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.
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 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.
General Listing of Projects
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:
- Improvement Category;
- Project output (e.g., miles of rumble strips, number of curves);
- Method for site selection (i.e., spot or systemic safety improvement);
- Project cost;
- Funding category;
- Relationship to the State's SHSP (i.e., emphasis area, strategy); and
- Roadway characteristics (i.e., functional classification, average annual daily traffic (AADT), speed, ownership).
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.