Regional Coalitions Build Alabama's SHSP Update from the Ground Up

Background

Fatalities and serious injuries don't happen “statewide;” they happen in communities. Alabama (AL) is taking this notion to heart and using a bottom-up approach to update its Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). This means that rather than starting from a statewide perspective, State safety leaders will get the word straight from the proverbial horse's mouth, starting the 2017 SHSP update with input from regional coalitions who will provide a community perspective. Alabama will develop an overarching, statewide SHSP from the ground up, based on the input of the regional coalitions.

The Approach

Over the next two years, the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) will phase in this approach, beginning with four regions that represent diverse geographic and demographic characteristics, as well as highway safety issues experienced in rural, urban, and suburban areas. In addition, new regional coalitions will provide much needed specifics regarding traffic safety in various geographical and socio-economic conditions. This information will provide the AL SHSP Steering Committee with a solid foundation for applying the regional SHSP program to the remaining regions. Each region will be assigned the following tasks:

• Form a regional safety coalition to oversee the development of a regional safety plan (coalition membership will be similar to that required for a statewide SHSP);
• Identify the most serious traffic safety problems in each region using data collection and analysis; and
• Report back to the AL SHSP Steering Committee regarding the best safety countermeasures and programs for each region along with requests for assistance.

ALDOT will assist the first four regional coalitions in a variety of ways—e.g., data analysis, coalition building strategies, meeting planning and facilitation, research on countermeasure effectiveness, etc.—and will use those experiences to develop a user-friendly guidebook to document the type of assistance available and the required procedures for the remaining eight regional coalitions to follow. The guidebook will outline the costs and benefits of regional SHSP implementation including challenges, opportunities, and lessons learned. It will also provide implementation guidance and available resources.

Additional ALDOT Support for Regional Effort and SHSP Initiatives

To provide support for the regional planning effort and to improve traffic safety statewide, ALDOT is undertaking additional safety initiatives, such as:

• Forming a statewide SHSP Steering Committee;
• Assessing the strengths and weaknesses of current and past practices;
• Identifying other transportation and safety plans to ensure the SHSP is coordinated with all State safety planning efforts;
• Implementing data improvements such as converting link-node to GIS and developing an Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) estimation methodology;
• Developing guidance and tools such as a road safety assessment manual, an HSIP management manual, a horizontal curve resigning program, electronic ball bank equipment and training, and an Alabama roundabout guide;
• Determining safety workforce development needs, and communicating those needs to officials at the DOT and other agencies;
• Conducting research to document the benefits of investments in law enforcement and first responder training, enhanced enforcement, high-friction surface treatments, and methods to deter drowsy and fatigued driving;
• Integrating safety and operations activities; and
• Creating a safety forecasting tool (ALSAFE).

Benefit

Regional coalitions will have direct, substantial, and meaningful input into the development of the statewide SHSP strategies and countermeasures, ones that take into account regional conditions and priorities. This approach gives local agencies a greater stake in safety outcomes and increases the likelihood of a successful implementation of the updated SHSP. Further, the experience of the first four regional coalitions will provide real-world examples to the remaining eight regional coalitions as they embark on the development of their regional safety plans.

Contact

Timothy E. Barnett, PE, PTOE
State Safety Operations Engineer
Alabama Department of Transportation
barnettt@dot.state.al.us

Maryland Brings Plans and Programs Under its SHSP Umbrella

Background

Every State's Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) provides a comprehensive framework for reducing deaths and serious injuries on all public roads. Maryland, which has adopted a vision of Toward Zero Deaths, is an exemplar of using an SHSP as a framework for Statewide safety plans and programs.

An SHSP is an umbrella plan that guides transportation plans and roadway safety investment decisions. Maryland's SHSP seeks to bring Statewide road fatalities down to 475 by 2015, and to half that level by 2030. To reach those goals, the State is bringing the SHSP concept to the local level.

“The SHSP guides our overarching highway safety goals and efforts. Our annual safety plans are where the rubber meets the road,” said Thomas J. Gianni, chief of the Maryland Highway Safety Office.

