Safe Streets NOFO

Town of Wickenburg — Regular Meeting (2026-04-20)

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 141579 characters

BILLING CODE 4910-9X
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary of Transportation
Docket Number: DOT-OST-2026-0050
DOT FY 2026 Safe Streets and Roads for All Funding
ISSUED: March 27, 2026
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Transportation, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT
or the Department)
ACTION: Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO or Notice), Assistance Listing # 20.939

Each section of this Notice contains information and instructions relevant to the application
process for Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) grants, and all applicants should read this
Notice in its entirety to have the information they need to submit eligible and competitive
applications.
Section
Content
A
Basic Information
B
Definitions
C
Eligibility Information
D
Program Description
E
Application Contents and Format
F
Submission Requirements and Deadlines
G
Application Review Information
H
Federal Award Notices
I
Post-Award Requirements and Administration
J
Other Information

A. Basic Information
Federal Agency
Name
Office of the Secretary of Transportation, U.S. Department of Transportation
Announcement
Type
Notice of Funding Opportunity
Funding
Opportunity
Number
DOT-SS4A-FY26-01 (Grants.gov)
Assistance Listing
Number
20.939
Executive
Summary
Funds for the fiscal year (FY) 2026 SS4A grant program are to be awarded on a
competitive basis to support planning, infrastructure, and behavioral and
operational initiatives to prevent fatalities and serious injuries on roads and
streets involving all roadway users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, public
transportation, motorists, and commercial vehicle operators.
Objective
The purpose of this notice is to solicit applications for SS4A.
Eligible Applicants
•
Metropolitan planning organizations;
•
Political subdivisions of a State or territory (e.g., cities, towns, counties);
•
Federally recognized Tribal governments; and
•
A multijurisdictional group of entities described in any of the
aforementioned three types of entities.
Eligible Project
Types
•
Develop a comprehensive safety action plan (Action Plan).
•
Conduct supplemental safety planning to enhance an Action Plan.
•
Carry out demonstration activities to inform the development of, or an
update to, an Action Plan.
•
Perform planning, design, and development activities for projects and
strategies identified in an Action Plan.
•
Implement projects and strategies identified in an Action Plan that
address roadway safety problems.
Funding Details
This Notice makes available up to $993,488,194 for FY 2026 grants:
$687,809,874 is available for Implementation Grants
o Expected number of awards: 40 to 70
o Expected funding range: $2,500,000 to $25,000,000
$305,678,320 is available for Planning and Demonstration Grants
o Expected number of awards: 400 to 700
o Expected funding range: $100,000 to $5,000,000
DOT reserves the right to make more, or fewer, awards. DOT reserves the
discretion to alter minimum and maximum award sizes upon receiving the full
pool of applications and assessing the needs of the program in relation to the
SS4A grant priorities in Section D.vi: Grant Priorities. DOT may increase the
overall amount of funding if additional funds become available.

Funding
Restrictions
Not more than 15 percent of the $1 billion in FY 2026 funds made available to
carry out the SS4A program may be awarded to eligible applicants in a single
State.1
A minimum of 30 percent of the total funds made available in FY 2026 must be
awarded for developing an Action Plan, including supplemental planning to
update an existing Action Plan, or demonstration activities to inform the
development or update of an Action Plan.
Key Dates
Planning and Demonstration Grant and Implementation Grant applications must
be submitted by 5:00 PM (EDT) on May 26, 2026.
Technical questions must be submitted by 5:00 PM (EDT) on April 24, 2026.
Pre-application eligibility review requests must be submitted for Implementation
Grants by 5:00 PM (EDT) on April 24, 2026.
Application Links
Applications must be submitted via Valid Eval, an online application submission
system used by DOT
•
Implementation Grant Application:
https://usg.valideval.com/teams/usdot_ss4a_2026_implementation/signup
•
Planning and Demonstration Grant Application:
https://usg.valideval.com/teams/usdot_ss4a_2026_planning_demo/signup
Customer support for Valid Eval can be reached at support@valideval.com.
Agency Contact
Information
Email: SS4A@dot.gov
Website: https://www.transportation.gov/grants/SS4A
DOT will regularly post answers to common questions and requests for
clarification, as well as schedule information for webinars providing additional
guidance on the SS4A website.
1. Changes in the FY 2026 NOFO
The FY 2026 NOFO substantively differs from the FY 2025 NOFO in the following ways:
• DOT is placing a priority on Public Safety Infrastructure.
• Section B. Definitions. Clarifying information is added regarding Public Safety
Infrastructure for post-crash care, emergency response coordination, and prehospital
blood transfusion activities.

1 Funding for Tribal lands will be treated as their own State and will not count toward a State’s 15% limit.

• Section G. Application Review Information has been updated to include clearer
information regarding how SS4A applications will be assessed.
• Section G. Application Review Information. Added language noting that if DOT does not
receive enough merit-worthy applications for Planning and Demonstration Grants to
award the 30 percent set aside requirement, surplus funds may be redirected toward
merit-worthy Implementation Grants.
• Added language highlighting new Executive Orders and DOT Orders.

B. Definitions

Term
Definition
Applicant’s
Jurisdiction(s)
The U.S. Census tract(s) where the applicant operates or performs their safety
responsibilities. If an applicant is seeking funding for multiple jurisdictions,
they should include all relevant Census tracts for the jurisdictions covered by
the application.
Comprehensive Safety
Action Plan
A comprehensive safety action plan (referred to as an “Action Plan”) is a plan
to prevent roadway fatalities and serious injuries in a locality or region or on
Tribal land. This can be either an Action Plan developed with a Planning and
Demonstration Grant, or a previously developed plan (e.g., a Vision Zero plan
or similar plan) that is substantially similar to and meets the eligibility
requirements of an Action Plan. See Table 1 for a detailed description.
Fatal or Serious Injury
Crash
A fatal or serious injury crash involves a motor vehicle traveling on a
roadway customarily open to the public. To be considered a motor vehicle
related fatal injury, the crash must involve a motor vehicle traveling on a
trafficway customarily open to the public and must result in the death of a
vehicle occupant or a nonoccupant within 30 days of the crash. This definition
aligns with the definition of a fatal crash in the Fatality Analysis Reporting
System (FARS).
High-Injury Network
Identifies the highest concentrations of motor vehicle related crashes resulting
in serious injuries and fatalities within a given roadway network or
jurisdiction.
Political Subdivision
of a State
A unit of government created under the authority of State law. This includes
cities, towns, counties, special districts, certain transit agencies, and similar
units of local government. A transit district, authority, or public benefit
corporation is eligible if it was created under State law, including transit
authorities operated by political subdivisions of a State.
Public Safety
Infrastructure
Physical and digital hardware, software, systems, technologies, equipment,
protocols, facilities, and coordination models used by public safety agencies
such as 9-1-1, emergency medical services (EMS), fire services, law
enforcement, and trauma system partners to either prevent, respond to, or
reduce the severity of roadway crashes. Public safety infrastructure may be
permanent, modular, configurable, or interoperable, and may include
temporary, pilot, or limited-scale deployments.

Term
Definition
Rural
For the purposes of this NOFO, jurisdictions outside an Urban Area (UA) or
located within UAs with populations fewer than 200,000, based on the 2020
Census, will be considered rural. Lists of UAs are available on the U.S.
Census Bureau website at
https://www2.census.gov/geo/docs/reference/ua/2020_Census_ua_list_all.xlsx
Safe System
Approach
A guiding principle to address the safety of all road users. It involves a
paradigm shift to improve safety culture, increase collaboration across all
safety stakeholders, and refocus transportation system design and operation
on anticipating human mistakes and lessening impact forces to reduce crash
severity and save lives.2
Areas of Persistent
Poverty and
Underserved
Community
Areas of Persistent Poverty (APP)3 are defined as:
•
Any county that has consistently had greater than or equal to 20
percent of the population living in poverty during the 30-year period
preceding November 15, 2021, as measured by the 1990 and 2000
decennial census and the most recent annual Small Area Income
Poverty Estimates as estimated by the Bureau of the Census
•
Any census tract with a poverty rate of at least 20 percent as measured
by the 2014 – 2018 5-year data series available from the American
Community Survey of the Bureau of the Census
•
Any territory or possession of the United States
Underserved Community will use the same definition as APP for purposes of
this NOFO.
C. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
Section 24112(a)(2) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), Pub. L. 117–58,
provides statutory eligibility criteria for the SS4A grants. Eligible applicants for SS4A grants are:

2For additional information, visit: https://www.transportation.gov/safe-system-approach
3 See 49 U.S.C. § 6702(a)(1).

1. a metropolitan planning organization (MPO);
2. a political subdivision of a State or territory;
3. a federally recognized Tribal government; and
4. a multijurisdictional group of entities made up of any of the aforementioned three types
of entities.
A multijurisdictional group of entities should identify a lead applicant as the primary point of
contact. Non-profits are not eligible applicants unless created under State law with roadway
safety and/or planning responsibilities equivalent to a political subdivision of a State. States and
territories are not eligible applicants.
SS4A award recipients from all previous years are eligible to apply in FY 2026. FY 2026
Projects of Merit, which are Implementation Grant or Planning and Demonstration Grant
applications that received a Highly Recommended rating, may automatically be carried forward
for consideration under a future SS4A NOFO, subject to availability of appropriations and
specific funding requirements which will be explained in future NOFOs. Applicants would be
responsible for updating an application should the future SS4A NOFO include program or policy
changes from this FY 2026 NOFO.
Additional Eligibility Requirements for Implementation Grant Applicants
An eligible applicant for an Implementation Grant must also meet at least one of the following
conditions:
• have ownership and/or maintenance responsibilities over a roadway network;
• have safety responsibilities that affect roadways; or

• have an agreement in the form of a signed letter, MOU, or other documentation from the
agency that has ownership and/or maintenance responsibilities for the roadway within
the applicant’s jurisdiction.
2. Number of Applications
Eligible applicants may submit one application only to the FY 2026 funding opportunity. If
multiple applications are received from the same political subdivision of a State and/or applicant,
the last application submitted will be reviewed. If an applicant is eligible for both a Planning and
Demonstration Grant and an Implementation Grant, the applicant must choose between applying
for a Planning and Demonstration Grant or an Implementation Grant.
Implementation Grant applicants may request funds to bundle supplemental planning and
demonstration activities as described in Section D.8.i, alongside a request for funds to implement
projects and strategies.
3. Planning and Demonstration Grant Eligibility Requirements
Eligible activities for a Planning and Demonstration Grant include: develop a new Action Plan,
conduct supplemental safety planning to update an existing Action Plan, or carry out safety
demonstration activities to inform the development of or update to an Action Plan.
These activities may be bundled in any combination, provided that the requirements in this
Notice are met. DOT encourages complementary but distinct activities, including but not limited
to safety demonstration activities that will help inform the development of an Action Plan.
Any applicant that meets the eligibility requirements described below may apply for a Planning
and Demonstration Grant to develop an Action Plan.

i.
Developing an Action Plan
The development of an Action Plan must include all relevant road users and be at a broad,
systemwide geography (i.e., the eligible applicant’s entire jurisdiction, not a few road segments
within a jurisdiction). Corridor-level or site-specific studies are considered to be supplemental
planning and not an Action Plan. Applicants with an existing Action Plan may also apply to
update their Action Plan.
ii.
Supplemental Planning and Demonstration Activities
Supplemental planning broadly refers to an activity that informs the development of a new or
existing Action Plan. Eligible supplemental planning activities include, but are not limited to, the
following:
•
Action plan updates
•
Action plan consolidation including combining different jurisdiction’s action plans or
integrating topical safety activities into an action plan
•
Complementary or topical safety plan development
•
Road safety audits
•
Follow-up data collection and safety analysis
•
Progress reporting
•
Stakeholder engagement and collaboration
•
Roadway safety planning
Demonstration activities are temporary safety improvements that inform the Action Plan by
testing proposed project and strategy approaches to determine future benefits and future scope.
Eligible demonstration activities include, but are not limited to the following:
•
Feasibility studies

•
MUTCD engineering studies
•
Behavioral or operational activity pilot programs
•
New technology pilot programs
Examples of eligible supplemental planning and demonstration activities are provided at
Planning and Demonstration Activities - SS4A | US Department of Transportation .
iii.
Action Plan Requirement
Applicants requesting Federal funding to conduct supplemental planning and/or demonstration
activities only, without developing or updating an Action Plan must either a) have an existing
Action Plan, which is demonstrated through meeting the Action Plan requirements outlined in
the Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet4 and described in Table 1: Action Plan Components,
b) have received SS4A funding in a previous round to develop or update an Action Plan and are
in the process of completing or updating an Action Plan, as described in Table 1: Action Plan
Components, or c) use a higher-level jurisdiction’s Action Plan as described below.
If a higher-level jurisdiction (e.g., an MPO or county would be a higher-level jurisdiction for a
city or town) has an eligible and finalized Action Plan, or is in the process of completing or
updating an SS4A-funded Action Plan from a previous grant round, an eligible applicant can
apply for supplemental planning and/or demonstration activities without its own plan only if: 1)
the geographic boundaries of the higher-level jurisdiction’s Action Plan cover the eligible
applicant’s jurisdiction; 2) the proposed activities are coordinated with the higher-level
jurisdiction and the application demonstrates such coordination; and 3) the activities will inform
the Action Plan of the higher-level jurisdiction.

