Page 1 of 55

MAINE

2021 ANNUAL REPORT

U.S. Department ofTransportation 

Federal Highway Administration 

HIGHWAY SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 

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

Page 2 of 55

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 .......................................................................................................................28

Funds Programmed.........................................................................................................................28

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................30

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................36

General Highway Safety Trends......................................................................................................36

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................41

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................44

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................45

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................45

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................45

Project Effectiveness.......................................................................................................................49

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................51

Optional Attachments..........................................................................................................................54

Glossary..............................................................................................................................................55
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 55

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 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 55

Executive Summary

Maine has a data driven approach for HSIP project selection, assessing various aspects of crash performance. 

Before and After crash results comparisons on safety projects have consistently shown performance 

improvement over the years. HSIP selection process is re-evaluated each year to see if there are opportunities 

for enhancement and for improved alignment for the state's SHSP.

Spot improvement project selection, particularly with regard to intersection safety, has been driven by HSM 

methodology this year, using our custom GIS intersection network screening process which computes excess 

crashes with EB adjustment for urban and rural stop and signal-controlled intersections on public highways in 

Maine regardless of jurisdiction. We continue to identify High Crash Locations each year as an additional 

consideration in prioritizing our spot improvement project candidates.

We continue to work on collecting the necessary MIRE data elements to expand our network screening to 

highway segments. We are currently working towards obtaining cross slope information for the second lane of 

2-lane rural highways using our ARAN 9000 by driving these roadways in the opposite direction of our normal 

pavement condition network collection activities as time and weather allows. We started the development of 

our custom GIS road segment screening tools that will assess the safety our highway network using excess 

crashes with EB adjustment in accordance with the HSM. 

In addition to spot improvements projects, Maine has used lane departure crash data to systemically evaluate 

our highway network for potential center line rumble strip locations as well as median cable barrier locations 

and has funded safety projects for both countermeasures. Due to continuing noise concerns expressed by

residents, Maine's rumble strip program for non-interstate roadways installations are of the sinusoidal type. We 

have received far fewer noise complaints on highways receiving these “mumble strips”. We continue to use 

data to identify horizontal curves that could benefit from the installation of edge line rumble strips to mitigate 

went-off-road crashes on these curves. The first installations of these curve enhancements were included in 

our 2020 statewide rumble strip contract. 

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Maine’s 2020 annual VMT was approximately 12.48% lower than 2019 levels, 

at one point being about 25% below “normal” then trending back upward in the fall towards but not reaching 

2019 levels. Our current projection for 2021 annual VMT is 3-4% lower than that experienced in 2019. 

Despite lower volumes in 2020, the number of fatalities in Maine was like 2019’s count. This has resulted in a 

significantly higher fatality rate than anticipated.

Unlike fatalities, Maine experienced a reduction in the number of serious injuries and only a very small 

increase in the serious injury rate during 2020. There were approximately 80 fewer serious injuries on Maine’s 

highways during 2020 which is very encouraging, and this helped to mitigate the impact of lower VMT last year 

on our serious injury rate. Despite the slight “bump in the road” of 2020 our serious injury numbers and rates 

continue in a downward trend.

2021 Safety Performance Targets were successfully coordinated internally, with Maine's Highway Safety Office 

(Bureau of Highway Safety) and MPO partners. The 2020 Safety Performance Targets previously established 

did not account for the significant drop in VMT we have experienced and the effect that would have on our 

calculated crash rates but we expect to meet four of our five targets with only our 2020 fatality rate not being 

met. 
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 55

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. 

MaineDOT's HSIP program is managed by the Office of Safety which is led by a director level position that 

reports directly to the Chief Engineer. The Office of Safety consists of a highway safety engineering section, 

crash records section, and ADA Coordinator providing a single unit within the Department with the resources 

needed to perform data-driven safety analysis and coordinate safety candidate identification and evaluation 

efforts. 

In addition to identification of safety candidates through data driven analysis and network screening, the Office 

of Safety coordinates regularly with a wide variety of resources within MaineDOT including Regional 

Operations, Local Roads, our Active Transportation Planner, Traffic Engineering, and Regional Planners to 

identify additional areas of concern and potential safety and spot improvement candidates and to ensure that 

HSIP funding is being used for projects that support the initiatives and strategies identified in Maine’s Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan.

The Department's Safety/Mobility Committee was created within MaineDOT and is comprised of a cross 

representation of MaineDOT functional areas that meets quarterly to review and coordinate work on potential 

safety and mobility projects, and to provide input on prioritization of HSIP projects for inclusion in the work 

plan. This committee is co-chaired by the Safety Office Director and the State Traffic Engineer.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-Office of Safety

The Office of Safety at MaineDOT reports directly to the Chief Engineer.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

• Other-Use Benefit Cost Criteria

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

Local roads are included with the state-wide project candidates. Maine captures crash and roadway data for all 

public roads and can evaluate all locations within the state based on similar crash and benefit/cost 

performance comparisons. Local safety project requests based on crash concerns are reviewed and evaluated 

as part of the candidate screening process using our network safety screening tools and methods.
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 55

Maine has an on-line public crash data query tool available to them to help with local analysis - and 

MPOs/RPOs have utilized this tool and praise its capabilities. The Office of Safety is also available to provide 

data and technical assistance to MPOs and municipalities that would like help evaluating their safety areas of 

concern.

