U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000
PDF (2.93 MB)
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers' names may appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high –quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.
| 1.
Report No. FHWA-SA-16-063 |
2. Government Accession No. | 3. Recipient's Catalog No. | ||
| 4. Title and Subtitle
HSIP 2015 National Summary Report |
5. Report Date
June 2016 |
|||
| 6. Performing Organization Code | ||||
| 7. Author(s) Sarah Smith and Kari Signor | 8. Performing Organization Report No. | |||
| 9. Performing Organization Name and Address University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center 730 ML King Jr Blvd, CB #3430 Chapel Hill, NC 27599 |
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) | |||
| 11. Contract or Grant No. DTFH61-11-C-00050 |
||||
| 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) Office of Safety 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590 |
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Summary Report 2015 |
|||
| 14. Sponsoring Agency Code FHWA |
||||
| 15. Supplementary Notes | ||||
| 16. Abstract The HSIP 2015 National Summary Report compiles and summarizes aggregate information related to the States' progress in implementing HSIP projects. Progress in implementing HSIP projects is described based on the amount of HSIP funds available and the number and general listing of projects initiated during the 2015 reporting cycle. The HSIP 2015 National Summary Report is not intended to compare states; rather to illustrate how the states are collectively implementing the HSIP to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads across the nation. |
||||
| 17. Key Words:
Highway Safety Improvement Program, reporting guidance, improvement category, Strategic Highway Safety Plan, emphasis area, national summary |
18. Distribution Statement
No restrictions. |
|||
| 19. Security Classif. (of this report)
Unclassified |
20. Security Classif. (of this page)
Unclassified |
21. No. of Pages
32 |
22. Price N/A | |
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72)
Reproduction of form and completed page is authorized
The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose to achieve a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. Under the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, Congress authorized approximately $2.4 billion per year for States to achieve this goal through the implementation of highway safety improvement projects, which is nearly double the amount that was authorized under the previous legislative act. The States not only met this challenge, but far exceeded it obligating nearly $3.9 billion for over 4,100 highway safety improvement projects in 2015.
These highway safety improvement projects come in all shapes and sizes. Some HSIP projects are much bigger in scope than others, while other projects include countermeasure installations across multiple sites. The 2015 HSIP National Summary Report provides an aggregate summary of the type and cost of projects across all States. Highlights of the States' 2015 HSIP implementation efforts are provided below.
The number and cost of HSIP projects has continued to increase from 1,684 projects with a total cost of $1.61B in 2009 to 4,188 projects with a total cost of $3.90B in 2015. Over the past seven years, States obligated $16.6 billion for more than 19,000 highway safety improvement projects.
The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the objective to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads through the implementation of highway safety improvement projects. The HSIP, similar to other Federal-aid programs, is a federally-funded, state administered program. The FHWA establishes the HSIP requirements via 23 CFR 924, and the States develop and administer a program to best meet their needs.
The HSIP requires a data-driven, strategic approach to improving highway safety on all public roads that focuses on performance. To obligate HSIP funds, each State shall:
States are also required to submit a report that describes the progress being made to implement highway safety improvement projects and the effectiveness of those improvements. The HSIP MAP-21 Reporting Guidance outlines the content and schedule for the annual HSIP report. The HSIP report should include, at a minimum, a discussion of each State's:
The HSIP 2015 National Summary Report compiles and summarizes aggregate information related to the States progress in implementing HSIP projects during the 2015 reporting cycle. Progress in implementing HSIP projects is described based on the amount of HSIP funds available and the number and general listing of projects obligated as documented in the 2015 HSIP reports. The HSIP 2015 National Summary Report is not intended to compare states; rather to illustrate how the states are collectively implementing the HSIP to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads across the nation.
A summary of available funding and the number and general listing of projects from prior years is available in the HSIP National Summary Baseline Report: 2009 -2012, HSIP 2013 National Summary Report, and HSIP 2014 National Summary Report.
Prior to MAP-21, each apportioned program had its own formula for distribution, and the total amount of Federal assistance a State received was the sum of the amounts it received for each program. MAP-21
instead provides a total apportionment for each State and then divides that apportionment amount
among individual apportioned programs.
MAP-21 authorizes a total combined amount ($37.5 billion in FY13 and $37.8 billion in FY14 and FY 15) in contract authority to fund five formula programs (including certain set-asides within the programs described below):
Figure 1 illustrates the distribution of funds across programs under MAP-21.