4 https://www.transportation.gov/grants/ss4a/self-certification-worksheet.

iv.
Duplicative Action Plans
An application may be deemed duplicative, and therefore ineligible, if it requests funds to
develop a new Action Plan when another jurisdiction is already preparing an Action Plan in the
same area using SS4A funding and/or requests funds to develop a new Action Plan in the same
area as another FY26 application. Duplicative funding requests to develop a new Action Plan
will be identified and assessed for merit within the context of other jurisdictions and their
planning activities and will result in an eligibility determination.
4. Implementation Grant Eligibility Requirements
i.
Action Plan Requirement
To apply for an Implementation Grant, the applicant must certify that they have an existing plan
that is substantially similar to an Action Plan as defined in Section B and Table 1: Action Plan
Components and has been finalized and/or last updated between 2021 and May 26, 2026. The
components required for an existing plan to be substantially similar to an Action Plan may be
found in up to three plans (e.g., a regional transportation safety plan and a local Vision Zero plan
may be used together to meet all component requirements).
If another jurisdiction (e.g., an MPO or county) has an existing plan in place that meets Action
Plan eligibility requirements, an eligible applicant covered within the Action Plan’s geographic
boundaries could apply without its own plan as long as the existing plan is focused, at least in
part, on the roadway network within the applicant’s jurisdiction, the plans include the applicant’s
projects and strategies, and all other eligibility requirements are met.

If an applicant does not have an existing Action Plan or is not located in a jurisdiction which has
an existing Action Plan, they should apply for a Planning and Demonstration Grant to develop
one. They should NOT apply for an Implementation Grant.
The plan, or a combination of up to three plans, must be uploaded as an attachment to the
application or provided as web links to publicly available sites. Applicants should use the Self-
Certification Eligibility Worksheet to determine eligibility and upload the completed worksheet
with their application.5
Ineligible Plans
State-level Action Plans (e.g., a Strategic Highway Safety Plan required under 23 U.S.C. § 148,
State Highway Safety Plans required under 23 U.S.C. § 402, Commercial Vehicle Safety Plans
required under 49 U.S.C. § 31102, or Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans required under
49 U.S.C. § 5329) cannot be used as an established plan to apply for an Implementation Grant.
Alignment With All Action Plan Components
Implementation Grant applicants who meet any of the following conditions must update their
Action Plan during the period of performance for the grant agreement to align with all Action
Plan components in Table 1: Action Plan Components as a condition of receiving SS4A funds:
• Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet areas that include a “no” response; or
• Safety focus in the qualifying Action Plan does not include all road users.
Implementation Grant applicants are encouraged to request supplemental planning funding in
their application to complete any missing components of an existing plan but may choose to
complete such activities without Federal funding.

5. Cost Sharing or Matching
The Federal share of an SS4A grant may not exceed 80 percent of total eligible SS4A project
costs. Recipients are required to contribute a local matching share of no less than 20 percent of
total eligible project costs. Matching funds may include funding from the applicant or other
eligible non-Federal sources. Unless otherwise authorized by statute, all matching contributions
must be from non-Federal sources. Applicants that intend to combine SS4A funds with Federal-
Aid funds provided under Title 23 U.S.C. could experience a significant delay in the
programming of funding and the execution of a grant agreement.
i.
Exceptions to Non-Federal Match Requirements
In the following situations, the non-federal match requirement may be met with Federal funds or
may be waived:
• For eligible applicants on federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native tribes,
nations, bands, communities and affiliated groups, Tribal Transportation Program and
Tribal Transportation Program Safety Funds are Federal funding programs, and these
programs may be used as non-Federal match.
• For eligible applicants located in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, when the required local match is
less than $200,000, SS4A will apply a 100 percent Federal share and waive local match
requirements per 48 U.S.C. § 1469a and Pub. L. 96-205, Title VI, § 601, as amended, and
consistent with OMB Controller Alert CA-23-04, Waiving Matching Fund Requirements
for Insular Areas.

ii.
Types of Non-Federal Match
In accordance with 2 CFR § 200.306, grant recipients may use in-kind or cash contributions
toward local match requirements so long as those contributions meet the requirements under 2
CFR § 200.306(b). Any in-kind contributions used to fulfill the cost-share requirement for both
Planning and Demonstration Grants and Implementation Grants must:
• Be in accordance with the cost principles in 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E;
• Include documented evidence of completion within the period of performance; and
• Support the execution of the eligible activities in Section D.10: Eligible Activities and
Costs
Additional information about match requirements and costs that can be considered match are
available at https://www.transportation.gov/grants/SS4A.
D. Program Description
1. Overview
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), Pub. L. 117–58, authorized and appropriated
$1,000,000,000 to be awarded by DOT for FY 2026 for the SS4A grant program.6 This Notice
solicits applications for activities to be funded under the SS4A grant program.
The purpose of SS4A grants is to improve roadway safety by significantly reducing or
eliminating roadway fatalities and serious injuries through the development, refinement, and
implementation of Action Plans focused on all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, public
transportation users, motorists, and commercial vehicle operators. The Action Plans include

6 See IIJA, Pub. L. 117-58, 135 Stat. 429, 815, Div. B, Title IV, § 24112; id., 135 Stat at 1413, Div. J, Title VIII.

strategies to implement the Safe System Approach. The program provides funding to develop
tools to strengthen a community’s approach to roadway safety and is designed to meet the needs
of local, Tribal, and regional communities that differ dramatically in size, location, and
experience administering Federal funding.
2. Total Funding Available
IIJA established the SS4A program with $5,000,000,000 in advanced appropriations in
Division J, including $1,000,000,000 for FY 2026. DOT has retained not more than 2 percent, or
$20,000,000, for administrative expenses.7 In addition, DOT has $13,488,194 in carryover funds.
Therefore, this Notice makes available up to $993,488,194 for FY 2026 grants under the SS4A
program. Refer to Section G for greater detail on additional funding considerations and Section
A. Basic Information for funding restrictions.
3. Start Dates and Period of Performance
DOT expects to obligate SS4A award funding via signed grant agreements between DOT and
recipients, as flexibly and expeditiously as possible, within 12 months of award announcement.
Because award recipients under this program may be first-time recipients of Federal funding,
DOT is committed to providing assistance to help them through the process of securing a grant
agreement and delivering grant projects and strategies through the SS4A Technical Assistance
Center8. Applicants who have never received Federal funding from DOT are also encouraged to
partner with eligible applicants within the same region, such as an MPO, that have established

7 IIJA § 24112(f)(2)
8 For additional information about the SS4A Technical Assistance Center, visit:
https://www.ss4aclearinghouse.org/TechnicalAssistance

financial relationships with DOT and knowledge of Federal grant administration requirements.
While States are not eligible applicants and cannot be a co-applicant (which includes State
Departments of Transportation and similar State-level entities), eligible applicants are
encouraged to seek guidance on project delivery and processes from States and other entities
experienced with administering Federal grants, outside of the SS4A grant award process, to
ensure effective administration of a grant award. The expected period of performance for
Planning and Demonstration and Implementation Grant agreements is between 24 months and
five years, depending on the scope and extent of the grant activities. The period of performance
for Planning and Demonstration Grant and Implementation Grant agreements may not exceed
five years.
4. Data Collection Requirements
Pursuant to section 24112(i)(1) of IIJA, DOT must post on a publicly available website best
practices and lessons learned for preventing roadway fatalities and serious injuries pursuant to
strategies or interventions implemented under SS4A. In addition, DOT must evaluate and
incorporate, as appropriate, the effectiveness of strategies and interventions implemented under
the SS4A grant program into the publicly available website on best practices and lessons
learned. 9 The best practices and lessons learned collected thus far are available on the SS4A
Clearinghouse website. DOT intends to measure safety outcomes through a combination of grant
agreement activities and data collections, including DOT data collections already underway and
program evaluations separate from the individual grant agreements. The grant data-collection

9 IIJA specifically cites Countermeasures That Work: A Highway Safety Countermeasure Guide for State Highway
Safety Offices, Eleventh Edition, or any successor document.

requirements reflect the need to build evidence of noteworthy strategies and best practices. DOT
expects to use the data and outcome information collected before and after evaluations. See
Section I for more information about post-award reporting requirements.
5. Grant Options and Deliverables
The SS4A program provides funding for two main types of grants: Planning and
Demonstration Grants and Implementation Grants. Planning and Demonstration Grants are
used to develop, complete, or supplement an Action Plan, as well as carry out safety
demonstration activities that inform an Action Plan. Implementation Grants are used to
implement strategies or projects that are consistent with an existing Action Plan. In addition,
applicants may bundle funding requests for supplemental planning and demonstration activities
that inform the Action Plan into an Implementation Grant application.
i.
Planning and Demonstration Grants

Action Plan
An Action Plan is the foundation of the SS4A grant program and supports the implementation of
projects and strategies that will help achieve local, data-driven transportation safety goals. The
goal of an Action Plan is to develop a holistic, well-defined strategy to prevent roadway fatalities
and serious injuries in a locality, region, or on Tribal Lands. Grants for Action Plans provide
Federal funds to eligible applicants to develop, complete, or enhance an Action Plan for broad,
systemwide geography covering the applicant’s entire jurisdiction.
The primary deliverable is a publicly available Action Plan. For the purposes of the SS4A grant
program, an Action Plan includes the components in Table 1. DOT considers the process of

developing an Action Plan to be critical for success and the components reflect a process-
oriented set of activities. For applications involving a multi-jurisdictional group, applicants may
propose the development of a single Action Plan covering all jurisdictions, several plans for
individual jurisdictions, or a system to administer sub-awards to entities within its jurisdiction.
Table 1: Action Plan Components
Component
Description
Leadership
Commitment and
Goal Setting
An official public commitment (e.g., resolution, policy, ordinance) by a high-
ranking official and/or governing body (e.g., Mayor, City Council, Tribal
Council, MPO Policy Board) to an eventual goal of zero roadway fatalities and
serious injuries. The commitment must include a goal and timeline for eliminating
roadway fatalities and serious injuries achieved through one, or both, of the
following:
(1) the target date for achieving zero roadway fatalities and serious injuries, or
(2) a percentage reduction of roadway fatalities and serious injuries by a specific
date with an eventual goal of eliminating roadway fatalities and serious injuries.
Planning Structure
A committee, task force, implementation group, or similar body charged with
oversight of the Action Plan development, implementation, and monitoring.
Safety Analysis
Analysis of existing conditions and historical trends that provides a baseline level
of crashes involving fatalities and serious injuries across a jurisdiction, locality,
Tribe, or region. Includes an analysis of crash locations and crash severity, as well
as contributing factors and crash types by relevant road users (e.g., motorists,
pedestrians, transit users, etc.). Analysis of systemic and specific safety needs is
also performed, as needed (e.g., high-risk road features, specific safety needs of
relevant road users, analysis of the built environment, demographics, and
structural issues). The safety analysis can consider factors that influence the
severity of outcomes when crashes occur, including the availability and
coordination of emergency response and post-crash care systems. To the extent
practical, the analysis should include all roadways within the jurisdiction, without
regard to ownership. Based on the analysis performed, a geospatial identification
of higher-risk locations is developed (a high-injury network or equivalent).

Supplemental Planning Activities
Supplemental planning activities support or enhance an existing Action Plan. Examples of
eligible supplemental planning activities are provided at
https://www.transportation.gov/grants/ss4a/planning-and-demonstration-activities.
Component
Description
Engagement and
Collaboration
Robust engagement with the public and relevant stakeholders and partners,
including the private sector, and community groups allows for both community
representation and feedback. Information received from engagement and
collaboration is analyzed and incorporated into the Action Plan. Overlapping
jurisdictions are included in the process. Plans and processes are coordinated and
aligned with other governmental plans and planning processes to the extent
practicable.
Policy and Process
Changes
Assessment of current local policies, plans, guidelines, and/or standards (e.g.,
manuals) to identify opportunities to improve how processes prioritize
transportation safety. The Action Plan discusses implementation through the
adoption of revised or new local policies, guidelines, and/or standards, as
appropriate.
Strategy and
Project Selections
Identification of a comprehensive set of projects and strategies informed by data,
the best available evidence and noteworthy practices, and stakeholder input that
will address the safety problems described in the Action Plan. These strategies
and countermeasures focus on a Safe System Approach and effective
interventions and consider multidisciplinary activities. To the extent practicable,
data limitations are identified and mitigated.
Once identified, the projects and strategies are prioritized in a list that provides
time ranges for when the strategies and countermeasures are expected to be
deployed (e.g., short-, mid-, and long-term timeframes). The list should include
specific projects and strategies, or descriptions of programs of projects and
strategies, and explain prioritization criteria used. The list should contain
interventions focused on infrastructure and behavioral and operational safety.
Progress and
Transparency
Method to measure progress over time after an Action Plan is developed or
updated, including outcome data. A means to ensure ongoing transparency is
established with residents and other relevant stakeholders. The approach must
include, at a minimum, annual public and accessible reporting on progress toward
reducing roadway fatalities and serious injuries and public posting of the Action
Plan online.