Approach

The big idea in Maryland is for local plans to align with the SHSP, but with emphasis areas and strategies tailored to match local conditions. The Maryland State Highway Administration is taking the lead and is developing local data packages for counties.

Harford County has already developed a local SHSP and has set the stage for efforts in other counties. Like the state's SHSP, the Harford County SHSP follows a data-driven, multidisciplinary approach the draws from the 4Es of traffic safety—education, emergency medical services, enforcement, and engineering.

The Harford County SHSP provides a framework for reducing fatalities and serious injuries on all Harford County roads, and it establishes goals, objectives, and key emphasis areas that align with the goals and objectives of the Maryland SHSP. The Harford County SHSP encompasses all road users, including bicyclists, drivers, motorcyclists, and pedestrians.

Harford County will join Maryland in adopting the goal of halving traffic fatalities by 2030, which is also the centerpiece of the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) national initiative Toward Zero Deaths. Harford County used the same methodology as the State's SHSP to establish benchmarks for progress and will follow interim goals for fatality and injury reductions by 2015.

At the State level, the Maryland Department of Transportation (DOT) did not always use the SHSP as a standard. In prior years, the safety elements in the Maryland DOT's Statewide Long Range Transportation Plan and the Motor Vehicle Association's long range plan were not in line with the SHSP. Now, through a concerted effort elevate the State SHSP in the eyes of the DOT, the SHSP sets the tone and goals for these plans, and the plans refer back to the SHSP.

Other Maryland State agencies have also begun to refer to the SHSP. For example, the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and the Maryland State Police both have agency business plans with highway safety components that align with those in the SHSP.

Results

By integrating the SHSP across the DOT and other State agency efforts, the safety needs of the State can be addressed more strategically and resources can be shared more effectively. Integration encourages State partners to strive toward common goals, collectively implement appropriate strategies and actions, share resources to meet or exceed the State's goals and objectives, and, most importantly, to save lives.

Kansas DOT Administers Funding Exchange to Fund Local Transportation Projects

Background

Local agencies (cities and counties) own and maintain about 92 percent of Kansas' road network. The size and expertise of local agency staff varies among agencies. Smaller agencies may not have the resources or expertise needed to apply for federal funds and administer the process to completion. In 2010, the Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) Bureau of Local Projects initiated an innovative funding program called the Federal Fund Exchange to help local agencies streamline the process of implementing projects on local roadways, including projects that could improve safety. The program provides local agencies the option to swap their federal funds to KDOT in exchange for State dollars. That option lets local agencies save time and money by avoiding restrictive and cumbersome requirements of the federal aid process.

Description of Practice

Federal transportation funds are made available to KDOT through FHWA. KDOT makes a portion of the funds available to all counties and cities with populations greater than 5,000. The local agency has the option to use their share of the federal funds to develop a federal-aid project in the traditional manner, or it may request to exchange the funds with KDOT. If the latter is chosen, KDOT agrees to accept the federal funds and makes 90 cents of State funds for every dollar of federal funds available to the local agency. The local agency follows local procedures to develop and administer the project, and submits a request for reimbursement to KDOT as costs are incurred. The local agency is reimbursed for 100 percent of the billings until the maximum amount of the exchange is expended. Participating local agencies are required to use the State funds for specific types of road or bridge improvement projects, but have a wider variety of projects and ranges of scope than the federal-aid program would permit. Safety improvements range from signing and pavement marking to roadside obstacles and intersection improvements.

Key Accomplishments

Over the four years the program has operated, KDOT has committed over $84.9 million in exchange dollars across the State to be used on local projects by eligible local governments. As of October 2014, $51.5 million have been reimbursed.

Results

The program allows greater flexibility in selecting local projects. Projects can be completed on non-federal aid routes and bridges do not have to meet Federal eligibility requirements. Local agencies are now better able to meet their highest local needs, and there is much less overall oversight required by KDOT. The program also results in less local-level oversight and paperwork for FHWA.

The program has allowed roadway improvements on county- and city-maintained roads that may not have otherwise been possible due to resource constraints. The majority of the funds have been spent on resurfacing and bridge maintenance or replacement projects. While these projects are not Highway Safety Improvement Program projects, they contribute to an improved and safer travel experience. The program is a potential funding option for local agencies to identify and implement safety improvements as needed without engaging the federal aid process.

