USA Banner
  U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Here's how you knowOfficial 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** ( A locked padlock ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. 
 U.S. Department of Transportation Icon United States Department of Transportation
 Search DOT
            Search
                    About FHWAFHWA Organization
                Headquarters Offices
                Field Offices
                Strategic Plan
                Business Opportunities
                Staff Directories
                Careers
                Highway History
                Contact UsProgramsAcquisition Management
                Civil Rights
                Federal Lands Highway
                Infrastructure
                Innovative Program Delivery
                Operations
                Planning, Environment, and Realty
                Policy
                Research, Development, and Technology
                Safety
                Browse by TopicsResourcesCore Highway Topics
                Federal Aid Essentials
                Automation
                Complete Streets
                Laws and Regulations
                Policy & Guidance Center
                Section 508
                Publications and Statistics
                Professional Development
                National Highway Institute
                Resource Center
                Accessibility Resource Library
                FHWA Research LibraryNewsroomPress Releases
                Speeches & Testimony
                Photos
                Videos
                Media ContactsMenu FHWA Highway Safety Programs Home
                        Safety
                        HSIP


            
            In This Section
        Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
                                Overview
                About
                Planning
                Implementing
                Evaluating
                Reporting
                Noteworthy Practices
                Legislation and Guidance
                Resources
                HSIP Special Rules
                Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP)
                                Overview
                About
                Develop
                Implement
                Evaluate
                Promote
                Legislation and Guidance
                Resources
                Noteworthy Practices
                Safety Performance Measure
                                Overview
                State Safety Performance Targets
                Policy & Guidance
                Fact Sheets & Informational Webinars
                Target-Setting Resources
                Safety Data Resources
                State Safety Reports
                Safety Contacts
                Technical Assistance & Training
                Railway Highway Crossing Program
                                Overview
                Policy and Guidance
                Resources
                
                Obligation Rates for the Highway Safety Improvement Program
HSIP Obligation Rates

HSIP Cumulative Obligations vs. Cumulative Apportionments
	HSIP Funding Transferred To/From Other Core Apportioned Programs
	RHCP Cumulative Obligations vs. Cumulative ApportionmentsHSIP Special Rules Obligation Rates

High-Risk Rural Roads Special Rule Obligation Rates
	Vulnerable Road User Safety Special Rule Obligation RatesHSIP Obligation Rates

An obligation is a definite commitment that creates a legal liability of the government for the payment, or a legal duty on the part of the United States that could mature into a legal liability by virtue of actions on the part of the State or local public agency (LPA). A Federal agency incurs an obligation when it records an obligation under a grant agreement to pay the State (or LPA) for the Federal share of a project's eligible cost. This commitment is generally made as both the Federal and State governments agree to specific project expenditures based upon a defined scope of work. Under the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), obligations are recorded against HSIP funds that were distributed via a formula provided in the law; these funds are commonly referred to as an apportionment. From the Federal perspective, the obligation to apportionment ratio is a way to represent the degree to which a State is using HSIP funds. Using apportionment figures for the calculations addresses two issues: 1) funding available is subject to transfer activities and 2) apportionments more accurately represent the extent to which States are using HSIP as a funding source.

HSIP funding obligation rates are not necessarily a reflection of a State's commitment to safety. There are many other ways to fund safety improvements. This summary does not show why obligations rates are high or low, or how safe highways may be in each State, as the information below does not include safety improvements that are planned, but not yet obligated, does not include transfer of funds to another agency, and does not reflect safety spending through other core programs such as the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program or the National Highway Performance Program, or funded by non-Federal funds.

HSIP Cumulative Obligations vs. Cumulative Apportionments Through FY 2023

Table 1 illustrates the ratio of the HSIP cumulative obligations to the cumulative apportionments for each State through the end of Fiscal Year (FY) 2023, which goes from October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2023. FY 2015 through FY 2019 includes combined funds from the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) and the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act. FY 2020 through FY 2021 includes funds only from the FAST Act. FY 2022 and FY 2023 includes combined funds from the FAST Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), also referred to as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). The obligation rates include the Railway-Highway Crossings Program (RHCP) and the High-Risk Rural Roads (HRRR) Special Rule funding under MAP-21, the FAST Act and IIJA. MAP-21 (and the subsequent extension of MAP-21) was in effect from October 2013 through September 2015. The FAST Act was in effect from October 1, 2015 through October 1, 2021. The IIJA passed on November 15, 2021 and took effect on October 1, 2021.

