U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000
December 29, 2016
2017 Reporting Cycle
Reporting Frequency and Schedule
Content and Structure of the HSIP Report
Progress in Implementing Highway Safety Improvement Projects
Progress in Achieving Safety Outcomes and Performance Targets
Protection of Data from Discovery & Admission into Evidence
Attachment 1: Highway Safety Improvement Categories
Attachment 2: Other Project Listing Categories
This guidance supersedes the February 13, 2013, "Highway Safety Improvement Program Reporting Guidance."
The Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Pub. L. No. 114-94) continued the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) as a core Federal-aid program with the purpose of reducing fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. HSIP is authorized under section 148 of title 23, United States Code, 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 performance management requirements established in the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) under 23 U.S.C. 150, States should select and implement projects that will contribute to a reduction in fatalities and serious injuries, consistent with their Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) goals and safety performance targets. The HSIP annual report serves as the mechanism to report on safety performance targets pursuant to 23 CFR Part 490. The States should 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.
This document provides guidance to help States meet the HSIP reporting requirements under 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 924.15. All States must submit these reports through the HSIP online reporting tool [23 CFR 924.15(a)]. While 23 U.S.C. 148(h)(1)(C)(iii) requires States to address railway-highway crossings, States should collect and include this information in the report required under 23 U.S.C. 130(g). (See guidance for the Railway-Highway Crossing Reporting requirements dated February 22, 2013, for additional information on the railway-highway crossings report.)
Pursuant to 23 CFR 924.15, a State shall submit its HSIP report to the FHWA Division Administrator no later than August 31st of each year. This date coincides with the railway-highway crossing report required under 23 U.S.C. 130(g). The Division Administrator will review the report to ensure consistency with the HSIP reporting requirements and current state of the practice. Divisions should use the HSIP report checklist (published separately) to assist in their review of the State's HSIP report. Upon acceptance of the report, the Division Administrator will transmit the report to the FHWA Office of Safety no later than September 30th each year.
All States shall use the FHWA online reporting tool to support the annual HSIP reporting process [23 CFR 924.15(a)]. Additional information is available on the FHWA Web site at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/resources/onrpttool/. An HSIP report template is available (published separately), which is identical to the online reporting tool content. The HSIP Online Reporting Tool meets all report requirements and USDOT Web site compatibility requirements.
Pursuant to 23 CFR 924.15, each reporting period is 1 year. A State, in consultation with the FHWA Division Office, may define the reporting period based on calendar year, Federal fiscal year, or State fiscal year. However, States should use a consistent reporting period from year to year. Performance measure data must be reported on a calendar year basis [23 CFR 924.15(a)(1)(iii)(A)].
The report should address all projects implemented with HSIP funds, including local projects and non-infrastructure projects (e.g., data, transportation safety planning). Furthermore, if a State has been approved to use Railway-Highway Crossing Program (RHCP) funds for HSIP purposes, the State should include those projects in the HSIP report. In addition, States should report on explicit safety projects identified through the HSIP but implemented with other funding sources. The FHWA encourages States 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 five sections: program structure, progress in implementing HSIP projects, progress in achieving safety performance targets, assessment of the effectiveness of the improvements, and a compliance assessment. The content and structure of each section is described below.
The report should briefly describe the structure of the State's HSIP. At a minimum, this description should include how HSIP funds are administered in the State and a summary of the methodology used to develop the programs and projects implemented through the HSIP on all public roads.
The report should briefly describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State, including information such as:
The report should also include any program administration practices that have changed since the last reporting period (e.g., new local HSIP policy, HSIP steering committee).
The HSIP planning, implementation, and evaluation processes must be developed in cooperation with the FHWA Division Administrator and in consultation with other safety stakeholders, as appropriate [23 CFR 924.7(b)]. Because these processes likely will not change on an annual basis, States should submit any such HSIP processes to the Division Administrator under a separate cover from the annual HSIP report and reference these documents in the FHWA/State Stewardship and Oversight Agreement as controlling documents. The Division Administrator should maintain a copy of current program and project identification processes. The State may choose to include the HSIP process as an attachment to the annual HSIP report, as appropriate.
