U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000


Skip to content
FacebookYouTubeTwitterFlickrLinkedIn

MAP-21 - Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century

Home / MAP-21 / Guidance / Highway Safety Improvement Program Reporting Guidance

Note: This document was superseded on 12/29/16 by Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Reporting Guidance

Highway Safety Improvement Program Reporting Guidance

Date Issued/Effective Date

February 13, 2013, Office of Safety

Background

The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) (P.L. 112-141) continued the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) as a core program and, on a national basis, authorized a significant increase in the funding for highway safety improvement projects. HSIP is authorized under section 148 of Title 23, United States Code (23 U.S.C. 148) with implementing regulations at 23 CFR Part 924.

To track HSIP implementation efforts, an annual report on HSIP implementation and effectiveness is required under 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 924.15. Given the purpose of the HSIP and the new performance management requirements MAP-21 established under 23 U.S.C. 150, it is important that States select and implement projects that will contribute to a reduction in fatalities and serious injuries, consistent with their State safety performance targets. The HSIP annual report will serve as the mechanism to report on safety performance targets pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 150(e). The States are encouraged to use the HSIP reports to demonstrate the success of their safety programs and to communicate to others within their States about the importance of a continued focus on improving highway safety.

Purpose

This document provides guidance to States in meeting the HSIP reporting requirements under 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 924.15. States may satisfy HSIP reporting requirements by submitting their reports through the HSIP Online Reporting Tool. While 23 U.S.C. 148(h) also includes a requirement to address railway-highway crossings, States should collect and include this information in the report required under 23 U.S.C. 130(g). At the option of the State, the HSIP and the railway-highway crossings reports required under Sections 148 and 130, respectively, may be submitted separately, or combined into one report with two distinct sections. (See guidance for the Railway-Highway Crossing Reporting requirements dated TBD 2012, for additional information on the railway-highway crossings report.)

This guidance supersedes the May 15, 2009, "Highway Safety Improvement Program Reporting Guidance."

Table of Contents

  1. Reporting Frequency and Schedule
  2. Content and Structure of the HSIP Report
    1. Program Structure
    2. Progress in Implementing the HSIP projects
    3. Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets
    4. Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation)
  3. Protection of Data from Discovery & Admission into Evidence

Attachment 1: USDOT Website Requirements
Attachment 2: HSIP Report Template
Attachment 3: General Listing of Projects
Attachment 4: Highway Safety Improvement Categories
Attachment 5: Other Project Listing Categories

Guidance

The HSIP reporting guidance provides information to States on the reporting frequency and schedule, content and structure, and protection of data from discovery and admission into evidence.

1. Reporting Frequency and Schedule

Pursuant to 23 CFR 924.15, a State shall submit its HSIP report to the FHWA Division Administrator no later than August 31 of each year. This date coincides with the railway-highway crossing report required under 23 U.S.C. 130(g). As 23 U.S.C. 148 (h)(3) requires the USDOT to post the HSIP reports to a USDOT Web site, States should ensure their reports are compatible with USDOT Web site requirements (see attachment 1).

2. Content and Structure of the HSIP Report

The HSIP report should be no more than 10 pages in length, excluding the general listing of projects. FHWA's online reporting tool is available to support the annual HSIP reporting process. Additional information is available on the FHWA Web site at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/resources/onrpttool/. The HSIP report template included in Attachment 2 reflects the online reporting tool content. Reporting into the HSIP Online Reporting Tool meets all report requirements and USDOT Web site compatibility requirements.

Pursuant to 23 CFR 924.15, the report shall be for a defined one-year reporting period. The State, in consultation with the FHWA Division Office, may define the reporting period based on calendar year, Federal fiscal year, or State fiscal year. Performance measure data should be reported on a calendar year basis.

The report should address all projects implemented with HSIP funds, including local projects and non-infrastructure projects. In addition, States should report on explicit safety projects identified through the STIP but implemented with other funding sources. States are encouraged to coordinate with their State highway safety office, planning organizations, and local government agencies to obtain all relevant information to ensure complete HSIP reporting.

The HSIP report should consist of four sections: program structure, progress in implementing HSIP projects, progress in achieving safety performance targets, and assessment of the effectiveness of the improvements. The content and structure of each section is described below.