Table 1: HSIP Cumulative Obligation Rates by State
	STATE
			FISCAL YEARMAP-21 & FAST ACT
			FAST ACT
			FAST ACT & IIJA2015
			2016
			2017
			2018
			2019
			2020
			2021
			2022
			2023Alabama
			41.5%
			51.3%
			54.8%
			60.4%
			63.1%
			67.4%
			70.6%
			71.4%
			73.5%Alaska
			98.0%
			98.5%
			98.8%
			91.9%
			82.9%
			91.7%
			86.6%
			91.2%
			85.4%Arizona
			56.4%
			65.3%
			77.5%
			74.1%
			66.4%
			46.3%
			53.6%
			59.9%
			62.6%Arkansas
			27.9%
			51.1%
			59.9%
			74.5%
			80.2%
			117.7%
			101.9%
			97.4%
			90.7%California
			86.3%
			108.3%
			123.6%
			135.2%
			139.2%
			200.6%
			216.1%
			212.3%
			211.9%Colorado
			65.3%
			63.2%
			75.4%
			73.1%
			71.3%
			52.3%
			59.2%
			67.8%
			84.8%Connecticut
			51.4%
			61.0%
			67.0%
			77.7%
			77.6%
			92.8%
			89.7%
			89.4%
			83.9%Delaware
			92.9%
			91.7%
			97.6%
			99.5%
			88.4%
			81.9%
			87.5%
			95.3%
			96.7%District of Columbia
			54.0%
			94.1%
			98.9%
			99.0%
			99.9%
			95.9%
			93.6%
			94.2%
			96.5%Florida
			79.9%
			79.3%
			86.7%
			87.5%
			74.9%
			71.3%
			82.8%
			83.1%
			89.7%Georgia
			65.5%
			78.8%
			85.3%
			90.7%
			88.5%
			100.7%
			103.7%
			114.7%
			120.0%Hawaii
			1.3%
			17.5%
			55.4%
			59.9%
			56.9%
			42.0%
			57.8%
			79.1%
			86.0%Idaho
			29.8%
			44.7%
			56.4%
			71.0%
			69.2%
			79.7%
			82.3%
			96.7%
			97.2%Illinois
			60.7%
			74.6%
			71.3%
			78.4%
			79.9%
			70.0%
			74.9%
			75.7%
			76.8%Indiana
			17.1%
			28.4%
			31.5%
			37.9%
			37.8%
			48.7%
			53.1%
			61.0%
			67.1%Iowa
			67.5%
			69.2%
			70.1%
			75.8%
			75.0%
			61.2%
			64.3%
			74.2%
			75.7%Kansas
			56.3%
			52.9%
			65.8%
			71.5%
			76.0%
			73.3%
			83.2%
			86.0%
			84.6%Kentucky
			43.1%
			48.5%
			59.1%
			69.4%
			64.7%
			84.3%
			86.3%
			88.4%
			89.9%Louisiana
			73.0%
			90.9%
			85.5%
			89.8%
			96.0%
			87.5%
			81.8%
			85.9%
			94.7%Maine
			91.1%
			90.6%
			91.7%
			89.2%
			91.6%
			81.9%
			76.9%
			85.1%
			85.9%Maryland
			33.1%
			42.5%
			40.8%
			41.6%
			36.3%
			22.5%
			36.4%
			45.3%
			58.8%Massachusetts
			97.0%
			95.5%
			100.1%
			98.6%
			95.8%
			91.3%
			85.4%
			87.8%
			91.3%Michigan
			85.8%
			81.8%
			87.6%
			88.2%
			90.0%
			83.6%
			85.8%
			84.6%
			86.9%Minnesota
			45.8%
			52.7%
			60.8%
			65.4%
			66.1%
			61.7%
			63.2%
			71.6%
			85.2%Mississippi
			100.0%
			100.0%
			99.3%
			98.5%
			93.0%
			96.6%
			97.2%
			97.7%
			98.0%Missouri
			59.2%
			65.6%
			86.8%
			98.5%
