Page 1 of 54

MISSOURI

HIGHWAY SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 

2021 ANNUAL REPORT

U.S. Department ofTransportation 

Federal Highway Administration 

Photo source: Federal Highway Administration
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 54

Table of Contents

Disclaimer ............................................................................................................................................. 3

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence............................................................. 3

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 4

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 5

Program Structure................................................................................................................................. 5

Program Administration..................................................................................................................... 5

Program Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 7

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................20

Funds Programmed.........................................................................................................................20

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................22

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................34

General Highway Safety Trends......................................................................................................34

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................40

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................42

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................43

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................43

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................43

Project Effectiveness.......................................................................................................................48

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................49

Optional Attachments..........................................................................................................................53

Glossary..............................................................................................................................................54
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 54

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence

23 U.S.C. 148(h)(4) states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or 

data compiled or collected for any purpose relating to this section[HSIP], shall not be subject to discovery or 

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action 

for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, 

schedules, lists, or other data.

23 U.S.C. 148(h)(4) states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or 

data compiled or collected for any purpose relating to this section[HSIP], shall not be subject to discovery or 

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action 

for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, 

schedules, lists, or other data.23 U.S.C. 409 states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, 

surveys, schedules, lists, or data compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning 

the safety enhancement of potential accident sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway 

crossings, pursuant to sections 130, 144, and 148 of this title or for the purpose of developing any highway 

safety construction improvement project which may be implemented utilizing Federal-aid highway funds shall 

not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for 

other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in 

such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 54

Executive Summary

The Missouri Coalition for Roadway Safety and the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) are 

dedicated to improving safety of roadway users through education, engineering, enforcement and emergency 

medical services initiatives. Safety is one of MoDOT's core values: "Be Safe." This message is also reinforced 

in the Department’s Practical Design Guide that states, "Safety will not be compromised. Every project we do 

will make the facility safer after its completion." Additionally, "keeping our customers and ourselves safe" is a 

MoDOT Tangible Result and is regularly tracked and reviewed in MoDOT’s performance management system.

Missouri's Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is driven by the state's Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

(SHSP). In October 2020, Missouri introduced its fifth edition of the SHSP and established a highway safety 

goal of ZERO fatalities by 2030. Show-Me ZERO: Driving Missouri Toward Safer Roads guides the State’s 

safety initiatives and addresses safety from a comprehensive standpoint including engineering, enforcement, 

education, emergency medical services, technology and public policy solutions. The SHSP focuses on 

implementing strategies that will reduce both fatal and serious injuries on Missouri roadways.

Evidenced-based decision-making is paramount to a sound safety program. Data analysis is a critical part of 

identifying overrepresented crash types, locations, driver age, driver gender, and driver behaviors. These 

findings guide the deployment of effective and appropriate strategies to improve safety on the entire system. 

Efforts are made to analyze fatal and serious injury crashes to help discern where limited safety funding should 

be applied so that maximum safety benefits are attained.

Missouri experienced 987 fatalities in 2020, which is the highest number since 2007. This spike may have 

been influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic. Fatal crashes involving aggressive driving increased by 22 

percent. While the overall fatalities did rise, the benefits of Missouri's HSIP helped to mitigate this increase in 

severe crashes. This can be attributed to the systemic initiatives and high benefit spot treatments being 

deployed, as well as other efforts to change the safety culture of Missouri's motorists, such as the Buckle 

Up/Phone Down campaign.
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 54

Introduction 

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose of achieving 

a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 

924.15, States are required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP implementation 

and evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent with the HSIP Reporting Guidance dated 

December 29, 2016 and consists of five sections: program structure, progress in implementing highway safety 

improvement projects, progress in achieving safety outcomes and performance targets, effectiveness of the 

improvements and compliance assessment.

Program Structure

Program Administration

Describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State. 

The overall HSIP is administered by MoDOT's Highway Safety and Traffic Division. However, the division does 

not typically identify individual projects as part of this process. Instead, HSIP funds are distributed to each of 

MoDOT's seven districts based on a three-year average of the number of fatalities and serious injuries 

occurring their areas. From there, each district identifies how their share of HSIP funds will be programmed in 

accordance with Missouri's SHSP and the latest safety research and guidance. The districts carry out the 

projects to completion. Occasionally, statewide safety projects may be carried out by the Highway Safety and 

Traffic Division. While Missouri's HSIP is lead by MoDOT, each project goes through a robust planning process 

and allows input from various stakeholders. Additionally, these projects are tied to strategies identified in the 

SHSP, which involved collaboration with various partners throughout the state.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Operations

MoDOT's Highway Safety and Traffic Division leads the HSIP reporting effort. MoDOT's District Traffic Offices 

facilitate the selection of HSIP projects and implement the HSIP program.

With the goal that every MoDOT project makes the facility safer after completion, Design and Planning staff 

also consider safety in their efforts.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Formula via Districts/Regions

MoDOT's Highway Safety and Traffic Division also have some HSIP funds distributed to them. In January of 

2018, the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission approved the use of a new formula for 

distributing safety funds to MoDOT's Districts. This new formula places more focus on areas where fatalities 

and serious injuries are occurring. This new distribution took effect in state fiscal year 2021.

Describe how local and tribal roads are addressed as part of HSIP.

Crash data on local roadways are included in the Missouri Statewide Traffic Accident Records System 

(STARS) managed by the Missouri State Highway Patrol (MSHP). MoDOT uses this data to evaluate all 

roadways in the state and place emphasis on where severe crashes are occurring. This analysis is performed 
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 54

for both intersections and non-intersection locations. This analysis method places weight towards the locations 

that have experienced a higher frequency of severe crashes and are identified as a location of interest. Most 

locations are on state system roadways, but there are local roadways identified on these lists as well. While the 

majority of the severe crash problem is located on the state system, non-state system needs are also 

investigated. MoDOT also communicates the locations of interest to planning entities like our Metropolitan 

Planning Organizations and Regional Planning Commissions.

More than half of non-state system fatalities occur in seven counties (Jackson, Jefferson, Greene, Boone, St. 