Additional Information

• Kansas Department of Transportation Federal Fund Exchange Program Guidelines (November 22, 2010)
• Kansas Federal Fund Exchange Program for Local Agencies Presentation (Presented by Ronald J. Seitz, P.E., Chief of Bureau of Local Projects)
• Up and Running: Update on KDOT’s Federal Fund Exchange, Kansas LTAP article

Publication Year: 2015

Image Description

Graphic that illustrates how KDOT's Federal Fund Exchange works: Federal funds are made available to KDOT through FHWA. KDOT shares a portion of federal funds with cities and counties. KDOT agrees to provide LPA $.90 state funds per $1.00 fed. LPA requests KDOT exchange funds. KDOT reimburses LPA up to maximum amount of total exchange. LPA submits request for reimbursements to KDOT along with appropriate documentation of expenditure. LPA lets/administers project(s) themselves and pays contractor/suppliers.

Evaluating Opportunities Using Predicted Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment - Missouri Case Study

Summary from Crash Modification Factors in Practice: Using CMFs to Quantify Safety in the Value Engineering Process

(The Missouri case study begins on Page 22 of the full report, after background information about the use of crash modification to quantify safety in the value engineering process.)

Background

The following case study illustrates how the Predicted Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment method has been used to explicitly consider the safety impacts of opportunities during the Value Engineering (VE) process. Specifically, it focuses on the quantification of safety in the evaluation phase when safety is a project factor and crash frequency is the related performance measure. Information for the case study was provided by the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT).

MoDOT integrates data-driven decision-making in many of their planning and design practices, including the VE process. While not part of their VE policy, MoDOT encourages the use of the AASHTO Highway Safety Manual to better understand the safety implications of design-related decisions.

Project Description

MoDOT Southeast District proposed a roadway improvement project on a rural, two-lane section of Route 34 in Bollinger County, MO. The existing 2.8-mile study section is characterized by a narrow cross-section with several horizontal curves and relatively unforgiving roadside. The proposed project involved resurfacing, lane and shoulder widening, horizontal realignment, installation of centerline rumble strips, and roadside improvements. The project was also listed on the district's VE work plan, which is created by the District Value Engineering Coordinator (DVEC) to identify priority projects for VE study. Suggested selection criteria are provided at the following link to aid the DVEC in selecting projects for the VE work plan: http://epg.modot.org/files/c/c0/130_VE_Project_Selection_Criteria.doc.

Findings

Safety Performance Function (SPFs) can be used to predict crashes for baseline conditions and CMFs can be applied to adjust the baseline estimate to reflect specific conditions of interest. This is useful for quantifying and comparing the safety performance of scenarios with different design features and can aid in the decision-making process. Specifically, this approach can help an agency to better understand the potential safety impacts of individual design elements and changes proposed as part of a VE study when safety is a project factor and crash frequency and/or severity is the performance measure. In this case, Southeast District of MoDOT used the Predicted Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment in order to quantify the safety impacts of road widening in conjunction with horizontal realignment, centerline rumble strips, and roadside improvements. Two alternative alignments (original proposed design and VE proposed design) were compared to the existing conditions. While the two alternative designs provide nearly identical levels of safety based on total predicted crashes, the VE proposed design would reduce project costs. The use of the Predicted Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment demonstrated that the proposed improvements could result in a substantial reduction in crashes compared to existing conditions. It also showed that the VE proposed design would provide a similar level of safety to the original proposed design while providing additional benefits. Recall that non-calibrated SPFs may overestimate or underestimate the predicted crash frequency, but provide a reasonable estimate of the percent difference in crashes among alternatives. As such, it is desirable to use a calibrated SPF if it is necessary to estimate the change in predicted crash frequency or conduct a formal economic analysis.