The final deliverable for supplemental planning is a written product that connects to, and
enhances, an Action Plan. Final products shall be made publicly available.
Demonstration Activities
Demonstration activities inform an Action Plan by testing proposed project and strategy
approaches to determine their potential benefits and future scope. Demonstration activities are
temporary and small in scale. Demonstration activities must measure potential benefits through
data collection and evaluation (e.g., before and after studies) and inform an Action Plan’s list of
selected projects and strategies and their future implementation.
Demonstration activities and pilot programs must inform Action Plans through small-scale tests
with finite trial periods intended to gauge potential project and strategy effectiveness that will
lead to project and strategy selection at a systemic level. DOT generally expects demonstration
activities to be initiated within 18 months of executing a grant agreement (e.g., quick-builds on
the roadway; pilot project established) and the benefits of the demonstration activity to be
evaluated during the period of performance for the grant agreement.
The final deliverable is an assessment of the demonstration activities and an updated Action Plan
that incorporates the information gathered from the demonstration activities into the Action
Plan’s list of projects or strategies and/or informs another part of the Action Plan.
ii.
Implementation Grants
Implementation Grants fund projects and strategies identified in an Action Plan that address
roadway safety problems. Implementation Grants may also fund supplemental planning and
demonstration activities as described above, as well as project-level planning, design, and
development activities for projects and strategies identified in an Action Plan (e.g., project-level

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance, associated environmental review
activities, permits and approvals, construction design, etc.).
6. SS4A Grant Priorities
This section discusses priorities specific to SS4A and NOFO requirements. Successful grant
applications will:
• Promote safety to prevent fatal and serious injuries on public roadways;
• Employ low-cost, high-impact strategies that can improve safety over a wide geographic
area;
• Ensure equitable investment in the safety needs of underserved communities, which
includes both underserved urban and rural communities;
• Beautifying transportation infrastructure with context-appropriate design and/or child-
friendly elements;
• Advance eligible truck parking with a clear roadway safety nexus;
• Incorporate evidence-based projects and strategies and adopt innovative technologies and
strategies; and
• Demonstrate engagement with a variety of public and private stakeholders.10
Additionally, applications will be more competitive if they
• Beautify transportation infrastructure with context-appropriate design and/or child-
friendly elements;
• Advance eligible truck parking with a clear roadway safety nexus;

10 See IIJA, Pub. L. 117-58, 135 Stat. 429, 816, § 24112(d)(3)(A)–(E).

• Modernize public safety infrastructure, including prehospital blood transfusion
capabilities and improve post-crash care.
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), awards focused on
infrastructure and demonstration activities must ensure that newly constructed facilities in the
public right-of-way are accessible to, and usable by, individuals with disabilities to the extent
that it is not structurally impracticable to do so. The ADA also requires that, when an existing
facility is altered, the altered facility be made accessible to and usable by individuals with
disabilities to the maximum extent feasible.11
DOT intends to use the SS4A program to support the creation of good-paying jobs through union
participation or project labor agreements which promote cost-effectiveness and open
competition, registered apprenticeship programs, and other training and placement programs.
DOT intends to apply principles from DOT Order 2100.7, (Ensuring Reliance Upon Sound
Economic Analysis in DOT’s Policies, Programs and Activities) and DOT Order 2100.9, (Ensuring
Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity in Department of Transportation Policies, Programs, and
Activities) when evaluating applications and making award selections. To the maximum extent
permitted by law, DOT will prioritize projects that are in alignment with the principles outlined in
DOT Order 2100.7 and DOT Order 2100.9.
DOT seeks to fund projects that advance the priorities of this Administration as described in
DOT’s mission statement and across executive orders.

11 See 28 CFR § 35.151.

7. Eligible Activities and Costs
Broadly, eligible activity costs must comply with the cost principles set forth in 2 CFR Part 200,
Subpart E. DOT reserves the right to make cost eligibility determinations on a case-by-case
basis.
i.
Eligible Activities
Eligible activities for grant funding include the following three elements:
A. Developing or updating an Action Plan (i.e., the activities described in Section C.3.i:
Developing an Action Plan);
B. Conducting planning, design, and development activities for projects and strategies
identified in an Action Plan; and
C. Carrying out projects and strategies identified in an Action Plan.
For Implementation Grants, activities must include element (C) and may include element (B).
Implementation Grant applications may also include element (A) such as supplemental planning
or demonstration activities. Projects and strategies identified in element (C) must be either
infrastructure, behavioral, operational, or post-crash care activities identified in the Action Plan,
including prehospital blood transfusion programs and other public safety system improvements,
and must be directly related to addressing the safety problem(s) identified in the application and
Action Plan. Applicants may “bundle” different projects, strategies, supplemental planning,
and/or demonstration activities into one Implementation Grant application, even if they address
different safety problems or are located in different areas. For “bundled” funding requests,
element (B) planning, design, and development activities must be directly connected to the
completion of the element (C) projects and strategies funded through the Implementation Grant

application. Public safety infrastructure activities are eligible for Implementation Grants such as
Field Blood Delivery, Public Safety Dispatch, Digital Alert System, and Education Campaigns;
these activities could also be eligible as a safety demonstration activity provided they meet the
demonstration activity eligibility requirements described in Section D.5.i: Demonstration
Activities. Truck parking activities contained in an Action Plan may be eligible under an Action
Plan Grant or as part of an Implementation Grant if such activities demonstrates a clear roadway
safety nexus and are not among the ineligible activities listed below in Section D.7.ii. Examples
of eligible Implementation Grant activities are listed on the SS4A website
(https://www.transportation.gov/grants/ss4a/implementation-grants).
ii.
Ineligible Activities and Costs
The following activities are not eligible for element (C) “projects and strategies” nor
demonstration activity funding:
• Projects and strategies whose primary purpose is not roadway safety.
• Projects and strategies exclusively focused on non-roadway modes of transportation,
including air, rail, marine, and pipeline. Note, however, roadway intersections with other
modes of transportation (e.g., at-grade highway rail crossings) are eligible activities.
• Capital projects to construct new roadways used for motor vehicles. A new roadway
facility exclusively for non-motorists (e.g., a pedestrian bridge) is an eligible activity if
the primary purpose is safety related.
• Infrastructure projects primarily intended to expand capacity to improve Levels of
Service for motorists on an existing roadway, such as the creation of additional through
lanes (i.e. without a clear safety nexus).

• Maintenance activities for an existing roadway primarily to maintain a state of good
repair. However, roadway modifications on an existing roadway in support of specific
safety-related projects identified in an Action Plan are eligible activities.
• Development or implementation of a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP)
required by 49 U.S.C. § 5329. However, a PTASP that identifies and addresses risks to
pedestrians, bicyclists, personal conveyance and micromobility users, transit riders, and
others may inform Action Plan development.
E. Application Contents and Format
The Planning and Demonstration Grant and the Implementation Grant, respectively, have
different application submission and supporting document requirements. The SS4A website
(https://www.transportation.gov/grants/SS4A) provides many resources to help complete the
required submission materials.
1. Implementation Grant Pre-Application Submissions
Prior to submitting an application, a potential Implementation Grant applicant is encouraged to
submit a Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet and links or attachments to any referenced
plan(s) to determine whether the applicant has an existing plan or plans that are substantially
similar to an Action Plan, which is required for Implementation Grant eligibility. A pre-
application eligibility review request must contain all required materials, including relevant
documentation, to receive an eligibility determination by DOT.
Pre-application submissions must be received at or before 5:00 PM (EDT) on April 24, 2026, by
emailing SS4A@dot.gov with the subject “Implementation Grant Eligibility Review: Applicant

Name, State.” DOT expects to provide an affirmative response or details as to why the plan(s) do
not meet eligibility requirements to the applicant within three weeks of receipt. Each applicant
may request only one pre-application submission review. DOT will not perform pre-application
reviews of full application materials nor provide feedback on the quality of the overall
application.
If a potential applicant has an Action Plan covering their jurisdiction that was developed using
prior SS4A funds that has been accepted by DOT, they should not submit those plans for pre-
application eligibility review. DOT will confirm eligibility for these applicants upon application
submittal.
Planning and Demonstration Grant applicants are not eligible for pre-application submission
reviews.
2. Planning and Demonstration Grant Application Submissions
The application must include the application materials as described below. The necessary file
formats for each application component will be displayed on the Valid Eval application portal.
Standard Forms
All applicants must submit the following Standard Forms:
• Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424),
• Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424A),
• Assurances for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424B), and
• Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL).

The SF-424 requests applicants provide information on “Estimated Funds” (box 18). This budget
must list the amount and percent of both the total Federal funding requested and any additional
non-Federal funds, if any, that will be used to pay for the project. If the SS4A Federal funding
amounts requested differ between forms and/or other application materials, the amount in the SF-
424 will be used to determine funding. Funding requests must be in whole numbers (no cents).
For the SF-424A form, Section D and Section E are optional as described in the SF-424A
instructions.
Key Information Questions
The following questions are asked in the SS4A application on Valid Eval at
https://usg.valideval.com/teams/usdot_ss4a_2026_planning_demo/signup.
Table 2: Example Planning and Demonstration Application Key Information Table
Title
Instructions
Lead Applicant Name
This should be consistent with Q. 8.a. of the SF-424.
Lead Applicant Unique Entity Identifier
(UEI)
See Section F.2 for more information about obtaining a
UEI from SAM.gov.
Eligible Entity Type
See Section C.1
Application Type (select one)
•
Develop a new Action Plan;
•
Update/add to an existing local safety plan to meet
the requirements of an SS4A Action Plan as
described in Table 1 Action Plan Components;
•
Develop or update an Action Plan and conduct
Demonstration or Supplemental Planning activities;
or
•
Conduct Demonstration or Supplemental Planning
activities only.
Project Title
A concise, descriptive title for the project. This should be
the same title used in the SF-424 form and the application
narrative.

Title
Instructions
Project Goal/Description
A short description of the proposed activities and how
they will address the safety problem(s) in the applicant’s
jurisdiction.
Total Applicant Jurisdiction Population
Source: 2020 U.S. Census data.
Total Count Motor Vehicle-Involved
Roadway Fatalities that includes the last 5
years of data made available in the Fatality
Analysis Reporting System (FARS) during
the NOFO period
From the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) for
the applicant jurisdiction. Use 2019-2023 data.
Total Average Annual Fatality Rate (per
100,000 population)
The fatality rate calculated using the 5-year annual
average from the total count of fatalities based on FARS
data from 2019-2023, divided by the population of the
applicant’s jurisdiction based on 2020 U.S. Census
population data.
Inclusion of Underserved Communities
Census Tract(s)
Whether the jurisdiction(s) covered by this application
are, or include, underserved communities.
Description of Supplemental Planning and
Demonstration Activities (if relevant)
See Section D.5.i: Planning and Demonstration Grants
Total SS4A Funding Request
Must be a whole number (no cents).
Total SS4A Non-Federal Share
Must be equal to, or greater than, 20% of total project
cost.
Total SS4A Project Cost
Sum of Total Federal Funding Request and Total Local
Share/Match.
Total Other Federal Funds Used
Must be a whole number (no cents). Other Federal funds
may include funds directly received from a Federal
agency or funds received through a pass-through agency
(e.g., State governmental agency) that originated as
Federal funds.
Coordination
For applications that include Action Plan development or
updates, the applicant agency must affirm that they will
coordinate with any jurisdictions that geographically
overlap with the applicant jurisdiction and have received
SS4A funding to develop or update an Action Plan or
have submitted an FY26 application requesting funds to
develop or update an Action Plan.

Title
Instructions
Proof of coordination (e.g., letter, email) from ALL such
geographically overlapping entities affirming they are
aware of your application and the need for coordination
to avoid duplication of efforts must be provided as an
attachment to the application.
Narrative
The narrative should include a brief description of the proposed activities. The narrative should
also respond to the Planning and Demonstration Grant Safety Context merit criteria described in
Section G.1.i: Planning and Demonstration Grant Merit Criteria to affirm the proposal’s
alignment with SS4A safety considerations and address the criteria. The applicant does not need
to address the Safety Impact or Underserved Communities merit criteria in the narrative; these
are based on nationally available data.
Applicants requesting less than $100,000 in funding must explain how the scope of activities will
be completed with the funding amount proposed.
Applicants requesting funding for demonstration activities to inform an Action Plan must
provide a brief schedule showing when the activities will occur (e.g., temporary materials
installed, when the pilot would begin), and the start/end dates of the pilot. If anticipated to be a
schedule constraint, applicants should include in the narrative any potential timeline implications
of meeting administration requirements in Section I such as domestic preference and any
required waivers, NEPA requirements, and any applicable permitting and approval timeframes.
Narrative Requirements:
• The narrative should be in PDF format, with font size no less than 12-point Times New
Roman, margins a minimum of one inch on all sides, and include page numbers.