Charles, St. Louis City, and St. Louis County). A few years ago, local strategic highway safety plans (SHSP) 

were developed for the top counties experiencing severe crashes. The local SHSPs identified systemic 

countermeasures and projects.

The Missouri Coalition for Roadway Safety has a subcommittee that is focused on infrastructure improvement. 

Several local agencies participate in this subcommittee where we discuss implementing key SHSP strategies, 

promote road safety assessments and local road safety plans, and share information on the latest safety 

research. Missouri now has two Vision Zero cities: Columbia and Kansas City.

Missouri's LTAP center continues to move safety forward. MoDOT has begun piloting a Safety Circuit Rider 

program through the LTAP center. This program provides a safety expert to work with local agencies that may 

not have the staff required to develop a local road safety plan or identify safety countermeasures for issues in 

there community.

Additionally, MoDOT facilitates the Transportation Engineering Assistance Program (TEAP) which allows local 

public agencies (LPAs) to receive engineering assistance for studying traffic engineering problems.

Identify which internal partners (e.g., State departments of transportation (DOTs) 

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

• Design

• Districts/Regions

• Governors Highway Safety Office

• Maintenance

• Operations

• Planning

• Traffic Engineering/Safety

There is some overlap in these selections with the way MoDOT is structured. Traffic engineering/safety could 

be included under operations, however operations is more inclusive in other traffic areas that both were 

selected.

Describe coordination with internal partners.

MoDOT has focused for some time on system-wide safety solutions. Collaboration continues to take place with 

the Design Division to update MoDOT's Engineering Policy Guide, the Maintenance Division to improve 

roadsides, and the Planning Division to better evaluate and select safety needs for improvements. Training 

opportunities are offered to the internal partners mentioned previously, in topics such as the Highway Safety 

Manual (HSM), Complete Streets, and Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian (STEP). FHWA's Resource 

Center continues to provides training support in these subjects. Additionally, we work daily with the Highway 

Safety office to evaluate and monitor the crash types. It is vital that all areas in our department work together 

and focus on safety improvements.
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 54

MoDOT has also established a process to report the safety benefits of all projects utilizing HSIP funds as part 

of an ongoing internal assessment of Missouri's HSIP program. This assessment is used as part of an 

evaluation process for safety projects planned to be incorporated into the State Transportation Improvement 

Program. 

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

• Academia/University

• FHWA

• Governors Highway Safety Office

• Law Enforcement Agency

• Local Government Agency 

• Local Technical Assistance Program

• Regional Planning Organizations (e.g. MPOs, RPOs, COGs)

• Other-National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

• Other-Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

• Other-Emergency Services, Department of Revenue, etc

Describe coordination with external partners.

Missouri's Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) is the umbrella document that identifies emphasis areas and 

prioritizes strategies for reducing fatalities and serious injuries on all Missouri roadways. The development of 

the SHSP utilized significant involvement from external stakeholders throughout the state, including 

metropolitan planning organizations and local government agencies.

MoDOT also works with Missouri's LTAP center to continue to move safety forward. MoDOT sees benefit in 

continuing the Safety Circuit Rider program through the LTAP center. The Safety Circuit Rider aims to assist 

local public agencies in the analysis of safety issues on locally owned roads and help determine possible lowcost solutions to improve safety.

Each project in Missouri has engagement with local agencies through MoDOT’s planning framework, starting 

with locals identifying and prioritizing projects through MoDOT’s regional process for programming into the 

STIP. MoDOT also collaborates with planning partners through monthly webinars, which include a safety 

update in each webinar. This is used to let partners know about safety issues, legislation, tools, challenges, 

opportunities, resources, up to date status on fatalities and trends, as well as safety target coordination.

Describe other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to 

elaborate. 

Safety impacts are assessed for any project utilizing HSIP funds. These are tracked in MoDOT's internal 

project management system. This system has been updated to incorporate data required for the annual HSIP 

report, including items such as improvement category, subcategory, and SHSP relationship. This will 

streamline the annual HSIP reporting process. Additionally, this internal project management system is being 

enhanced to collect more detailed information for any project improving safety regardless of the use of HSIP 

funds programmed on that project.

Program Methodology

Does the State have an HSIP manual or similar that clearly describes HSIP planning, 

implementation and evaluation processes?

No
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 54

MoDOT has an Engineering Policy Guide (EPG) article published online that outlines safety program 

guidelines.

http://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=907.1_Safety_Program_Guidelines

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• Bicycle Safety

• Horizontal Curve

• Intersection

• Median Barrier

• Pedestrian Safety

• Roadway Departure

• Skid Hazard

• Wrong Way Driving

• Other-Work Zone Enforcement

• Other-MASH Upgrades

• Other-Stripe Retroreflectivity

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology:10/1/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal crashes only

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Probability of specific crash types

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 54

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Systemic Evaluation

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology:2/8/2013

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Volume • Horizontal curvature

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Probability of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Systemic evaluation
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 54

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Other-Systemic safety initiative:2

Other-Severity Index:1

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology:1/21/2009

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Volume • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Systemic evaluation

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 54

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Other-Systemic safety initiative:2

Other-Severity Index:1

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology:9/27/2002

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Volume

• Median width

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Probability of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Systemic evaluation

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 54

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Other-Systemic safety initiative:1

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology:10/1/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes • Traffic

• Volume • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Probability of specific crash types

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Systemic Evaluation

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 54

Ranking based on B/C:1

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology:10/1/2004

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Volume • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Probability of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Systemic evaluation

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Other-Systemic safety initiative:2

Other-Severity Index:1
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 54

Program: Skid Hazard

Date of Program Methodology:2/8/2013

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Other-Wet pavement crashes

• Horizontal curvature

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Other-Wet/Dry Crash Ratio

• Relative severity index

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Systemic evaluation

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Other-Systemic safety initiative:0

Other-Wet/Dry Crash Ratio:1
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 54

Program: Wrong Way Driving

Date of Program Methodology:6/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Volume • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Probability of specific crash types

