Page 1 of 54

KANSAS

2018 ANNUAL REPORT
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 54

Table of Contents

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................... 2

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

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

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

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

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

Program Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 8

Project Implementation ......................................................................................................................................... 19

Funds Programmed ........................................................................................................................................... 19

General Listing of Projects ............................................................................................................................... 21

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................................... 26

General Highway Safety Trends ....................................................................................................................... 26

Safety Performance Targets .............................................................................................................................. 39

Applicability of Special Rules .......................................................................................................................... 41

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

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

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

Year 2017 .............................................................................................................................................................. 43

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

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 49
2018 Kansas 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. 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.” 
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 54

Executive Summary 

In Kansas we continue to spend our HSIP dollars in a variety of independently managed sub-programs, 

including intersections, signing, pavement markings, lighting, rail, HRRR, and general safety improvements. 

The rail program is reported with the RHGCP report. This is the sixth year HRRR is reported with the HSIP 

report. We are working with our sub-program managers to develop program manuals specific to each subprogram in a manner consistent with the requirements of this report and related strategies in our Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan. Collectively, these programs cover all 140,000 centerline miles of public roads in Kansas 

while applying a multitude of proven countermeasures designed to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes 

statewide.
2018 Kansas 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. 

Our HSIP is managed via seven independent sub-programs, including intersections, signing, pavement 

markings, lighting, rail, HRRR, and general safety improvements. Each of these programs, with the exception 

of rail, is described in detail within this report.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-Planning and Design 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Intersections, signing, pavement markings, lighting, and general safety improvements are managed in the 

Bureau of Transportation Safety and Technology within the Division of Planning and Development. HRRR is 

managed by the Bureau of Local Projects and rail by the Bureau of Road Design, both within the Division of 

Engineering and Design.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

Other-Headquarters

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

A committee made up of the HSIP Program Manager, FHWA Division Safety Engineer, sub-program 

managers, and management meet twice a year to measure program progress based on planned obligations 

and to estimate and distribute allocations for future years.
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 54

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

Our HSIP program is made up of seven sub-programs: lighting, pavement marking, signing, rail, intersections, 

HRRR, and general safety improvements. Lighting, pavement marking, signing, and general safety 

improvement projects are exclusive to the State Highway System, although projects may impact intersecting 

non-state roads. Intersections and rail projects may include local roads, that is, public roads not a part of the 

State Highway System. HRRR is exclusive to local roads. The rail program is addressed in the Rail-Highway 

Grade Crossing Program report.

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

are involved with HSIP planning.

Traffic Engineering/Safety

Design

Planning 

Maintenance

Operations 

Districts/Regions

Local Aid Programs Office/Division

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe coordination with internal partners.

Lighting sub-program: Projects are selected with input from the structural engineer in our State Bridge Office 

responsible for foundations for lighting, as well as field information from our Area Offices, and road safety 

audits performed by our Traffic Engineering Section.

Signing sub-program: This blanket replacement program was programmed to cover the entire state highway 

system in ten years. Our Area Offices complete a sign inventory for each project. Projects that are primarily on 

conventional roads the Area Offices typically install the new signs and posts. Projects that are on urban 

expressways and freeways are typically contractor let. Area Offices then administer the construction 

engineering duties.

Pavement Marking sub-program: Our pavement marking technician works closely with our district maintenance 

engineers to identify recommended routes. Works also with Traffic Engineering Section to identify locations in 

need of improved markings for safety.

Intersections sub-program: Projects are identified through solicitation to cities and their recommendations. 

Additionally, projects may be identified through studies such as Traffic Engineering Assistance Program 

reports (TEAP) and traffic studies. When the intersection is located on the State Highway System, our District 

and Area Offices are made part of the discussion as well. Once locations are identified a competitive process 

for funding begins using Part B of the Highway Safety Manual and engineering judgment.

HRRR sub-program: District Offices provide construction oversight. The Bureau of Local Projects manages the 

program. 
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 54

General Safety Improvements sub-program: Projects are selected and scoped in partnership with District and 

Area Offices.

All sub-programs: The Traffic Safety Section in our Bureau of Transportation Safety & Technology manage and 

report on crash data as needed.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

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

Local Government Agency 

FHWA

Other-Kansas Association of Counties 

Other-Local Roads Emphasis Area Team (SHSP)

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe coordination with external partners.