• The narrative should be no longer than two pages if requesting less than $1,000,000 in
Federal funds. If requesting $1,000,000 or more in Federal funds, the narrative must be
no longer than three pages.
Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet
If only applying for supplemental planning and/or demonstration activities that will inform the
update of an existing Action Plan, applicants must either demonstrate that their existing plan is
eligible by attaching a completed Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet, or be in the process of
developing or updating an SS4A-funded Action Plan from a previous grant round, as described
in Section C.3.i.
If applying to develop a new Action Plan, applicants do not need to include the Self-Certification
Eligibility Worksheet even if supplemental planning and/or demonstration activities are
included.
Map
The applicant must submit a map in both PDF and spatial format (e.g., Shapefile, .KML) that
shows the location of the jurisdiction and highlights the roadway network under the applicant’s
jurisdiction. Applicants requesting funding for demonstration activities must include the
locations of any proposed demonstration pilots if known.
Estimated Budget
Applicants are required to show how different funding sources will contribute to each activity
and present the data in whole dollars in a table similar to Table 3: Planning and Demonstration
Grant Supplemental Estimated Budget, below. A template is available at
https://www.transportation.gov/grants/ss4a/planning-and-demo-grant-budget-template. The
Planning and Demonstration Grant Supplemental Estimated Budget should summarize the

amount of funding going toward each of the three eligible activities for a Planning and
Demonstration Grant as applicable (developing a new Action Plan, conducting supplemental
planning to update an existing plan, and carrying out demonstration activities to inform the
development or update of an Action Plan). Funding sources should be grouped into four
categories: SS4A funding request, SS4A non-Federal match, total SS4A project cost, and other
Federal funds (if applicable), with specific amounts for each funding source. Estimated costs or
value of in-kind matches should also be provided. The budget should show how each source of
funds will be spent. This budget should not include any previously incurred expenses, or costs to
be incurred before the time of award and obligation because these expenses are not eligible for
reimbursement or cost-sharing. This table should be completed in a manner consistent with the
Federal funding amount, non-Federal share, and total project cost in the SF-424 form.

Table 3: Planning and Demonstration Grant Supplemental Estimated Budget
Activities
SS4A
Federal
Funding
Request
SS4A Non-
Federal
Match
Total SS4A
Project Cost
Other
Federal
Funds (if
applicable)
Itemized Estimated Costs to Develop or Update an Action Plan (if applicable)
New or Updated Action
Plan
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Subtotal Budget for New
or Updated Action Plan
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Itemized Estimated Costs of Supplemental Planning Activities (if applicable)
Supplemental Planning
Activity #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Supplemental Planning
Activity #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Supplemental Planning
Activity #3
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00

Subtotal Budget for
Supplemental Planning
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Itemized Estimated Costs of Demonstration Activities (if applicable)
Demonstration/Pilot
Activity #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Demonstration/Pilot
Activity #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Subtotal Budget for
Demonstration Activities
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Total Budget for
Planning and
Demonstration Activities
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00

3. Implementation Grant Application Submissions
The application must include the application materials as described below. The necessary file
formats for each application component will be displayed on the Valid Eval application portal.
Standard Forms
All applicants must submit the following Standard Forms:
• Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424),
• Budget Information for Construction Programs (SF-424C),
• Assurances for Construction Programs (SF-424D), and

• Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL).
The SF-424 requests applicants provide information on “Estimated Funds” (box 18). This budget
must list the amount and percent of both the total Federal funding requested and any additional
non-Federal funds, if any, that will be used to pay for the project. If the SS4A Federal funding
amounts requested differ between forms and/or other application materials, the amount in the SF-
424 will be used to determine funding. Funding requests must be in whole numbers (no cents).
Key Information Questions
The following questions are asked in the SS4A application on Valid Eval at
https://usg.valideval.com/teams/usdot_ss4a_2026_implementation/signup.
Table 4: Example Implementation Grant Application Key Information Table
Title
Instructions
Lead Applicant Name
This should be consistent with Q. 8.a. of the SF-424.
Lead Applicant Unique Entity
Identifier (UEI)
See Section F.2 for more information about obtaining a UEI from
SAM.gov.
Eligible Entity Type
See Section C.1.
Project Title
A concise, descriptive title for the project. This should be the same
title used in the SF-424 form and the application narrative.
Project Goal/Description
A short description of the proposed activities and how they will
address the safety problem(s) in the applicant’s jurisdiction.
Primary Project Purpose (select
one)
•
Infrastructure Strategies: Build physical transportation
improvements; goal is to create safer facilities (e.g.,
constructing roundabouts, sidewalks, and traffic calming
measures)
•
Behavioral Strategies: Focus on altering road user behavior
and/or reinforcing roadway habits for all users (e.g.,
performing High Visibility Enforcement or safety outreach
campaigns)
•
Operational or Technology Strategies: Focus on enhancing the
safety and efficacy of existing transportation infrastructure

Title
Instructions
(e.g., updating signal phasing to protect turning movements or
address conflict points at intersections)
•
Public Safety Infrastructure Strategies: Focus on programs or
technologies used by public safety agencies (e.g., field blood
distribution or improved emergency communications) to
prevent, respond to, and/or reduce the severity of roadway
crashes.
Total Applicant Jurisdiction
Population
Source: 2020 U.S. Census data.
Total Count Motor Vehicle-
Involved Roadway Fatalities in
the Applicant Jurisdiction that
includes the last 5 years of data
made available in the Fatality
Analysis Reporting System
(FARS) during the NOFO period
From the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) for the
applicant jurisdiction. Use 2019-2023 data.
Total Average Annual Fatality
Rate (per 100,000 population) for
the Applicant Jurisdiction
The fatality rate calculated using the 5-year annual average from
the total count of fatalities based on FARS data from 2019-2023,
divided by the population of the applicant’s jurisdiction based on
2020 U.S. Census population data.
Inclusion of Underserved
Communities in Jurisdiction(s)
Whether the jurisdiction(s) covered by this application are or
include underserved communities.
Inclusion of Underserved
Communities in Project Area(s)
Whether the project area(s) covered by this application are or
include underserved communities.
Project Area Fatalities
Count of fatalities in the project area(s). May use source other than
FARS, provided the data source is included in the application.
2019-2023 data is recommended, but applicants may use the most
recent five-year data available.
Project Area Serious Injuries OR
Project Area Injuries Severity
Unknown
Count of serious injuries in the project area(s). Applicants without
reliable serious injury data may use suspected serious injury
figures. The data source must be included in the application.
2019-2023 data is recommended, but applicants may use the most
recent five-year data available.

Title
Instructions
Applicant roadway safety
responsibility (may select
multiple)
•
Ownership and/or maintenance responsibilities over a roadway
network;
•
Safety responsibilities that affect roadways;
•
Have an agreement with the agency that has ownership and/or
maintenance responsibilities for the roadway within the
applicant’s jurisdiction
Does your project include
Supplemental Planning and/or
Demonstration activities?
See Section D.5.i
Would you consider accepting
funding for only Supplemental
Planning and/or Demonstration
activities?
Yes, no, n/a.
Total SS4A Federal Funds
Requested
Must be a whole number (no cents).
Total SS4A Non-Federal Share
Must be equal to, or greater than, 20% of total project cost.
Total SS4A Project Cost
Sum of Total SS4A Federal Funding Request and Total SS4A
Non-Federal Share/Match.
Total Other Federal Funds Used
(if applicable)
Must be a whole number (no cents). Other federal funds may
include funds directly received from a federal agency or funds
received through a pass-through agency (e.g., State governmental
agency) that originated as federal funds.
SS4A Funding Request for
Supplemental Planning and/or
Demonstration Activities (A)
Must be consistent with Implementation Grant Supplemental
Budget
SS4A Funding Request for
Planning, Design, and
Development Activities for
Projects/Strategies (B)
Must be consistent with Implementation Grant Supplemental
Budget
SS4A Funding Request for
Carrying Out Projects and
Strategies (C)
Must be consistent with Implementation Grant Supplemental
Budget
Existing Comprehensive Safety
Action Plan (or equivalent)
Link to or attachment

Narrative
In narrative form, the applicant must respond to the Implementation Grant merit criteria
described in Section G.1.ii to affirm its alignment with SS4A safety considerations and to
address the criteria.
a) Narrative Requirements
• The narrative should be in PDF format, with font size no less than 12-point Times New
Roman, margins a minimum of one inch on all sides, and include page numbers.
• The narrative may not exceed 12 pages in length, excluding cover page and the table of
contents.
• Implementation Grant applications that include supplemental planning and
demonstration activities may submit up to two additional pages – 14 pages total – if they
are focused solely on responding to the Supplemental Planning and Demonstration
Activities merit criterion (see Section G.1.ii).
• The following application elements do not count toward the page limit:
o Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet
o Budget
o Appendices, which may include additional maps and documents supporting
assertions or conclusions made in the narrative.
• If possible, website links to supporting documentation should be provided rather than
copies of these supporting materials.
• If supporting documents are submitted, applicants should clearly identify within the
narrative the relevance of each supporting document.

• Letters of support are encouraged, especially from relevant stakeholders and Public
Safety Agencies and associated Labor Unions representing First Responders. Letters of
support should be submitted with the application as one consolidated set in one
supporting attachment on Valid Eval.
b) Recommended Narrative Outline
Applicants are not required to follow a specific narrative format, but the structure should clearly
identify the narrative portions associated with each merit criterion. DOT recommends that the
narrative follows the outline below to address the program requirements and assist evaluators in
locating relevant information.
Overview
See below
Location
See below
Response to Merit Criteria
See Section G.1
Project Readiness
See Section G.1.ii
1. Overview
This section should provide an introduction and describe the proposed activities, safety context,
jurisdiction, and any high-level background information that would be useful to understand the
rest of the application.
2. Location
This section of the application should describe the jurisdiction’s location, the jurisdiction’s high-
injury network or equivalent geospatial identification (i.e., geographic or locational data using
maps) of higher risk locations, and potential locations (e.g., corridors or intersections) of the
projects and strategies they plan to implement based on their Action Plan.

Note that the applicant is not required to provide exact locations for each project or strategy if
they are not yet defined. In this case, the application should identify which geographic locations
are under consideration for projects and strategies to be implemented and what analysis will be
used in a final determination.
3. Response to Merit Criteria
This section should respond to the criteria for evaluation and selection in Section G.1 of this
notice and include a compelling narrative to highlight how the application aligns with four
required merit criteria: #1 Safety Need; #2 Safety Impact; #3 Implementation Costs; and #4
Engagement and Collaboration. If the application is bundling supplemental planning and/or
demonstration activities, it also must include narrative responding to criterion #5 Supplemental
Planning and Demonstration Activities.
4. Project Readiness
The applicant must provide information to demonstrate the applicant’s ability to complete the
full scope of work in the application proposal within five years of when the grant agreement is
executed, with a particular focus on environmental permitting, design, and construction, as well
as right of way acquisition, and utility relocation, if applicable. Applicants should indicate if they
will be seeking permission to use roadway design standards that are different from those
generally applied by the State in which the project is located. As part of this portion of the
narrative, the applicant must include a detailed activity schedule that identifies all major project
and strategy milestones. Examples of such milestones include State and local planning
approvals; start and completion of the NEPA process and other Federal environmental reviews
and approvals including permitting; design completion; right of way acquisition; utility

relocation; approval of plans, specifications, and estimates; procurement; public involvement;
partnership and implementation agreements; and construction. Environmental review
documentation should describe in detail known project impacts and possible mitigation for those
impacts. When a project will result in impacts, an award recipient must take steps to engage the
public. At a minimum, the project readiness narrative and detailed project activity schedule must
include the applicability and disposition of: NEPA and Federal environment reviews and
approvals; utility relocation; and right-of-way acquisition. For additional guidance and resources,
visit https://www.transportation.gov/grants/SS4A.
Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet
Submit a completed Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet demonstrating that the jurisdiction
has an Action Plan that meets the requirements described in Table 1: Action Plan Components.
Map
The applicant must submit a map in both PDF and spatial format (e.g., Shapefile, .KML) that
shows the location of the jurisdiction and highlights the roadway network under the applicant’s
jurisdiction. The map should show the jurisdiction’s high-injury network and potential locations
of the projects and strategies.
Estimated Budget
This section of the application should describe the budget for the SS4A proposal. Applicants are
required to submit an Implementation Grant Supplemental Estimated Budget that provides an
overview of estimated activity costs, organized by all major cost elements. The budget should
provide itemized estimates of the costs by separating different locations and/or different sets of
proposed projects and strategies that address a similar safety problem and provide a breakdown
of the major individual components that contribute to each of the line items. This information

should include capital costs for infrastructure safety improvements and/or costs associated with
behavioral and operational safety projects and strategies. The section should also distinguish
between the three eligible activity elements: (A) supplemental planning and demonstration
activities in support of an existing Action Plan; (B) conducting planning, design, and
development activities for projects and strategies identified in an Action Plan; and (C) carrying
out projects and strategies identified in an Action Plan. See Section C.3 for more information on
eligible activities.
Implementation Grant Supplemental Estimated Budgets should show how different funding
sources will contribute to each activity and present the data in whole dollars. A template for the
supplemental budget is available at https://www.transportation.gov/grants/ss4a/implementation-
grant-budget-template. Funding sources should be grouped into four categories: SS4A funding
request, SS4A non-Federal match, total SS4A project cost, and other Federal funds (if
applicable), with specific amounts for each funding source. Estimated costs or value of in-kind
matches should also be provided. The budget should show how each source of funds will be
spent. This budget should not include any previously incurred expenses, or costs to be incurred
before the time of award and obligation because these expenses are not eligible for
reimbursement or cost-sharing. This table should be completed in a manner consistent with the
Federal funding amount, non-Federal share, and total project cost in the SF-424 form. This table
should be completed in a manner consistent with the SF-424 in terms of total project cost, SS4A
Federal share, and SS4A cost sharing/match.