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Competitive application process

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Other-Systemic Safety Initiative:1

Program: Other-Work Zone Enforcement

Date of Program Methodology:10/1/2016
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 54

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only • Traffic • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Probability of specific crash types

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:1

Program: Other-MASH Upgrades

Date of Program Methodology:10/1/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 54

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Probability of specific crash types

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:1

Program: Other-Stripe Retroreflectivity

Date of Program Methodology:10/1/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Lane miles
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 54

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Probability of specific crash types

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this 

program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods 

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:1

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 48

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Cable Median Barriers

• High friction surface treatment 

• Horizontal curve signs

• Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

• Install/Improve Signing

• Pavement/Shoulder Widening

• Rumble Strips

• Upgrade Guard Rails

• Wrong way driving treatments

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

• Crash data analysis

• Data-driven safety analysis tools (HSM, CMF Clearinghouse, SafetyAnalyst, usRAP)

• Engineering Study

• Road Safety Assessment

• SHSP/Local road safety plan

• Stakeholder input

• Other-Enforcement and other stakeholders input.
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 54

• Other-Peer Exchange - lessons learned

All of the countermeasure identification processes listed here are applicable to MoDOT's countermeasure 

selection, although they vary depending on how the safety need was identified (Systemic, Spot, RSA).

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes 

Describe how the State HSIP considers connected vehicles and ITS technologies. 

Missouri's Strategic Highway Safety Plan, Show-Me ZERO: Driving Missouri Toward Safer Roads, highlights 

several strategies to reduce severe crashes. One of these strategies is to take advantage of technology 

solutions to reduce the likelihood of crashes. This includes:

• Use intelligent transportation systems to detect and warn of high-risk or adverse conditions.

• Support ongoing implementation of crash avoidance systems in vehicles by maintaining retroreflectivity 

levels for signs and markings and by sharing traveler information and traffic control data with mobile 

providers.

MoDOT is also actively pursuing the use of autonomous Truck Mounted Attenuators (TMAs) for mobile work 

zones. A pilot project is currently underway testing an autonomous TMA that follows a lead vehicle. This pilot 

testing is just bringing it's field testing stage.

Does the State use the Highway Safety Manual to support HSIP efforts?

Yes 

Please describe how the State uses the HSM to support HSIP efforts.

By MoDOT policy, any project that is funded with HSIP funds must calculate the anticipated reduction in fatal 

and serious injury crashes. This information is then used to justify and prioritize projects, to maximize the value 

of these limited safety funds. 

MoDOT is attempting to expand our use of the HSM to be performed on any project impacting safety, 

regardless of use of HSIP funds.

More recently, MoDOT developed a systemic evaluation tools for commonly used safety countermeasures. 

These tools provide information regarding the anticipated value that the systemic improvement may have, 

based on identified risk factors.

Describe other aspects of the HSIP methodology on which the State would like to 

elaborate.

MoDOT uses data driven safety analysis to identify the top crash types occurring in Missouri and developed a 

list of strategies focused on addressing these crash types. Additionally, MoDOT develops lists of various 

locations of interest that identify where there may be safety concerns based on various criteria, such as:

- High Severity Locations (Intersections/Range)

- Run Off Road Crash Locations (Curves and No Shoulders)

- Wet Crash Locations

- Crossed Centerline Crash Locations

Details regarding MoDOT's Safety Program can be found in MoDOT's Engineering Policy Guide 907.1.
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 54

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

Enter the programmed and obligated funding for each applicable funding category.

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $45,620,000 $56,391,064 123.61%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

U.S.C. 148(g)(1))

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$13,984,000 $14,779,987 105.69%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $5,069,000 $8,653,882 170.72%

Totals $64,673,000 $79,824,933 123.43%

One of the reasons for the difference between the total programmed funds and obligated funds is due to 

MoDOT's retroreflectivity striping and guardrail upgrades programs. Estimates for these programs were not 

included in the programmed numbers above. However, they are included in the obligated number above.

Another item of note are the programmed and obligated 154 penalty (open container) funds. Given the fact that 

the federal fiscal year ends in September and the state fiscal year ends in June, there are some safety projects 

programmed with open container funds that could be obligated in the following state fiscal year.

State and Local Funds were assumed to be 10 percent of the HSIP funds if other federal funds were included 

on projects for non-safety purposes.

How much funding is programmed to local (non-state owned and operated) or tribal 

safety projects?

0%

How much funding is obligated to local or tribal safety projects?

0%
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 54

How much funding is programmed to non-infrastructure safety projects?

2%

How much funding is obligated to non-infrastructure safety projects?

2%

The only non-infrastructure safety projects using HSIP funds are for work zone enforcement.

How much funding was transferred in to the HSIP from other core program areas 

during the reporting period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

0%

How much funding was transferred out of the HSIP to other core program areas during 

the reporting period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

0%

Discuss impediments to obligating HSIP funds and plans to overcome this challenge in 

the future.

MoDOT actively practices asset management to ensure the maintenance of the existing transportation 

network. Implementing new safety improvements that will add to the transportation system can be a challenge 

to fund in Districts that are unable to meet their asset management goals. It has been proposed to include 

HSIP projects into MoDOT's asset management process to ensure the safety improvements constructed will 

be able to be maintained into the future.
 

 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

General Listing of Projects 

List the projects obligated using HSIP funds for the reporting period. 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

1P3334 -

Curve safety 

improvements 

in the 

eastbound and 

westbound 

lanes 0.3 mile 

east and west 

of Helm St. 

(Business Rte. 

36) in 

Brookfield. 

Roadway Pavement 

surface – high 

friction surface 

1 Miles $116000 $116000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways 

7,705 65 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Data Driven 

Safety 

Analysis 

1P3314 - Oncall work zone 

enforcement 

at various 

locations in the 

Northwest 

District. 

Miscellaneous Work zone 

enforcement 

1 Work Zones $10000 $10000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Multiple/Varies Principal ArterialInterstate 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Work Zones 

2P3362 - Add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. 136 

west junction 

at Memphis to 

Rte. 6 north 

junction at 

Edina in Knox 

County. 