Intersections sub-program: Projects are identified through solicitation to cities and their recommendations. 

Additionally, projects may be identified through studies such as Traffic Engineering Assistance Program 

reports (TEAP) and KDOT traffic studies.

HRRR sub-program: Projects are identified through solicitation to counties and their recommendations. 

Additionally, projects may be identified through studies such as Traffic Engineering Assistance Program 

reports (TEAP), road safety audits, and Local Road Safety Plans.

Have any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

No

Are there any other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

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

A total of $25,145,671 in safety funds (HSIP and Rail) was apportioned for FFY 2018, distributed to each subprogram as follows:

Lighting: $1,000,000 HSIP

Pavement Marking: $4,000,000 HSIP
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 54

Signing: $6,000,000 HSIP

Highway-Railway Grade Crossing and Rail: $7,317,831 ($6,317,831 Rail & $1,000,000 HSIP)

Intersection Safety: $3,000,000 HSIP

High Risk Rural Roads: $3,500,000 HSIP

General Safety Improvements: $327,840 HSIP

The following dollars were obligated for SFY 2018 in each program:

Lighting: $248,001 HSIP 

Pavement Marking: $2,569,192 HSIP 

Signing: $2,094,183 HSIP

Highway-Railway Grade Crossing and Rail: $5,398,030 ($12,775,491 Rail, -$577,803 HSIP and -$6,799,658 

ACHSIP)

Intersection Safety: $998,697 ($1,798,697 HSIP and -$800,000.00 ACHSIP)

High Risk Rural Roads: $4,067,914 ($2,936,781 HSIP and $1,131,133 HRRR)

General Safety Improvements: $5,480,163 ($5,530,163 HSIP and -$50,000 ACHSIP)

Each of the programs discussed further in this report are consistent with our SHSP. It is our intent that 

strategies identified or developed as part of the SHSP process will contribute to the continued success of these 

programs. A portion of our HSIP funding is programmed as part of our RHGCP. See RHGCP report for more 

information.

Program Methodology

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

and evaluation processes?

No

To upload a copy of the State processes, attach files below.

File Name:

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

We are working with our FHWA Division Office on assessing our program and anticipate a final report at the 

beginning of FFY 2019. Outcomes will emphasize the importance of program evaluation at least at the subprogram level, overall distribution of funding, and an HSIP manual.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 54

Intersection

Sign Replacement And Improvement 

Local Safety

Other-Pavement Marking

Other-Lighting 

Other-General Safety Improvements

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Our HRRR Program may also be referred to as Local Safety since it applies exclusively to locally-owned roads.

Program: Intersection 

Date of Program Methodology: 8/25/2016 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Other-First-come first-serve. Must satisfy a need based on the HSM, address crashes, and have a B/C>1. 

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Other-Fatal and SI crashes 

Traffic 

Volume 

Population 

Lane miles 

Functional classification 

Other-Turn lanes 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Other-B/C ratio

Other-Observed crashes and patterns

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
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 54

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

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

Ranking based on B/C : 2 

Available funding : 3 

Other-Crash patterns : 1

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

This program is increasingly focused on low-cost safety improvements as well as higher-cost that addresses 

observed crash patterns. Additionally, HSM tools such as Safety Analyst help us rank and quantify the 

countermeasures to address intersections with the greatest potential to improve safety.

Program: Local Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 2/11/2011 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Traffic 

Volume 

Population 

Lane miles 

Horizontal curvature 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

Other-Shoulder width, sign sheeting 

type, percent in district, past 
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 54

projects, cost, road safety audit, 

county priority 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Crash rate

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions 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?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

This program applies only to local roads (non-state owned and operated.) 

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other-Scoring rubric

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 : 2 

Other-Scoring rubric : 1

Other-Geographical distribution : 3

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2006 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 54

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Other-Sign inventory 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Other-Pre-programmed blanket replacement program

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?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

This program applies only to local roads (non-state owned and operated.) 

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-Projects were pre-programmed based on a blanket replacement program. 

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-Per established cyclical program : 1

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

This program was established in 1996 to address necessary sign replacements on the State Highway System 

due to pending (now final) federal requirements for minimum retro-reflectivity of highway signs. This program 

schedules sign replacements based upon highway route-mileage statewide and the total mileage of all the 

routes in each District Sub-Area with multiple Sub-Areas in each District being addressed each year. This 

program excludes signs on any other state project that include sign replacement for that highway route in the 

same year. This program also excludes any signs that were replaced within seven years of the scheduled date 

of the replacement project. This is the 12th year KDOT has used HSIP funds to improve permanent signing. 