Table 5: Implementation Grant Supplemental Estimated Budget
Activities
SS4A
Federal
Funding
Request
SS4A Non-
Federal
Match
Total SS4A
Project Cost
Other
Federal
Funds (if
applicable)
Itemized Estimated Costs of the (A) Supplemental Action Plan Activities (if applicable)
Supplemental Planning or
Demonstration Activity #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Supplemental Planning or
Demonstration Activity #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Component
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Subtotal Budget for (A)
Supplemental Action
Plan Activities
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Itemized Estimated Costs of the (B) Planning, Design, and Development Activities
Planning, Design, and
Development - Location or
Project #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Planning, Design, and
Development - Location or
Project #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00

Activities
SS4A
Federal
Funding
Request
SS4A Non-
Federal
Match
Total SS4A
Project Cost
Other
Federal
Funds (if
applicable)
Individual Component for
Location or Project #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Subtotal Budget for (B)
Conducting Planning,
Design, and Development
Activities
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Itemized Estimated Costs of the (C) Proposed Projects and Strategies
Implementation - Location
or Project #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Implementation - Location
or Project #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Individual Component for
Location or Project #2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Subtotal Budget for (C)
Carrying Out Projects
and Strategies
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Total Budget for
Activities (A), (B), and
(C)
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00

F. Submission Requirements and Deadlines
1. Address to Request Application Package
All grant application materials can be accessed at grants.gov under opportunity number DOT-
SS4A-FY26-01. Potential applicants may also request paper copies of materials at:

Email: SS4A@dot.gov
Phone: 202-948-3466 (Telecommunication Relay Service: 7-1-1)
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
W84-237
Washington, DC 20590
2. Unique Entity Identifier and the System for Award Management (SAM)
Each applicant is required to:
a. Be registered in SAM (https://sam.gov/content/home) before submitting its
application;
b. Provide an active unique entity identifier in its application; and
c. Continue to maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times
during which it has an active Federal award or an application or plan under
consideration by a Federal awarding agency.
DOT may not make a Federal award to an applicant until the applicant has complied with all
applicable unique entity identifier and SAM requirements and, if an applicant has not fully

complied with the requirements by the time DOT is ready to make an award, DOT may
determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive an award and use that determination as a
basis for making an award to another applicant.
3. Submission Instructions
Applicants must submit their applications electronically via Valid Eval at:
https://usg.valideval.com/teams/usdot_ss4a_2026_planning_demo/signup for Planning and
Demonstration Grant applicants
https://usg.valideval.com/teams/usdot_ss4a_2026_implementation/signup for Implementation
Grant applicants
For technical assistance with Valid Eval, applicants should contact Valid Eval at
support@valideval.com.
4. Submission Dates and Times
This NOFO has a single application deadline for both Planning and Demonstration and
Implementation Grant applicants. All applications must be submitted by 5:00 PM (EDT) on
Tuesday, May 26, 2026. Applications cannot be submitted to Valid Eval after the deadline. Late
applications will not be considered unless there is a technical issue directly caused by the online
proposal submission system (Valid Eval), and the applicant contacts Valid Eval at
support@valideval.com describing the technical issue no later than 1:00 PM (EDT) on Tuesday,
May 26, 2026.
Pre-application submissions to review an applicant’s Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet
must be received via email at or before 5:00 PM (EDT) on April 24, 2026.

5. Intergovernmental Review
This program is not subject to intergovernmental review and applicants should select "c" on Box
19 of the SF-424 form.
G. Application Review Information
1. Merit Criteria
This section specifies the criteria DOT will use to evaluate and select applications for SS4A
grant awards. All complete applications from eligible applicants will be reviewed against the
merit criteria. Planning and Demonstration Grants and Implementation Grants, respectively, each
have their own set of application review and merit criteria.
i.
Planning and Demonstration Grant Merit Criteria
For Planning and Demonstration Grants, DOT will use three merit criteria to evaluate proposals.
DOT will evaluate each application narrative against merit criteria #1 Safety Context using the
rubric table provided below. Individual ratings of High, Medium, Low, or Non-Responsive will
be assigned to each Planning and Demonstration Grant component included in the proposal –
developing a new Action Plan, conducting supplemental planning to update an existing plan,
and/or carrying out demonstration activities to inform the development or update of an Action
Plan. Together, the individual component ratings will roll up into an overall rating for the Safety
Context merit criterion.
DOT will also evaluate quantitative data in two criteria: #2 Safety Impact; and #3 Underserved
Communities. The adequacy and reasonableness of costs will also be considered.

Merit Criterion #1: Safety Context Rubric Table
Merit
Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
New/Updated
Action Plan
The project is not
connected to an
Action Plan; the
narrative indicates
the proposal is
expected to
negatively affect
roadway safety; or
the narrative does
not contain sufficient
information.

The project is expected to make
a very limited advancement in
safety planning. The proposal
is weakly tied to safety
planning.

The narrative is missing two or
more of the components below,
and/or contains insufficient
information to assess the
project’s impact:
•
A clear description of
the Action Plan scope
of work to be
performed;
•
A clear description of
the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
Action Plan
development;
•
A clear and detailed
approach to developing
an Action Plan that
contains all required
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO, with a clear
goal to engage with a
variety of stakeholders
to identify evidence-
based, high-impact,
The project is expected to
moderately advance safety
planning, however the
narrative is missing clear or
detailed descriptions of one of
the following components:
•
A clear description of
the Action Plan scope
of work to be
performed;
•
A clear description of
the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
Action Plan
development;
•
A clear and detailed
approach to developing
an Action Plan that
contains all required
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO, with a clear
goal to engage with a
variety of stakeholders
to identify evidence-
based, high-impact,
low-cost, and
innovative strategies for
all road users.
The project is expected to
strongly advance safety
planning.

The narrative includes ALL of
the following components:
•
A very clear and
detailed description of
the Action Plan scope of
work to be performed;
•
A very clear and
detailed description of
the specific local
roadway safety issues
that necessitate Action
Plan development;
•
A very clear and
detailed approach to
developing an Action
Plan that contains all
required components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO, with a clear
goal to engage with a
variety of stakeholders
to identify evidence-
based, high-impact,
low-cost, and
innovative strategies for
all road users.

Merit
Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
low-cost, and
innovative strategies for
all road users.
Supplemental
Planning
The project is not
connected to
Supplemental
Planning activities;
the narrative
indicates the
proposal is expected
to negatively affect
roadway safety; or
the narrative does
not contain sufficient
information.

The project is expected to make
a very limited advancement in
safety planning. The proposal
is weakly tied to safety
planning.

The narrative is missing two or
more of the components below,
and/or contains insufficient
information to assess the
project’s impact:
•
A clear description of
the Supplemental
Planning scope of work
to be performed;
•
A clear description of
the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
the Supplemental
Planning activities;
•
A clear description of
how the funded
Supplemental Planning
activities will inform an
Action Plan and
identify evidence-based,
high-impact, low-cost,
and innovative
strategies for all road
users.
The project is expected to
moderately advance safety
planning, however the
narrative is missing clear or
detailed descriptions of one of
the following components:
•
A clear description of
the Supplemental
Planning scope of work
to be performed;
•
A clear description of
the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
the Supplemental
Planning activities;
•
A clear description of
how the funded
Supplemental Planning
activities will inform an
Action Plan that
contains all required
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO.
The project is expected to
strongly advance safety
planning.

The narrative includes ALL of
the following components:
•
A very clear description
of the Supplemental
Planning scope of work
to be performed;
•
A very clear description
of the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
the Supplemental
Planning activities;
•
A very clear description
of how the funded
Supplemental Planning
activities will inform an
Action Plan that
contains all required
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO.

Merit
Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
Demonstration
Activities
The project is not
connected to
Demonstration
Activities; the
narrative indicates
the proposal is
expected to
negatively affect
roadway safety; or
the narrative does
not contain sufficient
information.

The project is expected to make
a very limited advancement in
safety planning. The proposal
is weakly tied to safety
planning.

The narrative is missing two or
more of the components below,
and/or contains insufficient
information to assess the
project’s impact:
•
A clear description of
the scope of work for
the Demonstration
Activities to be
performed;
•
A schedule showing
when the
Demonstration
Activities will occur
and the start/end dates
of the work;
•
A clear description of
the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
the Demonstration
Activities;
•
A clear description of
how the funded
Demonstration
Activities will inform
an Action Plan that
contains all required
The project is expected to
moderately advance safety
planning, however the narrative
is missing one of the following
components:
•
A clear description of
the scope of work for
the Demonstration
Activities to be
performed;
•
A schedule showing
when the
Demonstration
Activities will occur
and the start/end dates
of the work;
•
A clear description of
the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
the Demonstration
Activities;
•
A clear description of
how the funded
Demonstration
Activities will inform
an Action Plan that
contains all required
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO, and help to
identify evidence-based,
high-impact strategies
for all road users;
The project is expected to
strongly advance safety
planning.

The narrative includes ALL of
the following components:
•
A very clear description
of the scope of work for
Demonstration
Activities to be
performed;
•
A detailed schedule
showing when the
Demonstration
Activities will occur
and the start/end dates
of the work;
•
A very clear description
of the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
the Demonstration
Activities;
•
A very clear description
of how the funded
Demonstration
Activities will inform
an Action Plan that
contains all required
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO, and help to
identify evidence-based,

Merit
Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO, and help to
identify evidence-based,
high-impact strategies
for all road users;
•
A clear description of
an approach to
measuring the potential
safety benefits of the
Demonstration
Activities through data
collection and
evaluation.
•
A clear description of
an approach to
measuring the potential
safety benefits of the
Demonstration
Activities through data
collection and
evaluation.
high-impact strategies
for all road users;
•
A very clear description
of an approach to
measuring the potential
safety benefits of the
Demonstration
Activities through data
collection and
evaluation.

Merit Criterion #2: Safety Impact
DOT will assess the proposal’s Safety Impact using two quantitative ratings that DOT will
calculate based on materials provided in the Key Information Table, map, and nationally
available data:
• The count of roadway fatalities from 2019-2023 data based on DOT’s FARS data, an
alternative traffic crash dataset, or a comparable data set with roadway fatality
information. 12
• The fatality rate, which is calculated using a 5-year annual average from the total count of
fatalities (based on FARS data or an alternative traffic crash dataset from 2019-2023)
divided by the population of the applicant’s jurisdiction based on 2020 population data
from the U.S. Census. The rate should be normalized per 100,000 persons.13
Merit Criterion #3: Underserved Communities
DOT will assess the Underserved Communities merit criterion using one quantitative rating that
DOT will calculate using the definition of Underserved Community in this NOFO and the
mapped jurisdictions included in the application:
• The percentage of the population in the applicant’s jurisdiction that resides in an
Underserved Community Census tract. 14
• Population of a Census tract, either a tract that is an Underserved Community or not,
must be based on 2020 U.S. Census data.

12 https://cdan.dot.gov/query
13 https://www.transportation.gov/grants/ss4a/calculating-average-annual-fatality-rate-ss4a
14 List of Areas of Persistent Poverty and Historically Disadvantaged Communities | US Department of
Transportation

Selection Consideration: Budget Costs
DOT will assess the extent to which the budget and costs to perform the proposed activities are
reasonable, necessary, and allocable based on 2 CFR § 200.404 and 405, and the extent to which
the application delineates the breakdown of Federal funds requested between developing an
Action Plan, conducting supplemental planning to update an existing plan, and/or carrying out
demonstration activities to inform the development or update of an Action Plan. DOT also will
review whether costs are reasonable and adequate if the amount requested is under $100,000.
Selection Consideration: High Fatality Rates
To prioritize areas with the highest fatality rates, DOT may prioritize SS4A Planning and
Demonstration Grant applications with a quantitative fatality rate of 17.5 fatalities per 100,000
persons or greater.15
Selection Consideration: No Prior SS4A Funding
DOT may prioritize SS4A Planning and Demonstration Grant applicants that have not received
SS4A funding previously.
ii.
Implementation Grant Merit Criteria
Implementation Grants have four required merit criteria: #1 Safety Need; #2 Safety Impact; #3
Implementation Costs, and #4 Engagement and Collaboration. An additional optional merit
criterion #5 Supplemental Planning and Demonstration Activities is only required for
Implementation Grant applicants requesting funds to conduct supplemental planning and/or carry
out demonstration activities.

15 The 90th percentile threshold value of 17.46 was derived from the 5-year average (2018-2022) fatality rate for all
counties with a population of 50,000+, and all cities with a population of 5,000+

DOT will evaluate application narratives against each of the merit criteria using the rubric table
provided below. Individual ratings of High, Medium, Low, or Non-Responsive will be
assigned to each merit criteria. Together, the individual merit criterion ratings will roll up into an
overall application rating of Highly Recommended, Recommended, Acceptable, or Not
Recommended.
Two additional factors will be used in the selection process: Project Readiness and Award
Considerations. The response to each criterion, to the extent practicable, should be aligned with
the applicant’s Action Plan.

Implementation Grant Merit Criteria Rubric Table
Merit Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
Safety Need
The narrative
does not address
a safety
problem

Project
negatively
affects safety

The narrative is missing two of
the components below, and/or
contains insufficient
information to assess the
project’s safety need:
•
The safety problem to be
addressed is well-
articulated and is clearly
supported by strong data
and analysis, including
historical trends, fatal
and serious injury crash
locations, contributing
factors, and crash types
by category of road user;
•
The locations of crashes
and/or crash risk
associated with the
specific safety problem
are clearly described
and displayed on a
High Injury Network
or equivalent map;
•
Safety risk is
summarized from risk
models, hazard analysis,
the identification of
high-risk roadway
features, road safety
The narrative demonstrates the
proposal is addressing an
existing safety problem, however
the narrative is missing one of
the following components:
•
The safety problem to be
addressed is well-
articulated and is clearly
supported by strong data
and analysis, including
historical trends, fatal
and serious injury crash
locations, contributing
factors, and crash types
by category of road user;
•
The locations of crashes
and/or crash risk
associated with the
specific safety problem
are clearly described
and displayed on a
High Injury Network
or equivalent map;
•
Safety risk is
summarized from risk
models, hazard analysis,
the identification of
high-risk roadway
features, road safety
The narrative demonstrates the
proposal is addressing a
substantial and documented
safety problem.