A. Program Structure

The report should briefly describe the structure of the State's HSIP. At a minimum, this should include program administration and program methodology.

Program Administration

The report should briefly describe how the HSIP funds are allocated in the State (e.g., centrally or via districts/regions). If the HSIP is administered at the district level, the report should describe the funding allocation process (e.g., formula, crash data). The report should include any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since the last reporting period (e.g., multidisciplinary HSIP steering committee). In addition, the report should indicate how local and tribal roads are addressed as part of the HSIP. For example, are local or tribal road (non-State owned and operated) projects identified using the same methodology as State roads? If not, the report should describe how local and tribal road projects are identified under the program methodology section below. Lastly, the report should explain overall coordination and collaboration with internal (e.g., State DOT Bureaus, Divisions) and external (e.g., MPOs, regional planning organizations) partners as it relates to the HSIP.

Program Methodology

The program and project identification processes must be developed in consultation with the FHWA Division Administrator. (23 CFR 924.7(b)) Because these processes likely will not change on an annual basis, it is recommended that they be submitted to the Division Administrator under separate cover from the annual HSIP report and be referenced in the FHWA/State Stewardship and Oversight Agreement. The Division Administrator should maintain a copy of current program and project identification processes. For the purposes of the annual HSIP report, States should indicate the date the program methodology was last updated and submit a brief summary of the following key elements for each group of similar types of projects, either by crash type or countermeasure, being implemented under the HSIP (e.g. high risk rural roads, median crossover, intersection, safe corridor, horizontal curve):

The report should also describe the process used to identify potential countermeasures (e.g., engineering study, road safety assessment). The report should indicate the extent to which systemic improvements are implemented as part of the HSIP (e.g., proportion of spot location vs. systemic improvements) and should indicate the type of systemic improvements implemented as part of the HSIP, if applicable. The report should identify any HSIP methodology practices that were introduced during the last reporting period to advance HSIP implementation efforts (e.g., Highway Safety Manual, road safety audits, systemic approach).

B. Progress in Implementing the HSIP projects

States should describe the progress in implementing HSIP projects during the specified reporting period. This description should include the HSIP funds programmed for highway safety improvement projects and the number and general listing of the types of projects initiated.

HSIP Funds Programmed:

For the purpose of the report, the term "HSIP funds" includes those funds that are available (programmed) to implement highway safety improvement projects that have been identified as part of the State's HSIP. At a minimum, this would include projects obligated using HSIP funds (23 U.S.C. 148), High Risk Rural Roads Program (HRRRP) funds (from SAFETEA-LU) or those funds obligated under the HRRR special rule in 23 U.S.C. 148(g)(1), penalty funds (from 23 U.S.C. 154 and 164), and remaining TEA-21 or SAFETEA-LU incentive grant funds (from 23 U.S.C. 163 and 406, respectively). In addition, the report should include other non-safety funds (i.e. STP, NHPP, State, local) that are programmed to implement highway safety improvement projects. Railway-Highway Crossing funds are addressed under separate reporting requirements.

Programmed funds are those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) for the reporting period to be expended on highway safety improvement projects. States should not only report programmed funds, but also the amount of programmed funds that were obligated during the specified reporting period.

This information could be presented in a format similar to that illustrated below. If this format is used, it should be supplemented with a narrative briefly describing the information presented. The report should also discuss any impediments to obligating HSIP funds and plans to overcome this challenge in the future, including a description of any funds transferred in to or out of the HSIP in accordance with the Uniform Transferability Provision under 23 U.S.C. 126.

HSIP Project Funding

Reporting Period MM/DD/YYYY to MM/DD/YYYY

Funding Category

Programmed*

Obligated

HSIP (Section 148)

 

 

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU)

 

 

HRRR Special Rule

 

 

Penalty Funds - Section 154

 

 

Penalty Funds – Section 164

 

 

Incentive Grants -  Section 163

 

 

Incentive Grants (Section 406)

 

 

Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. STP, NHPP)

 

 

State and Local Funds

 

 

Total

 

 

* Programmed funds refer to those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to be expended on highway safety improvement projects.