			98.0%
			94.0%
			94.0%
			95.3%
			96.7%Montana
			59.6%
			78.8%
			81.0%
			82.6%
			74.2%
			65.5%
			74.0%
			95.3%
			97.0%Nebraska
			79.8%
			77.9%
			81.0%
			79.8%
			83.4%
			67.0%
			76.6%
			66.0%
			74.9%Nevada
			98.8%
			97.7%
			93.6%
			88.6%
			81.8%
			66.8%
			70.1%
			68.5%
			65.6%New Hampshire
			89.9%
			93.0%
			89.0%
			87.3%
			86.8%
			78.7%
			77.5%
			79.6%
			82.2%New Jersey
			44.8%
			52.9%
			51.7%
			54.6%
			54.6%
			43.9%
			50.9%
			64.1%
			74.3%New Mexico
			44.9%
			49.7%
			59.3%
			70.7%
			71.6%
			77.8%
			80.6%
			84.4%
			82.5%New York
			58.9%
			56.7%
			80.1%
			82.2%
			71.7%
			69.8%
			75.9%
			79.9%
			80.6%North Carolina
			73.2%
			80.3%
			84.5%
			87.0%
			84.1%
			91.5%
			93.7%
			94.5%
			95.6%North Dakota
			72.5%
			75.1%
			84.9%
			93.6%
			95.1%
			107.9%
			112.8%
			114.7%
			114.3%Ohio
			99.3%
			99.3%
			87.7%
			89.4%
			87.5%
			90.1%
			97.1%
			97.7%
			102.1%Oklahoma
			88.5%
			91.1%
			94.4%
			96.1%
			89.5%
			89.7%
			93.1%
			90.1%
			91.5%Oregon
			57.3%
			78.7%
			80.5%
			73.4%
			69.0%
			64.6%
			69.5%
			76.7%
			80.2%Pennsylvania
			64.9%
			78.7%
			77.8%
			79.3%
			78.1%
			69.3%
			73.9%
			75.3%
			76.6%Rhode Island
			53.6%
			50.7%
			57.4%
			67.4%
			73.4%
			68.7%
			78.3%
			86.9%
			88.5%South Carolina
			97.0%
			87.6%
			86.5%
			89.4%
			79.3%
			73.8%
			69.8%
			80.7%
			85.1%South Dakota
			16.3%
			59.7%
			99.8%
			128.0%
			121.5%
			177.9%
			200.7%
			208.5%
			207.0%Tennessee
			72.0%
			83.3%
			88.4%
			89.0%
			87.5%
			87.1%
			91.4%
			88.8%
			93.7%Texas
			89.8%
			91.2%
			91.0%
			89.8%
			80.5%
			77.5%
			82.4%
			85.7%
			88.6%Utah
			93.4%
			88.9%
			94.6%
			89.6%
			90.3%
			95.8%
			96.2%
			96.3%
			94.9%Vermont
			53.6%
			72.1%
			81.2%
			82.6%
			78.0%
			84.3%
			81.9%
			88.4%
			93.2%Virginia
			77.4%
			85.7%
			86.8%
			86.1%
			78.4%
			67.0%
			68.6%
			65.3%
			78.9%Washington
			62.2%
			79.1%
			79.4%
			78.9%
			82.1%
			72.6%
			83.5%
			81.6%
			83.4%West Virginia
			34.9%
			44.1%
			54.4%
			85.9%
			89.9%
			93.7%
			76.9%
			78.3%
			82.3%Wisconsin
			4.8%
			19.4%
			32.8%
			36.7%
			36.5%
			33.5%
			44.1%
			51.2%
			56.5%Wyoming
			79.9%
			76.4%
			85.7%
			91.7%
			97.7%
			83.4%
			83.0%
			81.9%
			84.5%Total
			68.6%
			76.6%
			82.4%
			86.2%
			83.6%
			86.7%
			91.5%
			94.3%
			97.5%HSIP Funding Transferred To/From Other Core Apportioned Programs Through FY 2023