The narrative addresses ALL of
the following components:
•
The safety problem to be
addressed is well-
articulated and is clearly
supported by strong data
and analysis, including
historical trends, fatal and
serious injury crash
locations, contributing
factors, and crash types
by category of road user;
•
The locations of crashes
and/or crash risk
associated with the
specific safety problem
are clearly described
and displayed on a High
Injury Network or
equivalent map;
•
Safety risk is
summarized from risk
models, hazard analysis,
the identification of high-

Merit Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
audits/assessments, near
miss data, and/or other
proactive safety
analyses.
audits/assessments, near
miss data, and/or other
proactive safety
analyses.
risk roadway features,
road safety audits/
assessments, near miss
data, and/or other
proactive safety analyses.
Safety Impact
The projects and
strategies do not
address the
safety problem

Project
negatively
affects safety
The proposed projects and
strategies are missing more than
four of the components below
and/or the narrative contains
insufficient information to
assess the project’s safety need:
•
Are primarily on a
High Injury Network
or address high-risk
roadway features
correlated with severe
crash types;
•
Significantly reduce or
eliminate roadway
fatalities and serious
injuries involving
various road users;
•
Use low-cost, high-
impact strategies and
projects over a wide
geographical area;
•
Use evidence-based,
FHWA Proven Safety
Countermeasures
and/or NHTSA’s
Countermeasures that
Work, and/or other
documented highly
effective safety
The proposed projects and
strategies align with and address
an identified safety problem,
however the projects and
strategies are missing three or
four of the following
components:
•
Are primarily on a
High Injury Network
or address high-risk
roadway features
correlated with severe
crash types;
•
Significantly reduce or
eliminate roadway
fatalities and serious
injuries involving
various road users;
•
Use low-cost, high-
impact strategies and
projects over a wide
geographical area;
•
Use evidence-based,
FHWA Proven Safety
Countermeasures
and/or NHTSA’s
Countermeasures that
Work, and/or other
documented highly
The proposed projects and
strategies align with and
comprehensively address the
safety problem and provide
significant, documented, and
data-driven safety benefits.

The proposed projects and
strategies meet at least five of the
following components and are
addressed in the narrative:
•
Are primarily on a High
Injury Network or
address high-risk
roadway features
correlated with severe
crash types;
•
Significantly reduce or
eliminate roadway
fatalities and serious
injuries involving various
road users;
•
Use low-cost, high-
impact strategies and
projects over a wide
geographical area;
•
Use evidence-based,
FHWA Proven Safety
Countermeasures

Merit Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
countermeasures to
significantly improve
existing roadways;
•
Measure safety through
models, studies, reports,
proven noteworthy
practices, or Crash
Modification Factors
(CMF);
•
Will have safety benefits
that persist over time;
•
Incorporate technologies
that promote safety.
effective safety
countermeasures to
significantly improve
existing roadways;
•
Measure safety through
models, studies, reports,
proven noteworthy
practices, or Crash
Modification Factors
(CMF);
•
Will have safety benefits
that persist over time;
•
Incorporate technologies
that promote safety.
and/or NHTSA’s
Countermeasures that
Work, and/or other
documented highly
effective safety
countermeasures to
significantly improve
existing roadways;
•
Measure safety through
models, studies, reports,
proven noteworthy
practices, or Crash
Modification Factors
(CMF);
•
Will have safety benefits
that persist over time;
•
Incorporate technologies
that promote safety.
Implementation
Costs
Cost information
and/or fatality
and serious
injury
information are
not provided.
The costs for the implementation
of the projects and strategies are
missing more than one of the
components below and/or
insufficient information is
provided to assess the
reasonableness of costs for
implementation of projects and
strategies.
•
Costs are clearly
itemized and
summarized in a logical
manner;
The costs for the implementation
of the projects and strategies are
summarized in the supplemental
budget and narrative and are
reasonable based on the
projects/strategies being
proposed, but the application is
missing one of the following
components:
•
Costs are clearly
itemized and
summarized in a logical
manner;
The costs for the implementation
of the projects and strategies are
summarized in the supplemental
budget and narrative.

The applications addresses ALL
of the following components:
•
Costs are clearly
itemized and
summarized in a logical
manner in the
supplemental budget
and narrative

Merit Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
•
Costs are reasonable
based on the
projects/strategies being
proposed;
•
The projects and
strategies make
effective use of Federal
funds to address
locations with high
fatalities proportionate
to the amount of
funding requested.
•
Costs are reasonable
based on the
projects/strategies being
proposed;
•
The projects and
strategies make
effective use of Federal
funds to address
locations with high
fatalities proportionate
to the amount of
funding requested.
•
Costs are reasonable and
necessary based on the
projects/strategies being
proposed;
•
The projects and
strategies make effective
use of Federal funds to
address locations with
high fatalities
proportionate to the
amount of funding
requested.
Engagement
and
Collaboration
The narrative
does not address
the engagement
and collaboration
criterion or there
is a demonstrated
lack of support
for the project

The narrative is missing more
than two of the following
components and/or contains
insufficient information to
assess the engagement and
collaboration benefits:
•
Ensures investment in
preventing roadway
fatalities and serious
injuries in underserved
communities including
rural communities;
•
Includes demographic
analysis, both qualitative
and quantitative, and
stakeholder engagement
as part of the project
development and
implementation process;
•
Includes or will include
meaningful engagement
with the public during all
General engagement is described
that is not specific to the
planning and implementation of
the proposed projects/strategies.
The narrative is missing one or
two of the following
components:
•
Ensures investment in
preventing roadway
fatalities and serious
injuries in underserved
communities including
rural communities;
•
Includes demographic
analysis, both qualitative
and quantitative, and
stakeholder engagement
as part of the project
development and
implementation process;
•
Includes or will include
meaningful engagement
The narrative clearly
demonstrates plans to ensure
investment in the safety needs of
underserved communities, as well
as engagement with a variety of
public and private stakeholders.
The narrative has clear and direct
evidence of engagement and
collaboration in relation to the
implementation of the proposed
projects and strategies.

The narrative addresses ALL of
the following components:
•
Ensures investment in
preventing roadway
fatalities and serious
injuries in underserved
communities including
rural communities;
•
Includes demographic
analysis, both qualitative

Merit Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
phases of the project
such as planning, design,
construction, and
implementation;
•
Leverages partnerships
within the applicant
jurisdiction, with other
government entities,
non-governmental
organizations, the private
sector, academic
institutions, or other
relevant stakeholders to
achieve safety benefits
while avoiding negative
consequences for the
community.
with the public during all
phases of the project
such as planning, design,
construction, and
implementation;
•
Leverages partnerships
within the applicant
jurisdiction, with other
government entities,
non-governmental
organizations, the private
sector, academic
institutions, or other
relevant stakeholders to
achieve safety benefits
while avoiding negative
consequences for the
community.
and quantitative, and
stakeholder engagement
as part of the project
development and
implementation process;
•
Includes or will include
meaningful engagement
with the public during all
phases of the project such
as planning, design,
construction, and
implementation;
•
Leverages partnerships
within the applicant
jurisdiction, with other
government entities, non-
governmental
organizations, the private
sector, academic
institutions, or other
relevant stakeholders to
achieve safety benefits
while avoiding negative
consequences for the
community.

Merit Criterion #5: Supplemental Planning and Demonstration Activities
Merit Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
Supplemental
Planning
The project is not
connected to
Supplemental
Planning activities;
the narrative
indicates the
proposal is expected
to negatively affect
roadway safety; or
the narrative does
not contain
sufficient
information.

The project is expected to make
a very limited advancement in
safety planning. The proposal
is weakly tied to safety
planning.

The narrative is missing two or
more of the components below,
and/or contains insufficient
information to assess the
project’s impact:
•
A clear description of
the Supplemental
Planning scope of work
to be performed;
•
A clear description of
the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
the Supplemental
Planning activities;
•
A clear description of
how the funded
Supplemental Planning
activities will inform an
Action Plan and
identify evidence-
based, high-impact,
low-cost, and
innovative strategies
for all road users.
The project is expected to
moderately advance safety
planning, however the
narrative is missing clear or
detailed descriptions of one of
the following components:
•
A clear description of
the Supplemental
Planning scope of work
to be performed;
•
A clear description of
the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
the Supplemental
Planning activities;
•
A clear description of
how the funded
Supplemental Planning
activities will inform an
Action Plan that
contains all required
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO.
The project is expected to
strongly advance safety
planning.

The narrative includes ALL of
the following components:
•
A very clear
description of the
Supplemental Planning
scope of work to be
performed;
•
A very clear
description of the
roadway safety issues
that necessitate the
Supplemental Planning
activities;
•
A very clear
description of how the
funded Supplemental
Planning activities will
inform an Action Plan
that contains all
required components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO.

Merit Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
Demonstration
Activities
The project is not
connected to
Demonstration
Activities; the
narrative indicates
the proposal is
expected to
negatively affect
roadway safety; or
the narrative does
not contain
sufficient
information.

The project is expected to make
a very limited advancement in
safety planning. The proposal
is weakly tied to safety
planning.

The narrative is missing two or
more of the components below,
and/or contains insufficient
information to assess the
project’s impact:
•
A clear description of
the scope of work for
the Demonstration
Activities to be
performed;
•
A schedule showing
when the
Demonstration
Activities will occur
and the start/end dates
of the work;
•
A clear description of
the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
the Demonstration
Activities;
•
A clear description of
how the funded
Demonstration
Activities will inform
an Action Plan that
contains all required
The project is expected to
moderately advance safety
planning, however the
narrative is missing one of the
following components:
•
A clear description of
the scope of work for
the Demonstration
Activities to be
performed;
•
A schedule showing
when the
Demonstration
Activities will occur
and the start/end dates
of the work;
•
A clear description of
the roadway safety
issues that necessitate
the Demonstration
Activities;
•
A clear description of
how the funded
Demonstration
Activities will inform
an Action Plan that
contains all required
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO, and help to
identify evidence-
based, high-impact
The project is expected to
strongly advance safety
planning.

The narrative includes ALL of
the following components:
•
A very clear
description of the scope
of work for
Demonstration
Activities to be
performed;
•
A detailed schedule
showing when the
Demonstration
Activities will occur
and the start/end dates
of the work;
•
A very clear
description of the
roadway safety issues
that necessitate the
Demonstration
Activities;
•
A very clear
description of how the
funded Demonstration
Activities will inform
an Action Plan that
contains all required
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO, and help to

Merit Criteria
Non-Responsive
Low
Medium
High
components as
described in Table 1 of
the NOFO, and help to
identify evidence-
based, high-impact
strategies for all road
users;
•
A clear description of
an approach to
measuring the potential
safety benefits of the
Demonstration
Activities through data
collection and
evaluation.
strategies for all road
users;
•
A clear description of
an approach to
measuring the potential
safety benefits of the
Demonstration
Activities through data
collection and
evaluation.
identify evidence-
based, high-impact
strategies for all road
users;
•
A very clear
description of an
approach to measuring
the potential safety
benefits of the
Demonstration
Activities through data
collection and
evaluation.