For the purposes of the annual HSIP report, States should provide a brief overview of each program administered under the HSIP. The HSIP Manual defines a program as a group of projects (not necessarily similar in type or location) implemented to achieve a common highway safety goal.[1] For example, some States have one program that includes all projects resulting from the HSIP planning component. Other States have multiple "sub" programs. An example of a "sub" program may be a skid treatment program designed to reduce wet-weather-related crashes at different locations. Some States also refer to "sub" programs as initiatives.
For each program administered under the State's HSIP, the State should indicate the date that the program methodology was last updated and submit a brief summary of the following key elements:
The report should also describe the:
The report should identify any changes to the HSIP methodology practices that were introduced during the last reporting period to advance HSIP implementation efforts (e.g., HSM, road safety audits, systemic approach).
States should describe their progress in implementing HSIP projects during the specified reporting period. This description should include a comparison of the HSIP funds programmed and obligated for highway safety improvement projects, as well as the number and general listing of projects initiated.
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 includes highway safety improvement projects obligated using HSIP funds (23 U.S.C. 148), funds obligated under the High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR) special rule (23 U.S.C. 148(g)(1)), penalty funds used for HSIP purposes (23 U.S.C. 154 and 164), and the Railway-Highway Crossing Program (RHCP) funds used for HSIP purposes (23 U.S.C. 130(e)(2)). In addition, the report should include other non-safety funds (e.g., Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG), National Highway Performance Program (NHPP), State, local) that are programmed to implement highway safety improvement projects (i.e., those identified through the HSIP). Railway-highway crossing projects are addressed separately in the Railway-Highway Crossings Report.
For each funding category, the State must compare the funds programmed to those obligated (i.e., what the State was planning (funds programmed) versus what the State did (funds obligated) during the reporting period).
Programmed funds are those funds that are planned to be expended under the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) on highway safety improvement projects over the reporting period.
An obligation is the Federal government's legal commitment (promise) to pay or reimburse the States or other entities for the Federal share of a project's eligible costs. Therefore, obligated funds are those funds authorized by FHWA in the Fiscal Management Information System (FMIS).
| Funding Category | Programmed | Obligated | % Obligated/Programmed |
|---|---|---|---|
| HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) | |||
| HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C. 148(g)(1)) | |||
| Penalty Funds – 23 U.S.C. 154 (for HSIP purposes) | |||
| Penalty Funds – 23 U.S.C. 164 (for HSIP purposes) | |||
| RHCP (for HSIP purposes under 23 U.S.C. 130(e)(2)) | |||
| Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e., STBG, NHPP) | |||
| State and Local Funds | |||
| Total |
The report should briefly describe the amount of HSIP funds, either in dollar amounts or on a 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 a percentage basis, programmed and obligated for non-infrastructure safety projects over the specified reporting period. Non-infrastructure projects are those projects that do not result in construction (e.g., data, road safety audits, transportation safety planning).
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 into or out of the HSIP in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 126.
Pursuant to 23 CFR 924.15, States shall provide a list of highway safety improvement projects that were obligated during the reporting period, including non-infrastructure projects (e.g., data, transportation safety planning). For each project to which the State has obligated HSIP funds during the reporting period, the following information should be provided to the fullest extent possible:
The improvement category and sub-category should align with the list of highway safety improvement categories in Attachment 1. The list of highway safety improvement categories in Attachment 1 is similar to that used in the Highway Safety Information System (HSIS) 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 improved pedestrian accommodations at 10 intersections in its region, the project output would be 10 intersections. Attachment 1 also includes recommended output measures for each highway safety improvement subcategory. Please be as specific as possible when choosing the appropriate output measure.
The method for site selection should indicate whether the project was identified via spot or systemic safety analysis.
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 the agency uses multiple funding categories, the State should select the category associated with the most significant portion of funding. For example, if a State funds 60 percent of the project cost with HSIP funds and the remaining 40 percent with STBG funds, it should select the HSIP funding category.
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.
Attachment 2 includes other project listing categories for funding, SHSP emphasis areas, functional classification and roadway ownership.
States should describe the progress made toward achieving safety outcomes and performance targets. This includes an overview of general highway safety trends, documentation of safety performance targets, and the application of special rules.