The report should briefly describe the amount of HSIP funds, either in dollar amounts or on percentage basis, programmed and obligated to local or tribal safety projects for the specified reporting period. Local and tribal safety projects are those projects implemented on non-State owned and maintained roadways. Also, the report should briefly describe the amount of HSIP funds, either in dollar amounts or on percentage basis, programmed and obligated for non-infrastructure safety projects for the specified reporting period.

General Listing of Projects:

Pursuant to 23 CFR 924.15, States shall provide the number and general listing of the types of projects obligated using HSIP funds for the reporting period. For each project obligated with HSIP funds, the following information should be provided:

Attachment 3 illustrates how this information can be presented in a tabular format. If a table like this is used, it should be supplemented with a narrative briefly describing the information presented.

The improvement category and sub-category should align with the list of highway safety improvement projects in Attachment 4. The list of highway safety improvement projects in Attachment 4 is similar to that used in the HSIS [2] Multistate Safety Improvement Database and can be used to identify common countermeasure installations across States for national evaluation purposes. While a single project may consist of multiple project types, each project should be assigned to only one category. The category chosen should align with the primary purpose of the project. For example, if a State recently completed a pavement overlay at intersection A to improve the skid resistance on the approaches to the intersection, this project would be categorized as pavement surface - high friction surface under the roadway category since that was the primary purpose of the project.

The project output will vary depending on the type of project implemented. For example, if a State recently completed a rumble strip project, the project output would be the miles of rumble strips installed for that project. On the other hand, if the county had a project to improve pedestrian accommodations at ten intersections in its region, the project output would be 10 intersections.

The project cost should reflect both the total cost of each project, as well as the amount of HSIP funds used for each project.

The funding category should reflect the source of funds used to implement the highway safety improvement project. If multiple funding categories are used, the category associated with the most significant portion of funding should be selected. For example, if a State funds 60 percent of the project cost with HSIP funds and the remaining 40 percent with STP funds, the HSIP funding category should be selected.

For each HSIP project, the State must demonstrate the relationship to the State's SHSP. States should not only link each project to the appropriate SHSP emphasis area (i.e. intersection, roadway departure), but also the strategy that most closely aligns with the primary purpose of the project.

The State should provide the roadway characteristics associated with each project. Specifically, functional classification, AADT, posted speed and roadway ownership are key factors in the evaluation process. This information applies to infrastructure projects only.

C. Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

States should describe the progress in achieving annual safety performance targets, when established. Further information regarding the establishment of safety performance targets will be the subject of future rulemaking and guidance. This description should include an overview of general highway safety trends and the application of special rules.

Overview of general highway safety trends

States must present and describe information showing the general highway safety trends in the State by number and rate of fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads (23 U.S.C. 148(h)(1)(C). States should use the 5-year rolling average of these performance measures to meet this requirement and should present a minimum of five years of data. For the rate information, States should provide fatalities and serious injuries per hundred million vehicle miles traveled (HMVMT)). In addition, to the maximum extent possible, this information should be presented by functional classification and ownership. States can also report separately on trends for urbanized and rural areas.

Application of special rules

States should report the following information related to the high risk rural road safety and older drivers special rules described in 23 U.S.C. 148(g):

High Risk Rural Road Safety:

If the high risk rural road safety special rule applies to a State, the HSIP report should:

Older Drivers:

To determine the applicability of the older driver special rule under 23 U.S.C. 148(g)(2), FHWA will use data States provide on the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over the age of 65, in accordance with the "Older Driver Special Rule Guidance," which is forthcoming. The State should include the calculations performed, verifying how the Older Driver Special Rule applies. If the Older Driver Special Rule applies, the State should describe how it will meet the requirements to address the increase in older driver and pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries in their respective SHSP.

D. Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation)

While 23 U.S.C. 148(c)(2)(F)(i) requires States to establish an evaluation process to analyze and assess results achieved by highway safety improvement projects, States are not required to report evaluation results from individual project locations. Rather, this section should describe the effectiveness of projects carried out as part of the HSIP in the following three areas:

In addition, States should provide any other information that demonstrates the effectiveness and success of the HSIP. For example, in some instances, successful implementation of programs, strategies and/or treatments may lead to policy level changes, whereby safety treatments are applied across all projects and not only safety-specific projects. Such changes should be noted in the annual report, as they represent a shift in safety culture.

