USA Banner

Official US Government Icon

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure Site Icon

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

U.S. Department of Transportation U.S. Department of Transportation Icon United States Department of Transportation United States Department of Transportation

Tribal, Local, & Rural Road Safety

ODOT's GCAT GIS Tool Helps Local Roadway Agencies Justify Funding Requests for Road Safety Improvement

Summary from Assessment of Local Road Safety Funding, Training, and Technical Assistance: Benefit/Cost Tool and Local Road Safety Manual


Background

Local roadway agencies need a method for obtaining the data necessary to justify funding requests for road safety improvement projects. The Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) developed a crash-mapping tool called GCAT (GIS Crash Analysis Tool), which is used to map the crashes occurring on the State's roadways. GCAT uses Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to produce spatially located (latitude/longitude) data. Crash data for all local roadways is available.

The tool is a web application and can be accessed from any computer on-line through the ODOT web site. Access to GCAT is free and easy to obtain for employees of the city, county, village, township, metropolitan planning organizations, law enforcement, and prequalified safety study consultants. Local agencies can submit a basic account request on-line and begin using the GCAT program once they are notified via email.

Benfit

Ohio DOT has seen an increase in project applications from local agencies as tools and training opportunities provide the means to justify safety problems and identify potential countermeasures.

Contact

FHWA Office of Safety staff contacts by safety function

Caltrans Uses Local Road Safety Manual to Improve its Data-driven Approach to Statewide Safety Project Selection

Summary from Assessment of Local Road Safety Funding, Training, and Technical Assistance: Benefit/Cost Tool and Local Road Safety Manual


Background

Fifty percent of California's Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds are dedicated to local roads. The approximately $100 million-per-year program is managed by the Caltrans Division of Local Assistance (DLA), which is responsible for programming the funds to local road safety projects. As a part of the process, DLA sets criteria for HSIP project applications, reviews applications for accuracy, and selects projects. The division does not identify the projects for the local jurisdictions or administer the projects once selected, but instead provides guidance, tools, and training so the local jurisdictions are empowered to make informed decisions on effective safety improvements.

When the HSIP program first started, the application process was very basic, but has evolved into a data-driven process. To improve Caltrans's overall data-driven approach to statewide safety project selection and to maximize the long-term safety improvements across California, DLA developed Local Roadway Safety: A Manual for California’s Local Road Owners. The manual provides an easy-to-use, straightforward, comprehensive framework of the steps and analysis tools local jurisdictions would need to proactively identify locations with roadway safety issues and the appropriate countermeasures.

Benefits

Developing this resource has improved local agencies' ability to perform benefit/cost calculations for project applications. Two-and-a-half years ago, the average benefit/cost ratio on a project was approximately 8, but currently it is approximately 13.5. Local agencies are submitting applications for projects with greater lifesaving benefits. Local agencies understand the necessity of the data-driven process. The division also has seen an increase in positive communication with local agencies.

Contact

FHWA Office of Safety staff contacts by safety function

Genesee County (Flint, Michigan) Uses usRAP to Develop Safety Improvement Plan for County Roads

Original publication: 2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide Publication FHWA-SA-14-002; 2013


Description of Practice

In 2012, the Genesee County Road Commission (GCRC) in Flint, Michigan, signed an agreement for a U.S. Road Assessment Program (usRAP) Safety Improvement evaluation of the county road system. Initiated in 2004 as a pilot by the AAA Foundation, the usRAP program was designed to assess and benchmark the relative safety of roads using historical crash data and roadway inventory data. The program includes a Road Protection Score (RPS), which can identify road segments with higher crash potential through analyses of road inventory data relative to design features that are strongly correlated with the risk of serious crashes.

GCRC developed the safety improvement plan based on a comprehensive review of the existing physical infrastructure of the county road system. Project staff obtained and assembled data on over 40 existing safety-related infrastructure elements for more than 8,600 300-ft roadway segments. The project database was uploaded to the usRAP Tools software and processed to develop a safety improvement plan.

Key Accomplishments and Results

Assessing and benchmarking the relative safety of roads using historical crash data and roadway inventory data. The development of the plan was completed in early 2013 and is now proceeding to the programming and implementation stage.

Contact

John H. Daly III, Ph.D.
Genesee County Road Commission
810-767-4920
jdaly@gcrc.org

Wright County Highway Roadway Safety Program

Original publication: National Roadway Safety Awards: Noteworthy Practices Guide; 2011


Description of Practice

As one of the fastest growing counties in the Nation and responsible for 520 miles of highways, Wright County initiated a number of safety programs and strategies to minimize injuries and fatalities.

