Federal investments in infrastructure—roads, public transit, housing, and other parts of the built environment—can improve quality of life by connecting communities, making housing more affordable, increasing energy efficiency, providing clean drinking water, and expanding broadband access. Yet too often, unfair funding allocations and negative externalities from these investments have deepened racial and social inequities.
With recent legislation allocating billions in federal infrastructure investments, we are tracking how equitably federal funds are apportioned to and spent in communities. This page collects Urban Institute research and resources examining the equity of federal infrastructure spending. This body of work includes an interactive data tool, updated annually, showing investments across programs and geographies; reports examining federal infrastructure spending by fiscal year; program-specific case studies; equity-focused evaluations of different phases of the investment process; and recommendations to further equitable outcomes through infrastructure funding.
Explore our interactive data tool, which includes award data for110 federal infrastructure programs by state, county, and metropolitan area.
Recent Findings
We evaluated the state of broadband access in Indian Country and the federal programs that aim to close long-standing connectivity gaps. Despite recent increases in federal investment, people living on tribal lands—especially in rural areas—continue to face far lower rates of reliable broadband access than the rest of the US. And broadband infrastructure projects are often costly and technically complex, posing challenges for many communities.
Interviews and data analysis point to several best practices for accessing federal broadband resources, building reliable broadband networks, and, ultimately, improving broadband access in Native communities. These include preparing early and staying flexible when pursuing federal grants, building strong business and maintenance plans from the start, and investing in workforce development and partnerships that expand technical capacity while protecting tribal sovereignty. Our report also highlights opportunities for federal, state, and philanthropic partners to better support Native communities. Read more: Broadband Access in Indian Country: Best Practices for Tribal Nations in Navigating the Federal Funding Landscape.
The White House's proposed budget would cut housing supports from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in half. For many local governments, federal funding is the largest and most consistent source of support for affordable housing programs. Cutting HUD program funding, including slashing rental assistance support by 42 percent and eliminating the Community Development Block Grant Program and the HOME Investment Program, will likely have huge ripple effects for local housing markets.
We explored what this might mean for the Bay Area, a region home to 7.6 million residents that is already dealing with an affordable housing crisis. The proposed cuts would likely lead to more than 90,000 residents losing essential housing supports. HUD funding in the area would drop by at least 44 percent, from $2.9 billion in 2023 to just $1.6 billion in 2026. Cities in the Bay Area do not and will likely never have the tools or capacity to make up for the scale of the proposed federal cuts. However, they can take steps to diversify local housing supports by identifying additional local dedicated funding streams for housing; harnessing tools in local control, such as zoning laws, to encourage more construction; and tapping alternative federal resources, such as the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program. Read more: The White House's Proposed Budget Would Cut Housing Funds in Half. That Would Likely Make the Bay Area Even Less Affordable.
We mapped current HUD funding going to states and congressional districts across the country to help policymakers, practitioners, and advocates visualize what resources might be at risk of cuts in other communities. Read more: HUD Supports Affordable Housing Nationwide. Layoffs and Budget Cuts Will Undermine That Mission.
We evaluated whether federal infrastructure investments in broadband, energy grid, environmental resilience, housing, and transit programs in fiscal years 2022 and 2023 met community needs. Our key findings include the following:
- Broadband programs prioritized high-need communities, dispersing more funding to counties with lower shares of households with internet access and lower broadband speeds.
- Energy grid programs invested 45 percent of funds into counties with low incomes.
- Environmental resilience investments were concentrated in counties with higher environment-related administrative capacity, possibly causing lower-capacity jurisdictions to miss out on needed funds.
- Federal housing spending was strongly correlated with the presence of federally subsidized housing units.
- Transit funding was concentrated in high-income areas.
We detail our research methods in a methodological appendix.