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

• Design

• Districts/Regions

• Maintenance

• Planning

• Traffic Engineering/Safety

Describe coordination with internal partners.

Though the Office of Safety is the primary unit responsible for the development of HSIP project candidates, we 

coordinate with other units throughout the organization daily. Candidates generated from data-driven safety 

analysis or identified through other means are field reviewed through road safety audits or assessments that 

generally involve our region traffic engineers, regional planners, and active transportation planner. We also 

include other subject matter experts throughout the Department as warranted based on the type of safety 

issues we are investigating. Other systemic and spot improvement HSIP candidates are generated by our 

Transportation Analysis Unit in the Bureau of Planning and Traffic Engineering Group in the Bureau of 

Maintenance and Operations. Appropriate countermeasures are evaluated by the Office of Safety for each 

candidate using the Highway Safety Manual and checked to make sure the proposed candidate is an HSIP 

eligible activity in support of the Strategic Highway Safety Plan. This results in a vetted list of projects 

recommended for funding ranked in order of safety benefit/cost. 

In our experience, safety and mobility concerns are most often inextricably linked and MaineDOT strives to 

consider both throughout the project evaluation process. To that end, the Department formed a new 

Safety/Mobility Committee charged with functioning as a formal vehicle for communication and coordination of 

all work being performed in both areas. The Safety/Mobility Committee is co-chaired by the Director of the 

Office of Safety, and State Traffic Engineer and permanent members of this committee come from the 

following units within the Department:

• Office of Safety (Engineering) 

• Office of Safety (Crash Records) 

• M&O (Traffic Engineering) 

• M&O (Region Traffic Engineer) 

• M&O (ITS Manager) 

• Planning (Regional Planner) 

• Planning (Active Transportation Planner) 

• Planning (Transportation Analysis) 

• Project Development (Multimodal Program Director) 

• FHWA Maine Division (Safety & Operations Engineer) 

The Safety/Mobility committee generates a prioritized list of projects recommended for funding to the 

Department’s Core Executive Team for final approval and inclusion in the work plan.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

• FHWA
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 55

• Governors Highway Safety Office

• Law Enforcement Agency

• Local Government Agency 

• Local Technical Assistance Program

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

Describe coordination with external partners.

The MaineDOT Office of Safety has continuing communications and good relationships with all State, local and 

Federal partners. In addition to standard state partners such as the Bureau of Highway Safety, we also 

coordinate with Bureau of Motor Vehicles and DHS for alcohol/drug-related issues. In addition, we regularly 

work with AAA, Maine Motor Transport Association, Maine Turnpike, Bicycle Coalition of Maine, United Bikers 

of Maine (motorcycles) and others. We look for input from all and communicate out to them when needed. One 

means of communicating and coordinating with these external partners is through the Maine Transportation 

Safety Coalition (MTSC) which meets quarterly for the purpose of coordination. 

Our coordination efforts with our MPO/RPO partners occurs on an ongoing basis as well in addition to the 

performance target setting activities required each year. We try to include these partners in our road safety 

audit/assessment efforts and obtain their assistance in reviewing High Crash Locations within their respective 

areas for further investigation by the Office of Safety. These partners are also included in our annual regional 

"synergy" meetings as part of the work plan development process to coordinate all project work including 

safety work. 

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes?

Yes 

MaineDOT currently has a new HSIP Manual in draft form pending final approval by our Safety/Mobility 

Committee and Engineering Council.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• Bicycle Safety

• Horizontal Curve

• Intersection

• Left Turn Crash

• Local Safety

• Low-Cost Spot Improvements

• Median Barrier

• Pedestrian Safety

• Right Angle Crash

• Roadway Departure

• Rural State Highways

• Segments

• Shoulder Improvement

• Sign Replacement And Improvement

• Skid Hazard

• Wrong Way Driving

• Other-Median Cable Barrier -install completed in 2014

• Other-Speed management

• Other-Guard rail/end treatment upgrades
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 55

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-As speci

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Population

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• 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?

• 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

Ranking based on net benefit:1
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 55

Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology:4/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Being evaluated as a systemic need

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Other-Highway Corridor Priority

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Other-Systemic approach being used to identify corridors of most exposure

• 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-Benefit to Cost ranking

• 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

Ranking based on B/C:2
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 55

Available funding:1

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology:4/1/2017

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

• Traffic

• Volume

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

• Other-MaineDOT's Highway 

Corridor Priority classifications

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Other-HSM-based screenings

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-Benefit to Cost

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:1
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 55

Available funding:2

Program: Left Turn Crash

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-Part of intersection strategy along with center left turn lane considerations

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

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• 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-Benefit/Cost Prioritization

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 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 55

Ranking based on B/C:1

Available funding:2

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

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

• Traffic

• Volume

• Horizontal curvature

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• 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-Usually work with MaineDOT's Local Roads unit

• 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
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 55

Available funding:2

Ranking based on net benefit:1

Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

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

• Traffic

• Volume

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• 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?