SHSP Emphasis Areas

States should present information regarding SHSP emphasis areas that relate to the HSIP and describe trends in emphasis area performance measures (i.e. fatalities and serious injuries).

Groups of similar types of projects

Many States group similar types of projects for HSIP implementation. Projects may be grouped by crash type or countermeasure category (e.g., median barrier). States should report on the overall effectiveness of these groups of similar projects. For example, if a State has been implementing median barrier improvements for the past several years, trends in cross median crashes should be presented.

Systemic Treatments

Many States are beginning to implement treatments on a systemic basis. States should also report on the effectiveness of these treatments in reducing the target crash type. For example, if a State has been targeting horizontal curve crashes by implementing chevron warning signs on a systemic basis for the past several years, the State should report on the effectiveness (i.e. percent reduction of targeted crash type) of this treatment.

3. Protection of Data from Discovery & Admission into Evidence

Section 148(h)(4) mandates that data compiled or collected for the preparation of the HSIP Report "...shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in an action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in such reports..." This information is also protected by 23 U.S.C. 409 (discovery and admission as evidence of certain reports and surveys).


Attachment 1
USDOT Website Requirements

HTML Submissions

HyperText Markup Language (HTML) is the publishing language of the World Wide Web. Information submitted in the form of HTML files (i.e. Web pages) needs to be coded to meet the industry standards for HTML and the requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act.

The standards for HTML are contained in the "Recommendations" of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Submitted pages can meet either the HTML 4.01 (http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/) or XHTML 1.0 (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/) standards. The W3C has a free markup validation service (http://validator.w3.org/) which should be used to check the files. It is particularly important that any data tables in the Web pages follow the markup standards for tables. The HTML 4.01 specifications for table markup can be found at http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/tables.html.

One of the requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act is that the information on Federal Government Web sites be accessible to persons with disabilities. The technical standards for Web sites can be found in section 1194.22 &qout;Web-based intranet and internet information and applications." A guide to the standards is available on the U.S. Access Board's Web site at http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/guide/1194.22.htm. Again, it is important that the requirements contained in 1194.22(g) and 1194.22(h) for data tables be followed. These sections require that row and column headers of data tables are identified and that through markup, the data cells are associated with the correct headers. There are techniques in HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0 to meet these requirements.

Reporting into the HSIP Online Reporting Tool meets all report requirements and USDOT website requirements.


Attachment 2
HSIP Report Template [3]

Download Word File: hsipreporttemplate.docx, 44 KB

[State]
Highway Safety Improvement Program
[Year] Annual Report

Executive Summary

Program Structure

Program Administration

How are Highway Safety Improvement Program funds allocated in a State?

[] Central
[] District
[] Other:

     If District, how are the HSIP funds allocated?

     [] Formula
     [] Crash data
     [] Other:

Describe how local roads are addressed as part of Highway Safety Improvement Program.

Identify which internal partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. Check all that apply.

[] Design
[] Planning
[] Maintenance
[] Operations
[] Governor's Highway Safety Office
[] Other:

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners.

Identify which external partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. Check all that apply.

[] Metropolitan Planning Organizations
[] Governor's Highway Safety Office
[] Local Government Association
[] Other:

Identify any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since the last reporting period.

[] Multi-disciplinary HSIP steering committee
[] Other:

Describe any other aspects of Highway Safety Improvement Program Administration on which the State would like to elaborate.

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

[] Median Barrier
[] Horizontal Curve
[] Skid Hazard
[] Roadway Departure
[] Local Safety
[] Left-turn Crash
[] Intersection
[] Bicycle Safety
[] Low-Cost Spot Improvements
[] Pedestrian Safety
[] Shoulder Improvement
[] Segments
[] Safe Corridor
[] Rural State Highway
[] Red Light Running
[] Sign Replacement and Improvement
[] Right Angle Crash
[] Other:

For each program checked above, enter the following information:

Program:

Date of Program Methodology:

What data types were used in the program methodology? Check all that apply

Crashes [] All crashes
[] Fatal crashes only
[] Fatal and serious injury crashes only
[] Other:

Exposure
[] Traffic
[] Volume
[] Population
[] Lane miles
[] Other:

Roadway
[] Median width
[] Horizontal curvature
[] Functional classification
[] Roadside features
[] Other:

What project identification methodology was used for this program? Check all that apply.