The projects in the program are administered using two separate methods. Sub-Areas comprised primarily of 

routes classified as freeways and expressways with interchanges are let to contract via normal letting 
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 54

procedures. Sub-Areas with routes that are classified as expressways and conventional roads are 

administered by releasing contracts to purchase the signs and posts with installation performed by KDOT 

maintenance crews. However, due to KDOT maintenance work force reductions, the program will rely on 

contractors to install the signs regardless of route classification within some Sub-Areas.

Program: Other-Pavement Marking 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2006 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Volume 

Population 

Other-If we considered only traffic 

volumes, only high volume districts 

(1 and 5) would get funded, thus 

population is taken into account. At 

the district level, we then consider 

higher volume routes first and take 

into account retro-readings. 

Other-Retro-reflectivity. 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

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?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

This program applies only to local roads (non-state owned and operated.) 

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 54

Other-Pavement Marking Specialist works closely with district maintenance engineers to select projects.

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 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

This set-aside program was established in FY 1996 to address pavement marking necessary due to pending 

new federal requirements for minimum retro-reflectivity of pavement markings. Improvements in this category 

utilize high-performance, long-life pavement marking materials. Efforts are also made to identify those marking 

materials with wet-weather retro-reflectivity. This program is limited to projects that do not have highperformance markings included under any other KDOT program. Projects are selected by the BTS&T based 

upon a roadway's traffic volumes, past performance of marking material, geometry, surface condition, surface 

type, crash history, and, in the case of new marking materials, the research benefit. This is the 13th year 

KDOT has used HSIP funds to improve pavement markings.

Program: Other-Lighting 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2006 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Other-Night-time unlit crashes Volume Other-Road type: Interchanges 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Other-Locations are identified by District Engineers and public
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 54

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?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

This program applies only to local roads (non-state owned and operated.) 

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-Lighting Unit

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 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Because lighting is beneficial to the safety and operation of the highway system, this set-aside program was 

established in FY 2000. Projects are selected by the Bureau of Transportation Safety & Technology (BTS&T) 

based on the roadway's volume and the potential for night-time crash history. This program is limited to 

projects which are not included under any other KDOT program. Projects are scheduled until the available 

lighting funds are exhausted. This is the 13th year KDOT has used HSIP funds to improve lighting.

Program: Other-General Safety Improvements 

Date of Program Methodology: 2/10/2012 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 54

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Volume 

Population 

Lane miles 

Median width 

Horizontal curvature 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Crash rate

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?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

This program applies only to local roads (non-state owned and operated.) 

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 : 2 

Cost Effectiveness : 1

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 43 

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? Please check all that 

apply.

Install/Improve Signing

Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

Safety Edge

Install/Improve Lighting
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 54

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Percent was calculated by summing amounts apportioned for Lighting, Pavement Marking, and 90% of HRRR, 

and then dividing by the total apportioned.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? [Check all that apply]

Engineering Study 

Road Safety Assessment

SHSP/Local road safety plan

Other-Highway Safety Manual and CMF Clearinghouse 

Other-Crash data analysis to identify systematic countermeasures

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

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

Dollars were obligated this year to support the truck parking projects in Kansas.

The State of Kansas has formed an autonomous vehicle (AV) task force to consider the impacts of this 

emerging technology on everything from state statutes to infrastructure safety expenditures.

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.

Our intersections sub-program is working to integrate Part B (Roadway Safety Management Process) and Part 

D (Crash Modification Factors) into the program methodology.

Have any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

Yes

Describe program methodology practices that have changed since the last reporting period.
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 54

The signing sub-program has implemented the practice of contract services earlier in the project development 

process. Consultants are now collecting initial sign inventories and providing an evaluation of their survey for 

review prior to preparing plans for installation.

Are there any other aspects of the HSIP methodology on which the State would like to elaborate?