Yes

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
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 55

Cost Effectiveness:1

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2010

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Systemic need

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes • Other-limited access highway • Median width

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Risk factors noted above.

• 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: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology:1/1/2018
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 55

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-increasing number of pedestrian fatalities

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

• Traffic

• Volume

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• 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?

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-These projects are normally coordinated through MaineDOT's Bike/Ped coordinator

• 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

Program: Right Angle Crash

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 55

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-Part of Intersection Strategies

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

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• 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-Benefit/Cost Prioritization

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:1

Available funding:2

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology:4/1/2017
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 55

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Systemic funding - such as for centerline rumble strips

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Lane miles

• Median width

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

• Other-Posted speed limit

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Level of service of safety (LOSS)

• Other-Systemic for both Head On and Went Off Road (WOR). Curves will be focus for WOR

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?

• 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

Ranking based on net benefit:1
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 55

Program: Rural State Highways

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

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 

• Traffic

• Volume

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Coordinated with towns where speed concerns are expressed

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?

• 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: Segments

Date of Program Methodology:4/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 55

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Systemic funding - such as for centerline rumble strips

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Lane miles

• Median width

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

• Other-Posted speed limit

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Level of service of safety (LOSS)

• Other-Systemic for both Head On and Went Off Road (WOR). Curves will be focus for WOR

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?

• 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

Ranking based on net benefit:1

Program: Shoulder Improvement

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 55

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-Lane Departure, Bicycles, Pedestrians

What is the funding approach for this program? 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• 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-Benefit/Cost Prioritization

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:1

Available funding:2

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 55

• 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

• Traffic

• Volume

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• 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?

Yes

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

Ranking based on net benefit:1

Program: Skid Hazard

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 55

• FHWA focused approach to safety

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

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• 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?

Yes

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

Ranking based on B/C:1

Available funding:2

Program: Wrong Way Driving

Date of Program Methodology:12/31/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 55

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal crashes only

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Other-Laregely driven by ramp 

design components

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Maine State Police input

• Other-ramp design

• Probability of specific crash types

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

program?

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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: Other-Median Cable Barrier -install completed in 2014

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Department saw this as a systemic need

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes • Median width
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 55

• Other-Limited access roadway

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-Speed management

Date of Program Methodology:10/1/2017

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 

• Traffic

• Volume

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Coordinated with towns where speed concerns are expressed
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 55

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

program?

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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: Other-Guard rail/end treatment upgrades

Date of Program Methodology:10/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-State looking to make sure current standards met, especially in high speed/high volume 

locations

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Traffic

• Volume

• Other-posted speed limit

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Evaluation of hardware

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?
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 55

• 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

Other-Selection of locations of need as noted above:1

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 60

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

• Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

• Install/Improve Signing

• 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

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

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

MaineDOT continues to expand the use of ITS technologies and has assigned an ITS manager position within 

the Traffic Engineering section in the Bureau of Maintenance and Operations. The Department is in the 

process of creating our Transportation Management Center (TMC) and evaluating the deployment of additional 

technologies. The ITS Manager has a permanent/formal seat on the Department's newly-formed 

Safety/Mobility Committee, and the Director of the Office of Safety participates on the ITS Steering Committee.

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

Yes
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 55

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

MaineDOT has created and deployed a web-based GIS application to perform network safety screening of 

intersection assets in accordance with the HSM. Specifically, we have chosen to screen using excess 

expected average crash frequency with EB adjustment as our methodology. We have extended this method 

further by computing excess crash costs to provide weight and focus to those facilities that are experiencing 

the most severe injuries and fatalities in our efforts to lessen the number and severity of these events. We are 

continuing to acquire the necessary MIRE data elements to perform similar screening on roadway segments 

but that is a work in progress. The Department also uses HSM methods to perform alternative countermeasure 

analysis for individual locations and prioritization of projects recommended for funding.
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 55

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Calendar Year

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $14,552,481 $7,637,343 52.48%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$4,434,860 $4,345,031 97.97%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$582,835 $863,301 148.12%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $19,570,176 $12,845,675 65.64%

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%

MaineDOT's Office of Infrastructure Safety and our Local Roads Center are available to provide data and 

technical assistance to towns to help towns prioritize safety investments within their areas of responsibility. 

Highways within tribal areas are considered as part of our statewide safety analysis and eligible for safety 

project candidate funding identified as part of that analysis. There are no specific funding allocations for 

projects on either local or tribal road systems.

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

0%

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

0%
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 55

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.

None. MaineDOT Safety Office continues to work with internal and external partners to coordinate and 

integrate safety and seek the best opportunities to cost-effectively improve traffic safety. This process 

continues to be enhanced over time.

Describe any other aspects of the State’s progress in implementing HSIP projects on 

which the State would like to elaborate. 

2020 construction costs in Maine were much higher than expected for most all types of projects, not just safety 

projects. Contractors in Maine have had difficulty finding qualified workers to increase their capacity to take on 

more work, and have had difficulty procuring materials needed to perform the work.