$559,000 

Open 

Container 

funds. 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

22.5 Miles $559000 $1322000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Rural Minor Arterial 521 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Impaired 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

2P3307 - Oncall work zone 

enforcement 

at various 

locations in the 

Northeast 

District. 

Miscellaneous Work zone 

enforcement 

1 Work Zones $10000 $10000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Work Zones 

4P3213 -

Adding 

shoulders and 

culvert 

extensions, 

intersection 

improvements, 

Roadway Roadway - other 8 Miles $8869000 $8869000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Principal ArterialOther 6,922 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Occupant 

Protection 

Intersections 

Page 22 of 54 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

left turn lanes 

and pavement 

resurfacing 

from Rte. DD 

to Nation Rd. 

Inclu 

4S3338 - Add 

intersection 

turn lanes and 

crosswalks at 

Gregory 

Boulevard. 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Modify traffic 

signal – add 

backplates with 

retroreflective 

borders 

12 Signal heads $409000 $409000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways 

29,122 45 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Distracted 

Driving 

Intersections 

4S3326 - Add 

turn lanes at 

Stringtown 

Road and 

155th Street 

(County Line 

Road). 

$1,175,000 

Open 

Container 

funds. 

Intersection 

geometry 

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes 

2 Approaches $1550000 $1550000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Urban Minor Arterial 12,503 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Impaired 

Driving 

Intersections 

4P3212 -

Improve sight 

distance at 

Pink Hill Road. 

$1,728,000 

Open 

Container 

funds. 

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometry - other 

4 Approaches $1761000 $1761000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Urban Major Collector 2,274 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Impaired 

Driving 

Intersections 

3S3083 - Add 

shoulders and 

pavement 

resurfacing 

from Odessa 

south city 

limits to Rte. 

50. $583,000 

Open 

Container 

funds. 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

10 Miles $4264000 $4264000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 2,231 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Distracted 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

3S3137 -

Pavement 

resurfacing, 

adding 

sections of 

two-foot 

shoulders and 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

2 Miles $648000 $2391000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 9,245 45 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Distracted 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

Page 23 of 54 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

sidewalk 

improvements 

from 

Quisenberry 

Road to Rte. 

65. 

$1,082,000 

District O 

3P3080B -

Add turn lanes 

from 0.1 mile 

east of Air 

Center Circle 

to 0.1 mile 

east of Airpark 

Road. 

$451,000 

Open 

Container 

funds. 

Intersection 

geometry 

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes 

3 Approaches $451000 $451000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Rural Principal ArterialOther 9,713 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Impaired 

Driving 

Intersections 

4P3275 - Add 

roundabout at 

intersection of 

Rte. 45 Spur. 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout 

1 Intersections $2007000 $2007000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Principal ArterialOther 11,402 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Occupant 

Protection 

Intersections 

3P3100 - Oncall work zone 

enforcement 

at various 

locations in the 

rural Kansas 

City District. 

$13,000 Open 

Container 

funds. 

Miscellaneous Work zone 

enforcement 

1 Work Zones $13000 $13000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Rural Minor Arterial 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Impaired 

Driving 

Work Zones 

4I3193 - Oncall work zone 

enforcement 

at various 

locations in the 

urban Kansas 

City District. 

$162,000 

Open 

Container 

funds. 

Miscellaneous Work zone 

enforcement 

5 Work Zones $170000 $170000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Impaired 

Driving 

Work Zones 

4I3382 - Add 

Wrong Way, 

Do Not Enter 

and One Way 

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control 

Roadway signs 

and traffic control 

- other 

500 Signs $918000 $918000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate 0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Impaired 

Driving 

Data Driven 

Safety 

Analysis 

Page 24 of 54 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

signing at 

various 

interchange 

locations in the 

urban Kansas 

City District, 

not including 

Jackson Cou 

5S3319 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. 124 

to Rte. O, Rte. 

O from Rte. J 

to the end of 

state 

maintenance 

and Rte. UU 

from Rte. 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

11.9 Miles $3221000 $4922000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 1,060 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

5P3195 - Add 

J-turns and 

intersection 

turn lanes at 

various 

locations. 

Intersection 

geometry 

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes 

4 Approaches $4089000 $4089000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways 

25,347 70 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Intersections 

5S3324 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. O to 

Rte. JJ 

includes 

pavement 

resurfacing on 

Rte. JJ from I70 to Rte. UU. 

$247,000 Ope 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

6.3 Miles $807000 $1464000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 909 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

5S3395 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. J to 

Rte. 185. 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

35 Miles $1378000 $3440000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 836 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

Page 25 of 54 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

5S3384 -

Pavement 

improvements 

and add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. 28 to 

Rte. 68. 

$1,773,000 

Open 

Container 

funds. 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

21 Miles $1773000 $4138000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Rural Major Collector 519 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Impaired 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

5P3222 - Add 

J-turns and 

add 

intersection 

turn lanes at 

various 

locations in 

Miller County. 

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometry - other 

18.5 Approaches $3509000 $3509000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways 

14,709 70 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Intersections 

5P3222B -

Add J-turns 

and add 

intersection 

turn lanes at 

various 

locations in 

Miller County. 

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometry - other 

18.5 Approaches $2412000 $2412000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways 

14,709 70 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Intersections 

5P3199 - Add 

intersection 

turn lanes at 

Rte. 5 west of 

Tipton. 

Intersection 

geometry 

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes 

0.7 Approaches $1471000 $1471000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Principal ArterialOther 6,229 60 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Intersections 

5S3380 -

Pavement 

improvements 

and add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. 50 to 

the end of 

state 

maintenance. 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

4.3 Miles $501000 $789000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Minor Collector 1,985 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

5P3236 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. 8 to 

Rte. 19 near 

Salem and 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

25.1 Miles $2760000 $4548000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 1,146 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Distracted 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

Page 26 of 54 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

Rte. HH from 

Rte. 32 to the 

end of state 

maintenance. 