Figure 1: MAP-21 Program Apportionments
HSIP receives 7% of the States apportionment remaining after allocations to CMAQ and Metropolitan Planning, which amounts to approximately $2.4 billion each year, nearly double the amount apportioned to HSIP under SAFETEA-LU. The following sums are set-aside from the State's HSIP apportionment:
In addition, if the High Risk Rural Roads Special rule applies to a State, then in the next fiscal year the State must obligate an amount at least equal to 200% of its FY 2009 HRRR set-aside for high risk rural roads.
The final HSIP apportionment represents the amount of funding available to States for the advancement of highway safety improvement projects.
States provide project specific information for all projects obligated with HSIP funds during the reporting period in their annual HSIP reports. The reporting period is defined by the State and can be calendar year, state fiscal year or federal fiscal year. For 2015, the States obligated $3.9B for 4,188 total projects. These obligations utilized funds apportioned during the 2015 fiscal year as well as HSIP funds available from previous years' apportionments.
As per the HSIP MAP-21 Reporting Guidance, project specific information includes:
The following sections present various summaries of the nationwide HSIP project obligations for the 2015 reporting cycle. It should be noted that limited analysis of the project information can be done because not all states have included all of the above information for each project in their annual HSIP reports. Full use of the HSIP online reporting tool and compliance with the most recent HSIP reporting guidance will enable more complete and accurate reporting of national HSIP project data. In addition, HSIP projects come in all shapes and sizes. For example, some HSIP projects may be much bigger in scope than others, countermeasure installations across multiple sites, or non-infrastructure projects (i.e. transportation safety planning, data improvements). Nonetheless, the summaries in the following sections provide a broad scale analysis of HSIP spending in 2015 by project cost, functional classification and ownership, improvement categories and subcategories, and SHSP emphasis areas.
The cost per HSIP project in 2015 ranged widely. Some projects were small in scope and cost, such as replacing signs on a particular route. Others were higher cost projects, such as widening a highway or reconfiguring an intersection. Figure 2 shows the breakdown by project cost, grouped into general categories with breakpoints at $100,000, $500,000, and $1,000,000.
Figure 2 : Number of Projects by Project Cost
Roughly two-thirds of the projects had costs less than $500K. A small percentage (12 percent) fell into the $500K - $1M category. The remaining 22 percent were high cost projects totaling $1M or more. The top five sub categories selected for these high cost projects are:
In 2013 and 2014, the breakdowns were similar. About two-thirds of the projects had costs less than $500K, about 13 percent fell into the $500K – $1M category, and the remaining 20 percent were more than $1M.
Figure 3 through Figure 7 illustrate the distribution of projects by the types of roads on which they were conducted. Figure 3 shows number of projects by functional class, following the HPMS classification scheme; Figure 4 shows average total cost of projects by functional class; Figure 5 shows the number and average total cost of projects by urban/rural designation; Figure 6 shows projects by the agency who owns the road; and Figure 7 shows average total cost of projects by the agency who owns the road. If the functional class or road ownership was not indicated, the project is counted under the "unknown" category. Examples of classifications in the "other" category include multiple functional classes, state or citywide implementation, or non-infrastructure projects.
Figure 3 . Number of Projects by Functional Class
As in 2014, most projects were categorized as "Unknown" indicating that the State did not associate a functional class for a particular project. Projects that were associated with a functional class were most often categorized as "Rural Major Collector" or "Urban Principal Arterial – Other". There were 419 projects categorized as "Other" and of those, roughly 250 were categorized as multiple classes or systemic. Roughly another 30 projects were categorized as "n/a" due to the fact that they were non-infrastructure projects.
Figure 4. Average Total Cost of Projects by Functional Class
Figure 4 shows the average total cost of projects by functional class. It is important to note that not every project had an associated cost so the average is based on the number of projects which had cost information available. Projects categorized as "Urban Principal Arterial – Interstate" had the highest average total cost per project of $3.01 million (compared to $2.73M in 2014) and projects categorized as "Rural Local Road or Street" had the lowest average total cost per project of $330,000 (compared to $220,000 in 2014).
Figure 5 . Number and Average Total Cost of Projects by Urban/Rural Designation
Figure 5 illustrates the number and average total cost of projects by urban/rural designation. As in 2014, there are fewer total urban projects than rural projects but the average total cost of the urban projects is greater than the average total cost of the rural projects.
