The bill would amend the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to modify the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) program. It requires not less than 20% of the total SS4A planning grant funds, for fiscal year 2024 and each year thereafter, to be awarded to eligible projects described in subsection (a)(3)(A).
It also adds $5,000,000,000 in funding for the period of fiscal years 2027 through 2031 after 2026. These changes govern how planning grants are allocated and how the program is financed over the longer term, affecting which projects receive support and how state and local agencies plan safety investments.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill amends Section 24112 to require a 20% floor on planning-grant awards to projects described in subsection (a)(3)(A), applying to FY2024 and each year thereafter. It also inserts a $5B funding uplift for FY2027–2031, effective after 2026.
Who It Affects
State DOTs, local transportation agencies, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), and other eligible SS4A grant applicants implementing safety projects.
Why It Matters
It prioritizes safety-oriented planning investments and secures longer-term funding, shaping which projects can advance and how quickly communities can implement them.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
This bill targets how SS4A planning grants are distributed under the IIJA. It codifies a minimum-grants rule: at least 20% of all SS4A planning-grant funds, starting in FY2024 and continuing each year, must go to eligible projects described in subsection (a)(3)(A).
In practical terms, this creates a floor for funding safety-oriented planning proposals and curtails the ability to use a large share of funds for non-qualifying activities. The text also adds a substantial funding augmentation—$5 billion—for the period FY2027 through FY2031, to be available after FY2026—thus extending and expanding the program’s financing beyond the prior authorization window.
The changes are focused on allocation mechanics and budget scope, leaving implementation standards, reporting, and oversight to existing program rules. Overall, the bill tightens prioritization for safety projects while guaranteeing a multi-year funding path for SS4A planning efforts.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill mandates at least 20% of SS4A planning grants go to eligible projects described in subsection (a)(3)(A).
The 20% requirement applies to total program funding beginning in FY2024 and every fiscal year thereafter.
It adds $5,000,000,000 to the program for FY2027–2031, to be available after FY2026.
The changes are enacted through modifications to Section 24112 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
The measure carries a long-term funding horizon for SS4A planning and project implementation.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Planning grants: minimum 20%
This provision strikes the existing language and substitutes a new requirement: not less than 20% of the total amounts made available to carry out the SS4A program for fiscal year 2024 and each fiscal year thereafter shall be awarded to eligible projects described in subsection (a)(3)(A). The practical effect is to create a funding floor that prioritizes safety-focused planning projects, potentially reshaping the mix of proposals funded in each cycle.
Expanded funding: 2027–2031
This subsection inserts the line item for $5,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2027 through 2031 after 2026. The addition represents a substantial uplift in program financing intended to sustain or broaden SS4A planning activity beyond the prior authorization window, subject to future appropriations.
Short title
This Act may be cited as the Safe Streets for All Reauthorization and Improvement Act. The title signals the bill’s purpose and its place in the broader SS4A program, aligning legislative language with the program’s safety-improvement mission.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Infrastructure across all five countries.
Explore Infrastructure in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- a. State departments of transportation and local transportation agencies that administer SS4A planning grants and oversee project pipelines; the 20% floor directs funding to safety-oriented projects in their jurisdictions.
- b. Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) coordinating regional safety plans and prioritizing eligible projects under subsection (a)(3)(A).
- c. Local governments and authorities currently preparing or proposing safety-improvement plans in high-crash areas and other eligible project sponsors.
- d. Community-based organizations and nonprofits partnering with public agencies on eligible safety projects.
- e. USDOT program offices and federal staff responsible for SS4A oversight and reporting
Who Bears the Cost
- federal program administration costs associated with implementing and monitoring the 20% allocation.
- state and local agencies reconciling grant portfolios to ensure at least 20% goes to eligible projects, potentially reprioritizing other planning activities.
- MPOs and local jurisdictions may incur coordination and reporting costs to align proposals with subsection (a)(3)(A) eligibility.
- any gaps between funds available and eligible project pipelines could affect delivery timelines and require additional planning capacity.
- grants management and compliance burdens on grantee organizations to meet the new allocation rule.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Balancing a targeted minimum allocation to eligible projects with the flexibility to fund a broad, locally tailored safety program and the risk that a large future funding line depends on uncertain appropriations.
Two policy tensions stand out. First, the mandated 20% floor for planning grants pushes a subset of SS4A projects forward, but it may constrain grantees’ ability to fund other worthy planning efforts if the eligible project pool is small or mismatched with local needs.
Second, the $5B long-range funding injection expands the program’s financing, but it relies on future appropriations to actually materialize, which can complicate budgeting and program scoping in the near term. There are no explicit changes to accountability or reporting beyond existing SS4A requirements, so real-world risk will hinge on how agencies interpret and apply the new floor and the extended funding window.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.