Contact

Karen Scurry
FHWA Office
609-637-4207
Karen.Scurry@dot.gov

Publication Year: 2013

View more information about CMFs on the web at: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/.
Additional practices in the CMFs in Practice Series:

• Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Management Process - Virginia Case Study
• Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Audit Process - Michigan Case Study
• Quantifying Safety in the Development and Analysis of Alternatives - Arizona and Colorado Case Study
• Using CMFs to Quantify the Safety Performance of Design Decisions and Exceptions - California and Missouri

Crash Modification Factors in Practice: Using CMFs to Quantify the Safety Performance of Design Decisions and Exceptions - California and Missouri

Summary from Crash Modification Factors in Practice: Using CMFs to Quantify Safety in the Development and Analysis of Alternatives

(The case studies begins on Page 18 of the full report, after background information about the use of crash modification to quantify the safety performance of design decisions and exceptions.)

Background

Crash Modification Factors (CMFs) can be applied in the development and analysis of alternatives to estimate the safety performance when the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative are considered. The following case studies illustrate how CMFs have been applied by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) in the development and analysis of alternatives.

Case Study #1: California

The following case study illustrates how the Observed Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment method has been used to assess the safety impact of individual design elements and evaluate the overall impact of design exceptions on the safety performance of a facility. Information for the case study was provided by Caltrans.

Project Description

In response to 24 collisions that occurred in a three-year period within a section of US 199 in Northern California, District 1 of Caltrans proposed a series of engineering improvements to address potential safety issues. The project limits are within United States Forest Service Lands in Del Norte County, approximately two miles north of Hiouchi. The limits extend from 0.9 to 1.1 miles north of South Fork Road. The existing alignment consists of two curves with a short tangent transition, forming a reverse curve. Curve 2 was the primary focus of the engineering improvements as all 24 crashes occurred along this curve during the three-year period.

Findings

CMFs can be applied to quantify the safety impacts of design elements and estimate the effects of mitigation measures. Combined, these results can be used to evaluate the overall impacts of design exceptions on the estimated safety performance of a facility. In this case, District 1 of Caltrans used CMFs in order to quantify the safety impacts of increasing the radius of a curve, increasing the superelevation, increasing the width of the travel lane, and increasing the shoulder width. Even though some of the proposed changes did not meet the design standard based on California's design documents, the use of CMFs demonstrated that the proposed improvements could result in a substantial reduction in crashes compared to the existing conditions. Further analysis could compare the estimated safety impact of proposed design exceptions with respect to design standards. The results of the safety analysis could also be considered in conjunction with other factors such as project cost, operational performance, and environmental impacts.

Case Study #2: Missouri

The following case study illustrates how the Predicted Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment method has been used to assess the safety impact of individual design elements and evaluate the overall impact of design exceptions on the safety performance of a facility. Information for the case study was provided by the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT).

Project Description

MoDOT Central District proposed a project on a rural, two-lane section of Route 42 in Kaiser, MO. The existing conditions included a narrow cross-section with lane widths of 10.5 feet and unpaved shoulders. The proposed conditions included paved shoulders (2 feet in both directions) and shoulder and centerline rumble stripes. The design guidelines for minor roads in Missouri identify minimum expectations for several design features, including a consistent shoulder width of 2 to 4 feet. In this case, the District conducted an analysis, using Part C Predictive Methods of the HSM, to document the potential safety benefits of the proposed conditions compared to the existing conditions. A separate analysis is also provided to compare the safety performance of different shoulder widths (2 feet versus 4 feet).

Findings

SPFs can be used to predict crashes for baseline conditions and CMFs can be applied to adjust the baseline estimate to reflect specific conditions of interest. This is useful for quantifying and comparing the safety performance of scenarios with different design features and can aid in the decision-making process. Specifically, this approach can help an agency to better understand the potential safety impacts of individual design elements and design exceptions. MoDOT conducts similar safety analyses as part of the evaluation of design exceptions that involve safety related features. In this case, Central District of MoDOT used the Predicted Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment method in order to quantify the safety impacts of installing a paved shoulder with shoulder and centerline rumble stripes. Two different scenarios are compared to the existing conditions. The proposed condition included a paved shoulder width of two feet, while the alternative condition based on design guidelines is a paved shoulder width of four feet. The use of this quantitative method demonstrated that the proposed improvements could result in a substantial reduction in crashes compared to existing conditions. Recall that non-calibrated SPFs may overestimate or underestimate the predicted crash frequency, but provide a reasonable estimate of the percent difference in crashes among alternatives. As such, it is desirable to use a calibrated SPF if it is necessary to estimate the change in predicted crash frequency or conduct a formal economic analysis.