Figure 6. Number of Projects by Road Ownership
As in 2014, States implement most projects on roads owned by a "State Highway Agency" or "Unknown" (indicating that the State did not indicate road ownership for a particular project). There were 110 projects categorized as "Other" and of those, roughly 90 were categorized in state-defined ownership categories. No projects were categorized for the following ownerships:
Figure 7. Average Total Cost of Projects by Road
Ownership
Figure 7 shows the average total cost of projects by road ownership. It is important to note that not every project had an associated cost so the average is based on the number of projects which had cost information available. Projects categorized as "Other State Agency" had the highest average total cost per project of $9 million and projects categorized as "Local Park, Forest, or Reservation Agency" had the lowest average total cost per project of $81,000.
Under the HSIP MAP-21 reporting guidance, each project should be assigned a general improvement category and a subcategory under that general category. While a single project may consist of multiple project types, FHWA directs States to assign each project to only one category. The category chosen should align with the primary purpose of the project. Figure 8 and Figure 9 show the distribution of the number of projects by general improvement category. Figure 10 and Figure 11 combined show the distribution of the total cost of projects by general improvement category. Projects categorized as "Unknown" indicate that there was no general improvement category assigned by the State. Figure 12 through Figure 16 show the breakdown of the number of projects by subcategory for five improvement categories: Intersection geometry, Intersection traffic control, Pedestrians and bicyclists, Roadway, and Non-infrastructure. More detailed tables with the cost spent in each subcategory are available in Appendix B. For ease of reporting, similar subcategories were grouped together. For example, in Figure 12 below, "Auxiliary lanes – other" combines adding acceleration lanes, adding auxiliary through lanes, adding two way left turn lanes, and several other related subcategories.
Figure 8. Number of Projects by Improvement Category
(Top 11)
Figure 8 shows the number of projects by improvement category (top 11) as classified in the HSIP MAP-21 Reporting Guidance. Based on the project information reported by the States, the top five improvement categories are roadway, intersection traffic control, intersection geometry, roadside, and shoulder treatments. In 2013 and 2014, the top five improvement categories were the same and the numbers of projects classified in each category were similar with the exception of the roadway category. In 2015, there were approximately 475 additional projects classified in the roadway category. The ranking of the remaining project categories was similar in all three years.
Figure 9. Number
of Projects by Improvement Category (Bottom 11)
Figure 9 shows the number of projects by improvement category (bottom 11) as classified in the HSIP MAP-21 Reporting Guidance. In 2014, the number and ranking of projects classified in each category for the bottom 11 were similar.
Figure 10. Average Total Cost of Projects by
Improvement Category (top 11)
Figure 10 shows the average total cost of projects by improvement category (top 11). Again, it is important to note that not every project had an associated cost so the average is based on the number of projects with cost available. Compared to 2014, the following categories had notable differences in average project costs. Note that the "Multiple" category indicates that a State selected more than one improvement category. For example, the project could include changes to lighting, signs, pavement markings, intersection geometry, and number of lanes.
Figure 11. Average Total Cost of Projects by Improvement
Category (bottom 11)
Based on project information reported by the States, the lowest average HSIP cost projects are in the following categories:
Figure 12. Number of Intersection Geometry Projects
by Subcategory
The Intersection geometry category was selected for further evaluation because in 2015 (as in previous years) it ranked in the top five in terms of number of projects categorized and ranked in the bottom 11 in terms of average cost per project. FHWA has also identified intersections as one of three focus areas for the Focused Approach to Safety effort.
For the Intersection geometry category, most projects are sub categorized as "Intersection geometrics – other/unknown" (45 percent; 254 of 559 projects), "Auxiliary lanes – add left-turn lane" (28 percent; 155 of 559 projects), and "Auxiliary lanes – other" (13 percent; 72 of 559 projects). Examples of projects in the "Intersection geometrics – other/unknown" subcategory include modify intersection corner radius and general intersection safety improvement projects. The "Intersection geometrics – other/unknown" subcategory is predominately used without any project description, therefore, no other information is available for these projects.
Figure 13. Number of Traffic Control Projects by
Subcategory
The Intersection traffic control category was selected for further evaluation because in 2015 (as in previous years) it ranked in the top five in terms of number of projects categorized. FHWA has also identified intersections as one of three focus areas for the Focused Approach to Safety effort.
For the Intersection traffic control category, most projects are subcategorized as "Intersection traffic control – other/unknown" (38 percent; 231 of 615 projects) and "Modify traffic signal" (29 percent; 179 of 615 projects). Examples of projects in the "Intersection traffic control – other/unknown" category include projects described as signal and stop controlled systemic improvements and general intersection traffic control improvement projects. The "Intersection traffic control – other/unknown" subcategory is predominately used without any project description, therefore, no other information is available for these projects. Examples of projects in the "Modify traffic signal" category include modernization/replacement of traffic signal and adding flashing yellow arrow signals.