No
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 54

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $18,827,840 $14,599,214 77.54%

HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154) $0 $0 0%

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 $5,573,188 $3,574,684 64.14%

Totals $24,401,028 $18,173,898 74.48%

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

HSIP values were provided by our Management Systems Analyst; State and Local values were provided by 

our WinCPMS Administrator. Both persons in our Bureau of Program and Project Management. State and 

Local values are based on original estimates and obligations that occurred between 07/01/2017 and 

06/30/2018.

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

40% 

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

$4,157,675 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 54

Programmed is the total apportionment to those programs that include non-state owned roads in the 

methodology and may include dollars that get obligated to projects on state-owned roads: $1.00 mil (rail) + 

$3.00 mil (intersections) + $3.50 mil (hrrr) / $18.83 mil (total) = 40%

Obligated is the total obligated to those programs that include non-state owned roads in the methodology 

excluding projects in the intersections program on state-owned roads. -$577,803 (rail) + $1,798,697 

(intersection projects on locally-owned roads) + $2,936,781 (hrrr) = $4,157,675

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

$0 

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

$950,000 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

No funding is programmed directly to non-infrastructure safety projects. However, each sub-program may have 

non-infrastructure projects and those obligated in SFY 2018 are included in the total: $750,000 to KA-4828-01 

for mobile analysis of pavement markings and $200,000 for C-4855-18 for TEAP.

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% 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

Signing sub-program: Due to delays in the consultant services selections, the projects were moved from FY18 

to FY19. No new projects were initiated.

Does the State want to elaborate on any other aspects of it’s progress in implementing HSIP projects?

No
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 54

General Listing of Projects

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

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

N-0618-01 Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

2 Intersections $298331.13 $2404486.3 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

37,975 45 City of Olathe Spot Intersections

U-0541-01 Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

1 Intersections $409835 $463515.52 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

16,725 30 City of Manhattan Spot Intersections

KA-4627-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve retroreflectivity 21.5 Miles $505250 $505250 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

32,000 60 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Pavement 

Markings

KA-4635-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve retroreflectivity 11.33 Miles $209575 $209575 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

5,600 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Pavement 

Markings

KA-4731-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve retroreflectivity 9.49 Miles $104278.38 $104278.38 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

2,710 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Pavement 

Markings

KA-4740-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve retroreflectivity 1.1 Miles $37749.4 $37749.4 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,500 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Pavement 

Markings

KA-4828-01 Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records $750000 $750000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Data Pavement 

Markings

KA-4631-01 Lighting Continuous roadway lighting 0.5 Miles $109840.48 $109840.48 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

5,300 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure

C-0371-01 Roadway Roadway - other 0.2 Miles $384014 $507028 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4593-01 Roadway Roadway - other 0.2 Miles $-36765 $280665 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4595-01 Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder treatments - other 0.7 Miles $3974 $1269997 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4639-01 Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder treatments - other 0.4 Miles $-791 $358441 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4640-01 Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder treatments - other 3 Miles $-23205 $659184 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4671-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

74 Miles $-27880 $282891 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4675-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

44 Miles $-21170 $114938 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4679-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

62 Miles $-19817 $117981 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4680-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

74 Miles $23427 $228325 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 54

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

C-4682-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

51 Miles $-17236 $104233 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4684-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

49 Miles $-29952 $109965 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4685-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

97 Miles $-14695 $139334 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4686-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

40 Miles $-22503 $98700 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4691-01 Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder treatments - other 0.3 Miles $-3365 $166322 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4692-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

11 Miles $3880 $44831 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4797-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

171 Miles $230673 $508697 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4798-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

70 Miles $-20776 $293211 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4799-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

211 Miles $272058 $439030 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4800-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

127 Miles $-56084 $248832 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4801-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

73 Miles $-77463 $208604 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4802-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

26 Miles $-17860 $96518 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4805-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

39 Miles $-38128 $192195 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4806-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

77 Miles $-169177 $322658 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4808-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

70 Miles $-56415 $236532 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4810-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

2.2 Miles $-25854 $97189 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4811-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

81 Miles $-46592 $179091 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4812-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

60 Miles $-21900 $176189 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4813-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

219 Miles $327041 $371325 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4814-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

95 Miles $-64164 $231865 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4815-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

41 Miles $-16814 $113591 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 54

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

C-4816-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

363 Miles $-26023 $60801 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4847-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

74 Miles $-1549 $212943 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4848-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

169 Miles $149109 $243520 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4849-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

73 Miles $120497 $216220 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4850-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

71 Miles $138368 $270820 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4851-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

