On December 9, 2025, the DOT’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a report on the USDOT’s implementation of its National Roadway Safety Strategy (NRSS). The objective of the Audit was to evaluate the identification and implementation of NRSS priority actions, procedures for monitoring progress, and measuring the success of those priority actions. So, what did the report find, and is progress being made?

Our loyal readers know that STC has talked about the NRSS over the last several years on the speaking circuit. We have authored several articles relating to the NRSS, which are found here and here, and others offering recommendations for  FMCSA to strengthen NRSS, which can be viewed here, here, here, here and here.

The OIG Audit report noted a couple of important findings:

1. DOT identified and implemented priority actions that aligned with high-risk factors to decrease fatalities; and
2. DOT monitored NRSS priority actions and measured overall impact but lacked procedures to measure the success of individual actions.

Surprisingly, the OIG Audit report offered only one recommendation:

1. Work with the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and the NRSS Action Team to develop requirements and procedures for measuring the success of individual priority actions in achieving program outcomes.

The report also discussed the 11 priority actions related to reducing Truck- and Bus-related fatalities, three of which are still in progress. From where STC sits, and as we have talked about in our previous pieces, while some of these 11 actions are important and relevant to safety, the NRSS actions were not tied to specific outcomes, and the reporting did not substantiate the individual actions’ impacts on crashes. The OIG agreed.

The OIG report noted the Department’s NRSS Action Team had not established requirements or procedures for measuring the success of individual actions, and without procedures to measure the success of individual priority actions, DOT limited its ability to identify which actions were successful and most impactful. Thus, it was unclear how individual priority actions contributed to DOT’s reported progress in achieving crash-reduction goals, and it could hinder the Department as it works to determine where to best focus its resources in the future.

Unfortunately, with all of the effort that has gone into the NRSS along with the Audit conducted by the OIG, we are still left to a large degree in the dark on what has worked and what has not as it relates to specific actions impacting crash reduction. While overall roadway fatalities have decreased over the last few years, we still have a very long way to go in this country.

STC finds it hard to believe that, with the huge number of roadway fatalities that continue to accumulate, this is the only recommendation the OIG believes is needed to change course. The DOT MISSed (Measuring.Improved.Safety.Success) on this one. Hopefully, with new leadership, they will redouble their efforts to engage with their partners, including industry, to design specific initiatives and measures targeted at actions we know impact crashes, and report on them to the public so the public can see their efficacy.

Whether DOT continues with the NRSS or some other “national strategy,”  they must articulate how they are spending the public’s tax dollars, the safety ROI, and how they are using lessons learned to improve safety programs. It seems to STC that instead of adapting its programs, policies, and regulations based on their efficacy, additional programs are simply layered on top. What rarely happens is the elimination of ineffective programs. The frustratingly consistently high fatality crash numbers are indicative of a need