[] Crash frequency
[] Expected crash frequency with Empirical Bayes (EB) adjustment
[] Equivalent property damage only (equivalent property damage only (EPDO) crash frequency)
[] Relative severity index
[] Crash rate
[] Critical rate
[] Level of service of safety (LOSS)
[] Excess expected crash frequency using safety performance functions (SPFs)
[] Excess expected crash frequency with EB adjustment
[] Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments
[] Probability of specific crash types
[] Excess proportions of specific crash types
[] Other:

Are local roads (non-State owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as State roads?

If no, describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

[] Competitive application process
[] Selection committee
[] Other:

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

?Relative Weight in Scoring

?Rank of Priority Consideration

     Ranking based on benefit/cost (B/C)
     Available funding
     Incremental B/C
     Ranking based on net benefit
     Cost effectiveness
     Other

What proportion of highway safety improvement program funds address systemic improvements? If the State does not implement systemic improvements, enter zero.

Highway safety improvement program funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? Please check all that apply.

[] Cable median barriers
[] Rumble strips
[] Traffic control device rehabilitation
[] Pavement/shoulder widening
[] Install/Improve Signing
[] Install/improve pavement marking/delineation
[] Upgrade guard rails
[] Clear zone improvements
[] Safety edge
[] Install/improve lighting
[] Add/upgrade/modify/remove traffic signal
[] Other:

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures?

[] Engineering Study
[] Road Safety Assessment
[] Other:

Identify any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since the last reporting period.

[] Highway Safety Manual
[] Road Safety Audits
[] Systemic Approach
[] Other:

Describe any other aspects of the Highway Safety Improvement Program methodology on which the State would like to elaborate.

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Enter the programmed and obligated funding for each applicable funding category.

HSIP Project Funding

Reporting Period MM/DD/YYYY to MM/DD/YYYY

Funding Category

Programmed*

Obligated

HSIP (Section 148)

 

 

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU)

 

 

HRRR Special Rule

 

 

Penalty Funds - Section 154

 

 

Penalty Funds  – Section 164

 

 

Incentive Grants -  Section 163

 

 

Incentive Grants (Section 406)

 

 

Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. STP, NHPP)

 

 

State and Local Funds

 

 

Total

 

 

How much funding is programmed to local (non-State owned and maintained) safety projects?

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

How much funding is programmed to non-infrastructure safety projects?

How much funding is obligated to non-infrastructure safety projects?

How much funding was transferred in to the HSIP from other core program areas during the reporting period?

How much funding was transferred out of the HSIP to other core program areas during the reporting period?

Discuss any impediments to obligating Highway Safety Improvement Program funds and plans to overcome such impediments in the future.

Describe any other aspects of the general Highway Safety Improvement Program implementation progress on which the State would like to elaborate.

General Listing of Projects

List each highway safety improvement project obligated during the reporting period.

Project Improvement Category (see Attachment 4) Output (i.e. #, miles) HSIP Cost* Total Cost Funding Category^ Functional Classification**,^ AADT** Speed** Roadway Ownership^ Relationship to SHSP
Emphasis Area^ Strategy
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

Present data showing the general highway safety trends in the State for the past five years.

Performance Measures*

[Year]

[Year]

[Year]

[Year]

[Year]

Number of fatalities

 

 

 

 

 

Number of serious injuries

 

 

 

 

 

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

 

 

 

 

 

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

 

 

 

 

 

*States should use a 5-year rolling average to present the performance measures

To the maximum extent possible, present this data by functional classification and ownership.

Function Classification

[Year]

Number of fatalities

Number of
serious injuries

Fatality rate
(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Roadway Ownership

[Year]

Number of fatalities

Number of
serious injuries

Fatality rate
(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Describe any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which the State would like to elaborate.

Application of Special Rules

Present the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over the age of 65.