5I3408 - High 

friction surface 

treatment at 

various 

locations in 

Central 

District. 

Roadway Pavement 

surface – high 

friction surface 

3 Miles $1102000 $1102000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Data Driven 

Safety 

Analysis 

5P3406 - Oncall work zone 

enforcement 

at various 

locations in the 

Central 

District. 

Miscellaneous Work zone 

enforcement 

1 Work Zones $63000 $63000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Work Zones 

5S3290 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. 8 to 

Rte. CC and 

on Rte. H from 

Rte. 47 to Rte. 

WW. 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

15.4 Miles $1695000 $2877000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 2,035 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

5S3385 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. 8 to 

Rte. M. 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

9.8 Miles $1090000 $2036000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 1,038 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

6S3292 -

Pavement 

resurfacing, 

guardrail 

upgrades and 

turn lane 

additions from 

Old Highway 

21 to east of 

Collins Road. 

Add turn lanes 

at Harrison 

Lake 

Intersection 

geometry 

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes 

1 Approaches $759000 $6493000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Minor Arterial 10,686 60 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Distracted 

Driving 

Intersections 

Page 27 of 54 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

6S3517 -

Pavement 

resurfacing, 

guardrail 

upgrades and 

add shoulders 

from 

Washington 

County line to 

Rte. 21. 

$802,000 

Open 

Container 

funds. 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

10.3 Miles $802000 $4100000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Urban Major Collector 3,108 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Impaired 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

6I3498 -

Upgrade 

signing for 

wrong way 

countermeasures at 

various ramp 

locations in St. 

Charles, St. 

Louis and 

Jefferson 

Counties and 

St. Louis City. 

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control 

Roadway signs 

and traffic control 

- other 

39.2 Signs $750000 $750000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate 77,445 60 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Impaired 

Driving 

Data Driven 

Safety 

Analysis 

6P3482 -

Median barrier 

repair and 

upgrades over 

I-64 between 

on and off 

ramps. Project 

involves 

bridge A6120. 

$200,000 

Open 

Container 

funds. 

Roadside Barrier – 

concrete 

0.5 Miles $200000 $200000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways 

30,478 45 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Impaired 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

6P3372 - Add 

J-turns at 

Riverlands 

Way and raise 

southbound 

lanes from the 

Mississippi 

River to north 

of Machens 

Club Drive. 

$800,000 

Access 

management 

Median 

crossover -

directional 

crossover 

2 Crossovers $1683000 $6384000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways 

21,645 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Impaired 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

Page 28 of 54 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

Open 

Container, 

6P3464 - Oncall work zone 

enforcement 

at various 

locations in the 

St. Louis 

District. 

Miscellaneous Work zone 

enforcement 

5 Work Zones $650000 $750000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Principal ArterialOther 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Work Zones 

6P3477 - High 

friction surface 

treatment on 

curves at 

various 

locations 

around the St. 

Louis District. 

Roadway Pavement 

surface – high 

friction surface 

1.5 Miles $692000 $692000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Principal ArterialOther 77,445 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Distracted 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

8P0588H -

Add lanes, 

turn lanes, 

drainage from 

Fort St to 0.2 

mile E/O 

Tiffany Blvd; 

add fiber optic 

connection 

from Rte 160 

to Ridgecrest 

St; add sid 

Intersection 

geometry 

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes 

3 Approaches $527000 $8009000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Urban Principal ArterialOther 13,390 30 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Impaired 

Driving 

Intersections 

8S3188 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

shoulders from 

Rte. AB to I-44 

in Springfield. 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

2.7 Miles $72000 $798000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 9,033 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Distracted 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

8S3092 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

from Rte. WW 

to north of 

Stoneridge 

Street. 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

center 

8.8 Miles $4000 $587000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Major Collector 8,609 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Distracted 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

8S3187 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

shoulders from 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

1.2 Miles $117000 $585000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Minor Arterial 4,865 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

Page 29 of 54 
 

 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

0.1 mile south 

of I-44 to north 

of Rte. 60 in 

Greene 

County. 

8S3193 - High 

friction surface 

treatment at 

various 

locations in the 

urban 

Southwest 

District. 

Roadway Pavement 

surface – high 

friction surface 

1.2 Miles $432000 $432000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Minor Arterial 9,580 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

8S3123 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

from Jackson 

Street in 

Willard to Rte. 

13. 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

4.06 Miles $63000 $592000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 1,760 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Distracted 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

8P3032B -

Add lanes on 

James River 

Freeway, 

improve ramps 

from National 

Avenue to Rte. 

65, and 

reconfigure 

interchange at 

Bus. 65 

(Glenstone 

Avenue) i 

Interchange 

design 

Interchange 

improvements 

1 Interchanges $1229000 $20358000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways 

80,000 60 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Impaired 

Driving 

Intersections 

7P3262 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

from the 

Kansas State 

line to west of 

Fir Road in 

Carl Junction; 

add 

roundabout at 

Rte. 96 and 

Rte. YY; and 

add turn lan 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout 

1 Intersections $819000 $4567000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Principal ArterialOther 7,900 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Intersections 

7S3189J -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

2.7 Miles $73000 $435000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Rural Major Collector 1,372 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Impaired 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

Page 30 of 54 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

and add 

shoulders at 

various 

locations from 

Rte. D in Alba 

to Rte. 96. 

$73,000 Open 

Container 

funds. 

7S3292 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

shoulders and 

rumblestripes 

at various 

locations from 

Rte. 43 in 

Southwest 

City to Rte. 37 

near 

Washburn. 

$551,0 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

12.3 Miles $551000 $4651000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Rural Major Collector 1,582 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Impaired 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

7P3424 - High 

friction surface 

treatment at 

various 

locations in 

Newton, Polk, 

Stone, Taney 

and Webster 

Counties. 

$1,129,000 

Open 

Container 

funds. 

