This bill adds a new section to 23 U.S.C. §135 to create an explicit public reporting requirement for large transportation investments. A “covered project” is defined as a STIP-included project with an estimated cost over $10 million that will enhance or expand the transportation system.
Each state must publish an online report within a year of enactment and every year thereafter describing the prior year’s covered projects and scoring them against performance measures aligned with national goals in 150(b).
The report must include a score indicating how the project contributes to performance targets, anticipated benefits, the year the project first appeared in the STIP, geographic coordinates, and a brief justification. Beginning after the first report, states must incorporate a review of progress toward projected benefits and cost-effectiveness into the STIP and long-range planning processes.
A conforming amendment allows a report under subsection (n) to satisfy existing requirements in 23 U.S.C. §135(g)(5)(B).Overall, the bill elevates transparency around large transportation investments and ties project selection to measurable performance outcomes, with a formal mechanism to feed learnings back into planning documents.
At a Glance
What It Does
Adds a new subsection defining ‘covered projects’ and requires annual public reports on these projects, including scoring, benefits, timing, and a project justification. It also requires a performance review integrated into planning processes.
Who It Affects
State departments of transportation and transportation agencies, MPOs, and state-level planners who administer the STIP and long-range plans, plus the federal oversight bodies that monitor compliance.
Why It Matters
It creates a standardized, public-facing benchmark for large, costly projects and ties project selection to measurable performance goals, potentially improving transparency and accountability in federal-aid highway investments.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Transportation Project Accountability Act of 2026 adds a formal reporting requirement for large transportation projects. It defines a ‘covered project’ as a project included in the statewide transportation improvement program (STIP) with an estimated cost greater than $10 million that will enhance or expand the transportation system.
Each state must publish, online, a yearly report identifying every covered project carried out in the previous year. For each project, the report must include a score showing how the project contributes to performance measures and national goals, the anticipated benefits, the year the project was first included in the STIP, and a brief justification along with geographic coordinates.
The bill also requires a performance accountability review. Starting with the first published report, states must incorporate into their STIP and long-range statewide transportation plan a review of progress toward the projected benefits and the cost-effectiveness of covered projects, as well as their alignment with national goals described in 150(b).In addition, the bill provides a conforming amendment: a report under subsection (n) may satisfy certain requirements of 23 U.S.C. §135(g)(5)(B).
The net effect is greater transparency and deliberate feedback into planning processes, ensuring large transportation investments are justified by measurable performance outcomes.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill defines a covered project as a STIP-included project with an estimated cost over $10 million.
States must publish an annual online report identifying each covered project from the prior year.
Reports must include a performance-based score, anticipated benefits, year of STIP inclusion, geographic coordinates, and a justification.
A first-and-every-year-after accountability review must be incorporated into the STIP and the long-range plan.
A subsection (n) report may satisfy certain existing requirements under 23 U.S.C. §135(g)(5)(B).
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definition of covered project and reporting obligations
This section adds the Transportation Accountability framework. It defines ‘covered project’ as a STIP-listed project that will enhance or expand the transportation system and carries an estimated cost exceeding $10 million. It then requires States to publish, no later than one year after enactment and annually thereafter, an online report that lists each covered project from the prior year and provides a structured set of details about each project, including performance-related scores, anticipated benefits, the project’s initial inclusion year in the STIP, and a geographic description.
Requirements for the public report
The report must include a score indicating the extent to which the covered project advances performance measures and national goals in 150(b), the anticipated benefits, the year the project first appeared in the STIP, and a brief justification with geographic coordinates. It must also include a brief summary explaining the metrics used to calculate scores for all covered projects.
Accountability for performance and planning integration
Beginning after the first report is published, the State must incorporate into the STIP and the long-range transportation plan a review of progress toward projected benefits and cost-effectiveness for covered projects. The review must assess whether these projects continue to contribute to the national goals described in 150(b) and adjust planning accordingly.
Conforming amendment
The amendment adds to 23 U.S.C. §135(g)(5)(B) that a report under subsection (n) may be considered to satisfy the requirements of this subparagraph, tying the new accountability mechanism to existing reporting expectations.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.
Explore Transportation 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
- State departments of transportation and state transportation agencies: gain a formal, public-facing mechanism to justify large investments and to inform budgeting and planning decisions.
- Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and regional planners: benefit from standardized metrics and clearer alignment with national goals in planning documents.
- Federal Highway Administration and other federal oversight bodies: obtain transparent data to monitor compliance and performance relative to national goals.
- Local governments and communities near covered projects: gain visibility into project selection rationales and expected benefits.
- Public-interest watchdogs and accountability advocates: access standardized, public data to scrutinize project decisions.
- Investors and lenders evaluating transportation investments: can assess cost-effectiveness and expected performance benefits.
Who Bears the Cost
- State departments of transportation and state planning offices: bear data collection, reporting, and potential IT hosting costs.
- Metropolitan planning organizations and local governments: incur administrative costs to supply data and coordinate reporting.
- Contractors and project sponsors: may need to provide data and performance information for reporting purposes.
- State IT systems and online platforms: require maintenance and hosting capacity for public dashboards.
- Federal agencies overseeing implementation: allocate resources to verify data quality and compliance.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing the public interest in transparent, performance-based project selection with the practical burden of data collection and the risk of metric-driven decision-making that may not capture nuanced project value.
The bill accelerates transparency by imposing new data collection and public reporting requirements for large transportation projects. While this can improve accountability and alignment with national goals, it also creates administrative burdens and data quality challenges for state and local agencies.
The success of these provisions depends on the accuracy and timeliness of data, the clarity of scoring methods, and the ability of planning processes to absorb new information without delaying project delivery. Questions remain about data standards, verification, privacy in geospatial reporting, and how to handle projects with evolving scopes or multi-phase timelines.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.