Older Driver
Performance Measures

[Year]

[Year]

[Year]

[Year]

Fatality rate (per capita)

 

 

 

 

Serious injury rate (per capita)

 

 

 

 

Fatality and serious injury rate (per capita)

 

 

 

 

Does the older driver special rule apply to the State?

If yes, describe the approach to include respective strategies to address the increase in those rates in the State SHSP.

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation)

What indicators of success can the State use to demonstrate effectiveness and success in the Highway Safety Improvement Program? Select all that apply.

[] B/C ratio
[] Policy change
[] Other:

What significant programmatic changes have occurred since the last reporting period? Select all that apply.

[] Shift focus to fatalities and serious injuries
[] Organizational changes
[] More systemic projects included in HSIP
[] Other:

Briefly describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period.

SHSP Emphasis Areas

For each SHSP emphasis area that relates to the HSIP, present trends in emphasis area performance measures.

HSIP-related
SHSP Emphasis Areas

Number of fatalities

Number of
serious injuries

Fatality rate
(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Groups of similar project types

Present the overall effectiveness of groups of similar types of projects.

HSIP Sub-program Types

Number of fatalities

Number of
serious injuries

Fatality rate
(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Systemic Treatments

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Systemic improvement

Number of fatalities*

Number of
serious injuries*

Fatality rate
(per HMVMT)*

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*For the target crash type

Describe any other aspects of the overall Highway Safety Improvement Program effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate.

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional).

[Insert project evaluation table]


Attachment 3
HSIP Project Listing

Project Improvement
Category
(see Attachment 4)
Output
(i.e. #, miles)
HSIP Cost* Total Cost Funding Category^ Functional Classification**,^ AADT** Speed** Roadway Ownership**^ Relationship to SHSP
Emphasis Area^ Strategy
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       

*If other than HSIP funding category is selected, this column should be zero.

**These fields apply to infrastructure projects only. For non-infrastructure projects, enter N/A for functional classification, AADT, speed and roadway ownership.

^See attachment 5 for category selections.


Attachment 4
Highway Safety Improvement Categories

Highway Safety Improvement Project Categories
(Source: HSIS Safety Improvements Database)

While a single project may consist of multiple project types, each project should be assigned to only one category and sub-category combination. The category chosen should align with the primary purpose of the project.

Category

Sub-category

Access management

Access management - other
Change in access – close or restrict existing access
Change in access – miscellaneous/unspecified
Grassed median - extend existing
Median crossover - close crossover
Median crossover - directional crossover
Median crossover - relocate existing
Median crossover - unspecified
Raised island - install new
Raised island - modify existing
Raised island - remove existing
Raised island – unspecified

Advanced technology and ITS

Advanced technology and ITS - other
Congestion detection / traffic monitoring system
Dynamic message signs
Over height vehicle detection

Alignment

Alignment - other
Horizontal curve realignment
Horizontal and vertical alignment
Vertical alignment or elevation change

Animal-related

Animal related

Interchange design

Acceleration / deceleration / merge lane
Convert at-grade intersection to interchange
Extend existing lane on ramp
Improve intersection radius at ramp terminus
Installation of new lane on ramp
Interchange design - other
Ramp closure
Ramp metering

Intersection geometry

Auxiliary lanes – add acceleration lane
Auxiliary lanes – add auxiliary through lane
Auxiliary lanes – add left-turn lane
Auxiliary lanes – add right-turn lane
Auxiliary lanes – add right-turn lane (free-flow)
Auxiliary lanes – add slip lane
Auxiliary lanes – add two-way left-turn lane
Auxiliary lanes – extend acceleration/deceleration lane
Auxiliary lanes – extend existing left-turn lane
Auxiliary lanes – extend existing right-turn lane
Auxiliary lanes – miscellaneous/other/unspecified
Auxiliary lanes – modify acceleration lane
Auxiliary lanes – modify auxiliary through lane
Auxiliary lanes – modify free-flow turn  lane
Auxiliary lanes – modify left-turn lane offset
Auxiliary lanes – modify right-turn lane offset
Auxiliary lanes – modify turn lane storage
Auxiliary lanes – modify turn lane taper
Auxiliary lanes – modify two-way left-turn lane
Intersection geometrics – miscellaneous/other/unspecified
Intersection geometrics – modify intersection corner radius
Intersection geometrics – modify skew angle
Intersection geometrics – realignment to align offset cross streets
Intersection geometrics – realignment to increase cross street offset
Intersection geometrics – re-assign existing lane use
Intersection geometry - other
Splitter island – install on one or more approaches
Splitter island – remove from one or more approaches
Splitter island – unspecified
Through lanes – add additional through lane