Selection Consideration: Project Readiness
DOT will review and consider Project Readiness in application selection. Project Readiness
focuses on the extent to which the applicant will be able to complete the full scope of work in the
Implementation Grant application within five years of when the grant agreement is executed.
This includes information related to required design and construction standards, as well as
environmental, permitting, and approval processes. DOT also will review and consider how soon
the applicant expects to be able to execute a grant agreement based on the project’s readiness.
DOT will evaluate the extent to which the application:
• Documents all applicable local, State, and Federal requirements;
• Includes information on activity schedule, required permits and approvals, the NEPA
class of action and status, State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) status (if applicable), public involvement,
right-of-way acquisition plans, procurement schedules, multi-party agreements, utility
relocation plans, and risk and mitigation strategies, as appropriate; and
• Is reasonably expected to begin any construction-related projects in a timely manner
consistent with all applicable local, State, and Federal requirements.
2. Review and Selection Process
This section addresses the IIJA requirement to publish the methodology for evaluation in the
NOFO, 16 including how applications advance through the evaluation process and the other
considerations made during selection. DOT may utilize reviewers from within DOT or other

16 See IIJA, Pub. L. 117-58, 135 Stat. 429, 816–17, § 24112(d)(4).

Federal agencies. The SS4A grant program review and selection process consists of eligibility
reviews, merit criteria review, Senior Review Team consideration and a final selection by the
Secretary.
i.
Eligibility Review
Teams of Department and contractor support staff will review all applications to determine
eligibility based on the Eligibility Information in Section C. This process includes confirmation
that the applicant is an eligible entity and has an active UEI. Applications will also be reviewed
for completeness.
If DOT cannot confirm eligibility based on the above considerations, the applicant will be
contacted and given an opportunity to provide clarifications and/or updated materials.
Eligible applications will be reviewed for merit based on the merit criteria in Section G.1.
The review teams will examine the locations of the applicants to identify if an applicant is
requesting funds to develop an Action Plan in a geographic area that previously received SS4A
funds to develop an Action Plan, as well as any potential overlap in geographic boundaries in
funding requests for FY 2026. DOT will assess the extent to which the application to develop an
Action Plan is duplicative of existing or proposed activities and reserves the right to advise
applicants with duplicative funding requests to consolidate their efforts as one multijurisdictional
group prior to receiving an award. DOT may decline to fund duplicative applications irrespective
of their individual merits. Planning and Demonstration Grant Review and Selection Process
ii.
Planning and Demonstration Grant Review and Selection Process
Overall Selection Process and Ratings
All eligible SS4A Planning and Demonstration Grant applications receive a Merit Criteria
Review to see how well the project described in the application aligns with the Safety Context

merit criterion listed in Section G.1.i. DOT staff will evaluate the significance of the benefits and
the extent to which the proposal is likely to achieve the benefits described in the application.
For Merit Criteria #1 Safety Context, each eligible Planning and Demonstration Grant
application narrative will be reviewed for its merit based on the Safety Context merit criteria in
Section G.1.i. Each application narrative will be reviewed and assessed, and then receive a rating
of Highly Recommended, Recommended, Acceptable, or Not Recommended. Applications
that do not address Merit Criteria #1 Safety Context are deemed “not qualified” and will not be
considered for award.
For Merit Criteria #2 Safety Impact and #3 Underserved Communities, the review team will rate
eligible applications numerically based on information provided in the application materials and
nationally available data.
Safety Context Criterion Rating Methodology
Each Planning and Demonstration Grant application is reviewed to determine which eligible
activities are included in the proposal – developing a new Action Plan, conducting supplemental
planning to update an existing plan, and carrying out demonstration activities to inform the
development or update of an Action Plan.
Each component is assigned a rating of High, Medium, Low, or Non-Responsive, according to
the rubric table in Section G.1.i. The individual ratings are tallied to calculate an overall merit
rating of: Highly Recommended, Recommended, Acceptable, or Not Recommended based
on the table below.

Safety Context Component
Ratings (Update/New Action
Plan, Supplemental Planning,
Demonstration Activities)
Overall Criteria #1
Safety Context Rating
Justification
All "High"
Highly Recommended
Consistent excellence across all proposed
activities.
Mixed "High" and "Medium"
Highly Recommended
The application shows strong merit; minor
weaknesses in some activities do not
outweigh primary goals. If more than 1
element is rated “Medium”, then the
overall rating is “Recommended.”
"High" and "Low"
Recommended
A "Low" in any activity (like
Demonstration Activities) suggests a lack
of readiness that prevents a "High" overall
rating. If more than 1 element is rated
“Low”, then the overall rating is
“Acceptable.”
All "Medium"
Recommended
Solid application that meets all basic
requirements.
Two or more “Low”
Acceptable
A “Low” in more than one category
demonstrates a lack of readiness/clarity
about the project being proposed.
All “Low”
Acceptable
Insufficient information is provided.
Any "Not Responsive"
Not Recommended
Fails to meet the basic requirements of the
NOFO.

iii.
Implementation Grant Review and Selection Process
Overall Selection Process and Ratings
All eligible Implementation Grant applications receive a Merit Criteria Review to see how well
the project described in the application aligns with the merit criteria listed in Section G.1.ii: #1
Safety Need; #2 Safety Impact; #3 Implementation Costs; and #4 Engagement and
Collaboration. Based on the individual merit criterion ratings, DOT will assign an overall
application rating of Highly Recommended, Recommended, Acceptable, or Not
Recommended based on the evaluation team consensus discussion, and using the rubric table
below. The merit criteria are weighted according to importance.

Implementation Grant applications that include supplemental planning or demonstration
activities will also be reviewed for criterion #5 Supplemental Planning and Demonstration
Activities, but it will not affect the overall Implementation Grant rating. Instead, DOT will use
the information to determine whether the supplemental planning and/or demonstration activities
should be funded as part of the overall project. DOT is more likely to fund, as part of an overall
implementation project, supplemental planning and demonstration activities that rate well on
criterion #5. Alternatively, DOT may award an Implementation Grant but exclude proposed
supplemental planning or demonstration activities from the scope of the award if those activities
were not rated well under criterion #5.
Implementation Grant Application Rating Methodology
Overall Merit
Rating
Criteria Ratings
Highly
Recommended
At least 3 of the 4 merit criteria ratings are “High”. The Safety Impact rating must
be “High.”
None of the merit criteria ratings are “Low” or “Non-Responsive”
Recommended
At least 2 of the 4 merit criteria ratings are “High”
None of the merit criteria ratings are “Low” or “Non-Responsive”
Acceptable
Any combination of “High” and “Medium” not described above, and no more than
2 “Low” merit criteria ratings. None of the merit criteria ratings are “Non-
Responsive.” Safety Impact is not “Low.”
Not
Recommended
Ratings that do not fit the definitions of Highly Recommended, Recommended, or
Acceptable.

Project Readiness Criterion Rating Methodology
All Implementation Grant applications will also receive a Project Readiness evaluation, as
described below. The reviewers will use the application materials to assess the applicant’s
Project Readiness and will provide a rating of either “Likely” or “Unlikely” based on the table
below.

Likely
Unlikely
Based on the information provided in the
application and the proposed scope of the
projects and strategies, it is likely the
applicant can execute a grant agreement
within 1 year and complete all projects and
strategies within 5 years of grant agreement
execution. Application provides information
on NEPA status, utility relocation, right-of-
way acquisition, and other project
implementation requirements.
Based on the information provided in the
application and the proposed scope of the
projects and strategies, it is uncertain whether
the applicant can execute a grant agreement
within 1 year and complete all projects and
strategies within 5 years of grant agreement
execution. Application is missing information
on NEPA status, and whether utility
relocation and/or right-of-way acquisition is
required.

iv.
Senior Review Team Phase
The Senior Review Team (SRT), comprised of senior DOT officials, determines which highly
rated Implementation Grant and Planning and Demonstration Grant applications will be
advanced for selection by the Secretary. The SRT may consider the following when determining
which applications to advance.
Favorable Considerations:
• Whether previous SS4A funding was awarded to the applicant to develop or update an
Action Plan;
• Letters of support, especially from relevant stakeholders and Public Safety Agencies and
associated Labor Unions representing First Responders;
• Higher percentage of Implementation Grant funds that will be spent in, and provide
safety benefits to, locations in Census tracts designated as underserved communities as
defined by this NOFO;17

17 See the definition of Underserved Community in Section B, which includes U.S. Census tracts identified as Areas
of Persistent Poverty.

• Applicants in a rural area;
• Geographic diversity of Implementation Grant award recipients;
• Principles from the DOT Order, Ensuring Reliance Upon Sound Economic Analysis in
DOT’s Policies, Programs and Activities;
• Beautifying transportation infrastructure with context-appropriate design and/or child-
friendly elements;
• At-grade highway rail crossing safety improvements (including railroad and rail transit);
• Truck Parking safety improvements with a clear roadway safety nexus;
• Applicants that best reflect the prioritization of reducing vagrancy as detailed in
Executive Order 14321 “Ending Crime and Disorder on America’s Streets.”; and
• Whether an applicant has a Killed and Serious Injuries per $1 million in Federal funding
rate that is high compared to other Highly Rated applications.
Less Favorable Considerations:
• Inclusion of infrastructure reducing level of service for vehicles or reducing access for
emergency vehicles, delivery vehicles, and vehicles serving the disabled;
• Inclusion of automated traffic enforcement, except in work zones, school zones, or
cameras affixed to school buses; and
• Inclusion of new dedicated bicycle lanes that reduce vehicular capacity or impair
movements.
Among well-rated applications, the SRT may prioritize Planning and Demonstration Grant
applicants and jurisdictions that have not received prior SS4A funding, as described in Section

G.1.i: Selection Consideration; the SRT may also prioritize Implementation Grant applicants and
jurisdictions that did not receive an SS4A Implementation Grant in previous funding rounds.
For each grant type, the SRT will present the list of Applications for Consideration to the
Secretary, either collectively or through a representative of the SRT. The SRT may advise the
Secretary on any application on the list of Applications for Consideration, including options for
reduced awards. The Secretary makes final selections of applications that best address program
requirements and are most worthy of funding.
If insufficient merit-worthy applications for Planning and Demonstration Grants are received for
DOT to award the full 30 percent of funding set aside for the planning and demonstration grants,
the SRT may redirect any such surplus funding toward merit-worthy Implementation Grants.
FY 2026 SS4A applications advanced by the SRT to the Highly Rated List, but that are not
awarded, are automatically designated as “Projects of Merit.” Projects with this designation will
be carried over into future potential SS4A rounds, subject to authorization and appropriations,
and considered by the SRT for advancement to the Highly Rated List, along with other
applications eligible for advancement to the Highly Rated List.
Planning and Demonstration Grant Senior Review Team Phase
Once every Planning and Demonstration Grant application has been reviewed based on the
methodology above, all applications with a Highly Recommended or Recommended Safety
Context rating will be included in a list of Applications for Consideration by the SRT. If the total
funding request for Planning and Demonstration Grants exceeds the funding available, the SRT
will consider quantitative merit criteria ratings for #2 Safety Impact and #3 Underserved
Communities as well as applicants that meet the criteria for Award Considerations.

Implementation Grant Senior Review Team Phase
Once every Implementation Grant application has been assigned an overall rating based on the
methodology above, all “Highly Recommended” applications will be included in a list of
Applications for Consideration by the Secretary. The SRT will review all “Highly
Recommended” applications that received an “Unlikely” project readiness rating, and either
remove those applicants from the Applications for Consideration or recommend a reduced scope
to remove components that reduced the project’s readiness, so that if awarded the applicant
would be likely to execute a grant agreement within one year and complete the scope of work
within five years of the grant agreement execution. The Secretary will consider the applications
with a reduced scope due to the “Unlikely” project readiness rating in the same way as
applications with a “Likely” rating.
In addition, to ensure the funding awards align to the extent practicable with the program goals,
the SRT may review and call up “Recommended” applications for substantial safety benefits.
SRT-identified “Recommended” applications with substantial safety benefits that would
otherwise be added to the Applications for Consideration will also receive a SRT project
readiness review similar to all “Highly Recommended” applications.
For applications that would not otherwise be included on the list of Applications for
Consideration, the SRT may include applications with supplemental planning and demonstration
activity funding that received a “High” or “Medium” rating for merit criterion #5
Supplemental Planning and Demonstration Activities. The SRT may recommend to the Secretary
that DOT fund a reduced scope of only the supplemental planning and demonstration activities
for these applications.

Risk Review
Pursuant to federal statute and regulation, DOT is required to review eligibility and financial
integrity information for applicants, available in databases designated by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), prior to making a Federal award.18
DOT is required to review the responsibility and qualification records available in the non-public
segment of SAM prior to making a Federal award where the Federal share is expected to exceed
the simplified acquisition threshold, defined at 41 U.S.C. § 134, over the period of performance.
An applicant can review and comment on any information in the responsibility/qualification
records available in SAM.
When assessing risk, DOT will consider:
• Financial stability. The applicant's record of effectively managing financial risks, assets,
and resources;
• Management systems and standards. Quality of management systems and ability to meet
the management standards prescribed in this part;
• History of performance. The applicant's record of managing previous and current
Federal awards, including compliance with reporting requirements and conformance to
the terms and conditions of Federal awards, if applicable;
• Audit reports and findings. Reports and findings from audits performed under subpart F
or the reports and findings of any other available audits, if applicable; and

18 See Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019, Pub. L. 116-117, 134 Stat. 113; 31 U.S.C. § 3354 (the “Do Not
Pay Initiative”); 41 U.S.C. § 2313; and 2 CFR § 200.206.