9 Miles $57723 $312317 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4852-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

106 Miles $184196 $393125 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4853-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

101 Miles $99825 $227139 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4854-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

37 Miles $53439 $130951 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4856-01 Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder treatments - other 7 Miles $288285 $397598 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4857-01 Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder treatments - other 2 Miles $753060 $827533 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4858-01 Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder treatments - other 0.7 Miles $476123 $592887 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4862-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

197 Miles $374839 $425839 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4863-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

32 Miles $143940 $167983 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4869-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

71 Miles $39064 $307616 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4888-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

88 Miles $45643 $348439 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4889-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

15 Miles $8761 $60352 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4890-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

102 Miles $55653 $530291 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4892-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

154 Miles $39840 $284098 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4893-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

23 Miles $26690 $185558 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4894-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

112 Miles $43000 $214537 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 54

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

C-4895-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

13.6 Miles $26500 $182405 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4896-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

23.5 Miles $16000 $123460 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4897-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

131 Miles $35500 $309340 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4898-01 Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add left-turn 

lane

0.3 Miles $31500 $399847 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4899-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

102 Miles $29090 $176788 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4900-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

115 Miles $37976 $294785 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4901-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

64 Miles $33680 $214313 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4902-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

87 Miles $36576 $207801 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4903-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

51 Miles $31000 $159184 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4904-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

86 Miles $43073 $299334 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4905-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

45.5 Miles $23725 $105558 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

C-4855-18 Non-infrastructure Non-infrastructure - other $200000 $200000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

Local Roads Package 

solutions with 

data through 

programs such 

as TEAP

KA-4235-05 Parking Truck parking facilities $1370000 $6513858 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Statewide 0 State Highway 

Agency

KA-4235-25 Parking Truck parking facilities $3568458 $3577716 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Statewide 0 State Highway 

Agency

KA-4632-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

23.547 Miles $368276.38 $368276.38 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

0 65 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4744-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

9.693 Miles $0 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4744-02 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

49.015 Miles $193374 $193374 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Mix: Urban 

Principal Arterial - 

Other Freeways 

and Expressways, 

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4744-03 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

11.36 Miles $5115 $5115 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 54

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

KA-4744-04 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

66.616 Miles $415075 $415075 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Mix: Rural 

Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Interstate, 

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4745-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

128.982 Miles $202700 $202700 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4745-02 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

54.551 Miles $70580 $70580 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4746-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

31.612 Miles $42660 $42660 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Mix: Rural Minor 

Arterial, Rural 

Major Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4746-02 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

62.011 Miles $58750 $58750 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4746-03 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

205.011 Miles $10000 $10000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4746-04 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

205.011 Miles $453530 $453530 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4746-05 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

PE Only for (KA4746-03 & KA4746-04)$350000 $350000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4747-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

85.555 Miles $117530 $117530 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Mix: Rural Minor 

Arterial, Rural 

Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4748-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

36.651 Miles $49480 $49480 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4748-02 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

49.231 Miles $0 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Mix: Rural Minor 

Arterial, Rural 

Major Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4748-03 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

66.939 Miles $209740 $209740 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4749-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

57.451 Miles $31050 $31050 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

KA-4749-02 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

56.82 Miles $17970 $17970 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Blanket Roadway 

Departure

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

With the exception of C-4855-18, which is non-infrastructure, all C-projects are based on one or both of the emphasis areas Intersections and Roadway Departure as indicated by the improvement category.
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 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 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatalities 386 431 386 405 350 385 355 429 461

Serious Injuries 1,675 1,717 1,581 1,592 1,446 1,201 1,185 1,137 970

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.310 1.440 1.290 1.325 1.159 1.250 1.130 1.340 1.430

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

5.679 5.742 5.266 5.207 4.787 3.911 3.776 3.550 3.010

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

28 16 16 33 31 30 27 46 39

Number of non-motorized 

serious injuries

88 95 97 106 108 84 101 102 87
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 54

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 54

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 54

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe fatality data source.