States must present and describe information showing the annual highway safety trends in the State for at least the last 5 years for the following performance measures:
In addition, to the maximum extent possible, States should present this information by functional classification and ownership.
States can present fatality performance measure data using State-reported fatality data or data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). The State should clearly describe the data source in the HSIP report. FHWA will use the FARS data to both determine whether targets were met and set the baseline for the significant progress assessment.
States must present serious injury performance measure data consistent with the Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria (MMUCC) 4th edition definition for "suspected serious injury (A)" or use the serious injury conversion tables on FHWA's website.[2] FHWA will use the State-reported serious injury data to determine whether targets were met as well as set the baseline for the significant progress assessment. States should include a discussion on the current status of compliance with the MMUCC definition in the Compliance Assessment section of this report.
For the rate information, States must provide fatalities and serious injuries per HMVMT. Please note that FHWA will use the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) data to derive the State VMT data to both determine whether targets were met and conduct the significant progress assessment.
States must present the number of non-motorized fatalities separately from the number of non-motorized serious injuries. The FHWA will use the State-reported, non-motorized serious injury data combined with the non-motorized fatalities reported in FARS to assess whether a State met its non-motorized safety target or whether its performance outcome was better than the baseline year.
States shall report the most current full calendar year of data that is available (e.g., for the 2017 reporting cycle, States should report 2016 performance measure data) [23 CFR 490.209 and 924.15(a)(1)(iii)(A)]. If the State is not able to report the most current year's performance measure data, please describe why and the State's efforts to become current.
States must present safety performance targets for the following calendar year for each of the five safety performance measures listed above [23 CFR 924.15(a)(1)(iii)(B)]. For example, for the 2017 reporting cycle, States will report calendar year (CY) 2018 targets for the (1) number of fatalities, (2) number of serious injuries, (3) fatality rate, (4) serious injury rate, and the (5) total number of non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries. CY2018 targets represent the 5-yr rolling average for 2014 to 2018 (as per 23 CFR 490.207(b)). Each performance measure is based on a 5-year rolling average. The targets for number of fatalities, number of serious injuries, and fatality rate must be identical to the targets submitted to NHTSA in the State's Highway Safety Plan [23 CFR 490.209(a)(1)]. States should describe their efforts to coordinate with other stakeholders (e.g., State highway safety office, metropolitan planning organizations) to establish the safety performance targets.
In addition, for each safety performance measure, State DOTs may choose to establish separate targets for any of the urbanized areas within the State and may also choose to establish a single target for all of the non-urbanized areas in the State. If the State chooses to establish these optional targets, it must also declare and describe the boundaries of each area. States can use boundaries from the decennial census or adjust them, as appropriate. If adjusted, the State should provide the boundary file as part of the HSIP report submission.
States must also describe the basis for each established target, how the established targets support SHSP goals, and, in future years, any reasons for differences between the actual outcomes and targets [(23 CFR 924.15(a)(1)(iii)(B)]. States should provide this information for each target.
States should report on the applicability of the high risk rural roads and older drivers special rules described in 23 U.S.C. 148(g).
High Risk Rural Roads
The HSIP report should indicate whether or not the HRRR Special Rule applies to the State for this reporting period (based on previous determination by FHWA). If the HRRR Special Rule applies to the State, States should include in their annual HSIP report a description of the methodology used to identify HRRR projects in the Program Methodology section, documentation of the amount of HRRR funding programmed and obligated during the reporting period in the Funding section, a listing of HRRR projects obligated during the reporting period in the General Listing of Projects section, and the a description of the effectiveness of HRRR projects in the Program Evaluation section.
Older Drivers and Pedestrians
Beginning with the 2017 HSIP annual reports, States will only report fatalities and serious injuries involving older drivers and pedestrians, consistent with the most current version of the Section 148: Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Guidance.[3] States should present this information for seven years, ending with the year prior to the most current full year of data [23 CFR 924.15(a)(1)(iii)(C)]. For example, for the 2017 HSIP report, States must report older driver and pedestrian performance measure data for the years 2009 through 2015.