Key Accomplishments and Results:

  • Utilization of pavement markings and signage, and ITS technologies such as intersection warning systems, curve warning system, and driver feedback speed limit signs.
  • Project contributed to a 34 percent reduction of fatal and serious injury crashes since 1997
  • Improved public awareness of roadway safety

Two photographs: (1) a single lane road that widens to two lanes at a left intersection and (2) a roadway marking vehicle painting a solid white line to delineate the travel lane and breakdown area"Photograph of a worker on a truck affixing a yellow caution sign ('Look For Traffic') to a pole"

Contact

Wayne A. Fingalson
Wright County Highway Department
763-682-7388
Wayne.Fingalson@xo.wright.mn.us

Minnesota County Road Safety Plans

Original publication: National Roadway Safety Awards: Noteworthy Practices Guide; 2011


Description of Practice

In order to meet Minnesota's Toward Zero Deaths goal, roadway safety at the local-level needed to be addressed. County highway departments in Minnesota didn't have the experience with carrying out system-wide crash analysis or linking crash causes with mitigation strategies at specific locations. The County Road Safety Plans (CRSP) Program was created by MnDOT to more effectively involved local highway agencies in the safety planning process and provide them with technical assistance needed to apply for State and Federal funding.

Key Accomplishments and Results:

  • Crash analysis and system-wide risk assessment of road and traffic characteristics for each county
  • Identification of low-cost, infrastructure-based safety project for specific at-risk locations on county roads
  • Project prioritization and training about the Highway Safety Improvement Program solicitation process
  • First set of 20 country road safety plans identified $70 million worth of projects with 90% focused on roadway departure crashes

"Two photographs of local highway agency meetings"

Contact

Sue Groth
Minnesota Department of Transportation
651-234-7004
Sue.Groth@state.mn.us

Jones/Linn County Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Overlay With Safety Edge ℠

Original publication: National Roadway Safety Awards: Noteworthy Practices Guide; 2011


Description of Practice

An Iowa State University study found that a pavement edge drop-off may have been a contributing factor in approximately 18% of rural run-off-the-road crashes on paved roadways with unpaved shoulders. They also found that pavement edge drop-off-related crashes were twice as likely to result in fatalities as other crash types on similar roadways. Safety Edge℠ was installed on a 2.7 mile stretch of roadway which had been previously identified as a “High Risk Rural Road” and the agency evaluated the constructability, quality, and performance of the project.

Key Accomplishments and Results:

  • Installation of 6-inch unbonded Portland cement concrete (PCC) overlay placed of an existing 6-inch PCC pavement. Overlay included two 11-foot lanes with tied 2-foot shoulders plus a 9-inch wide, 30-degree sloped Safety Edge℠ in both eastbound and westbound directions.
  • Crash reduction factors indicate that the use of Safety Edge℠ has the potential to reduce crashes by 5.7 percent and may provide additional pavement edge stability improving overall pavement life.

"Two photographs: (1) a construction crew lays down a road surface with a Safety Edge and (2) the a finished road with a Safety Edge"

Contacts

Mike McClain
Jones County Secondary Roads Department
319-462-3785
engineer@co.jones.ia.us

Steve Gannon
Linn County Secondary Roads Department
319-892-6400
Steve.Gannon@linncounty.org

Design-Build Push Button Contract Significantly Reduces the Time It Takes to Implement Safety Improvements

Original publication: N/A


Describe the roadway safety situation or state before the new practice was implemented. What was the safety issue, problem, or gap?

In the past, Florida DOT (FDOT) has used its traditional Work Program Process to deliver safety improvements using FHWA safety funds; this brought concepts to construction within a 3 to 5 year time frame.

"flowchart that shows how the Design-Build Push Button Project was selected as a candidate project"

FDOT District 7 (D7; offices located in Tampa) decided that some ‘simple or low cost’ safety concepts did not need to go through the full work program process and could be expedited. In an attempt to reduce the time frame from concept to construction and to simplify the process for safety improvements, Florida DOT District 7 worked with the FHWA Florida Division and developed a push button framework using Federal safety funds. Ultimately, the push button framework allowed the District to reduce the time it takes to deliver simple or low cost safety improvement from 3-5 years to 3-9 months.