State Motor Vehicle Crash Database

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

Year 2016

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

24 78 0.67 2.12

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

10 25 0.8 1.89

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other

67 137 2.1 4.3

Rural Minor Arterial 48 111 2.07 4.81

Rural Minor Collector 6 20 1.94 6.05

Rural Major Collector 48 141 1.84 5.36

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 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 Local Road or Street 54 144 3.07 8.2

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Interstate

22 115 0.54 2.76

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

14 51 0.7 2.62

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other

29 187 2.19 14.1

Urban Minor Arterial 29 138 0.64 3.06

Urban Minor Collector 0 0 0 0.18

Urban Major Collector 10 43 0.44 1.95

Urban Local Road or Street 21 114 0.84 4.66
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 54

Year 2015

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 202 647 1.12 3.59

County Highway Agency

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City of Municipal Highway 

Agency

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency 175 750 1.31 5.61

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, University)

Indian Tribe Nation
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 54

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Functional Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 54

0

50

100

150

200

250

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 54

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 54

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 54

0

50

100

150

200

250

State Highway Agency Other Local Agency

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Roadway Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 54

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

State Highway Agency Other Local Agency

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 54

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

State Highway Agency Other Local Agency

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 54

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

We do not have confidence in our 2017 data enough to adequately report these numbers. They will be 

included with next year's report.

Are there any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which the State would like to 

elaborate?

No

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2019 Targets * 

Number of Fatalities 389.0 

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

The 2019 five year moving average projection based upon the trend line indicates 389 

total fatalities. A zero percent reduction in this projection would derive our goal of 389 

total fatalities in 2019. Based upon recent history, the trend line of the target, the zero 

percent reduction goal will be difficult to achieve, but we are not comfortable with 

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

State Highway Agency Other Local Agency

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 54

anything higher. The 2019 HSP and 2019 HSIP five-year moving average targets are 

equal. The goal in our SHSP is to reduce fatalities by half between 2009 and 2029. 

Our five-year average in 2009 was 417 fatalities per year. Our 2029 goal is thus less 

than 208 fatalities per year. To be on pace requires 313 fatalities per year in 2019, 

which is well below our target. This is discouraging, though not unexpected. It is our 

hope that continued efforts via the SHSP as well as advancing vehicle technologies 

will drive us closer to our goal by 2029. 

Number of Serious Injuries 980.0 

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

The 2019 five year moving average projection based upon the trend line indicates 990 

serious injuries. A one percent reduction in this projection would derive our goal of 

980 serious injuries in 2019. Based upon recent history, the trend line of the target, the 

one percent reduction goal is realistic and attainable. The 2019 HSP and 2019 HSIP 

five-year moving average targets are equal. The goal in our SHSP is to reduce serious 

injuries by half between 2009 and 2029. Our five-year average in 2009 was 1762 

serious injuries per year. Our 2029 goal is thus less than 881 serious injuries per year. 

To be on pace requires 1278 serious injuries per year in 2019, which is well above our 

target. This is encouraging, and surprising given the struggle with fatality numbers. 

Further, even as fatalities have increased in 2016 and into 2017, serious injuries 

continue to decrease. 

Fatality Rate 1.200 

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

The 2019 five year moving average projection based upon the trend line indicates 1.21 

fatalities per 100 million VMT. A one percent reduction in this projection will produce 

our goal of 1.20 fatalities per 100 million VMT in 2019. Based upon recent history, 

the trend line of the target, the one percent reduction goal may be difficult to achieve. 

Our target for fatality rate is slightly more aggressive than for fatalities since the 

former accounts for exposure while the latter does not. The 2019 HSP and 2019 HSIP 

five-year moving average targets are equal. Our SHSP does not include a goal based 

on rates. However, it is understood that in order to reduce fatalities and serious injuries 

by half over 20 years, the rates for each must reduce by more that half as long as VMT 

continues to increase. 

Serious Injury Rate 3.000 

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

The 2019 five year moving average projection based upon the trend line indicates 

3.062 serious injuries per 100 million VMT. A two percent reduction in this projection 

would lead to our goal of 3.000 serious injuries per 100 million VMT in 2019. Based 

upon recent history, the trend line of the target, the two percent reduction goal is 

realistic and attainable. Our target for serious injury rate is slightly more aggressive 

than for serious injuries since the former accounts for exposure while the latter does 
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 54

not. Our SHSP does not include a goal based on rates. However, it is understood that 

in order to reduce fatalities and serious injuries by half over 20 years, the rates for 

each must reduce by more that half as long as VMT continues to increase. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 136.0 

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

The 2019 five year moving average projection based upon the trend line indicates 137 

fatalities and serious injuries. A one percent reduction in this projection would derive 

our goal of 136 fatalities and serious injuries in 2019. Based upon recent history, the 

trend line of the target, the one percent reduction goal is realistic and attainable. Our 

current SHSP does not address non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries based on a 

strategic approach to planning. However, non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries 

have been on the increase. And since these numbers contribute to the overall numbers, 

we have added a pedestrian/bicyclist emphasis area team to our next update to the 

SHSP in 2019. 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

targets. 