The FHWA will use this information to calculate the older driver and pedestrian fatality and serious injury rate per capita, determine whether or not the special rule applies to each State, and notify the States no later than March of the following year. States will no longer self-report applicability of the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule in their HSIP annual report.
Under 23 U.S.C. 148(c)(2)(F)(i), States must establish an evaluation process to analyze and assess results achieved by highway safety improvement projects. States should report evaluation results from individual project locations, the effectiveness of groupings or similar types of highway safety improvement projects (e.g., particular countermeasures), and the effectiveness of the program as a whole. States typically look back at least 3 years for project and program evaluations. For example, States would look back to projects completed in 2013 for the 2017 report.
States should describe the measures of effectiveness used to determine effectiveness of the HSIP, as well as the results of program level evaluations, as appropriate. Measures might include the change in total crashes, change in target crashes, benefit-cost ratio, economic effectiveness (cost per crash reduced), lives saved, injuries avoided, or crashes prevented.
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 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 and contribute to the success of the program.
The effectiveness of groupings or similar types of highway safety improvement projects (e.g., particular countermeasures) is evident through SHSP emphasis area trends and the results of countermeasure effectiveness evaluations.
At a minimum, States should present and describe highway safety trends for SHSP emphasis area performance measures that relate to the HSIP.
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 the results of countermeasure evaluations, as appropriate. States should not only provide the results of the evaluation, but also supporting information such as the target crash type, number of installations or miles of treatment included in the evaluation, or number of years of before and after data and evaluation methodology. The State may also include the research report or other documentation as an attachment to the HSIP report.
States should monitor the effectiveness of individual projects in addressing the target crash types, consistent with the State HSIP evaluation processes. The FHWA encourages States to report information from individual project evaluations using the template provided in the online reporting tool. The FHWA uses this information to support national efforts to estimate the benefits of the HSIP. Relevant evaluation information includes:
The HSIP and Safety Performance Measure Final Rules[4] introduced several new requirements relating to the SHSP update cycle, Model Inventory of Roadway Elements (MIRE) fundamental data elements, and serious injury definition. In addition, FHWA established a strategic initiative for every State to conduct an HSIP program assessment at least once every 5 years. To ensure States are making progress towards meeting these requirements, States should provide the current status of these efforts in their annual HSIP report.
States must update their SHSP at least once every 5 years [23 CFR 924.9(a)(3)(i)]. To help FHWA ensure compliance with this requirement, States should report information related to their SHSP update efforts. This information should include, at a minimum, the date that the State SHSP was approved or signed by the Governor or designated State representative; the years covered by the current SHSP, and an estimated date for completion of the next SHSP update.
States must incorporate specific quantifiable and measurable anticipated improvements for the collection of MIRE fundamental data elements into their Traffic Records Strategic Plan by July 1, 2017 [23 CFR 924.11(b)]. The HSIP report should provide the current status of MIRE fundamental data collection efforts and briefly describe actions the State will take moving forward to meet the requirement for States to have access to the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads by September 30, 2026.
States must use serious injury data that is either MMUCC 4th edition compliant or converted to the KABCO system (A) for injury classification through use of the NHTSA conversion tables [23 CFR 490.207(c)]. States should describe the current status of compliance with this requirement, for both the crash database and the standard crash report form, in the HSIP report. If the State is not yet compliant with the MMUCC 4th edition definition, it should describe the actions it plans to take to become compliant by April 15, 2019.
States should conduct an HSIP program assessment (e.g. self-assessment, program review or peer review) at least once every 5 years. States should describe their efforts to meet this goal. This might include the date and topic of the most recent assessment, or an estimated timeframe to complete a planned assessment.
Section 148(h)(4) of title 23 provides 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 may also be protected under 23 U.S.C. 409 (discovery and admission as evidence of certain reports and surveys). The protection afforded under Sections 148(h)(4) and 409 does not provide an outright bar to litigation. It is an evidentiary privilege that must be affirmatively asserted by the party against whom discovery is sought or evidence is offered. Neither provision excuses FHWA from fulfilling the statutory requirements of the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 U.S.C. § 552, as amended.