By expediting the delivery of safety improvements, FDOT is also able to reduce the number of crashes that could have occurred while the concept is being developed, helping FDOT to achieve the FHWA Every Day Counts (EDC) goal. Furthermore, by achieving a crash reduction within a few months, as opposed to years, the project's Net Present Value (NPV) is increased due to the time, value, money. NPV is the methodology that FDOT uses to select and prioritize safety engineering projects.

What were the key challenges that needed to be addressed before the new practice could be implemented?

The key challenges surrounded developing a framework that allowed FDOT to:

  • Meet Federal guidelines to obtain the approval of funds.
  • Meet internal requirements related to scheduling, coordination, QA/QC, etc.
  • Eliminate internal barriers that had stove-piped the work in order to create a streamlined schedule.

Describe the new practice.

  1. D7 put into place a design-build push button contract, which was approved by the FHWA Florida Division & FHWA Headquarters.
  2. D7 identifies a need for a simple or low cost safety improvement.
  3. D7 generates a task cost estimate using pre-approved contract pay items and corresponding unit prices.
  4. D7 submits the cost estimate along with the task's scope of services and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) categorical exclusion certification to the FHWA Florida Division for approval through the Federal Financial Management Information System (FMIS).
  5. The FHWA Florida Division reviews the task for eligibility criteria, and if eligible, approves it through FMIS.
  6. D7 encumbers Federal safety funds and issues a notice to proceed for the task work order.
  7. The design-build team delivers a constructed concept within 3-9 months (depending on difficulty and work load)

List the key accomplishments that resulted from the new practice. Include the roadway safety improvements.

  • Much faster delivery/construction of ‘simple or low cost’ safety improvements. Safety improvements delivered through this contract include the installation of:
    • High emphasis crosswalks
    • Bicycle lanes
    • Pavement markings, wet weather audible marking
    • Concrete medians
    • Overhead sign structures
    • Turn lanes or offset left turn lanes
    • Pedestrian safety treatment - Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons (RRFBs)
    • New traffic signal installations
    • High friction surface treatments
  • Multiple roads benefited from this contract, in total, the first design-build push button contract had 55 projects for the 24-month contract period.

What technical and/or institutional changes resulted from the new practice?

  • Buy-in from FDOT and FHWA management for the need to create this innovative contract
  • Approval from FHWA to allow Federal-funded safety projects to be implemented at the District level using this design-build push button contract format
  • Contract process changes for FDOT design-build contract to accommodate this innovative approach
  • Creation of statewide design-build push button contract task team

What benefits were realized as a result of the practice?

  • Reduced the time it takes to implement a safety improvement; at the same time, reduced the potential for fatalities and serious injuries during the shortened implementation period
  • Reduced overall costs of the project application process by reducing the turnover rate
  • Ensured compliance with Federal guidelines on all submitted project proposals
  • Promoted use of these low-cost safety improvements
"two photographs of a pedestrian crosswalk, before and after improvements: the before photo on the left shows two parallel white lines painted across the road; the after photo on the right shows thick, evenly-spaced white lines perpendicular to, and between, the two white lines crossing the road"
Installation of rumble stripes, a safety improvement in District 7 (before and after)

 

"two photographs of a road before and after installation of overhead signage"
Improved overhead signage, a safety improvement in District 7 (before and after)

 

two photographs of a pedestrian crosswalk, before and after improvements: the before photo on the left shows two parallel white lines painted across the road; the after photo on the right shows thick, evenly-spaced white lines perpendicular to, and between, the two white lines crossing the road
Upgraded pedestrian crosswalk, a safety improvement in District 7 (before and after)

 

"photograph of FDOT District 7's Design-Build Push Button Contract manual"
FDOT District 7's Design-Build Push Button Contract manual

 

 

For more information:

  • >FDOT’s Design Build Push Button (DBPB) page, including a video about FDOT District Seven’s DBPB projects.

Contact

Ping (Peter) Hsu, P.E.
FDOT, D7 Assistant District Traffic Operations Engineer (Safety)
(813) 975-6251
Ping.Hsu@dot.state.fl.us

Safety Summit Yields Tenfold Increase in Number of Safety Applications Submitted by Local Agencies

Original publication: N/A


Describe the roadway safety situation or state before the new practice was implemented. What was the safety issue, problem, or gap?

In any given year, between 40 and 50% of the fatalities and serious injuries in Florida occur in local roads. The percentage of safety funds spent on local roads, however, has been at most between 4 and 8% per year. In order to further reduce fatalities and serious injuries, Florida DOT (FDOT) has identified the need to address safety concerns on the local roads.