Read the full practice →

Contact

Karen Scurry
FHWA Office
609-637-4207
Karen.Scurry@dot.gov

Publication Year: 2013

View more information about CMFs on the web at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/.
Additional practices in the CMFs in Practice Series:

• Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Management Process - Virginia Case Study
• Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Audit Process - Michigan Case Study
• Quantifying Safety in the Development and Analysis of Alternatives - Arizona and Colorado Case Study
• Evaluating Opportunities Using Predicted Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment - Missouri Case Study

Crash Modification Factors in Practice: Quantifying Safety in the Development and Analysis of Alternatives - Arizona and Colorado Case Studies

Summary from Crash Modification Factors in Practice: Using CMFs to Quantify Safety in the Development and Analysis of Alternatives

(The case studies begins on Page 17 of the full report, after background information about the use of crash modification development and analysis of roadway safety alternatives.)

Background

Crash Modification Factors (CMFs) can be applied in the development and analysis of alternatives to estimate the safety performance when the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative are considered. The following case studies illustrate how CMFs have been applied by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) in the development and analysis of alternatives.

Case Study #1: Colorado

The following case study illustrates how the Observed Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment method has been used to assess the safety impact of alternatives. Information for the case study was provided by CDOT.

Project Description

Castle Rock, Colorado lies south of Denver along the Interstate 25 corridor. To accommodate growing development in the area, CDOT considered a new interchange on I-25. In addition to the “no build” scenario, they considered two alternatives for the new interchange design. Alternative 1 would extend one road, Castlegate Drive, to create the new interchange. Alternative 2 would extend another road, Atrium Drive, to create the new interchange.

As part of the environmental assessment of the project in 2009, CDOT conducted a safety analysis to evaluate the effect on crashes for the proximate roadway segments and intersections, including ramp junctions. The full safety analysis developed estimates of crash predictions for each segment and junction based on either Safety Performance Functions (SPFs) (for segments) or comparisons to similar intersections in the area (for intersections). At the time of the analysis, CDOT did not have available SPFs for intersections.

Findings

This case study presented an example of how CMFs can be applied to estimate the safety impacts of various alternatives. The safety analysis presented in this case study was just one piece of the overall safety analysis conducted for the proposed interchange alternatives. In addition to the safety analysis of the alternative junction types, CDOT developed crash estimates for each segment and intersection within the study area. The result was an estimate of annual crashes for the entire study area for Alternatives 1 and 2. The estimated safety performance of each alternative can then be considered with the operational performance, project costs, environmental impacts, and other factors to identify a balanced design and the most desirable alternative.

Case Study #2: Arizona

The following case study illustrates how the Expected Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment method has been used to quantify the safety impacts during the development and analysis of alternatives. Information for the case study was provided by ADOT.

ADOT is performing predictive analyses following the procedures in the AASHTO Highway Safety Manual at the scoping and alternative selection stage of demonstration projects. They are working to develop a framework for integrating substantive safety considerations into the ADOT project planning and development process.

Project Description

ADOT identified potential safety improvements on a 24.6 mile section of Arizona State Route 264 (SR 264) and evaluated the potential safety impacts during the analysis phase of the development and analysis of the alternatives. SR 264 is a rural, two-lane road in northeastern Arizona and functionally classified as a minor arterial. Figure 2 identifies the general location and limits of the study section.

Findings

This case study presented an example of how the Expected Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment method can be used to estimate the expected safety impacts of various design alternatives. ADOT used SPFs and CMFs from the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) in this analysis, supported by the Interactive Highway Safety Design Model (IHSDM) software. They also incorporated observed crash history, using the Empirical Bayes method, to estimate the expected crashes for various scenarios. The result was an estimate of total expected crashes for the entire study section over a 20-year analysis period. This allowed for a quantitative comparison of the safety performance for two design alternatives and the existing conditions. ADOT used the results of the crash analysis in a benefit-cost analysis to help select the most cost-effective alternative.

