Abstract
Discretionary grant programs have been popular with state legislatures as a mechanism for extending the benefits of transit programs to small cities and rural areas as well as for stimulating innovations in urban areas. This article analyzes state discretionary grant transit programs in California and Minnesota by using the criterion of effective administration. The purpose is to develop a framework for understanding administrative problems that result when state discretionary transit programs do not have adequate objectives. Without explicit objectives, selection, monitoring, evaluation, and overall management are weak. Project performance is reduced and scarce public funds are wasted. Recommendations include the following: (a) legislatures should make explicit the mission and goals of discretionary programs, (b) administrative agencies should define measurable objectives and administrative guidelines, and (c) local grant recipients should be granted funds only after specific objectives and performance standards have been presented.