Lower levels of safety funding on local roads was due to limited knowledge in local agencies of the state and Federal safety programs and their requirements. Local agencies were submitting an average of only three applications for safety improvement projects per year. To increase local-level applications for safety funding, FDOT needed to create a program that increased local-level awareness of programs and application processes. The District 7 (D7 - Tampa) Local Safety Summit was, and continues to be, an ambitious step in the development and implementation of a Local Road Safety Program.

What were the key challenges that the noteworthy practice sought to address?

Key challenges to address include:

  • Lack of knowledge on the part of local agencies of Federal and state safety programs and requirements
  • Lack of a single point of contact for all local agencies
  • Relatively high staff turnover at the local agencies (impacting the safety culture within the organization and the development of a consistent/long-term agency safety program)
  • Lack of staff with specialized knowledge of safety at some local agencies
  • A mechanism for assisting the local agencies to ensure their safety projects are submitted correctly and complete, and making the submittal process is simple as possible

Describe the new practice.

D7 launched an annual Safety Summit, a one-day seminar where local agencies, law enforcement, FDOT staff and D7 Safety Team members within District 7's jurisdiction discuss roadway safety. During the summit, FDOT and the Federal Highway Administration make presentations about applicable state and Federal safety requirements, programs, and processes for obtaining funding for local safety improvements. FDOT also links local agencies to “safety ambassadors” who help agencies understand options and funding opportunities for implementing roadway safety improvements on local roads.

D7 has also developed a “Local Agency Safety Funding Guide for Off-System Roadways” for local agencies that serves as a guide for the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) application process. The District also maintains a Safety Summit >web site that contains summit information, HSIP resources, and an online application agencies can use to submit their safety projects. (Local agencies continue to have the option of submitting their projects through the paper application process.)

List the key accomplishments that resulted from the new practice. Include the roadway safety improvements.

  • Established a framework and venue that fosters the exchange of local roads knowledge. As a result, local agencies have an improved understanding of the application process required to receive project funding.
  • As a result of the improved level of understanding regarding the application process, the number of project submissions made by local agencies increased from averaging 3 applications each year to 50+ applications per year.

What technical and/or institutional changes resulted from the new practice?

Institutional changes include:

  • Local agencies have a better understanding of how to request funding and submit applications for safety improvement projects.
  • Improved communications and coordination between D7 and local agencies has resulted in projects being delivered on-time and within budget.

What benefits were realized as a result of the practice?

Prior to the safety summits, D7 used to receive around three off-system safety project requests per year. Since the safety summit has been held, FDOT D7 has received 50+ applications per year from their local agencies seeking HSIP funding for their safety projects. Local agencies are now more willing and able to address local road safety issues using Federal safety funds.

Contact

Ping (Peter) Hsu, P.E.
FDOT, D7 Assistant District Traffic Operations Engineer (Safety)
(813) 975-6251
Ping.Hsu@dot.state.fl.us

Inexpensive Nighttime Inspection Kits to Improve Rural Sign Safety

Original publication: 2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide; FHWA-SA-14-002; 2013


"Two photographs: 1) Two hands attaching an inspection panel to a sign, and 2) A man, approximately ten yards away, looking at the sign/inspection panel"

Attaching inspection panel to target sign.

Viewing sign with inspection panel attached
(done at night during actual use).

 

Describe the roadway safety situation or state before the new practice was implemented. What was the safety issue, problem, or gap?

Three County Highway Departments in western New York did not have access to the necessary equipment for inspecting local signage for compliance with the new Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) sign retroreflectivity standards. In short, there was not enough equipment to inspect the retroreflectivity of all signing in the region.

What were the key challenges that needed to be addressed before the new practice could be implemented?

Required equipment, such as a retroreflectometer, carries a heavy price tag. Without accurate testing equipment, these local counties had to “guess;” erring on the side of caution, the replaced signs that actually might have complied with MUTCD standards (had they been properly inspected).

Describe the new practice:

In the summer of 2011, the Cornell University Local Roads Program (CLRP) initiated a project with the three County Highway Departments and created a sharing agreement so that each agency had access, at a low cost, to a retroreflectometer for inspecting local signing in support of the new Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) sign retroreflectivity standards. This sharing program included all three counties as well as local jurisdictions in the respective counties (i.e., towns, villages, and one city).