On February 22, 2017 we hosted a Kansas Safety Target Setting Coordination Training Workshop presented 

by the FHWA. Most MPOs in the state were represented at this training. On April 17, 2017 we hosted a 

conference call with all the MPOs to present state targets and discuss next steps. We have been and will 

continue to provide each MPO with the data necessary to calculate their 2019 targets. At present, we are not 

certain whether individual MPOs will adopt the state targets or their own. Our SHSO and SHSP/HSIP 

coordinator are housed in the same section within the Kansas DOT, making coordination simple. Our state 

targets were discussed and established at a meeting dated May 14, 2018. On May 24, 2018, our 2019 state 

targets were presented to the Executive Safety Council, a multi-agency committee that oversees development 

and implementation of our SHSP.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Applicability of Special Rules

Does the HRRR special rule apply to the State for this reporting period? 
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 54

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Fatalities

54 68 70 63 50 78 74

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Serious Injuries

116 107 117 84 89 99 96

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The numbers above reflect our interpretation of the older driver rule. Specifically, these are only older drivers 

and pedestrians who have died or been seriously injured. These numbers do NOT include older passengers, 

or, for example, fatal crashes where an older driver was involved but did not have serious injuries.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

# of Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Years

Number of Older Driver and Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries by 

Year.

Fatalities Serious Injuries
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 54

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

Other-Obligation of HSIP dollars. 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Based on the measures of effectiveness selected previously, describe the results of the State's program 

level evaluations.

In FFY 2017 we were apportioned $18,375,593. In SFY 2017 we obligated $19,233,724, providing some 

indication we are spending our HSIP funding. However, in FFY 2018 we were apportioned $18,827,840. In 

SFY 2018 we obligated only $14,599,213.74. While scheduling and timing often dictate the values of these 

calendar totals, we will continue to work towards a higher obligation rate in FY 2019.

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

Highway Safety Improvement Program?

More systemic programs

Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

Increased focus on local road safety

HSIP Obligations 

Other-Gradual development of a statewide signing database 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any significant programmatic changes that have occurred since the last reporting period? 

No

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2017 
2018 Kansas 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)

Roadway Departure 238 586 0.76 1.87

Intersections 85 357 0.27 1.14

Pedestrians 30 68 0.1 0.22

Bicyclists 5 29 0.02 0.09

Older Drivers 94 210 0.3 0.67

Motorcyclists 48 170 0.15 0.54

Work Zones 7 27 0.02 0.09

Teen Drivers 46 201 0.15 0.64

Large Commercial Vehicles 71 109 0.23 0.35
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 54

0

50

100

150

200

250

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 54

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the reporting period?

No

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 54

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Kansas 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. 

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

IMPROVEMENT 

TYPE

PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

Nothing to report

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any other aspects of the overall HSIP effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

Describe any other aspects of HSIP effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate.

It remains our intent to develop performance measures for each of these HSIP sub-programs. This will be in concert with a current HSIP Assessment and completion of a program manual for each eligible sub-program, and be driven by 

our SHSP which includes reallocation of HSIP funding as a key strategy for the emphasis areas intersections and roadway departure. As an example, three of these programs (lighting, pavement marking, and signing) can be measured 

by wet-weather and/or nighttime crashes.
2018 Kansas 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?

 07/26/2017 

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2015 To: 2019 

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

 2019 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

We are updating our 2015 SHSP. This minor update will be known as the 2017 SHSP. The 2019 update will begin this fall and be our next major revision.