Maine's leading crash exposure continues to be Lane Departure, experiencing 70% of state-wide fatalities in 

this category. Additional systemic safety opportunities are being evaluated to achieve a better funding mix that 

is reflective of SHSP priorities and to address these lane departure crashes. 2016 was the first year where we 

fielded calls on public noise-related concerns. MaineDOT’s 2018-2020 statewide rumble strip contracts 

specified that only sinusoidal center line rumble strips would be installed. This has substantially reduced the 

number of noise complaints we have received from the public. 

MaineDOT used data-driven analysis to screen for horizontal curves with significant crash experience and 

identified specific areas where edge line/center line rumble strips could be installed in the vicinity of the curve 

to decrease the likelihood of went-off-road crashes. These were programmed for installation in 2020.

Although not necessarily directly translating to HSIP funding, but certainly contributing to safety planning, there 

is continued dialogue with MPO's/RPO's on local safety needs and a cooperative approach on safety 

performance target setting. 

Pedestrian traffic fatalities are still a concern and a focused outreach program continued to be delivered 

throughout the state in 2020. This program includes public engagement and road safety audits and seeks to 

identify potential bike/pedestrian hazard mitigation that could be funded through HSIP or other fund sources. 

MaineDOT is also in the process of developing a pedestrian safety toolbox to identify appropriate safety 

countermeasures for locations with demonstrated vehicle/pedestrian crash exposure.
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 55

General Listing of Projects

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

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

016336.19 - RSMS 

SIGNS SOFTWARE 

2019

Miscellaneous Data collection 1 Local Road 

Sign 

Inventory 

AppDev

$4427.11 $8410.89 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Local Road or 

Street

0 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Data

018769.20 -

STATEWIDE, 

INTERSTATE 

STRIPING

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

231.98 Miles $1215000 $1610628.18 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Principal ArterialInterstate0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Explore 

pavement 

markings 

and sign 

enhanceme

nt 

opportunities

019002.00 -

ARUNDEL,INT OF 

ALFRED & NEW RD

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify auxiliary lanes 0.744 Miles $1907389.7

9

$2120237.39 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Multiple/Varies 16,30

3

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

019197.00 - BAR 

HARBOR, ROUTE 3

Pedestrians 

and bicyclists

Pedestrians and bicyclists 

– other

9.5 Miles $3030201.4

8

$25551410.8

2

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 8,560 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Multiple 

Strategies

020210.00 -

STANDISH, RT 

25/MANCHESTER/SA

C

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – Modern 

Roundabout

1 Intersection

s

$2295460.4

2

$2550511.58 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 4,229 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

020581.20 -

STATEWIDE, 

STRIPING 2020

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

$4721198.2

1

$6002870.76 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Explore 

pavement 

markings 

and sign 

enhanceme

nt 

opportunities

020581.21 -

STATEWIDE, 

STRIPING 2021

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1 Funding for 

future year

$250000 $6400000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Explore 

pavement 

markings 

and sign 

enhanceme

nt 

opportunities

021783.00 -

EDGECOMB, ROUTE 

1

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replaceme

nt

1 Intersection

s

$389545.49 $2755247.4 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther11,15

5

50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 55

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

021849.00 -

STATEWIDE, 

RUMBLE STRIPS 

2018

Roadway Rumble strips – center 198.324 Miles $555270.58 $616967.31 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Identify 

priority areas 

where edge 

line and 

center line 

rumble strips 

should be 

installed to 

reduce wentoff-road and 

head-on 

crashes.

022506.00 - OXFORD, 

ROUTE 26/ROUTE 

121

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replaceme

nt

1 Intersection

s

$623568.32 $705474.7 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Principal ArterialOther11,91

3

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

022683.00 - BELFAST 

RT 1/RT 7 SB RAMP

Interchange 

design

Interchange 

improvements

1 Locations $516814.38 $574238.2 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther7,362 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

022879.00 - HERMON, 

ROUTE 2

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify auxiliary lanes 1 Intersection

s

$243000 $1126250 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 8,731 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

022881.00 - HOLDEN, 

ROUTE 1A

Roadway Roadway narrowing (road 

diet, roadway 

reconfiguration)

2.02 Miles $1414442.3

2

$1571602.58 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Principal ArterialOther17,98

1

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

022885.00 -

HOULTON, SMYRNA 

STREET SIGNAL

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replaceme

nt

1 Intersection

s

$69300 $497000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 10,54

2

25 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

022926.00 - MERCER, 

ROUTE 2

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection flashers –

sign-mounted or 

overhead

1 Intersection

s

$76414.75 $84905.26 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther3,826 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

022974.00 -

SANFORD, ROUTE 

109-4A

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection signing –

other

1 Intersection

s

$208434.11 $231593.46 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther6,172 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

022976.00 -

SCARBORS.PRTLAND GUARD 

RAIL

Roadside Barrier- metal 2.7 Miles $282589.31 $314009.84 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

8,591 60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Continue 

review of 

guardrail and 

end 

treatment 
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 55

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

safety 

performance

. Update 

MaineDOT 

policies, 

qualified 

products list, 

and 

installations 

as needed.