• Ability to effectively implement requirements. The applicant's ability to effectively
implement statutory, regulatory, or other requirements imposed on recipients of Federal
awards.
Before making decisions in the risk review required by § 200.206, DOT will consider any
comments by the applicant, along with information available in the responsibility/qualification
records in SAM.gov.
H. Federal Award Notices
The Secretary will announce awards no later than 270 days after issuing the NOFO. Following
the evaluation outlined in Section G, the Secretary will announce awarded applications by
posting a list of selected recipients at https://www.transportation.gov/grants/SS4A. The posting
of the list of selected award recipients will not constitute an authorization to begin performance.
Following the announcement, DOT will contact the point of contact listed in the SF-424 to
initiate negotiation of a grant agreement unless the applicant notifies DOT of a changed contact
via SS4A@dot.gov.
1. Availability of Funds
Grant funding obligation occurs when a selected applicant and DOT enter into a written grant
agreement after the applicant has satisfied applicable administrative requirements. Unless
authorized by DOT in writing after DOT’s announcement of FY 2026 SS4A grant awards, any
costs incurred prior to DOT’s obligation of funds for activities (“pre-award costs”) are ineligible
for reimbursement and may not be used as matching funds. If authorized by DOT in writing,
Implementation Grant award recipients may incur pre-award costs for NEPA and design

activities, and these expenses may count toward match or cost share. Applicants who expect to
request pre-award authority must clearly articulate such request in the application. DOT will
determine whether such pre-award costs may be counted toward match or cost share on a case-
by-case basis. All SS4A funds must be expended within five years after the grant agreement is
executed.
SS4A funds will reimburse recipients only after a grant agreement has been executed, allowable
expenses are incurred, and valid requests for reimbursement are submitted. Grant agreements are
expected to be administered on a reimbursement basis; and at DOT’s discretion alternative
funding arrangements may be established on a case-by-case basis.
In connection with any program or activity conducted with or benefiting from funds awarded
under this notice, recipients of funds must comply with all applicable requirements of Federal
law, including, without limitation, the Constitution of the United States; the conditions of
performance, nondiscrimination requirements, and other assurances made applicable to the
award of funds in accordance with applicable executive orders and the regulations of DOT; and
applicable Federal financial assistance and contracting principles promulgated by the OMB. In
complying with these requirements, recipients must ensure that no concession agreements are
denied, or other contracting decisions made on the basis of speech or other activities protected by
the First Amendment. If DOT determines that a recipient has failed to comply with applicable
Federal requirements, DOT may terminate the award of funds and disallow previously incurred
costs, requiring the recipient to reimburse any expended award funds.
I. Post-Award Requirements and Administration

1. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
i.
Compliance with Federal Law and Policies
Except where prohibited by court order, the applicant assures and certifies, with respect to any
application and awarded Project under this NOFO, that it will comply with all applicable Federal
laws, regulations, executive orders, policies, guidelines, and requirements as they relate to the
application, acceptance, and use of Federal funds.
ii.
Federal Anti-Discrimination
Except where prohibited by court order, pursuant to Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal
Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity, as a condition of grant award, each
Recipient must agree that its compliance in all respects with all applicable Federal anti-
discrimination laws is material to the government’s payment decisions for purposes of section
3729(b)(4) of Title 31, United States Code.
Except where prohibited by court order, pursuant to Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal
Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity, as a condition of grant award, each
Recipient must certify that it does not operate any programs promoting diversity, equity, and
inclusion (DEI) initiatives that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.
iii.
Civil Rights and Title VI
As a condition of a grant award, grant recipients should demonstrate that the recipient has a plan
for compliance with civil rights obligations and nondiscrimination laws, including Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 and implementing regulations (49 CFR Part 21), the ADA, and section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 794), all other civil rights requirements, and
accompanying regulations. This should include a current Title VI plan, completed Community

Participation Plan, and a plan to address any legacy infrastructure or facilities that are not
compliant with ADA standards. DOT’s and the applicable Operating Administrations’ Office of
Civil Rights may work with awarded grant recipients to ensure full compliance with Federal civil
rights requirements.
iv.
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)
Funding recipients must comply with NEPA under 42 U.S.C. § 4321. Obligation of Federal
funds for final design, right-of-way acquisition, utility relocation, and/or construction will not
occur until NEPA approval is received. In these cases, the grant agreement will require a partial
obligation of Federal funding until NEPA approval is obtained and a grant agreement
amendment to obligate additional funding after NEPA approval is received and documented.
v.
Domestic Preference Requirements
As expressed in Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by All
of America’s Workers (86 FR 7475), the executive branch should maximize, consistent with law,
the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.
Infrastructure projects and demonstration activities are subject to the Build America, Buy
America Act as clarified in OMB Memorandum M-24-02. 19 Projects under this notice are
subject to the domestic preference requirement at section 70914 of the Build America, Buy
America Act. DOT expects all recipients to comply with this requirement.

19 See IIJA, Pub. L. No. 117-58, Div. G, Title IX, Subtitle A, 135 Stat. 429, 1298, § 70914 (2021). For additional
information and guidance on section 70914, see OMB-24-02, available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2023/10/M-24-02-Buy-America-Implementation-Guidance-Update.pdf.

vi.
Labor and Workforce
Each applicant selected for SS4A grant funding must demonstrate, to the full extent possible
consistent with the law, an effort to create good-paying jobs with a free and fair choice to join a
union in project construction and in on-going operations and maintenance, and promote cost-
effectiveness and open competition through union participation and the use of project labor
agreements, registered apprenticeship programs, and other joint labor-management training
programs.
vii.
Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience
It is the policy of the United States to strengthen the security and resilience of its critical
infrastructure against all hazards, including physical and cyber threats, consistent with the
National Security Memorandum (NSM-22) on Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience,
and the National Security Memorandum on Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity for Critical
Infrastructure Control Systems. Each applicant selected for SS4A grant funding must
demonstrate, prior to the signing of the grant agreement, effort to consider and address physical
and cyber security risks relevant to the transportation mode and type and scale of the project.
Award recipients that have not appropriately considered and addressed physical and cyber
security and resilience in their planning, design, and project oversight, as determined by DOT
and the Department of Homeland Security, will be required to do so before receiving
Implementation Grant funds.
viii.
Other Administrative and Policy Requirements
All awards will be administered pursuant to the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards found in 2 CFR Part 200 as adopted by
DOT at 2 CFR Part 1201. In addition, as permitted under the requirements described above,

applicable Federal laws, rules, and regulations of the relevant operating administration (e.g., the
Federal Highway Administration) administering the activities will apply to the activities that
receive SS4A grants, including planning requirements, Stakeholder Agreements, and other
requirements under DOT’s other highway and transit grant programs. DOT anticipates grant
recipients to have varying levels of experience administering Federal funding agreements and
complying with Federal requirements, and DOT will take a risk-based approach to SS4A
program grant administration to ensure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.
Because award recipients under this program may be first-time recipients of Federal funding,
DOT is committed to implementing the program as flexibly as permitted by statute and to
assisting award recipients through the process of securing a grant agreement and delivering both
Planning and Demonstration Grant activities and Implementation Grant projects and strategies.
Award recipients are encouraged to identify any needs for assistance in delivering the
Implementation Grant projects and strategies so that DOT can provide directly, or through a third
party, sufficient support and technical assistance to mitigate potential execution risks.
2. Reporting
i.
Progress Reporting on Grant Activity
Reporting responsibilities for award recipients include quarterly program performance reports
using the Performance Progress Report (PPR) and quarterly financial status using the SF-425
(also known as the Federal Financial Report or SF-FFR). 20

20 https://www.grants.gov/forms/post-award-reporting-forms.html

Budget and recipient performance information will be gathered on a quarterly basis in PPR. To
fulfill the data collection requirements and in accordance with the DOT Public Access Plan,
award recipients must consider, budget for, and implement appropriate data management, for
data and information outputs acquired or generated during the course of the grant. 21, Federally
recognized Tribal governments receiving grants may request alternative data collection
requirements during grant agreement formulation, as appropriate. Applicants are expected to
account for data and performance reporting in their budget submission.
ii.
Post Award Reporting Requirements/Reporting of Matters Related to
Integrity and Performance
All award recipients shall submit a final report not later than 120 days after the end of the period
of performance. A link to submit this report electronically will be provided by the Operating
Administration (FHWA, FTA, or NHTSA) administering your grant. The content of the final
report includes:
• The costs of each eligible project and strategy carried out using the grant;
• The lessons learned and any recommendations relating to future projects or strategies to
prevent death and serious injury on roads and streets.
Recipients of Implementation Grants or Planning and Demonstration Grants with demonstration
activities must also provide:
• Safety performance data, including total fatalities and serious injuries, and fatalities by
road user category, and other outcomes and benefits in the project location(s);
• Information about project location(s).

21 https://doi.org/10.21949/1520559

Award recipients that develop, complete, or enhance an Action Plan must provide information to
support that the Action Plan satisfies each of the required Action Plan components listed in Table
1: Action Plan Components.
Award recipients carrying out demonstration activities must also:
• Measure potential benefits through data collection and evaluative activities, and
• Report to DOT how the demonstration activities informed an Action Plan’s list of
projects and strategies and future implementation.
iii.
General Reporting Requirement (Federal Share of SS4A Funds Over
$500,000)
If the total value of a selected applicant’s currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and
procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies exceeds $10,000,000 for any period of
time during the period of performance of this Federal award, the applicant during that period of
time must maintain the currency of information reported in SAM that is made available in the
designated integrity and performance system about civil, criminal, or administrative proceedings
described in Section I.2.iv: “Proceedings About Which Recipients Must Report” of this award
term and condition. This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Pub. L. No.110–417, as
amended (41 U.S.C. § 2313). As required by section 3010 of Pub. L. No. 111–212, all
information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15,
2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be
publicly available. In addition, if applicable, funding recipients must be in compliance with the
audit requirements in 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F.
iv.
Proceedings About Which Recipients Must Report
Recipients must submit the required information about each proceeding that:

• Is in connection with the award or performance of a grant, cooperative agreement, or
procurement contract from the Federal Government;
• Reached its final disposition during the most recent five-year period; and
• Is one of the following—
o A criminal proceeding that resulted in a conviction;
o A civil proceeding that resulted in a finding of fault and liability and payment of a
monetary fine, penalty, reimbursement, restitution, or damages of $5,000 or more;
o An administrative proceeding that resulted in a finding of fault and liability and
payment of either a monetary fine or penalty of $5,000 or more or reimbursement,
restitution, or damages in excess of $100,000; or
o Any other criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding if—
 It could have led to an outcome described in one of the three examples
cited above;
 It had a different disposition arrived at by consent or compromise with an
acknowledgment of fault on the recipient’s part; and
 The requirement in this award term to disclose information about the
proceeding does not conflict with applicable laws and regulations.
• Reporting Procedures. Enter the required information in SAM for each proceeding
described in paragraph (b) of this award term. Recipients do not need to submit the
information a second time under grants and cooperative agreements that the recipient
received if already provided the information in SAM because the recipient were required
to do so under Federal procurement contracts that the recipient was awarded.

• Reporting Frequency. During any period of time when the recipient is subject to the
general reporting requirement, the recipient must report proceedings information in
SAM.gov for the most recent five-year period, either to report new information about a
proceeding that the recipient has not reported previously or affirm that there is no new
information to report. If the recipient has Federal contract, grant, and cooperative
agreement awards with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000, the recipient
must disclose semiannually any information about the criminal, civil, and administrative
proceedings.
• Definitions. For purposes of this Notice—
o Administrative proceeding means a non-judicial process that is adjudicatory in
nature to make a determination of fault or liability (for example, Securities and
Exchange Commission Administrative proceedings, Civilian Board of Contract
Appeals proceedings, and Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals
proceedings). This includes proceedings at the Federal and State level but only in
connection with the performance of a Federal contract or grant. It does not include
audits, site visits, corrective plans, or inspection of deliverables.
o Conviction means a judgment or conviction of a criminal offense by any court of
competent jurisdiction, whether entered upon a verdict or a plea, and includes a
conviction entered upon a plea of nolo contendere.
o Total value of currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement
contracts includes the value of the Federal share already received plus any
anticipated Federal share under those awards (such as continuation funding).

3. Program Evaluation
DOT intends to measure safety outcomes through a combination of grant agreement activities
and data collections, including DOT data collections already underway and program evaluations
separate from the individual grant agreements in accordance with Section D.4. Pursuant to 5
U.S.C. § 311, Program Evaluation is “an assessment using systematic data collection and
analysis of one or more programs, policies, and organizations intended to assess their
effectiveness and efficiency.” Recipients and subrecipients are encouraged to incorporate
program evaluation including associated data collection activities from the outset of their
program design and implementation to meaningfully document and measure their progress.
Allowable data and evaluation costs are specified in 2 CFR § 200.455(c). As a condition of grant
award, SS4A grant recipients may be required to participate in an evaluation undertaken by
DOT, or another agency or partner. The evaluation may take different forms such as an
implementation assessment across grant recipients, an impact and/or outcomes analysis of all or
selected sites within or across grant recipients, or a benefit/cost analysis or assessment of return
on investment. DOT may require applicants to collect data elements to aid the evaluation and/or
use information available through other reporting. Grant recipients must agree to: (1) make
records available to the evaluation contractor or DOT agency staff; (2) facilitate and provide
access to program records, and any other relevant documents to calculate costs and benefits; (3)
in the case of an impact analysis, facilitate the access to relevant information as requested; and
(4) follow evaluation procedures as specified by the evaluation contractor or DOT agency staff.
J. Other Information

1. Publication of Application Information
Following the completion of the selection process and announcement of awards, DOT intends to
publish a list of all applications received along with the names of the applicant organizations and
a few relevant data fields from the application. DOT may share application information within
DOT or with other Federal agencies if DOT determines the applicant could benefit from Federal
technical assistance programs, or that sharing is relevant to the respective program’s objectives.
2. Department Feedback on Applications
DOT strives to provide as much information as possible to assist applicants with the application
process. Unsuccessful applicants may request a debrief up to 30 days after the selected funding
recipients are publicly announced on https://www.transportation.gov/grants/SS4A.
3. Grant Application Resources
DOT will provide resources to help interested applicants understand the different DOT
competitive grant programs through webinars, frequently asked questions, templates, and other
materials provided on the SS4A program website https://www.transportation.gov/grants/SS4A.
Additional grant applications resources for this and other Departmental grant programs can be
found on the DOT Navigator at www.transportation.gov/dot-navigator. User-friendly
information and resources regarding DOT’s competitive grant programs relevant to rural
applicants can be found on the Rural Opportunities to Use Transportation for Economic Success
(ROUTES) website at www.transportation.gov/rural.