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

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT

Segment Identifier (12) 99 99 99 99 99 99

Route Number (8) 99 99

Route/Street Name (9) 99 99

Federal Aid/Route Type 

(21)

99 99

Rural/Urban Designation 

(20)

99 99 99 99

Surface Type (23) 99 99 99 99

Begin Point Segment 

Descriptor (10)

99 99 99 99 99 99

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

99 99 99 99 99 99

Segment Length (13) 99 99

Direction of Inventory (18) 99 99

Functional Class (19) 99 99 99 99 99 99

Median Type (54) 99 99
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 54

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Access Control (22) 99 99

One/Two Way Operations 

(91)

99 99

Number of Through Lanes 

(31)

99 99 99 99

Average Annual Daily 

Traffic (79)

99 99 99 99

AADT Year (80) 99 99

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

99 99 99 99 99 99

INTERSECTION

Unique Junction Identifier 

(120)

75 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 1 Crossing Point 

(122)

75 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 2 Crossing Point 

(123)

75 0

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

75 0

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

75 0

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road (79)

75 0

AADT Year (80) 75 0

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

75 0

INTERCHANGE/RAMP

Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

99 0

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Beginning of 

Ramp Terminal (197)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

0 0

Ramp Length (187) 99 0

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

99 0
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 51 of 54

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Roadway Type at End 

Ramp Terminal (199)

99 0

Interchange Type (182) 50 0

Ramp AADT (191) 99 0

Year of Ramp AADT (192) 99 0

Functional Class (19) 99 0

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

99 0

Totals (Average Percent 

Complete):

99.00 99.00 75.00 0.00 76.55 0.00 99.00 99.00 99.00 99.00

*Based on Functional Classification

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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.

Complete access to MIRE FDE on all public roads in Kansas should be accomplished by two projects: K-Hub and work associated with Next Generation 911.

K-Hub:

K-Hub is a new Linear Referencing and Transportation Database System, which will replace our existing CANSYS II database system.

K-Hub is an opportunity for KDOT to develop a combined statewide geospatially enabled roadway and transportation data management system that allows KDOT to efficiently meet current and future business requirements. Successful 

deployment of K-Hub will position KDOT to maintain data on all 140,000 miles of Kansas public roads with the current level of staffing. Bottom line, this is a colossal IT project that will influence almost every KDOT system.

Primary objectives of the K-Hub project include:

• Deploy an innovative solution that balances upfront project cost, system lifecycle cost and total cost of ownership to achieve the best value and level of service for KDOT.

• Utilize commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) software components licensed to KDOT and additional components, as needed, to meet K-Hub System Requirements.

• Innovative approaches to accomplish system functions and data exchanges to support current and future KDOT business processes while minimizing the need for custom components.

• Project planning and execution to ensure successful and timely transition to K-Hub from the existing system.

• Integration of hardware and software components to provide system response performance that consistently meets system benchmarks.

• Flexibility that allows for modification and enhancement by KDOT, the bidder team or third parties.

• User friendly and easily accessible design for enterprise-wide usage.
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 52 of 54

• Configurable system parameters.

• Position KDOT to maximize its ability to support the system post implementation.

Next Generation 911:

Next Generation 9-1-1 (abbreviated NG9-1-1) refers to an initiative aimed at updating the 9-1-1 service infrastructure in the United States and Canada to improve public emergency communications services in a growingly wireless mobile 

society.

Provide the suspected serious injury identifier, definition and attributes used by the State for both the crash report form and the crash database using the table below. Please also indicate whether or not these elements are 

compliant with the MMUCC 4th edition criteria for data element P5. Injury Status, suspected serious injury. 

CRITERIA SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY 

IDENTIFIER(NAME) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY DEFINITION MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY ATTRIBUTES(DESCRIPTORS) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * 

Crash Report Form Disabling Injury No N/A No N/A No

Crash Report Form Instruction Manual Disabling Injury No Any injury other than a fatal injury, which 

prevents the injured person from walking, 

driving, or normally continuing the activities 

he/she was capable of performing before 

the injury occurred. 

No Incapacitating No

Crash Database Disabling Injury No N/A No N/A No

Crash Database Data Dictionary Disabling Injury No See crash report form instruction manual. No Where # of fatalities = 0 and # of disabled > 

0.

No

Please describe the actions the State is taking to become compliant by April 15, 2019.

We will be adopting the new serious injury definition effective January 1, 2019. 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Did the State conduct an HSIP program assessment during the reporting period?

Yes

Describe the purpose and outcomes of the State’s HSIP program assessment.

We are currently working on our assessment. It will be completed this fall.
2018 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 53 of 54

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation: 

Compliance Assessment:
2018 Kansas 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 non-infrastructure 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.