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
                        Federal and Tribal Lands Road Safety Audits: Case Studies


            
            In This Section
        Safety Data Analysis & Tools
                Crash Modification Factor Clearinghouse
                Roadway Safety Data Program (RSDP)
                                Overview
                Data Driven Safety Analysis
                Data Management
                Safety Data Analysis Tools
                Local Data Integration
                Technical Assistance
                Case Studies
                Training
                Resources
                Highway Safety Manual (HSM)
                Model Inventory of Roadway Elements (MIRE) and FDEs
                Systemic
                                Overview
                Why Systemic
                Training
                Resources
                Road Safety Audits
                                Overview
                Benefits
                Legal Issues
                Steps of Conduct
                Training
                Resources
                
                THE RSA PROCESS
Eight Steps of an RSA

The eight steps of an RSA are shown in Figure 1, and are discussed below with some reference to the case studies.

Figure 1 RSA Process

**RSA projects** and the **RSA Team** (Steps 1 and 2) were pre-selected in this FHWA case studies project. RSA teams were interdisciplinary, typically including engineering and enforcement staff. Some RSA teams included non-traditional disciplines that were beneficial to the team, such as the public health specialist from Indian Health Services (IHS) who played a critical role in the Red Mesa RSA for the Navajo Nation.

All meetings and site visits for the RSAs in the case studies project were conducted over two or three day periods. The RSAs typically began with a **start-up meeting** (Step 3) attended by the Project Owner and/or Design Team (hereafter referred to as the Owner), and the RSA team:

The Owner described concerns regarding the roads and intersections to be assessed, why the sites had been chosen for an RSA, and any constraints or limitations. Typically, the reasons for the RSA site selection centered on high-profile crashes or public safety concerns.
	The multidisciplinary RSA Team then described the RSA process. This included an overview of the RSA process with examples of safety issues that are typically encountered and mitigation measures to address them.
	Additional issues can be discussed during this step. For example, at the Red Cliff RSA, which included a review of planned improvements, the Design Team representative described the proposed future road design, including its constraints and challenges.Fiure 2 Start-Up Meeting
			Figure 3 Field ReviewFollowing the start-up meeting and a preliminary review of the design or site documentation, the RSA Team conducted a **field review**(Step 4). The purpose of the field review was to observe the ambient conditions in which the proposed design would operate (for the planning-stage RSA), or to observe geometric and operating conditions (for the RSAs of existing roads). The RSA Team observed site characteristics (such as road geometry, sight distances, clear zones, drainage, signing, lighting, and barriers), traffic characteristics (such as typical speeds and traffic mix), surrounding land uses (including traffic and pedestrian generators), and link points to the adjacent transportation network. Human factors issues were also considered by the RSA team, including road and intersection “readability,” sign location and sequencing, and older-driver limitations. Field reviews were conducted by the RSA Team under a variety of environmental conditions (such as daytime and night-time) and operational conditions (such as peak and off-peak times).

The team conducted the **RSA analysis**(Step 5) in a setting in which all team members reviewed available background information (such as traffic volumes and collision data) in light of the observations made in the field. On the basis of this review, the RSA Team identified and prioritized safety issues, including features that could contribute to a higher frequency and/or severity of crashes. For each safety issue, the RSA Team generated a list of possible measures to mitigate the crash potential and/or severity of a potential crash.

At the end of the analysis session, the Owner and RSA Team reconvened for a **preliminary findings meeting**(Step 6). Presenting the preliminary findings verbally in a meeting gave the Owner the opportunity to ask questions and seek clarification on the RSA findings, and also provided a useful forum for the Owner to suggest additional or alternative mitigation measures in conjunction with the RSA team. The discussion provided practical information that was subsequently used to write the RSA report.

Fiure 4 RSA Analysis Session
			Figure 5 Preliminary Findings MeetingIn the weeks following the on-site portion of the RSA, the RSA Team wrote and issued the **RSA report**(also part of Step 6) to the Owner documenting the results of the RSA. The main content of the RSA report was a prioritized listing and description of the safety issues identified (illustrated using photographs taken during the site visit), with suggestions for improvements.

The Owner was encouraged to write a brief **response letter**(Step 7) containing a point-by-point response to each of the safety issues identified in the RSA report. The response letter identifies the action(s) to be taken, or explains why no action would be taken. The formal response letter is an important “closure” document for the RSA. As a final step, the Owner was encouraged to use the RSA findings to identify and implement safety improvements when policy, manpower, and funding permit (Step 8).



Prioritization of Issues

For many of the RSAs conducted on FLMAs and tribal lands, reliable crash data were not available. Anecdotal information on run off the road crashes and evidence of fence strikes along the roadway helped create a more complete picture of the potential hazards, but could not be quantified with any certainty. Therefore a prioritization framework was applied in both the RSA analysis and presentation of findings. The likely *frequency*and *severity*of crashes associated with each safety issue were qualitatively estimated, based on team members’ experience and expectations. Expected crash *frequency*was qualitatively estimated on the basis of expected crashes, exposure (how many road users would likely be exposed to the identified safety issue?) and probability (how likely was it that a collision would result from the identified issue?). Expected crash *severity*was qualitatively estimated on the basis of factors such as anticipated speeds, expected collision types, and the likelihood that vulnerable road users would be exposed. These two risk elements (frequency and severity) were considered during the qualitative risk assessment of each safety issue on the basis of the matrix shown in Table 2.

Consequently, the RSA Team prioritized each safety issue. It should be stressed that this prioritization method was qualitative, based on the expectations and judgment of the RSA Team members, and was employed to help the Owner prioritize the multiple issues identified in the RSA. For each safety issue identified, possible mitigation measures were suggested for short-term, intermediate, and long-term implementation timeframes. The suggestions focused on short-term and intermediate measures that could be cost-effectively implemented within likely budget constraints. Ultimately, implementation of the measures suggested in the RSA is dependent on project costs and financial constraints of the Owner.



TABLE 2 CRASH RISK ASSESSMENT
	FREQUENCY RATING
			SEVERITY RATING*Minor*
			*Moderate*
			*Serious*
			*Fatal**Frequent*
			Moderate-High
			High
			Highest
			Highest*Occasional*
			Moderate
			Moderate-High
			High
			Highest*Infrequent*
			Low
			Moderate
			Moderate-High
			High*Rare*
			Lowest
			Low
			Moderate
			Moderate-High
      
  Book traversal links for THE RSA PROCESS
      ‹ INTRODUCTION
                    Up
                    RSAs: COSTS AND BENEFITS ›
                
                Book:Federal and Tribal Lands Road Safety Audits: Case Studies
              INTRODUCTION
                THE RSA PROCESS
                RSAs: COSTS AND BENEFITS
                CONCLUSION
                APPENDIX A CASE STUDY RSAs 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