Figure 14. Number of Pedestrian and Bicyclist
Projects by Subcategory
The Pedestrian and bicycle category was selected for further evaluation because infrastructure improvements in this category are of significant interest to various stakeholders. FHWA has also identified pedestrians and bicyclists as one of three focus areas under the Focused Approach to Safety effort.
For the Pedestrians and bicyclists category, most projects are subcategorized as "Miscellaneous pedestrian and bicyclist improvements" (40 percent; 49 of 122 projects) and "Install or modify pedestrian signal" (25 percent; 31 of 122 projects). Many of the projects in the "Miscellaneous pedestrian and bicyclist improvements" subcategory do not have any project description, therefore, no other information is available for these projects.
Figure 15. Number of Roadway Projects by Subcategory
The Roadway category was selected for further evaluation because in 2015 (as in previous years) it ranked as the number one category in terms of number of projects categorized. FHWA has also identified roadway departure as one of three focus areas for the Focused Approach to Safety effort.
For the Roadway category, most projects were subcategorized as "Roadway – other/unknown" (46 percent; 553 of 1195 projects) and "Rumble strips" (36 percent; 427 of 1195 projects). Examples of projects in the "Roadway – other/unknown" subcategory were projects such as "restripe to revise separation between opposing lanes and/or shoulder widths".
Figure 16. Number of Non-Infrastructure
Projects by Subcategory
The Non-infrastructure category was selected for further evaluation because improvements in this category are of significant interest to various stakeholders. For the Non-infrastructure category, most projects were subcategorized as "Data/traffic records" (30 percent; 59 of 199 projects), "Transportation safety planning" (22 percent; 44 of 199 projects), "Educational efforts/outreach" (17 percent; 33 of 199 projects), and "Road safety audits" (15 percent; 29 of 199 projects).
Based on a review of State SHSPs, FHWA identified the eight SHSP emphasis areas common across most States. These emphasis areas are used in the HSIP online reporting tool for categorizing HSIP projects. Figure 17 presents the number of HSIP projects categorized by SHSP emphasis area. For consistency and national reporting purposes, state-defined SHSP emphasis areas were assigned to these emphasis areas, where possible. Please note that States sometimes categorize a single project by several SHSP Emphasis Areas. Therefore, for the purpose of Figure 17 , a single project may be counted more than once. For example, the State recently completed an intersection improvement project that enhanced safety for pedestrians. This project could be categorized as "Intersections" as well "Pedestrians" and is therefore counted once in each category.
About 42 percent of the projects were categorized as "Roadway Departure" (33 percent in 2014), 31 percent were categorized as "Intersections" (27 percent in 2014), 14 percent categorized as "Unknown/Other" (26 percent in 2014. Examples of other categories used by the States include: "Improve driver decisions about rights-of-way and turning", "Spot safety improvements", and "Curbing aggressing driving".
Figure 17. Number of Projects by SHSP Emphasis Area
Most states prepared their 2013 through 2015 HSIP reports in accordance with the MAP-21 HSIP Reporting Guidance; therefore FHWA can make a direct comparison of information related to the 2013 through 2015 highway safety improvement projects. As can be seen in Table 3 below, the total number of projects and cost of projects did not change much from 2013 to 2014 but in 2015, there were roughly 900 more projects reported. However, the breakdown in project costs for various breakpoints was similar across years.
Table 1. Total number of projects and project cost breakdown, 2013-2014
| Year | 2013 | Percentage | 2014 | Percentage | 2015 | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of projects | 3292 | 3348 | 4188 | |||
| Num. of projects (with cost info.)* | 3253 | 3339 | 3976 | |||
| Cost of projects | $3.09B | $3.10B | $3.90B | |||
| Average cost per project | $950,840 | $928,388 | $979,881 | |||
| Number of projects <$100K | 1176 | 36% | 1050 | 31% | 1374 | 35% |
| Number of projects $100K - $499K | 985 | 30% | 1054 | 32% | 1131 | 28% |
| Number of projects $500K-$1M | 415 | 13% | 466 | 14% | 461 | 12% |
| Number of projects $1M+ | 617 | 19% | 741 | 22% | 864 | 22% |
Table 2 shows the comparison from 2013 through 2015 of the number of projects and average total cost of projects for various project types highlighted in this report. For most project types, the number and cost of projects has increased over the three year period.