022986.00 -

STATEWIDE, 

RUMBLE STRIP 2019

Roadway Rumble strips – center $476761.74 $535235.27 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Identify 

priority areas 

where edge 

line and 

center line 

rumble strips 

should be 

installed to 

reduce wentoff-road and 

head-on 

crashes.

022990.00 -

STATEWIDE, 

GUARDRAIL 

TREATMENT

Roadside Barrier- metal 1 Funding for 

future year

$25104.99 $67841.44 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Continue 

review of 

guardrail and 

end 

treatment 

safety 

performance

. Update 

MaineDOT 

policies, 

qualified 

products list, 

and 

installations 

as needed.

022996.02 -

STATEWIDE, 

VEHICLE ENFORCE

Speed 

management

Speed management -

other

0.12 Miles $52353.53 $58170.59 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Illegal/Unsaf

e Speed

Enhance 

speed 

enforcement 

efforts by 

targeting 

high incident 

locations.

023006.00 -

STATEWIDE, SPEED 

FEEDBACK SIGN

Speed 

management

Dynamic Speed 

Feedback Signs

50 Signs $171741.35 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Illegal/Unsaf

e Speed

Utilize 

portable 

dynamic 

speed 

feedback 
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 55

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

trailers and 

portable 

postmounted 

speed 

feedback 

signs

023030.00 - WEST 

BATH, STATE ROAD

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replaceme

nt

1 Intersection

s

$551204.82 $1011454.98 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Major Collector 6,810 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

023589.00 -

FREEPORT, I-295 

EXIT 20

Roadway Roadway - other 0.58 Miles $7558.29 $8398.1 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 7,590 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

023761.00 - 2020 

STATEWIDE RUMBLE 

STRIPS

Roadway Rumble strips – center $16200 $700732.75 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Identify 

priority areas 

where edge 

line and 

center line 

rumble strips 

should be 

installed to 

reduce wentoff-road and 

head-on 

crashes.

023765.00 -

STATEWIDE, 

DYNAMIC SPEED 

SIGNS

Speed 

management

Dynamic Speed 

Feedback Signs

1 Funding for 

future year

$142867.57 $158741.74 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Illegal/Unsaf

e Speed

Utilize 

portable 

dynamic 

speed 

feedback 

trailers and 

portable 

postmounted 

speed 

feedback 

signs

023775.00 -

VASSALBORO, 

ROUTE 201

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - other 0.12 Miles $7200 $92498.37 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 3,758 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Commercial 

Trucks and 

Buses

Pursue 

targeted 

enforcement 

efforts that 

will lead to 

educational 

opportunities
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 55

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

023775.02 - HOLLIS, 

ROUTE 4/117/202

Roadside Roadside - other 0.12 Miles $111102.64 $123447.39 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther6,455 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Commercial 

Trucks and 

Buses

Pursue 

targeted 

enforcement 

efforts that 

will lead to 

educational 

opportunities

023791.00 - WELLS, 

ROUTE 109

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify auxiliary lanes 1 Intersection

s

$48358 $65000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther15,10

9

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

023801.00 -

WINDHAM, ROUTE 

202

Roadway Roadway narrowing (road 

diet, roadway 

reconfiguration)

$55800 $248595.16 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 5,381 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

023871.20 -

STATEWIDE 

STRIPING 2020 

CONTRA

Roadway 

delineation

Improve retroreflectivity $324000 $500000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Explore 

pavement 

markings 

and sign 

enhanceme

nt 

opportunities

024179.00 -

STATEWIDE, SIGNAL 

HEADS

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal – add 

backplates with 

retroreflective borders

1 Funding for 

future year

$437568.03 $446826.78 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Provide 

reflective 

back plates 

on traffic 

signals and 

improve the 

tethering of 

signal heads

024203.00 -

WINDHAM, ROUTE 

302

Roadway Roadway narrowing (road 

diet, roadway

reconfiguration)

0.48 Miles $302775.63 $336417.37 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Principal ArterialOther17,30

0

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

024219.00 - REGION 

3,4, AND 5, LARGE 

ANIMAL HIGH CRASH 

FREQUENCY 

LOCATIONS

Miscellaneous Animal-related 1 Funding for 

future year

$9000 $19500 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Large 

Animals 

(Deer and 

Moose)

Mitigate 

animalvehicle 

collisions at 

select 

locations:

024221.00 -

SHERMAN, 

INTERSTATE 95

Miscellaneous Animal-related 2.892 Miles $2250 $131575.01 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Large 

Animals 

(Deer and 

Moose)

Mitigate 

animalvehicle 

collisions at 

select 

locations:
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 55

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

024223.00 -

STATEWIDE, ANIMAL 

WARNING SIGNS

Miscellaneous Animal-related 1 Funding for 

future year

$8100 $50000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Large 

Animals 

(Deer and 

Moose)

Mitigate 

animalvehicle 

collisions at 

select 

locations:

024233.00 -

STATEWIDE, 

FLASHING BEACONS

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection flashers –

sign-mounted or 

overhead

1 Funding for 

future year

$236250 $262500.01 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Develop 

solutions for 

reviewed 

locations

024255.00 -

STATEWIDE, 

RUMBLE STRIPS

Roadway Rumble strips – center 1 Funding for 

future year

$900 $59775.29 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Identify 

priority areas 

where edge 

line and 

center line 

rumble strips 

should be 

installed to 

reduce wentoff-road and 

head-on 

crashes.