A funding transfer involves the shifting of the budget (contract) authority in one fund account to another. The HSIP is subject to the transfer provision under section 126 of Title 23, United States Code (U.S.C.). Under this provision, States are permitted to transfer up to 50 percent of their HSIP funds apportioned for the fiscal year to any other eligible core apportioned program. As of September 30, 2023, 12 States transferred funds out of the HSIP into to other core apportioned programs and 11 States transferred funds from other core apportioned programs into the HSIP. Table 2 below shows the transfer amounts and rates from FY 2016 through FY 2023 and includes both FAST Act and IIJA funds. Table 2 does not include transfer of funds to another agency.

Table 2: HSIP Funding Transferred To/From Other Core Apportioned Programs
	STATE
			TOTAL HSIP FUNDS
			TRANSFERRED
			(2016-2023)
			TOTAL HSIP
			APPORTIONMENTS
			(2016-2023)
			TRANSFER
			RATEAlabama
			($47,251,135)
			$384,896,543
			-12.28%Alaska
			($25,195,831)
			$255,006,002
			-9.88%Arizona
			($108,065,878)
			$352,524,410
			-30.65%Arkansas
			$12,647,912
			$260,670,037
			4.85%California
			$1,908,533,452
			$1,653,254,746
			115.44%Colorado
			($35,192,970)
			$239,367,083
			-14.70%Connecticut
			($32,501,867)
			$243,330,723
			-13.36%Florida
			($95,549,529)
			$984,272,067
			-9.71%Georgia
			$181,317,367
			$592,127,786
			30.62%Hawaii
			($5,294,073)
			$79,878,970
			-6.63%Illinois
			($79,822,943)
			$624,360,671
			-12.78%Indiana
			($171,750,631)
			$453,933,636
			-37.84%Iowa
			($49,392,874)
			$232,375,370
			-21.26%Kansas
			($2,420,302)
			$153,973,945
			-1.57%Kentucky
			($26,614,768)
			$337,344,873
			-7.89%Maine
			($6,500,000)
			$89,091,379
			-7.30%Maryland
			($85,329,940)
			$288,719,405
			-29.55%Massachusetts
			($18,500,000)
			$277,645,822
			-6.66%Michigan
			($36,444,638)
			$475,702,573
			-7.66%Minnesota
			($39,026,534)
			$306,099,297
			-12.75%Montana
			($940,730)
			$207,432,842
			-0.45%Nevada
			($60,025,397)
			$172,526,377
			-34.79%New Hampshire
			($9,950,351)
			$77,750,368
			-12.80%New Jersey
			($136,936,259)
			$465,492,258
			-29.42%New Mexico
			($17,179,476)
			$176,245,412
			-9.75%New York
			($154,969,065)
			$786,980,191
			-19.69%North Dakota
			$24,038,597
			$105,258,297
			22.84%Ohio
			$30,000,000
			$628,640,687
			4.77%Oklahoma
			($23,538,512)
			$307,747,013
			-7.65%Oregon
			($44,520,109)
			$238,331,722
			-18.68%Pennsylvania
			($126,773,158)
			$801,051,269
			-15.83%Rhode Island
			($14,526,780)
			$105,348,830
			-13.79%South Carolina
			($46,087,388)
			$335,016,128
			-13.76%South Dakota
			$159,397,844
			$130,231,328
			122.40%Tennessee
			$10,000,000
			$411,944,707
			2.43%Texas
			($137,806,460)
			$1,844,166,968
			-7.47%Utah
			($46,615)
			$167,547,264
			-0.03%Vermont
			($5,610,244)
			$97,237,483
			-5.77%Virginia
			$2,021,431
			$495,775,639
			0.41%Washington
			$2,718,684
			$313,544,364
			0.87%West Virginia
			($33,970,635)
			$228,541,280
			-14.86%Wisconsin
			($151,736,732)
			$369,679,590
			-41.05%Wyoming
			($16,600,000)
			$132,662,519
			-12.51%RHCP Cumulative Obligations vs. Cumulative Apportionments Through FY 2023

Rail-Highway Crossings Program (RHCP) Section 130 funds are set-aside from the HSIP apportionment. The RHCP set-aside funds are apportioned to States by formula. Table 3 illustrates the ratio of the RHCP (Section 130) set-aside obligations to the apportionments for each State through the end of FY 2023. FY 2014 through FY 2019 includes combined funds from MAP-21 and the FAST Act. FY 2020 through FY 2021 includes funds only from the FAST Act. FY 2022 and FY 2023 includes combined funds from the FAST Act and IIJA.

As noted above, RHCP funding obligation rates are not a reflection of a State's commitment to safety. This summary does not show why obligations rates are high or low, or how safe rail-highway crossings may be in each State, as the information in Table 3 does not include safety improvements that are planned, but not yet obligated, and does not reflect safety spending through other core programs.