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/sub-category chosen should align with the primary purpose of the project.
| Category | Sub-category | Output Measure |
|---|---|---|
| Access management | Access management – other | # miles or # access points |
| Change in access – close or restrict existing access | # miles or # access points | |
| Change in access – miscellaneous/unspecified | # miles or #access points | |
| Grassed median – extend existing | # miles | |
| Median crossover – close crossover | # miles or # crossovers | |
| Median crossover – directional crossover | # miles or # crossovers | |
| Median crossover – relocate existing | # miles or # crossovers | |
| Median crossover – unspecified | # miles or # crossovers | |
| Raised island – install new | # miles | |
| Raised island – modify existing | # miles | |
| Raised island – remove existing | # miles | |
| Raised island – unspecified | # miles | |
| Advanced technology and ITS | Advanced technology and ITS – other | # intersections or # units |
| Congestion detection / traffic monitoring system | # miles or # units | |
| Dynamic message signs | # locations or # signs | |
| Over height vehicle detection | # locations | |
| Alignment | Alignment – other | # miles |
| Horizontal curve realignment | # curves | |
| Horizontal and vertical alignment | # miles | |
| Vertical alignment or elevation change | # miles | |
| Animal-related | Animal related | # miles or # locations |
| Interchange design | Acceleration / deceleration / merge lane | # miles or # locations |
| Convert at-grade intersection to interchange | # intersections | |
| Extend existing lane on ramp | # miles or # ramps | |
| Improve intersection radius at ramp terminus | # intersections | |
| Installation of new lane on ramp | # miles or # ramps | |
| Interchange design – other | # interchanges | |
| Ramp closure | # ramps | |
| Ramp metering | # ramps | |
| Intersection geometry | Auxiliary lanes – add acceleration lane | # intersections or # lanes |
| Auxiliary lanes – add auxiliary through lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – add left-turn lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – add right-turn lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – add right-turn lane (free-flow) | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – add slip lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – add two-way left-turn lane | # miles | |
| Auxiliary lanes – extend acceleration/deceleration lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – extend existing left-turn lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – extend existing right-turn lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – miscellaneous/other/unspecified | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – modify acceleration lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – modify auxiliary through lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – modify free-flow turn lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – modify left-turn lane offset | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – modify right-turn lane offset | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – modify turn lane storage | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – modify turn lane taper | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Auxiliary lanes – modify two-way left-turn lane | # miles | |
| Intersection geometrics – miscellaneous/other/unspecified | # intersections | |
| Intersection geometrics – modify intersection corner radius | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection geometrics – modify skew angle | # intersections or #approaches | |
| Intersection geometrics – realignment to align offset cross streets | # intersections | |
| Intersection geometrics – realignment to increase cross street offset | # intersections | |
| Intersection geometrics – re-assign existing lane use | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection geometry – other | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Splitter island – install on one or more approaches | # approaches | |
| Splitter island – remove from one or more approaches | # approaches | |
| Splitter island – unspecified | # approaches | |
| Through lanes – add additional through lane | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection traffic control | Intersection flashers – add "when flashing" warning sign-mounted | # intersections or # approaches |
| Intersection flashers – add advance emergency vehicle warning sign-mounted | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection flashers – add advance heavy vehicle warning sign-mounted | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection flashers – add advance intersection warning sign-mounted | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection flashers – add miscellaneous/other/unspecified | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection flashers – add overhead (actuated) | # intersections | |
| Intersection flashers – add overhead (continuous) | # intersections | |
| Intersection flashers – add stop sign-mounted | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection flashers – modify existing | # intersections | |