024385.00 - REPLACE 

X LITE GUARDRAIL 

ENDS

Roadside Barrier end treatments 

(crash cushions, 

terminals)

1 Funding for 

future year

$119950.43 $150189.05 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Continue 

review of 

guardrail and 

end 

treatment 

safety 

performance

. Update 

MaineDOT 

policies, 

qualified 

products list, 

and 

installations 

as needed.
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 55

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 164 145 131 156 160 172 136 157 165

Serious Injuries 982 865 815 754 746 728 685 689 607

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.140 1.010 0.913 1.050 1.070 1.140 0.910 1.040 1.250

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

6.830 6.010 5.680 5.080 4.980 4.810 4.560 4.560 4.590

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

10 15 11 19 21 23 8 19 11

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

101 59 88 64 72 75 72 61 48
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 55

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Annual Fatalities

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Annual Serious Injuries
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 55

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

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

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

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

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

Page 39 of 55

Describe fatality data source.

Other

If Other Please describe

FARS and MaineDOT Dashboard

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

8.4 29.2 0.39 1.36

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0 0.4 0 18.06

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

24.2 83.4 1.37 4.75

Rural Minor Arterial 19.8 78.8 26.99 84.18

Rural Minor Collector 34.2 122.6 1.59 5.71

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

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

Page 40 of 55

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 Major Collector 12 48.2 1.22 5.3

Rural Local Road or 

Street

14.4 86.2 1 6.11

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

5 25.6 0.4 2.05

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0.2 6.4 0.12 4.33

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

6.6 50 0.87 6.66

Urban Minor Arterial 10.8 66 1.54 12.91

Urban Minor Collector 9.4 57.4 0.93 5.79

Urban Major Collector 0 7 0 7.25

Urban Local Road or 

Street

6.2 30.2 1.33 6.54
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 55

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

130.6 560.2 1.16 4.96

County Highway 

Agency

0.2 1.6 1.32 9.92

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

25 115.4 1.37 6.33

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

0 0 0 0

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

0 1.2 0 18.96

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

0 0 0 0

Other State Agency 0 0 0 0

Other Local Agency 0 0 0 0

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

0 0 0 0

Railroad 0 0 0 0

State Toll Authority 3.6 14.6 0.24 0.97

Local Toll Authority 0 0 0 0

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

0.2 0 1.44 0

Indian Tribe Nation 0 0 0 0

Fatality Data for Federal Functional Class and Jursidiction Tables in this report taken from the MaineDOT Data 

Warehouse and is slightly different than that which is found in the FARS system.

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2022 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:160.0

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals.
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 55

• Maine Fatality data has varied widely during the 2020 Benchmark Performance (2016-2020) period 

ranging from 139 in 2018 to 172 in 2017. The 5-year average was 158.2 through the period. A 

significantly lower VMT experienced in 2020 due to the pandemic combined with the 2nd highest fatality 

count during the benchmark period has contributed to the highest fatality rate in Maine since 2006. This 

will likely result in the 5-year fatality rate continuing to trend upward. 2021 fatal numbers as of May 31, 

2021 are thankfully lower than 2020 numbers at the same point in time but not low enough to mitigate 

the high 2020 fatality rate. 

Number of Serious Injuries:715.0

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

• Serious Injuries (A) is one of Maine's Safety Performance Areas that continues to show steady 

improvement over the years, but it too, has had erratic performance in the past. The 5-year average 

serious injury benchmark performance was 691.6. Unlike fatalities, Maine experienced a reduction in 

the number of serious injuries and only a very small increase in the serious injury rate during 2020. 

There were approximately 80 fewer serious injuries on Maine's highways during 2020 which is very 

encouraging, and this helped to mitigate the impact of lower VMT last year on our serious injury rate. 

Despite the slight "bump in the road" of 2020 our serious injury numbers and rates continue in a 

downward trend. 

• Due to past performance, recommended 2022 targets have been set slightly lower than those 

established for 2021. 

Fatality Rate:1.120

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

• Maine Fatality data has varied widely during the 2020 Benchmark Performance (2016-2020) period 

ranging from 139 in 2018 to 172 in 2017. The 5-year average was 158.2 through the period. A 

significantly lower VMT experienced in 2020 due to the pandemic combined with the 2nd highest fatality 

count during the benchmark period has contributed to the highest fatality rate in Maine since 2006. This 

will likely result in the 5-year fatality rate continuing to trend upward. 2021 fatal numbers as of May 31, 

2021 are thankfully lower than 2020 numbers at the same point in time but not low enough to mitigate 

the high 2020 fatality rate. 