Table 2. Number of projects and average total project cost for various project types, 2013-2014
| Project Type | Num Projects 2013 | Avg Cost 2013 | Num Projects 2014 | Avg Cost 2014 | Num Projects 2015 | Avg Cost 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Urban projects | 826 | $1.4M | 954 | $1.3M | 1236 | $1.2M |
| Rural projects | 1244 | $896K | 1361 | $880K | 1847 | $1.0M |
| Roadway projects | 854 | $635K | 722 | $935K | 1195 | $608K |
| Intersection traffic control projects | 420 | $667K | 505 | $677K | 615 | $788K |
| Intersection geometry projects | 376 | $1.2M | 379 | $972K | 559 | $971K |
| Ped/bike projects | 103 | $528K | 118 | $485K | 122 | $965K |
| Non-infrastructure projects | 109 | $444K | 148 | $563K | 199 | $607K |
The HSIP National Summary Baseline Report 2009-2012 reported project and cost information for HSIP reports submitted by the States for years 2009-2012. The information from the baseline report is summarized below with the purpose of comparing basic cost and project information to the 2013 through 2015 reports. Table 3 below shows that States obligated $16.6B for more than 19,000 projects over the seven-year period. These obligations include not only HSIP funds apportioned during the reporting period (2009-2015), but also HSIP funds available from previous years' apportionments.
Table 3 : Total Number and Cost of Projects by Year
| Year | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of Projects | 1,684 | 2,386 | 2,523 | 2,429 | 3,292 | 3,348 | 4,188 | 19,850 |
| Number of Projects (with cost info.)* | 1,609 | 2,348 | 2,449 | 2,374 | 3,253 | 3,339 | 3,976 | 19,348 |
| Cost of projects | $1.61B | $1.46B | $1.78B | $1.65B | $3.09B | $3.10B | $3.90B | $16.6B |
| Avg. Cost Per Project | $1.00M | $621K | $726K | $696K | $951K | $928K | $980K | $857K |
FHWA, MAP-21 Apportionment Fact Sheet
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/factsheets/apportionment.cfm
FHWA, HSIP Apportionment Notices
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/notices/
FHWA, HSIP MAP-21 Fact Sheet https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/factsheets/hsip.cfm
FHWA, HSIP MAP-21 Reporting Guidance, February 13, 2013
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/guidance/guidehsipreport.cfm
FHWA, HSIP Online Reporting Tool
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/resources/onrpttool/
FHWA, HSIP National Summary Baseline Report 2009-2012
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/reports/nsbrpt_2009_2012.cfm
FHWA, HSIP 2013 National Summary Report
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/reports/nsbrpt2013.cfm
FHWA, HSIP 2014 National Summary Report
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/reports/pdf/2014/hsip_natl2014.pdf
2015 State HSIP Reports
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/reports/
| 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 signa – 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 |
Table 4. Number and Cost of 2015 Projects by Improvement Category
| Improvement Category | Number of Projects | Total Cost of Projects* | Average Total Cost* | Total HSIP Cost of Projects* | Average HSIP Cost* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Access management | 64 | $40,528,952.04 | $723,731.29 | $43,820,608.90 | $782,510.87 |
| Advanced technology and ITS | 40 | $104,337,881.88 | $2,819,942.75 | $21,676,809.06 | $699,251.91 |
| Alignment | 66 | $74,415,999.67 | $1,240,266.66 | $52,703,937.74 | $908,688.58 |
| Animal-related | 3 | $22,423,847.00 | $7,474,615.67 | $9,815,366.00 | $3,271,788.67 |
| Interchange design | 36 | $267,466,790.51 | $7,866,670.31 | $110,179,816.68 | $3,240,582.84 |
| Intersection geometry | 559 | $521,462,049.51 | $971,065.27 | $311,611,586.04 | $566,566.52 |
| Intersection traffic control | 615 | $445,310,601.00 | $788,160.36 | $350,232,639.22 | $597,666.62 |