Table 3: RHCP Cumulative Obligation Rates by State
	STATE
			FISCAL YEARMAP-21 & FAST ACT
			FAST ACT
			FAST ACT & IIJA2015
			2016
			2017
			2018
			2019
			2020
			2021
			2022
			2023Alabama
			4.7%
			34.7%
			53.1%
			47.1%
			34.6%
			14.9%
			28.9%
			27.6%
			35.1%Alaska
			100.0%
			100.0%
			100.0%
			98.3%
			100.0%
			87.6%
			66.9%
			85.6%
			78.6%Arizona
			43.3%
			55.3%
			59.4%
			51.8%
			45.8%
			33.8%
			39.5%
			47.7%
			54.5%Arkansas
			31.3%
			36.6%
			44.1%
			48.9%
			59.3%
			59.9%
			53.1%
			64.8%
			65.4%California
			9.7%
			22.0%
			53.5%
			60.3%
			59.7%
			52.4%
			58.4%
			67.9%
			75.0%Colorado
			21.6%
			24.2%
			37.8%
			47.1%
			70.8%
			53.9%
			89.4%
			95.2%
			98.1%Connecticut
			9.6%
			31.9%
			47.6%
			54.1%
			61.2%
			91.4%
			97.4%
			97.6%
			97.9%Delaware
			35.0%
			42.5%
			100.0%
			100.0%
			98.8%
			89.1%
			79.5%
			77.1%
			88.1%District of Columbia
			62.4%
			60.5%
			100.0%
			92.1%
			99.0%
			94.8%
			79.8%
			97.8%
			91.1%Florida
			92.2%
			83.4%
			95.5%
			94.1%
			89.8%
			85.7%
			94.7%
			94.3%
			95.0%Georgia
			10.8%
			25.8%
			53.3%
			57.1%
			60.9%
			58.3%
			63.1%
			63.9%
			81.1%Hawaii
			10.5%
			32.4%
			45.2%
			47.6%
			76.0%
			97.0%
			81.6%
			84.1%
			98.1%Idaho
			2.7%
			21.5%
			41.1%
			46.6%
			52.7%
			35.9%
			39.4%
			88.1%
			89.5%Illinois
			1.3%
			47.1%
			39.8%
			47.0%
			59.2%
			43.4%
			52.8%
			57.4%
			63.3%Indiana
			10.1%
			36.6%
			37.8%
			61.3%
			68.6%
			67.4%
			60.2%
			95.8%
			98.0%Iowa
			33.4%
			35.4%
			41.9%
			49.4%
			61.9%
			57.2%
			55.5%
			63.5%
			71.2%Kansas
			75.1%
			57.5%
			79.0%
			93.5%
			82.0%
			73.8%
			76.2%
			74.9%
			66.3%Kentucky
			8.1%
			35.4%
			36.0%
			46.1%
			82.2%
			57.9%
			59.7%
			58.1%
			63.3%Louisiana
			62.8%
			64.7%
			58.7%
			58.3%
			59.2%
			42.2%
			51.8%
			57.5%
			66.8%Maine
			27.2%
			25.0%
			32.9%
			22.7%
			39.4%
			32.0%
			43.9%
			60.4%
			63.6%Maryland
			45.6%
			54.5%
			61.6%
			50.6%
			51.3%
			37.1%
			47.4%
			46.3%
			56.3%Massachusetts
			94.4%
			83.0%
			94.9%
			91.1%
			93.1%
			68.8%
			54.2%
			65.4%
			76.9%Michigan
			21.0%
			32.4%
			45.3%
			52.7%
			65.3%
			60.0%
			57.1%
			57.2%
			63.4%Minnesota
			29.2%
			34.5%
			38.4%
			48.3%
			51.3%
			35.5%
			43.8%
			63.6%
			84.8%Mississippi
			100.0%
			100.0%
			94.2%
			87.6%
			75.3%
			97.0%
			97.5%
			97.8%
			98.1%Missouri
			93.8%