Serious Injury Rate:4.900

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

• Serious Injuries (A) is one of Maine's Safety Performance Areas that continues to show steady 

improvement over the years, but it too, has had erratic performance in the past. The 5-year average 

serious injury benchmark performance was 691.6. Unlike fatalities, Maine experienced a reduction in 

the number of serious injuries and only a very small increase in the serious injury rate during 2020. 

There were approximately 80 fewer serious injuries on Maine's highways during 2020 which is very 

encouraging, and this helped to mitigate the impact of lower VMT last year on our serious injury rate. 

Despite the slight "bump in the road" of 2020 our serious injury numbers and rates continue in a 

downward trend. 

• Due to past performance, recommended 2022 targets have been set slightly lower than those 

established for 2021. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:87.0
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 55

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

• As with statewide crash fatalities, this data has varied widely from year to year through the benchmark 

performance period, mainly due to the disparity observed from 2017 to 2018. The 2019 count matched 

that of 2018 which perhaps indicates progress. While the 2020 fatality count overall was high, these 

were largely motor-vehicle related crashes not involving non-motorized system users. Our 2020 nonmotorized K&A count of 61 was our lowest in more than 17 years. 

• The 5-year Average for the 2016-2020 Benchmark Period was 81.8, down from 86.6 during the 

previous evaluation period. It is hoped that our continued focused pedestrian outreach in Maine through 

STEP and HeadsUp programs will continue to bring down our bike/ped fatality numbers and I 

recommend setting a slightly lower target for 2022 than that of 2021.

The following factors are likely to influence the ability of Maine to meet previous safety performance targets 

and need to be considered for future projections:

• Setting our 2021 Safety Performance Targets last year amid uncertainty the impact of Covid-19 would 

have on Maine’s 2020 and 2021 VMT, MaineDOT assumed a 20% reduction in traffic for 2020, and 

10% reduction in 2021. While traffic was indeed seriously impacted in 2020, these assumptions have 

proven to be somewhat conservative when compared to our actual traffic experience. Maine’s 2020 

VMT was approximately 12.48% lower than 2019 levels, and our current projection for 2021 VMT is 3-

4% lower than that experienced in 2019. Although uncertainty remains as to when volumes will “return 

to normal”, it does appear to be headed in that direction.

• Maine’s economy has been and will continue to be affected by Covid-19 economic impacts on both 

businesses and citizens’ household finances. Fuel, food, and construction material prices have been 

rising steadily as of late. Labor shortages in many economic sectors exist right now. It remains to be 

seen how severely this could impact the tourism industry in Maine in 2021 and beyond, or whether 

these impacts may be mitigated by the public’s enthusiasm to travel again after spending most of 2020 

at home. 

• Multi-agency safety efforts will continue to be refined and focused on primary serious crash trends such 

as lane departure and pedestrians

• Based on recruitment difficulties along with state and local budgetary constraints, law enforcement 

agencies will continue to experience staffing challenges, reducing the effective crash-reducing impact 

that their on-road presence has.

• Impaired driving is a growing concern both due to legalization of marijuana and increased illicit drug 

usage. That growing impairment problems translates to serious crash exposures.

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

safety performance targets. 

Maine Bureau of Highway Safety and MaineDOT reviewed last year's targets and worked collaboratively to 

arrive at agreed upon goals and to make sure they are in context with the latest influencing factors such as the 

unexpected traffic volumes experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

MaineDOT has earlier discussed its target setting philosophy with MPOs and how it would translate to MPO 

performance targets. The Department prepares suggested performance targets for each MPO as a starting 

point for discussion and provides the necessary data for them to evaluate their own past performance and to 

either accept MaineDOT's recommendation or to come up with their own in support of the statewide Safety 

Performance Targets.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

None
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 55

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 161.0 158.0

Number of Serious Injuries 737.0 691.0

Fatality Rate 1.070 1.082

Serious Injury Rate 4.900 4.700

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

90.0 82.0

Four of five of Maine’s 2020 Safety Performance Targets were met. This was in large part to the unusual drop 

in pedestrian fatalities in 2018 which brought the overall and 5-year average benchmark fatal numbers down. 

The trend of overall Highway Fatalities in Maine continues to climb slightly, however, and the rate more so than 

the raw number. Our first goal is to work towards levelling that trend off and then we can work towards further 

reductions. 

Maine’s serious injury numbers and rates have also been steadily decreasing since 2012 despite increased 

statewide VMT. Both factors contributed to our meeting the number of non-motorized fatalities and serious 

injury performance target as well. We are, however, concerned that our 2018 crash experience was a bit of a 

statistical outlier the effect of which will impact the five-year average for awhile, after which we'll see a jump in 

these numbers and rates. When you consider the impacts on travel of the pandemic in 2020 we are even more 

concerned for future years.

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

26 27 32 42 28 31 33

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

74 70 78 92 86 95 61
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 55

Evaluation 

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

• Benefit/Cost Ratio

• Change in fatalities and serious injuries

Infrastructure projects are evaluated each year with results included with HSIP (before/after injuries and B/C).

Systemic improvements like rumble strips are periodically reviewed for collective performance where installed.

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

the State's program level evaluations.