Roadway Pavement 

surface – high 

friction surface 

5.2 Curves $1868000 $1868000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate 16,749 70 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Impaired 

Driving 

Intersections 

7S3181 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

centerline 

rumblestripe 

from Rte. 32 to 

Rte. WW. 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

center 

40.4 Miles $16000 $2064000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 2,196 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Distracted 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

7P3373 - Oncall work zone 

enforcement 

at various 

locations in the 

rural 

Miscellaneous Work zone 

enforcement 

1 Work Zones $71000 $71000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Principal ArterialOther 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Work Zones 

Page 31 of 54 
 

 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

Southwest 

District. 

8P3154 - Oncall work zone 

enforcement 

at various 

locations in the 

urban 

Southwest 

District. 

Miscellaneous Work zone 

enforcement 

1 Work Zones $201000 $201000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Urban Principal ArterialOther 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Work Zones 

9S3556 - Add 

rumblestripes 

from County 

Road 462 to 

County Road 

441. 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Pave existing 

shoulders 

7.7 Miles $840000 $840000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Minor Collector 1,924 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Distracted 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

9S3732 - High 

friction surface 

treatment on 

various curves 

from Rte. EE 

near 

Charleston to 

end of state 

maintenance. 

Roadway Pavement 

surface – high 

friction surface 

1.4 Miles $441000 $441000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Major Collector 1,957 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

9P3169 -

Installation, 

widening and 

realignment of 

guardrail from 

0.9 mile east 

of County 

Road 530 to 

0.3 mile west 

of North Fork 

River. 

Roadway Roadway 

widening - curve 

1.1 Miles $232000 $2732000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Minor Arterial 817 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

9P3458 -

Pavement 

resurfacing 

and add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. 5 to 

Rte. 101. 

$1,727,000 

Open 

Container 

funds and 

$2,592,000 

District 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Pave existing 

shoulders 

22.5 Miles $3356000 $5948000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154) 

Rural Minor Arterial 1,156 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Impaired 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

Page 32 of 54 
 

 

 

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

Operation 

funds. 

9P3558 - Add 

rumblestripes 

from Rte. 106 

to Rte. 60. 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Pave existing 

shoulders 

13 Miles $559000 $859000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Minor Arterial 1,903 55 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Distracted 

Driving 

Lane 

Departures 

9P3574 - Oncall work zone 

enforcement 

at various 

locations in the 

Southeast 

District. 

Miscellaneous Work zone 

enforcement 

1 Work Zones $40000 $40000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Speed and 

Aggressive 

Driving 

Work Zones 

HSIP Project Costs include Open Container plus HSIP federal funds and state matching funds. Some projects included both Open Container and HISP funds. In those cases, whichever was the greater source of funding was selected as 

the Funding Category. 

AADT and Speed for projects improving multiple locations varied between each individual site. In these instances, the value for these fields were identified as 1 due to the variation between locations. 

Page 33 of 54 
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 54

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

Present data showing the general highway safety trends in the State for the past five 

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 826 757 766 870 947 932 921 881 987

Serious Injuries 5,506 4,938 4,657 4,573 4,743 4,887 4,708 4,489 4,786

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.208 1.092 1.080 1.210 1.271 1.228 1.211 1.119 1.369

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

8.049 7.123 6.565 6.360 6.365 6.438 6.190 5.700 6.640

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

94 81 76 117 113 113 105 127 141

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

329 367 332 319 356 358 343 392 400
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 54

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Annual Fatalities

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Annual Serious Injuries
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 54

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 54

In previous reports, low power electric bicycles were not included in the non-motorized fatalities and serious 

injuries. These motorized bikes that do not meet motorcycle status (such as mopeds) are now included in the 

non-motorized totals starting in the 2016 data. Data for this report was compiled in August 2021.

Describe fatality data source.

State Motor Vehicle Crash Database

The fatality information for 2020 was not published in FARS at the time of this report.

To the maximum extent possible, present this data by functional classification and 

ownership.

Year 2020

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

43.6 157.8 0.63 2.28

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

52 196.2 1.06 4

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

65.4 227.8 1.98 6.94

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 54

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Minor Arterial 92 357.8 2.56 9.96

Rural Minor Collector 21.4 87.4 3.15 12.79

Rural Major Collector 145.8 586.2 2.92 11.75

Rural Local Road or 

Street

75 385.6 0.88 4.52

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

95 421 0.68 3.03

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

51.8 240.8 0.96 4.46

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

102 655.4 1.84 11.75

Urban Minor Arterial 103 707.2 1.63 11.16

Urban Minor Collector 3.2 26.6 3.59 25.66

Urban Major Collector 36 276.6 1.22 9.38

Urban Local Road or 

Street

47.4 395.6 0.6 5
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 54

Year 2020

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway 

Agency

County Highway 

Agency

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

Indian Tribe Nation

State System 672 2,992.2 1.33 5.93

City & County 261.6 1,732 1.05 6.97

Sample size may be an issue with some of the rates due to low VMT for the functional classification.

Data for this report was compiled in August 2021.

Note: Due to 2020 data being preliminary, 7 serious injuries did not contain data for rural/urban attributes.
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 54

MO Crash data does not indicated these levels of detail in ownership of roadways at crash locations. MoDOT 

can only identify State or Other ownership.

Provide additional discussion related to general highway safety trends.

While Missouri had been making progress in reducing the number of fatalities and serious injuries over the last 

few years, last year (2020) saw a significant spike in severe crashes. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic 

likely had an influence on this increase, particularly as is relates to speeding and aggressive driving. 

There have been over 100 non-motorized fatalities over the last 6 years and spiked last year to 141 fatalities. 

MoDOT has partnered with FHWA to organize Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian (STEP) workshops to 

promote pedestrian safety initiatives.

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2022 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:920.6

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals.

Targets are based on an annual reduction needed to reach Zero fatalities by 2030. This reduction assumes 

larger decreases in future years as new safety technologies are implemented, such as autonomous vehicles. 

This target is in line with the SHSP to reduce the number of fatalities on Missouri's roadways.

Number of Serious Injuries:4564.1

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals.

Targets are based on an annual reduction needed to reach Zero serious injuries by 2040. This target is in line 

with the SHSP to reduce the number of serious injuries on Missouri's roadways.

