Met or Made Significant Progress Determination Fact Sheet

Introduction

FHWA will assess State safety performance target achievement to determine whether States have met or made significant progress toward meeting their safety performance targets, per 23 U.S.C. 148(i). At least 4 out of the 5 safety performance targets must be either met or the actual outcome for the target is better than baseline performance to make significant progress.

States have the option to establish any number of urbanized area targets and one non-urbanized area target, in addition to the required statewide targets, for any or all of the safety performance measures. The urbanized and non-urbanized targets are not included in the determination of whether a State has met or made significant progress toward meeting its safety performance targets.

Evaluating Whether a State Has Met or Made Significant Progress Toward Meeting its Safety Performance Targets

If the actual outcome for a performance measure is equal to or less than the target, the target has been met.

If a State has not met a target, FHWA will determine if the actual outcome for the target is better than the baseline performance for that target. The baseline performance is the 5-year rolling average for the target ending the year prior to the establishment of the State's target.

Data Sources for Determining Significant Progress

The table below indicates the data sources that are used to determine if a State has met or made significant progress toward meeting its safety performance targets.

Findings:

• The number of fatalities target (465.0) was not met, but the actual performance in 2016-2020 (472.4) was better than the 2014-2018 baseline (474.0)
• The rate of fatality target (0.980) was not met. The actual performance in 2016-2020 (0.990) was worse than the 2014-2018 baseline (0.990)
• The number of serious injuries target (2,560.0) was not met, but the actual performance in 2020-2020 (2,578.4) was better than the 2014-2018 baseline (2,703.2)
• The rate of serious injuries target (4.126) was not met, but actual performance in 2016-2020 (4.288) was better than the 2014-2018 baseline (4.288)
• The number of non-motorized fatalities and non-motorized serious injuries target was met; therefore no other assessment is required.

Conclusion:

Since one target was met and three targets were better than the baseline, for this example, FHWA would determine that the State met or made significant progress toward meeting their 2020 safety performance targets'

If a State has not met or made significant progress toward meeting its safety performance targets, the State must comply with the provisions set forth in 23 USC 148(i) for the subsequent fiscal year. The State shall:

1. Use obligation authority equal to the HSIP apportionment for the year prior to the target year, only for HSIP projects.
2. Submit an HSIP Implementation Plan that describes actions the State will take to meet or make significant progress toward meeting its safety performance targets. The HSIP Implementation Plan should guide the State's project decisions so that the combined 148(i) provisions lead to the State meeting or making significant progress toward meeting its safety performance targets in subsequent years.

Note: In the example above, if the State had been determined to have not met or made significant progress toward meeting its CY 2020 safety performance targets, the State would have to use obligation authority equal to their FY 2019 HSIP apportionment only for HSIP projects in FY 2023 and submit an HSIP Implementation Plan for FY 2023.

FHWA-HSA-16-045
(revised November 2021 to reflect CY 2020 safety performance target cycle)