Maine's fatality rate has been trending upward for the past few years despite being mitigated by a significant 

decrease in pedestrian fatalities in 2018. In 2020, our statewide fatality total was similar to the previous year 

despite a 12.5% reduction in VMT due to reduced travel during the Covid-19 pandemic. As a result, our 2020 

fatality rate was substantially higher than expected. Our serious injury rate has been

steadily decreasing since a peak in 2012. This downward trend continued in 2020.

Our overall benefit-cost performance on mitigation efforts has been good. Systemic installations such as center

line rumble strips have continued to prove very effective at a relatively low cost. We plan to expand this

program as we continue to explore new systemic safety programs that have proven to be successful in other

states.

We continue to assess our center line rumble strip program for those segments

with three years of before/after crash data available which when last evaluated showed an average reduction 

in fatalities and serious

injuries of 62.9% and 48.1% respectively where these are installed.

MaineDOT is also continuing a study quantifying the benefits of converting rural two-way stop

controlled intersection to all-stop controlled intersections. Preliminary data shows a significant reduction in both

the number and severity of crashes at these facilities after conversion. Overall, we are observing a 70%

reduction in crash costs with this countermeasure.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program?

• # miles improved by HSIP

• Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

• Increased focus on local road safety

• More systemic programs

• Policy change

• Other-Pedestrian Strategic Focus Outcomes

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2020
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 55

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)

Lane Departure 111.4 375 0.76 2.56

Intersections 22.6 109 0.15 0.74

Pedestrians 13.4 47.2 0.09 0.32

Bicyclists 2.2 17.6 0.01 0.12

Older Drivers 43.8 94.8 0.3 0.64

Motorcycles 24.8 114.6 0.17 0.78
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 55

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Lane

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcycles

Fatalities

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

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Lane

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcycles

Serious Injuries

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

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 55

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Lane Departure Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcycles

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

Lane Departure Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcycles

Serious Injury Rate

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

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 55

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)

19010.00 -

GREENE, ROUTE 

202

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry -

other

5.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 6.00

20207.00 -

MECHANIC 

FALLS-POLAND, 

RTE 26

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

13.00 6.00 8.00 1.00 21.00 7.00

22681.00 -

AUBURN, 

HOTEL/STEVENS 

MILL RDS

Rural Major 

Collector

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – new traffic 

signal

4.00 7.00 1.00 7.00 2.00 12.00 9.00

22682.00 -

PORTLAND, 

ROUTE 

22/WESTBROOK

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry -

other

23.00 16.00 8.00 7.00 31.00 23.00

20211.00 - GRAY, 

ROUTE 

202/CAMPBELL 

SHORE

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

1.00 1.00 2.00

19006.00 - NEW 

GLOUCESTER, 

RTE 202 & 231

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

4.00 8.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 6.00 11.00

20568.00 -

AUGUSTA, 

ROUTE 27/DARIN 

DR.

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

5.00 9.00 2.00 1.00 7.00 10.00

20215.00 -

AUGUSTA, EXIT 

109B/WESTERN 

AVE

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Interstate

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry -

other

38.00 31.00 9.00 7.00 47.00 38.00

18857.00 -

AUGUSTA, RTE 

202/I-95 OFF 

RAMP

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Interstate

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry -

other

19.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 21.00 3.00

20565.00 - BATH, 

WASHINGTON 

ST

Urban Major 

Collector

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

6.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 6.00 5.00
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 55

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)

22673.00 -

WELLS, 

RT1/CHAPEL RD

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

geometry

Modify lane assignment 32.00 4.00 1.00 8.00 1.00 40.00 6.00

For this evaluation we simply used total crash count reductions for the intersection projects listed above. The Department continues to develop tools to perform more sophisticated HSIP project and overall countermeasure effectiveness 

evaluations. Crash counts based on 3 years before - 3 years after construction.
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 51 of 55

Compliance Assessment

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

 11/20/2017

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2017 To: 2022

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

 2022

MaineDOT has begun identifying partners who will participate in our 2022 SHSP update process. Many of these partners also participate in the Maine Transportation Safety Coalition (MTSC) quarterly meetings, but other essential 

participant stakeholders have been identified and we are in the first stages of assembling our team for this cycle. We anticipate a kickoff meeting for this effort this fall to review the latest crash data trends and to start identifying focus 

areas for the plan. By early 2022, we hope to have emphasis area champions identified and subcommittees formed to begin their work.

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]

100 100 100 100

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
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 52 of 55

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

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Median Type (54) 

[55]

100 100

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100 100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 100 100

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]

50 50

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

50 50

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

100 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 53 of 55

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

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]

100 100

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]

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): 100.00 100.00 87.50 87.50 81.82 81.82 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

*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.

Many of the outstanding data elements are available to MaineDOT now through a generation process, but are not currently stored in our data warehouse as desired by FHWA. We are discussing the best process to make these elements 

available in a format acceptable to meet the data mapping requirements.
Page 54 of 55

2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Optional Attachments 

Program Structure:

MaineDOT HSIP Manual Draft - 4-21-2021.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2021 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 55 of 55

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.