| Lighting | 63 | $32,132,297.78 | $526,758.98 | $30,009,274.67 | $526,478.50 |
| Miscellaneous | 72 | $67,917,652.19 | $998,789.00 | $17,981,980.86 | $599,399.36 |
| Multiple | 12 | $2,280,825.00 | $190,068.75 | $833,340.00 | $208,335.00 |
| Non-infrastructure | 199 | $112,952,571.71 | $607,271.89 | $95,718,526.59 | $493,394.47 |
| Parking | 1 | $1,424,765.00 | $1,424,765.00 | $1,424,765.00 | $1,424,765.00 |
| Pedestrians and bicyclists | 122 | $99,417,076.01 | $965,214.33 | $48,584,902.61 | $418,835.37 |
| Railroad grade crossings | 18 | $28,426,496.30 | $1,672,146.84 | $22,700,086.54 | $1,261,115.92 |
| Roadside | 422 | $349,950,365.79 | $892,730.52 | $298,650,865.15 | $716,189.13 |
| Roadway | 1195 | $712,767,937.40 | $607,645.30 | $463,639,845.73 | $391,257.25 |
| Roadway delineation | 144 | $280,307,471.56 | $2,031,213.56 | $109,105,264.21 | $796,388.79 |
| Roadway signs and traffic control | 189 | $88,807,042.13 | $519,339.43 | $64,606,657.80 | $353,041.85 |
| Shoulder treatments | 237 | $499,004,257.48 | $2,123,422.37 | $334,512,488.38 | $1,448,106.01 |
| Speed management | 6 | $1,510,300.00 | $377,575.00 | $2,483,982.00 | $413,997.00 |
| Work Zone | 19 | $4,165,365.44 | $219,229.76 | $3,847,445.25 | $202,497.12 |
| Unknown | 106 | $138,995,874.00 | $1,336,498.79 | ||
| Total | 4188 | $3,896,006,419.40 | $979,880.89 | $2,394,140,188.43 | $611,373.90 |
* Not all states provided cost data for all projects in a given improvement category.
Table 5. Number and Cost of Projects by Subcategory for Intersection Geometry
| Subcategory | Number of Projects | Total Cost |
|---|---|---|
| Auxiliary lanes – add left-turn lane | 155 | $165,468,986 |
| Auxiliary lanes – add right-turn lane | 31 | $21,363,499 |
| Auxiliary lanes – other | 72 | $99,717,888 |
| Intersection geometrics – modify skew angle | 39 | $16,148,729 |
| Intersection geometrics – other/unknown | 254 | $203,770,258 |
| Intersection geometrics – realignment to improve offset | 8 | $14,992,689 |
| Total | 559 | $521,462,050 |
Table 6. Number and Cost of Projects by Subcategory for Intersection Traffic Control
| Subcategory | Number of Projects | Total Cost |
|---|---|---|
| Intersection flashers and signing | 58 | $7,175,853 |
| Intersection traffic control - other/unknown | 231 | $129,749,953 |
| Modify control to roundabout | 91 | $102,780,501 |
| Modify traffic signal | 179 | $154,515,079 |
| Modify traffic signal timing or phasing | 45 | $48,597,313 |
| Pavement markings | 11 | $2,491,902 |
| Total | 615 | $445,310,601 |
Table 7. Number and Cost of Projects by Subcategory for Pedestrians and Bicyclists
| Subcategory | Number of Projects | Total Cost |
|---|---|---|
| Install or modify crosswalk | 18 | $9,289,768 |
| Install or modify pedestrian signal | 31 | $14,164,927 |
| Install sidewalk | 24 | $54,786,678 |
| Miscellaneous pedestrian and bicyclist improvements | 49 | $21,175,704 |
| Total | 122 | $99,417,076 |
Table 8. Number and Cost of Projects by Subcategory for Roadway
| Subcategory | Number of Projects | Total Cost |
|---|---|---|
| Pavement surface | 114 | $120,969,982 |
| Roadway – other/unknown | 553 | $156,031,786 |
| Roadway narrowing (road diet, roadway reconfiguration) | 9 | $7,738,933 |
| Roadway widening | 71 | $256,105,550 |
| Rumble strips | 427 | $157,962,412 |
| Superelevation / cross slope | 21 | $13,959,276 |
| Total | 1195 | $712,767,937 |
Table 9. Number and Cost of Projects by Subcategory for Non-Infrastructure
| Subcategory | Number of Projects | Total Cost |
|---|---|---|
| Data/traffic records | 59 | $22,819,393 |
| Educational efforts/outreach | 33 | $19,976,497 |
| Enforcement | 14 | $10,658,935 |
| Non-infrastructure – other/unknown | 14 | $5,856,916 |
| Road safety audits | 29 | $11,441,768 |
| Training and workforce development | 6 | $2,081,385 |
| Transportation safety planning | 44 | $40,117,677 |
| Total | 199 | $112,952,571.71 |