In addition to the retroreflectometer sharing agreement, CLRP developed a total of 50 inexpensive sign inspection kits, costing less than $50 each. The kits use clear “overhead projector” sheets in layers to degrade the retroreflectivity of small comparison panels of different colors to a conservative level above the minimum retroreflective levels identified in Table 2A-3 of the MUTCD. The clear overhead sheets are the same ones used with overhead projectors and are available at office supply stores.

List the key accomplishments that resulted from the new practice. Include the roadway safety improvements.

  • Improved availability of accurate retroreflectivity testing tools to three local counties, improving sign retroreflectivity quality (and improving compliance with new MUTCD standards) along rural routes.

What technical and/or institutional changes resulted from the new practice?

  • Sharing agreement for the retroreflectometer
  • Development of a cost effective inspection kit

What benefits were realized as a result of the practice?

The biggest benefit realized were the savings in the form of time and money. In general, the sharing agreement led to a reductions in overtime costs for nighttime inspections, reductions in the number of signs that need to be replaced annually, and an easily compiled, inexpensive ($50) portable field kit that is available at all times.

More specific benefits were:

  • More accurate nighttime sign inspections, virtually eliminating “guessing” about the quality of a particular sign (reducing the number of signs that were replaced unnecessarily).
    • Example: Wyoming County, New York
      • Prior to receiving the kits, sign technicians would err on the side of caution and replace many signs that were actually adequate.
      • With the kits, they replaced 20 percent fewer signs than they had replaced previously due to concerns about retroreflectivity.
  • Besides being more accurate, retroreflectivity inspections were faster.
    • Example: Wyoming County, New York
      • Saved a day of overtime, inspecting all the county's signs in only 3 nights.
  • From the Wyoming County, New York example: Savings from the reduction of 2 full shifts of overtime work and approximately 30 signs amounts to $3,000 each year.

Is the practice you are submitting from a larger report, journal, or other document? Yes

2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide
Publication FHWA-SA-14-002

Contact

David P. Orr, Ph.D.
Cornell Local Roads Program
607-255-8033
David.Orr@cornell.edu

Raised Pavement Markers (RPMs) – A Low-Cost Alternative for Run-off-the-Road Crashes

Original publication: 2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide; FHWA-SA-14-002; 2013


"Two photographs of a curve with 20 feet RPM spacing, one during the day and one at night. The photograph at night shows the markers reflecting light."

Example of 20 feet RPM spacing for a curve.

Example of same location at night.

Describe the roadway safety situation or state before the new practice was implemented. What was the safety issue, problem, or gap?

With help from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT), Mobile County, Alabama determined that 10 rural roadways within the county rated the highest in the State for run-off-the-road crashes. These roadways, totaling more than 68 miles, had experienced 224 run-off-the-road type crashes between 2005-2008, resulting in 7 fatalities and 152 injuries.

What were the key challenges that needed to be addressed before the new practice could be implemented?

The challenge was to determine the most effective low-cost treatment. While rumble strips can reduce run-off-the-road crashes, installing them requires large machinery, manpower with technical skills, and oftentimes additional right of way, making them a cost-prohibitive solution.

Describe the new practice:

To counter these cost concerns, Mobile County and ALDOT implemented a program for the systematic application of raised pavement markers (RPM) to improve sight distance recognition and guidance along the edge of the pavement, especially during wet weather conditions at night. One-directional, white RPMs adjacent to the white edge-line stripe were easily installed using existing traffic maintenance department equipment and manpower.

What technical and/or institutional changes resulted from the new practice?

The program set guidelines for consistent implementation for all roadways within the county. RPMs were placed just outside the existing edge-line stripe.

  • Tangent sections of roadways would have RPMs installed at 80 feet spacing.
  • At the approach to a curve having an advance warning curve sign, the spacing would be 40 feet apart from sign location to the beginning of the curve.
  • In the curve, the spacing would be 20 feet until reaching the tangent section.

What benefits were realized as a result of the practice?

Based on 2009-2012 crash data, crashes on the initial 10 roadways treated dropped from 224 to 33, from 7 fatalities to 0, and from 152 injuries to 10. The average number of crashes for all 10 roadways decreased by 85.3 percent. RPMs give critical guidance to drivers, especially along dark and rainy county roadways. As a result of this pilot project, they are now included in most roadway projects in Alabama.

Is the practice you are submitting from a larger report, journal, or other document? Yes

2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide
Publication FHWA-SA-14-002

Contact

James Foster
Mobile County Engineer Office
251-574-8595
JFoster@mobilecounty.net