Contact

Karen Scurry
FHWA Office
609-637-4207
Karen.Scurry@dot.gov

Publication Year: 2013

View more information about CMFs on the web at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/.
Additional practices in the CMFs in Practice Series:

• Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Management Process - Virginia Case Study
• Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Audit Process - Michigan Case Study
• Using CMFs to Quantify the Safety Performance of Design Decisions and Exceptions - California and Missouri
• Evaluating Opportunities Using Predicted Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment - Missouri Case Study

Crash Modification Factors in Practice: Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Audit Process - Michigan Case Study

Summary from Crash Modification Factors in Practice: Quantifying Safety in the Road Safety Audit Process

(The Michigan case study begins on Page 11 of the full report, after background information about the use of crash modification factors in the Roadway Safety Audit process.)

Background

Crash Modification Factors (CMFs) can be applied in the Roadway Safety Audit (RSA) process to quantify the safety effects of various treatments and justify the RSA team suggestions to the project owner and/or design team. The following case study illustrates how CMFs have been applied in the RSA process. It also identifies noteworthy practices and actual challenges encountered by agencies with respect to this process.

Project Description

The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) conducted an Operational and Preliminary Design Stage RSA along the first horizontal curve on M-26 north of the village limits of South Range, in Houghton County. The RSA location is circled in Figure 2. This curve was chosen by MDOT on the basis of crash history.

The objectives of the RSA were to:

• Review road safety at the curve.
• Identify physical and operational issues that may affect road safety.
• Review the proposed plan concept.
• Develop and evaluate potential countermeasures to reduce the frequency and severity of collisions.

Findings

The RSA process is typically a qualitative evaluation of the safety performance of a given facility. The RSA report is generally the final deliverable of an RSA team, including a list of potential safety issues and associated countermeasures. It is then the responsibility of the project owner/design team to consider the suggestions identified by the RSA team and determine which countermeasures will be implemented and the relative timeframe for implementation. The application of CMFs not only helps an agency to compare the relative effectiveness of suggested countermeasures, but it also provides information to be used in a benefit-cost analysis. A benefit-cost analysis can be used to prioritize suggested improvements and may be required when applying for funding.

Contact

Karen Scurry
FHWA Office
609-637-4207
Karen.Scurry@dot.gov

Publication Year: 2013

View more information about CMFs on the web at: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/.
Additional practices in the CMFs in Practice Series:

• Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Management Process - Virginia Case Study
• Quantifying Safety in the Development and Analysis of Alternatives - Arizona and Colorado Case Study
• Using CMFs to Quantify the Safety Performance of Design Decisions and Exceptions - California and Missouri
• Evaluating Opportunities Using Predicted Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment - Missouri Case Study

Crash Modification Factors in Practice: Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Management Process - Virginia Case Study

Summary from Crash Modification Factors in Practice: Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Management Process

(The Virginia case study begins on Page 7 of the full report, after background information about the use of crash modification factors to quantify roadway safety.)

Background

In 2007, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) started a new program, Strategically Targeted Affordable Roadway Solutions (STARS), aimed at critical safety and congestion hot spots throughout the State. The primary goals of the STARS program are to identify roadway improvements on the interstate and primary systems that:

• Are relatively low-cost.
• Address existing mobility and safety problem areas.
• Require minimal preliminary engineering and right-of-way.
• Can be implemented quickly (24 months or less).

The STARS program allows VDOT to better incorporate operations and safety into the long-term planning process and involves the following four steps.

1. Study area selection.
2. Detailed safety and operational analysis.
3. Prioritization of recommendations.
4. Programming and implementation.

In this process, the study team identifies potential safety and operational issues in Step 2 along with a list of potential countermeasures. Crash Modification Factors (CMFs) are then applied in Step 3 to help justify and prioritize the suggestions. Specifically, CMFs are used to estimate the safety impacts associated with each countermeasure.

Findings

There are several potential benefits associated with the application of CMFs in the safety management process. Specifically, CMFs provide a means to quantify the safety impacts of decisions and help to raise awareness of safety. The application of CMFs also helps to prioritize potential treatments and provides decision-makers with the information needed to identify cost-effective strategies. VDOT indicated that the STARS program has helped to raise awareness of safety issues at both the State and local level, which has led to more safety-focused projects.