Intersection traffic control

Intersection flashers – add “when flashing” warning sign-mounted
Intersection flashers – add advance emergency vehicle warning sign-mounted
Intersection flashers – add advance heavy vehicle warning sign-mounted
Intersection flashers – add advance intersection warning sign-mounted
Intersection flashers – add miscellaneous/other/unspecified
Intersection flashers – add overhead (actuated)
Intersection flashers – add overhead (continuous)
Intersection flashers – add stop sign-mounted
Intersection flashers – modify existing
Intersection flashers – remove existing
Intersection signing – add basic advance warning
Intersection signing – add enhanced advance warning (double-up and/or oversize)
Intersection signing – add enhanced regulatory sign (double-up and/or oversize)
Intersection signing – miscellaneous/other/unspecified
Intersection signing – relocate existing regulatory sign
Intersection traffic control - other
Modify control – all-way stop to roundabout
Modify control – modifications to roundabout
Modify control – no control to roundabout
Modify control – no control to two-way stop
Modify control – remove right-turn yield
Modify control – reverse priority of stop condition
Modify control – traffic signal to roundabout
Modify control – two-way stop to all-way stop
Modify control – two-way stop to roundabout
Modify control – two-way yield to two-way stop
Pavement Markings – add advance signal ahead
Pavement markings – add advance stop ahead
Pavement markings – add dashed edge line along mainline
Pavement markings – add lane use symbols
Pavement markings – add stop line
Pavement markings – add yield line
Pavement markings – miscellaneous/other/unspecified
Pavement markings – refresh existing pavement markings
Modify traffic signal – add additional signal heads
Modify traffic signal – add backplates
Modify traffic signal – add backplates with retroreflective borders
Modify traffic signal – add closed loop system
Modify traffic signal – add emergency vehicle preemption
Modify traffic signal – add flashing yellow arrow
Modify traffic signal – add long vehicle detection
Modify traffic signal – add railroad preemption
Modify traffic signal – add wireless system
Modify traffic signal – miscellaneous/other/unspecified
Modify traffic signal – modernization/replacement
Modify traffic signal – modify signal mounting (spanwire to mast arm)
Modify traffic signal – remove existing signal
Modify traffic signal – replace existing indications (incandescent-to-LED and/or 8-to-12 inch dia.)
Modify traffic signal timing – left-turn phasing (permissive to protected/permissive)
Modify traffic signal timing – left-turn phasing (permissive to protected-only)
Modify traffic signal timing – adjust clearance interval (yellow change and/or all-red)
Modify traffic signal timing – general retiming
Modify traffic signal timing – signal coordination

 

Systemic improvements – signal-controlled
Systemic improvements – stop-controlled

Lighting

Continuous roadway lighting
Intersection lighting
Lighting - other
Site lighting – horizontal curve
Site lighting – intersection
Site lighting – interchange
Site lighting – pedestrian crosswalk

Miscellaneous

Miscellaneous

Non-infrastructure

Educational efforts
Enforcement
Data/traffic records
Non-infrastructure - other
Outreach
Road safety audits
Training and workforce development
Transportation safety planning

Parking

Modify parking
Parking - other
Remove parking
Restrict parking
Truck parking facilities

Pedestrians and bicyclists

Crosswalk
Install new "smart" crosswalk
Install new crosswalk
Install sidewalk
Medians and pedestrian refuge areas
Miscellaneous pedestrians and bicyclists
Modify existing crosswalk
Pedestrian beacons
Pedestrian bridge
Pedestrian signal
Pedestrian signal - audible device
Pedestrian signal – Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
Pedestrian signal - install new at intersection
Pedestrian signal - install new at non-intersection location
Pedestrian signal - modify existing
Pedestrian signal - remove existing
Pedestrian warning signs - add/modify flashers
Pedestrian warning signs – overhead