			92.3%
			86.8%
			85.8%
			81.1%
			71.6%
			66.0%
			73.6%
			84.2%Montana
			77.7%
			78.0%
			91.4%
			96.9%
			89.3%
			85.8%
			82.3%
			87.9%
			98.1%Nebraska
			1.0%
			34.5%
			61.2%
			59.8%
			79.3%
			55.9%
			60.9%
			64.3%
			77.3%Nevada
			77.8%
			61.2%
			61.4%
			54.7%
			52.6%
			29.0%
			64.8%
			88.9%
			82.5%New Hampshire
			43.3%
			46.3%
			42.1%
			47.5%
			50.2%
			31.9%
			41.6%
			57.2%
			58.7%New Jersey
			96.7%
			92.1%
			98.2%
			95.1%
			95.9%
			79.3%
			94.0%
			97.8%
			98.1%New Mexico
			41.0%
			64.7%
			68.0%
			62.9%
			62.5%
			37.4%
			45.9%
			50.6%
			56.6%New York
			29.8%
			47.1%
			42.9%
			46.3%
			59.9%
			53.0%
			53.3%
			58.0%
			67.6%North Carolina
			85.6%
			90.0%
			91.7%
			91.2%
			78.7%
			57.9%
			66.1%
			68.4%
			75.4%North Dakota
			12.6%
			59.2%
			71.9%
			78.5%
			82.6%
			77.0%
			81.7%
			87.8%
			96.7%Ohio
			97.9%
			99.2%
			100.0%
			96.2%
			100.0%
			97.0%
			97.4%
			97.8%
			98.1%Oklahoma
			44.8%
			47.5%
			64.3%
			72.6%
			75.6%
			62.1%
			92.5%
			97.8%
			97.9%Oregon
			36.9%
			45.8%
			51.3%
			53.7%
			60.0%
			53.5%
			50.1%
			76.2%
			79.0%Pennsylvania
			1.3%
			24.0%
			37.0%
			47.7%
			60.5%
			45.8%
			52.7%
			57.3%
			68.4%Rhode Island
			36.9%
			22.3%
			35.6%
			48.8%
			61.1%
			45.0%
			53.4%
			67.9%
			67.6%South Carolina
			70.2%
			53.3%
			68.2%
			79.4%
			69.4%
			51.9%
			59.0%
			86.8%
			89.2%South Dakota
			15.8%
			24.3%
			36.6%
			56.4%
			60.2%
			48.7%
			56.5%
			81.7%
			84.9%Tennessee
			14.7%
			66.5%
			82.1%
			68.4%
			63.4%
			53.7%
			73.6%
			85.0%
			97.7%Texas
			57.7%
			55.9%
			53.3%
			47.7%
			45.2%
			17.2%
			41.5%
			49.2%
			63.5%Utah
			46.8%
			40.4%
			46.4%
			56.1%
			81.2%
			91.3%
			89.2%
			84.4%
			77.4%Vermont
			0.0%
			92.5%
			98.0%
			85.3%
			72.5%
			86.4%
			92.2%
			83.7%
			77.1%Virginia
			50.0%
			50.3%
			47.3%
			51.6%
			43.9%
			25.7%
			23.1%
			24.7%
			43.4%Washington
			16.4%
			55.9%
			47.1%
			58.7%
			74.2%
			61.8%
			63.6%
			65.4%
			59.4%West Virginia
			53.6%
			58.4%
			52.4%
			48.6%
			67.9%
			59.5%
			64.0%
			69.1%
			70.8%Wisconsin
			21.2%
			21.0%
			25.3%
			32.4%
			39.5%
			28.4%
			36.9%
			41.2%
			48.8%Wyoming
			60.9%
			54.5%
			57.3%
			65.5%
			73.1%
			50.9%
			58.3%
			68.4%
			70.8%Total
			40.4%
			51.0%
			59.3%
			62.7%
			66.1%
			54.9%
			61.5%
			69.0%
			75.5%HSIP Special Rules Obligation Rates