| Intersection flashers – remove existing | # intersections | |
| Intersection signing – add basic advance warning | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection signing – add enhanced advance warning (double-up and/or oversize) | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection signing – add enhanced regulatory sign (double-up and/or oversize) | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection signing – miscellaneous/other/unspecified | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection signing – relocate existing regulatory sign | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Intersection traffic control – other | # intersections | |
| Modify control – all-way stop to roundabout | # intersections | |
| Modify control – modifications to roundabout | # intersections | |
| Modify control – no control to roundabout | # intersections | |
| Modify control – no control to two-way stop | # intersections | |
| Modify control – remove right-turn yield | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Modify control – reverse priority of stop condition | # intersections | |
| Modify control – traffic signal to roundabout | # intersections | |
| Modify control – two-way stop to all-way stop | # intersections | |
| Modify control – two-way stop to roundabout | # intersections | |
| Modify control – two-way yield to two-way stop | # intersections | |
| Pavement Markings – add advance signal ahead | # approaches | |
| Pavement markings – add advance stop ahead | # approaches | |
| Pavement markings – add dashed edge line along mainline | # intersections | |
| Pavement markings – add lane use symbols | # approaches | |
| Pavement markings – add stop line | # approaches | |
| Pavement markings – add yield line | # approaches | |
| Pavement markings – miscellaneous/other/unspecified | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Pavement markings – refresh existing pavement markings | # intersections | |
| Modify traffic signal – add additional signal heads | # intersections or # approaches or # signal heads | |
| Modify traffic signal – add backplates | # intersections or # approaches or # signal heads | |
| Modify traffic signal – add backplates with retroreflective borders | # intersections or # approaches or # signal heads | |
| Modify traffic signal – add closed loop system | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Modify traffic signal – add emergency vehicle preemption | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Modify traffic signal – add flashing yellow arrow | # approaches | |
| Modify traffic signal – add long vehicle detection | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Modify traffic signal – add railroad preemption | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Modify traffic signal – add wireless system | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Modify traffic signal – miscellaneous/other/unspecified | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Modify traffic signal – modernization/replacement | # intersections | |
| Modify traffic signal – modify signal mounting (spanwire to mast arm) | # intersections | |
| Modify traffic signal – remove existing signal | # intersections | |
| Modify traffic signal – replace existing indications (incandescent-to-LED and/or 8-to-12 inch dia.) | # approaches or # signal heads | |
| Modify traffic signal timing – left-turn phasing (permissive to protected/permissive) | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Modify traffic signal timing – left-turn phasing (permissive to protected-only) | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Modify traffic signal timing – adjust clearance interval (yellow change and/or all-red) | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Modify traffic signal timing – general retiming | # intersections | |
| Modify traffic signal timing – signal coordination | # intersections or # miles | |
| Systemic improvements – signal-controlled | # intersections | |
| Systemic improvements – stop-controlled | # intersections | |
| Lighting | Continuous roadway lighting | # miles |
| Intersection lighting | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Lighting – other | # miles or # intersections | |
| Site lighting – horizontal curve | # curves | |
| Site lighting – intersection | # intersections | |
| Site lighting – interchange | # interchanges | |
| Site lighting – pedestrian crosswalk | # crosswalks | |
| Miscellaneous | Miscellaneous | # miles or # units |
| Data/traffic records – LRS/GIS | N/A or # units | |
| Data/traffic records – Crash Data Collection | N/A or # units | |
| Data/traffic records – Roadway/Traffic Data Collection | N/A or # units | |
| Data/traffic records – Data Integration | N/A or # units | |
| Data/traffic records – Analysis Tools | N/A or # units | |
| Non-infrastructure – other | N/A or # units | |
| Outreach | N/A or # units | |
| Road safety audits | N/A or # units | |
| SHSP Development | N/A or # units | |
| Training and workforce development | N/A or # units | |
| Transportation safety planning | N/A or # units | |
| Parking | Modify parking | # locations |
| Parking – other | # locations | |
| Remove parking | # locations | |
| Restrict parking | # locations | |
| Truck parking facilities | # locations | |
