State governments periodically solicit, review, and award Safe Routes to Schools grants to local governments and school districts that are seeking to make improvements that will improve student travel to and from school. Having endured the process of identifying a worthy project and completing the grant application, these local entities must then execute the specified work. Many communities are successful, but some are not. The research presented in this paper identified promising practices used by those entities that had completed their projects (and had successfully achieved their goals) despite difficulties along the way. The research identified ways in which the grant fulfillment process broke down and how these difficulties may be overcome.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
StauntonC. E., HubsmithD., and KallinsW.. Promoting Safe Walking and Biking to School: The Marin County Success Story. American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 93, No. 9, 2003, pp. 1431–1434. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.9.1431.
2.
BoarnetM. G., DayK., AndersonC., McMillanT., and AlfonzoM.. California’s Safe Routes to School Program: Impacts on Walking, Bicycling, and Pedestrian Safety. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 71, No. 3, 2005, pp. 301–317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944360508976700.
3.
DiMaggioC., and LiG.. Effectiveness of a Safe Routes to School Program in Preventing School-Aged Pedestrian Injury. Pediatrics, Vol. 131, No. 2, 2013, pp. 290–296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-2182.
4.
CollinsB. K., and GerberB. J.. Taken for Granted? Managing for Social Equity in Grant Programs. Public Administration Review, Vol. 68, No. 6, 2008, pp. 1128–1141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00960.x.
5.
Grants to State and Local Governments: An Overview of Federal Funding Levels and Selected Challenges. GAO-12-1016. U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2012.
6.
HowlettM.Policy Analytical Capacity and Evidence-Based Policy-Making: Lessons from Canada. Canadian Public Administration, Vol. 52, No. 2, 2009, pp. 153–175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-7121.2009.00070_1.x.
7.
McDonaldN. C., BarthP. H., and SteinerR. L.. Assessing the Distribution of Safe Routes to School Program Funds, 2005–2012. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 45, No. 4, 2013, pp. 401–406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.04.024.
8.
TermanJ. N., and FeiockR. C.. Improving Outcomes in Fiscal Federalism: Local Political Leadership and Administrative Capacity. Journal of Public Administration: Research and Theory, Vol. 25, No. 4, 2015, pp. 1059–1080. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu027.
9.
Recovery Act: Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Recipients Face Challenges Meeting Legislative and Program Goals and Requirements. GAO-11-379. U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2011.
10.
EECBG Program Notice 11-002. U.S. Department of Energy, 2011.
11.
Nicholson-CrottyS.Goal Conflict and Fund Diversion in Federal Grants to the States. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 48, No. 1, 2004, pp. 110–122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00059.x.
12.
LeskoM.Miscommunication Delays ‘Safe Routes to School’ Grant Application. Streetsboro Gateway News, April10, 2013.
13.
Levin MartinS., MoetiR., and Pullen-SeufertN.. Implementing Safe Routes to School: Application for the Socioecological Model and Issues to Consider. Health Promotion Practice, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2009, pp. 606–614. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1524839907309378.
14.
ArchibaldD., SandraO., CallahanR. F., SternerK. A., and MilwardH. B.. Key Actions that Contribute to Successful Program Implementation: Lessons from the Recovery Act. IBM Center for the Business of Government, Washington, D.C., 2012.
15.
WilliamsonA.Proposed Pathway to Elementary School Stalls. Florida Times-Union, April16, 2016.
16.
CarpenterJ.Waikomo Road Improvement Project Deferred. Garden Island, May14, 2016.
17.
BoxS.LADOT: Driven to Distraction. CityWatch, July4, 2011.
18.
DinkelspielF. Berkeley. Fourth-Grader Hit by Taxi; Parents Call for Better Crosswalk Lighting. Berkeleyside, March9, 2016.
19.
WatsonS. S.Decentralizing Community Development Decisions: A Study of Oklahoma’s Small Cities Program. Publius, Vol. 22, No. 1, 1992, pp. 109–122.
20.
StewartO., MoudonA. V., and ClaybrookeC.. Multistate Evaluation of Safe Routes to School Programs. American Journal of Health Promotion, Vol. 28, No. 3Supplement, 2014, pp. S89–S96.
21.
WeissC. H.Evaluation Research: Methods for Assessing Program Effectiveness. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1972.
22.
McDonaldN. C., and AalborgA. E.. Why Parents Drive Children to School: Implications for Safe Routes to School Programs. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 75, No. 3, 2009, pp. 331–342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944360902988794.