Fatality Rate:1.205

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals.

The fatality rate was calculated by taking a 5-year rolling average of historical and forecasted annual fatality 

rates. Historical fatality rates were derived from observed fatality totals and estimated Annual Vehicle Miles 

Traveled (VMT). Forecasted rates were determined by using the number of fatalities performance target and 

dividing by the estimated Annual VMT. The VMT dropped significantly in 2020, by nearly 10%. It is anticipated 

at 2021 volumes will rebound by 7% followed by an annual growth rate of 1% per year. This target is in line 

with the SHSP to reduce the number of fatalities on Missouri's roadways.

Serious Injury Rate:5.972

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals.

The serious injury rate was calculated by taking a 5-year rolling average of historical and forecasted annual 

serious injury rates. Historical serious injury rates were derived from observed serious injury totals and 

estimated Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Forecasted rates were determined by using the number of 

serious injuries performance target and dividing by the estimated Annual VMT. The VMT dropped significantly 

in 2020, by nearly 10%. It is anticipated at 2021 volumes will rebound by 7% followed by an annual growth rate 
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 54

of 1% per year. This target is in line with the SHSP to reduce the number of serious injuries on Missouri's 

roadways.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:484.0

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals.

The non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries performance target was based on the performance targets for 

number of fatalities (Zero by 2030) and number of serious injuries (Zero by 2040). An exception is made for 

instances where the baseline 5-year rolling average (2015-2019) is less than the calculated target. In this 

instance, the baseline is less than the calculated performance target, and so the baseline was used as the 

target. This target is in line with the SHSP to reduce the number of fatalities and serious injuries on Missouri's 

roadways.

Performance Measures for Fatalities, Fatality Rate, and Serious Injuries were set based on what was reported 

in the Highway Safety Plan.

Performance Measures for Serious Injury Rate and Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries were set 

based on crash data available in August 2021 for use in the Highway Safety Improvement Program Annual 

Report.

Describe efforts to coordinate with other stakeholders (e.g. MPOs, SHSO) to establish 

safety performance targets. 

Missouri's Highway Safety Office is located within MoDOT which promotes a collaborative environment 

between engineering and safety staff. MoDOT updated its Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) using a 

collaborative, team approach. The team included external partners from emergency management, FHWA, 

FMCSA, hospitals, law enforcement, Missouri Department of Revenue, MPOs, NHTSA, Regional Planning 

Commissions (RPCs), and universities. Revisions to the SHSP were shared periodically with the MPOs and 

RPCs.

Extensive coordination occurred between FHWA, MoDOT, MPO, and NHTSA staff when setting the Safety 

Targets. Missouri safety data was reviewed for trends, along with assumptions and challenges. MoDOT 

conducts monthly calls with planning stakeholders. In 2016, a target coordinating process was presented with 

feedback and consensus from the MPOs. In March, MoDOT calculated statewide and MPO data trends for 

each safety performance measure. This information was shared and discussed with MoDOT's Executive 

Team, MPOs FHWA, and NHTSA. After review of feedback from partner groups, the methods and 

assumptions used to develop the performance targets were finalized in April. MoDOT then applied the agreed 

upon methodology to develop the safety performance targets and communicated them with the partners.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2020 Safety Performance Targets (based 

on data available at the time of reporting). For each target, include a discussion of any 

reasons for differences in the actual outcomes and targets. 

PERFORMANCE MEASURES TARGETS ACTUALS

Number of Fatalities 859.3 933.6

Number of Serious Injuries 4505.4 4722.6
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 54

Fatality Rate 1.130 1.240

Serious Injury Rate 5.953 6.267

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

437.4 489.6

Based on the data available at the time of reporting, the actual 2020 performance was worse than the 2020 

targets, for each of the safety performance targets. This is primarily due to an increase in fatalities and serious 

injuries which occurred within the 5 year average reporting period. This is consistent with what was 

experienced nationally during this timeframe, meaning there were external factors, beyond the HSIP program, 

that were influencing the increase in fatalities. One of the major external factors is that of the COVID-19 

pandemic.

Unfortunately, last years (2020) increase in fatalities and serious injures may be more than an outlier, as 

Missouri is currently experiencing a comparable number of severe crashes this year (2021). The largest 

increases have been involved speeding and aggressive driving as well as in the more rural areas. Additionally, 

Missouri's state legislature recently repealed a helmet law for motorcyclists, which can be correlated to an 

increase in motorcycle fatalities.

MoDOT will continue to work with the Missouri Coalition for Roadway Safety to attempting to change the safety 

culture of Missouri's motorists, specifically as it relates to the 4 emphasis areas identified in Missouri's SHSP: 

Occupant Protection, Distracted Driving, Speed and Aggressive Driving, and Impaired Driving.

Applicability of Special Rules

Does the HRRR special rule apply to the State for this reporting period? 

No

Provide the number of older driver and pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries 65 

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

120 137 154 135 143 121 148

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

355 361 367 369 426 378 368

Data for this report was complied in August 2021.
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 54

Evaluation 

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

• Benefit/Cost Ratio

• Change in fatalities and serious injuries

• Lives saved

• Other-Evaluation of individual HSIP projects and programs

MoDOT reports on the safety benefits, such as benefit/cost ratio and lives saved, of all projects utilizing HSIP 

funds as part of an internal assessment of their HSIP program. This assessment is used as part of a vetting 

process for safety projects planned to be incorporated into the State Transportation Improvement Program.

Based on the measures of effectiveness selected previously, describe the results of 

the State's program level evaluations.

MoDOT will evaluate specific HSIP projects to assess their effectiveness at reducing fatal and serious injury 

crashes. This information is then used to promote or discourage the use of a particular safety countermeasure. 

For systemic improvements, MoDOT tracks the change in the number of fatalities as the amount of a safety 

improvement is further deployed. This allows MoDOT to monitor the safety benefits returned on its continued 

investment of a systemic strategy. One systemic strategy evaluated was the implementation of chevrons on 

curves where advisory speeds are at least 15 mph less than posted speeds. Between 2014 and 2019, 

horizontal curve fatalities and serious injuries on minor roads decreased from 622 to 474.