| Pedestrians and bicyclists | Crosswalk | # locations |
| Install new "smart" crosswalk | # locations | |
| Install new crosswalk | # locations | |
| Install sidewalk | # miles | |
| Medians and pedestrian refuge areas | # miles or # locations | |
| Miscellaneous pedestrians and bicyclists | # miles or # locations | |
| Modify existing crosswalk | # locations | |
| Pedestrian beacons | # locations | |
| Pedestrian bridge | # locations | |
| Pedestrian signal | # locations | |
| Pedestrian signal – audible device | # locations | |
| Pedestrian signal – Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon | # locations | |
| Pedestrian signal – install new at intersection | # intersections or # approaches | |
| Pedestrian signal – install new at non-intersection location | # locations | |
| Pedestrian signal – modify existing | # locations | |
| Pedestrian signal – remove existing | # locations | |
| Pedestrian warning signs – add/modify flashers | # locations | |
| Pedestrian warning signs – overhead | # locations | |
| Railroad grade crossings | Grade separation | # locations |
| Model enforcement activity | N/A or # units | |
| Protective devices | # locations | |
| Railroad grade crossing gates | # locations or # approaches | |
| Railroad grade crossing signing | # locations or # approaches | |
| Railroad grade crossings – other | # locations or # approaches | |
| Surface treatment | # locations or # approaches | |
| Upgrade railroad crossing signal | # locations or # approaches | |
| Widen crossing for additional lane | # locations or # approaches | |
| Roadside | Barrier end treatments (crash cushions, terminals) | # units |
| Barrier transitions | # units | |
| Barrier – cable | # miles | |
| Barrier – concrete | # miles | |
| Barrier- metal | # miles | |
| Barrier – other | # miles or # units | |
| Barrier – removal | # miles | |
| Curb or curb and gutter | # miles | |
| Drainage improvements | # miles or # locations | |
| Fencing | # miles | |
| Removal of roadside objects (trees, poles, etc.) | # miles or # locations or # objects | |
| Roadside grading | # miles | |
| Roadside – other | # miles | |
| Roadway | Install / remove / modify passing zone | # miles or # locations |
| Pavement surface – high friction surface | # locations | |
| Pavement surface – miscellaneous | # miles | |
| Roadway narrowing (road diet, roadway reconfiguration) | # miles | |
| Roadway – other | # miles | |
| Roadway – restripe to revise separation between opposing lanes and/or shoulder widths | # miles | |
| Roadway widening – add lane(s) along segment | # miles | |
| Roadway widening – curve | # curves | |
| Roadway widening – travel lanes | # miles | |
| Rumble strips – center | # miles | |
| Rumble strips – edge or shoulder | # miles | |
| Rumble strips – transverse | # miles | |
| Rumble strips – unspecified or other | # miles | |
| Superelevation / cross slope | # miles or # curves | |
| Roadway delineation | Improve retroreflectivity | # miles or # signs |
| Longitudinal pavement markings – new | # miles | |
| Longitudinal pavement markings – remarking | # miles | |
| Delineators post-mounted or on barrier | # miles | |
| Raised pavement markers | # miles | |
| Roadway delineation – other | # miles | |
| Roadway signs and traffic control | Curve-related warning signs and flashers | # curves or # signs |
| Sign sheeting – upgrade or replacement | # signs | |
| Roadway signs and traffic control – other | # signs | |
| Roadway signs (including post) – new or updated | # signs | |
| Shoulder treatments | Widen shoulder – paved or other | # miles |
| Pave existing shoulders | # miles | |
| Shoulder grading | # miles | |
| Shoulder treatments – other | # miles | |
| Speed management | Modify speed limit | # locations |
| Radar speed signs | # locations or # signs | |
| Speed detection system / truck warning | # locations | |
| Speed management – other | # locations | |
| Traffic calming feature | # locations | |
| Work Zone | Work zone | N/A or # units |
HSIP (Section
148)
HRRR Special Rule
Penalty Funds – Section 154
Penalty Funds – Section 164
RHCP Funds (used for HSIP purposes)
Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e., STBG, NHPP)
State and Local Funds
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Motorcycles
Roadway/lane departure
Intersections/interchanges
Head-on and across-median crashes
Work zones
Other
Rural Principal Arterial – Interstate
Rural Principal Arterial – Other Freeways and Expressways
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
State Highway Agency
County Highway Agency
Town or Township Highway Agency
City or 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 Tribal Government
Other
[1] FHWA, Highway Safety Improvement Program Manual, 6.1 (January 2010), available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/resources/fhwasa09029/index.cfm#toc.
[2] FHWA, State Serious Injury Conversion Tables, available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/spm/conversion_tbl/.
[3] FHWA, Section 148: Older Drivers and Pedestrians Special Rule Final Guidance (May 19, 2016), available at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/guidance/guideolder.cfm.
[4] Incorporated in 23 CFR Parts 924 and 490, respectively.
Return to top