Railroad grade crossings

Grade separation
Model enforcement activity
Protective devices
Railroad grade crossing gates
Railroad grade crossing signing
Railroad grade crossings - other
Surface treatment
Upgrade railroad crossing signal
Widen crossing for additional lane

Roadside

Barrier end treatments (crash cushions, terminals)
Barrier transitions
Barrier - cable
Barrier - concrete
Barrier- metal
Barrier - other
Barrier - removal
Curb or curb and gutter
Drainage improvements
Fencing
Removal of roadside objects (trees, poles, etc.)
Roadside grading
Roadside - other

Roadway

Install / remove / modify passing zone
Pavement surface – high friction surface
Pavement surface - miscellaneous
Roadway narrowing (road diet, roadway reconfiguration)
Roadway - other
Roadway - restripe to revise separation between opposing lanes and/or shoulder widths
Roadway widening - add lane(s) along segment
Roadway widening - curve
Roadway widening - travel lanes
Rumble strips - center
Rumble strips – edge or shoulder
Rumble strips - transverse
Rumble strips – unspecified or other
Superelevation / cross slope

Roadway delineation

Improve retroreflectivity
Longitudinal pavement markings - new
Longitudinal pavement markings - remarking
Delineators post-mounted or on barrier
Raised pavement markers
Roadway delineation - other

Roadway signs and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs and flashers
Sign sheeting – upgrade or replacement
Roadway signs and traffic control - other
Roadway signs (including post) – new or updated

Shoulder treatments

Widen shoulder – paved or other
Pave existing shoulders
Shoulder grading
Shoulder treatments - other

Speed management

Modify speed limit
Radar speed signs
Speed detection system / truck warning
Speed management - other
Traffic calming feature

Work Zone

Work zone

Attachment 5
Other Project Listing Categories

Funding Categories HSIP (Section 148)
HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU)
HRRR Special Rule
Penalty Funds - Section 154
Penalty Funds- Section 164
Incentive Grants - Section 163
Incentive Grants (Section 406)
Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. STP, NHPP)
State and Local Funds

Relevant SHSP Emphasis Area
Instituting graduated licensing for younger drivers
Ensuring drivers are licensed and fully competent
Sustaining proficiency in older drivers
Curbing aggressive driving
Reducing impaired driving
Keeping drivers alert
Increasing driver safety awareness
Increasing seat belt use and improving airbag effectiveness
Making walking and street crossing easier
Ensuring safer bicycle travel
Improving motorcycle safety and increasing motorcycle awareness
Making truck travel safer
Increasing safety enhancements in vehicles
Reducing vehicle-train crashes
Keeping vehicles in the roadway
Minimizing the consequences of leaving the road
Improving the design and operation of highway intersections
Reducing head-on and across-median crashes
Designing safer work zones
Enhancing emergency medical capabilities to increase survivability
Improving information and decision support systems
Creating more effective processes and safety management system
Other

Functional Classification Rural Principal Arterial - Interstate
Rural Principal Arterial - Other
Rural Minor Arterial
Rural Major Collector
Rural Minor Collector
Rural Local Road or Street
Urban Principal Arterial - Interstate
Urban Principal Arterial - Other Freeways and Expressways
Urban Principal Arterial - Other
Urban Minor Arterial
Urban Major Collector
Urban Minor Collector
Urban Local Road or Street
Other

Roadway Ownership
State Highway Agency
County Highway Agency
Town or Township Highway Agency
City of Municipal Highway Agency
State Park, Forest, or Reservation Agency
Local Park, Forest or Reservation Agency
Other State Agency
Other Local Agency
Private (Other than Railroad)
Railroad
State Toll Authority
Local Toll Authority
Other Public Instrumentality (e.g., Airport, School, University)
Indian Tribe or? Nation
Other


[1] Guidance Memorandum on Fundamental Roadway and Traffic Data Elements to Improve the Highway Safety Improvement Program, dated August 1, 2011, http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/tools/data_tools/memohsip072911/

[2] Highway Safety Information System (HSIS), http://www.hsisinfo.org/

[3] This information collection has been assigned OMB control number 2125-0025 under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

Page last modified on February 13, 2017
Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000