What other indicators of success does the State use to demonstrate effectiveness and 

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program?

• HSIP Obligations

MoDOT's planning office tracks the programming of safety funds to ensure they do not lapse on HSIP funds. 

There are other success indicators that MoDOT has seen some improvement but they are not currently being 

reported on. These indicators include:

· Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

· Increased focus on local road safety

· More systemic programs

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2020
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 54

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury 

Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Occupant Protection -

Unbelted Vehicle 

Occupants

394 1,192.6 0.52 1.58

Substance-Impaired 

Driving

205 623.8 0.27 0.83

Speeding Driver* 344.6 1,336.6 0.46 1.77

Aggressive Driving** 493.8 2,079.6 0.66 2.76

Distracted Driving 81.6 557.6 0.11 0.74
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 54

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Fatalities

2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Serious Injuries

2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 54

*Speeding driving includes the contributing circumstances: speed exceeded limit and too fast for conditions.

**Aggressive driving includes the following contributing circumstances: speed exceeded limit, too fast for 

conditions, improper passing, following too close, and improper lane usage/change.

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Fatality Rate

2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Serious Injury Rate

2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 54

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the 

reporting period?

Yes

Please provide the following summary information for each countermeasure 

effectiveness evaluation. 

CounterMeasures: RCUT 

Description: Simple before-after evaluation of RCUT 

performance in Missouri. 

Target Crash Type: Angle 

Number of Installations: 15 

Number of Installations: 15 

Miles Treated: 

Years Before: 3 

Years After: 3 

Methodology: Simple before/after 

Results: 

93 percent reduction in fatal crashes 76 

percent reduction in serious injury crashes 

92 percent reduction in right angle 

crashes. 

File Name: y20v2AnalysisOfJTurns.docx
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 54

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 54

Compliance Assessment

What date was the State’s current SHSP approved by the Governor or designated State representative?

 09/29/2020

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2021 To: 2025

When does the State anticipate completing it’s next SHSP update?

 2025

Missouri's Strategic Highway Safety Plan, Show-Me ZERO, can be found on the Missouri Coalition for Roadway Safety's website. https://www.savemolives.com/mcrs/show-me-zero 

Provide the current status (percent complete) of MIRE fundamental data elements collection efforts using the table below. 

*Based on Functional Classification (MIRE 1.0 Element Number) [MIRE 2.0 Element Number]

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12) [12]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 

[8]

100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9) [9]

100 100

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21) [21]

100 100

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20) [20]

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100 90 100 40

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100 100 100
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 54

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Median Type (54) 

[55]

30 30

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 50

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 80

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 90 100 40

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 100 20

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

100 80

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

100 80

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 80

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

100 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

100 100
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 51 of 54

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201) [191]

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

100 100

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

100 100

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

100 100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 96.11 91.11 100.00 92.50 100.00 100.00 100.00 77.78 100.00 100.00

*Based on Functional Classification (MIRE 1.0 Element Number) [MIRE 2.0 Element Number]

Describe actions the State will take moving forward to meet the requirement to have complete access to the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads by September 30, 2026.

MoDOT will use multiple methods over the next several years to meet the requirements for the collection of FDE’s on all public roads. MoDOT will prioritize these needs by addressing the Non-Local Paved roads data gaps first.

Surface Type/Number of Lanes/one-two way operations/access control/Median Type – These data items will be addressed through the cooperative program we have with our local authorities that ensures we have complete and correct 

geospatial network. As we continue these reviews in the future, we will ask them to provide these additional four items. Also, much of this data can be collected through other sources such as aerial photography and video logging. The 

targeted completion data for the collection and storage of this data is December 31, 2023.

The second priority will be the Local Paved Roads.

Surface Type/Number of through lanes – These items will be collected at the same time they are collected on Non-Local Paved roads. Since geospatial reviews include all public roads, this data will have already been collected.
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 52 of 54

AADT – It is estimated that an additional 80,000 traffic count locations will be needed to fulfill this requirement. MoDOT has attempted to work with several local agencies to share traffic data, but there has been little success. Few 

agencies collect traffic data in a manner that allows the calculation of AADT. Local governments collect traffic data, often one time only, for specific purposes like signal timing. Local agencies do not have permanent sites or a history of 

short term counts available to create AADT data.
Page 53 of 54

2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Optional Attachments 

Program Structure:

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

y20v2AnalysisOfJTurns.docx

Compliance Assessment:
2021 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 54 of 54

Glossary

5 year rolling average: means the average of five individuals, consecutive annual points of data 

(e.g. annual fatality rate).

Emphasis area: means a highway safety priority in a State’s SHSP, identified through a data-driven, 

collaborative process.

Highway safety improvement project: means strategies, activities and projects on a public road 

that are consistent with a State strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous 

road location or feature or addresses a highway safety problem.

HMVMT: means hundred million vehicle miles traveled.

Non-infrastructure projects: are projects that do not result in construction. Examples of noninfrastructure projects include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities, 

improvements in the collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement 

activities.

Older driver special rule: applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and 

pedestrians over the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2-year period for which 

data are available, as defined in the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Interim Guidance 

dated February 13, 2013.

Performance measure: means indicators that enable decision-makers and other stakeholders to 

monitor changes in system condition and performance against established visions, goals, and 

objectives.

Programmed funds: mean those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP) to be expended on highway safety improvement projects.

Roadway Functional Classification: means the process by which streets and highways are 

grouped into classes, or systems, according to the character of service they are intended to provide.

Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP): means a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary plan, based on 

safety data developed by a State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148.

Systematic: refers to an approach where an agency deploys countermeasures at all locations across 

a system.

Systemic safety improvement: means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high 

risk roadway features that are correlated with specific severe crash types.

Transfer: means, in accordance with provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, a State may transfer from an 

apportionment under section 104(b) not to exceed 50 percent of the amount apportioned for the fiscal 

year to any other apportionment of the State under that section.