The HSIP includes special rules which set aside funding for High-Risk Rural Roads (HRRR) [23 U.S.C. 148(g)(1)] and Vulnerable Road User Safety (VRU) [23 U.S.C. 148(g)(3)] if a State triggers certain conditions. If either of these special rules apply, States are required to obligate special rule set-aside funds and associated obligation limitation the next fiscal year. Obligation limitation associated with the special rules are only available for that subsequent fiscal year. For more information, visit the HSIP Special Rules website.

High-Risk Rural Roads Special Rule Obligation Rates for FY 2023

HRRR special rule funds are set-aside from a State’s HSIP apportionment. If a State’s fatality rate on rural roads increased over the most recent 2-year period for which data are available, that State is required to obligate in FY 2023 for projects on high-risk rural roads an amount equal to at least 200 percent of its FY 2009 high-risk rural roads set-aside. Table 4 illustrates the ratio of HRRR set-aside obligations to the FY 2023 HRRR obligation requirements for those States that are subject to the HRRR Special Rule in FY 2023.

Table 4: FY 2023 High-Risk Rural Roads Special Rule Obligation Rates
	STATE
			HRRR FUNDS
			REQUIRED TO
			BE OBLIGATED
			 IN FY 2023
			FY 2023 HRRR
			SPECIAL RULE
			OBLIGATION
			RATEArizona
			$4,093,716
			100%California
			$17,563,128
			100%Connecticut
			$1,502,890
			100%Idaho
			$1,294,798
			100%Kansas
			$3,150,110
			100%Maine
			$900,000
			100%Michigan
			$5,852,012
			100%Mississippi
			$3,279,148
			100%New Mexico
			$1,887,424
			100%North Carolina
			$4,726,978
			100%Oregon
			$2,440,120
			100%Rhode Island
			$900,000
			100%Tennessee
			$4,236,520
			100%Vermont
			$900,000
			100%Virginia
			$4,459,774
			100%Total
			$57,186,618
			100%Vulnerable Road User Safety Special Rule Obligation Rates for FY 2023

fatalities of vulnerable road users in calendar year (CY) 2021 is greater than 15 percent of the total CY 2021 fatalities, that State is required to obligate not less than 15 percent of the FY 2023 VRU Safety set-aside for highway safety improvement projects to address the safety of vulnerable road users. Table 5 illustrates the ratio of VRU Safety set-aside obligations to the FY 2023 VRU Safety obligation requirements for those States that are subject to the VRU Safety special rule in FY 2023.

Table 5: FY 2023 Vulnerable Road User Safety Special Rule Obligation Rates
	STATE
			VRU SAFETY FUNDS REQUIRED TO BE OBLIGATED IN
			FY 2023
			FY 2023 VRU
			SAFETY SPECIAL
			RULE OBLIGATION
			RATEAlaska
			$6,108,899
			100%Arizona
			$8,523,852
			100%California
			$40,221,412
			100%Colorado
			$6,055,455
			100%Connecticut
			$5,873,781
			100%Delaware
			$1,898,849
			100%District of Columbia
			$1,789,421
			100%Florida
			$23,122,207
			100%Georgia
			$14,858,175
			100%Hawaii
			$1,913,520
			100%Illinois
			$15,636,886
			100%Louisiana
			$8,411,066
			100%Maryland
			$6,905,232
			100%Massachusetts
			$6,825,483
			100%Michigan
			$11,770,974
			100%Mississippi
			$5,665,445
			100%Nevada
			$4,197,679
			100%New Hampshire
			$1,864,186
			100%New Jersey
			$11,326,418
			100%New Mexico
			$4,421,429
			100%New York
			$18,845,018
			100%North Carolina
			$12,078,148
			100%Ohio
			$15,088,502
			100%Oklahoma
			$7,350,907
			100%Oregon
			$5,840,062
			100%Pennsylvania
			$19,299,908
			100%Puerto Rico
			$4,219,599
			100%Rhode Island
			$2,566,675
			100%South Carolina
			$7,953,170
			100%Tennessee
			$9,877,855
			100%Texas
			$46,118,374
			100%Utah
			$4,106,266
			100%Vermont
			$2,339,447
			100%Washington
			$7,822,861
			100%Total
			$350,897,161
			100% U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

**Federal Highway Administration**

1200 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, SE

WASHINGTON, DC 20590

202-366-4000Subscribe to email updates
                    About
  

        
              About FHWA
                Careers
                Org Chart
                Staff Directories
                Work with UsPrograms
  

        
              Acquisition Management
                Civil Rights
                Federal Lands Highway
                Infrastructure
                Innovative Program Delivery
                Operations
                Planning, Environment, and Realty
                Policy
                Research, Development, and Technology
                SafetyPolicies, Rights, Legal
  

        
              About DOT
                Accessibility
                Budget and Performance
                Civil Rights
                FOIA
                Information Quality
                No FEAR Act
                Office of Inspector General
                Privacy Policy
                USA.gov
                Web Policies and Notices
                Web StandardsNews & Events
  

        
              Newsroom
                Press Releases
                Speeches & Testimony
                Media Contacts
                Connect with Us