The goal of the STARS program is to identify where safety and congestion issues overlap on the State's roadways. As demonstrated in the case study, CMFs are used in the benefit-cost analysis to quantify the safety impact of the suggested countermeasures. The results of the benefit-cost analysis are beneficial in the prioritization of recommendations as well as the programming and implementation stage. VDOT indicated that STARS-based projects have addressed more crashes and typically involve lower impact treatments (less utility and right of way) that can be implemented more quickly than proposals submitted prior to the STARS program.

Using CMFs as part of the benefit-cost analysis is not only beneficial to prioritizing the suggested countermeasures for a particular site, but also helps in the management of a safety program. The STARS program actively utilizes Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds for many of the hot spot locations throughout the State. The CMFs used in the benefit-cost analysis are instrumental in the application process for HSIP funding.

Contact

Karen Scurry
FHWA Office
609-637-4207
Karen.Scurry@dot.gov

Publication Year: 2013

View more information about CMFs on the web at: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/.
Additional practices in the CMFs in Practice Series:

• Quantifying Safety in the Roadway Safety Audit Process - Michigan Case Study
• Quantifying Safety in the Development and Analysis of Alternatives - Arizona and Colorado Case Study
• Using CMFs to Quantify the Safety Performance of Design Decisions and Exceptions - California and Missouri
• Evaluating Opportunities Using Predicted Crash Frequency with CMF Adjustment - Missouri Case Study

Tennessee DOT Local Roads Safety Initiative Assists Counties Challenged by Limited Staff with Road Safety Improvements

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

Background

The Tennessee DOT (TDOT) Local Roads Safety Initiative (LRSI) was created in 2010 to assist with improving safety on local roads. TDOT created the initiative to assist its counties with road safety improvements. The initiative provides basic signing, striping upgrades, signage for curves, guardrail, and approaches to guard rails. Most counties have limited support staff and very few counties have staff with the needed engineering expertise. Only 6 of 95 county chief administrative officers are licensed engineers. The LRSI was developed by a partnership between the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) and safety projects coordinator, State traffic engineer, assistant chief of operations, incident management division director, and the Tennessee FHWA Division. TDOT developed a consultant contract and hired two consultants to conduct local road safety analysis in Tennessee's 95 counties.

Benefit

The TDOT Local Road Safety Initiative has successfully conducted Road Safety Audit Reviews (RSARs) through the draft stage for 45 counties and 21 projects have been let to bid and awarded since the program's inception.

Contact

FHWA Office of Safety staff contacts by safety function

Ohio DOT and LTAP Provides Opportunities for Townships to Improve Town-wide and Corridor Signage at Intersections and Curves

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

Background

The Ohio DOT's (ODOT) Office of Local Programs, with the assistance of the Ohio Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) Center, administers a systemic signage intersection and curve upgrade program for targeted Ohio Townships. The program provides two opportunities for townships to apply for free safety and advanced warning signs.

• The Township-wide Systematic Signage Upgrade Program is for Townships with a high number of severe crashes. The Top 50 Townships with a high number of serious crashes for a five-year period are invited to apply for funding to implement systematic signage upgrades.
• The Township Corridor Systematic Signage Upgrade Program provides intersection signage and curve upgrades for Townships with a corridor among the Top 50 Township High-Risk Rural Roads in Ohio based on a five-year period of crash data. Townships can apply for funding on designated corridors.
• Townships participating in the programs are responsible for installation and maintenance of the signage and are limited to a list of preapproved signs.

As a part of the program, the Ohio LTAP Center provides crash data and information on the types of sign packages available for specific situations. Townships can choose from the signage packages or build their own sign orders. The ODOT Office of Local Programs also provides guidance and assistance to Townships on sign installation if necessary. Program details are available on the ODOT Local Programs web page.

Figure 1. Before and After Photos of Sign Installation Completed as Part of Program.

Benefit

The signage packages help insure the townships install the signs according to the requirements of the Ohio Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (OMUTCD).

Contact

FHWA Office of Safety staff contacts by safety function