Page 1 of 41

COLORADO

2019 ANNUAL REPORT
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 41

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................14

Funds Programmed.........................................................................................................................14

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................16

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................20

General Highway Safety Trends......................................................................................................20

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

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................28

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................29

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................29

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................29

Project Effectiveness.......................................................................................................................34

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................35
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 41

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence

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

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

to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other 

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

in the reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or other data.”

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

or data compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety 

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

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

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

highway funds shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court 

proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence 

at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 41

Executive Summary 

The number of fatalities in Colorado has decreased in 2018 as compared to the previous year even with 

increasing vehicle mile traveled (VMT). As a result, fatality rates have also decreased. The crash data has 

shown that there are four specific areas where the fatalities increased from 2017: Urban, Older Driver (age 65 

or older), Bicyclist, and Alcohol Impaired. Motorcycle fatalities in 2018 were the same as the previous year. 

The number of serious injuries and serious injury rate did increase in 2018 as compared to the previous year. 

Non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries in 2018 were about as the same as the previous year.

Colorado's HSIP program is administered by the Traffic & Safety Engineering (TSE) Branch at CDOT 

headquarters (HQ) and coordinates with the CDOT Office of Transportation Safety (which is the SHSO) to 

ensure that safety programs align with each other's objectives. The TSE branch actively engages with regional 

staff to coordinate efforts to research and analyze the need for safety improvements on segments and 

intersections statewide. The group provides subject matter expertise in safety and crash analyses to all 

roadway projects delivered by the Regions. The TSE staff also communicates and works directly with external 

entities and governing bodies such as FHWA, state and local law enforcement officials, other state agencies, 

MPOs, municipalities, counties, and other interested parties.

The Colorado Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) is a great tool to unify safety efforts in the state, as it is a 

comprehensive plan for transportation safety. Local agencies are invited and encouraged to participate in the 

SHSP update and subsequent implementation. They often participate in the emphasis area teams, for safety 

program or project design and implementation. Colorado will be completing its next SHSP update in 2020, as 

the current one was approved in 2015.

Colorado programmed a total of $33,777,419 of Federal HSIP funding (not including state or local match) 

towards safety improvement projects in state fiscal year (FY) 2019. Only seven percent of HSIP funding was 

programmed towards local (non-state highway) safety projects in FY 2019. Based on the survey responses 

and interviews from a 2018 HSIP assessment, some of the reasons for the low participation include lack of 

local agency knowledge of the opportunity, lack of readily available data, non-existent technical support, 

cumbersome federal aid program laws and regulations, lack of time and matching funds. CDOT recognizes 

these local agency challenges and has strategies planned to address them.

CDOT has started a new Safety Circuit Rider (SCR) program in 2019. The purpose of the SCR is to provide 

safety related education, training, outreach and support to local agency safety stakeholders under the direction 

of the Colorado Local Technical Assistance Program (CLTAP) and CDOT. 

The High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR) special rule is once again in effect for this reporting period. Colorado must 

obligate $2,826,084 of HRRR in Federal FY 2019. Colorado is planning to integrate more systemic projects as 

part of the HSIP in upcoming years. This systemic approach should help Colorado deliver more HRRR 

projects, more specifically along local roads.

In addition to HSIP, CDOT utilizes other sources of safety funding. The Funding Advancement for Surface 

Transportation and Economic Recovery Act of 2009 (FASTER) established the Road Safety Fund to support 

the construction, reconstruction, or maintenance of projects that the state Transportation Commission, a 

county, or municipality determine are needed to enhance the safety of a state highway, county road, or city 

street. The fund dollars are allocated based on a statutory formula: 60% to CDOT, 22% to counties, and 18% 

to municipalities. For CDOT, FASTER provides approximately $80 million per year in safety funds.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 41

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. 

Colorado's HSIP program is administered by the Traffic & Safety Engineering (TSE) Branch at CDOT 

headquarters (HQ). 

Regional CDOT traffic and safety engineering staff work internally and in consort with local agencies to identify 

projects with safety improvement needs. Initial review and analysis occur at this regional level. Upon 

acceptance by the region as a viable and potentially necessary safety project, the region makes a request to 

HQ for final review and analysis and associated HSIP funding eligibility criteria. The HQ TSE staff conducts an 

independent analysis of the project, including a detailed Benefit/Cost analysis, calculation of predicted crashes 

mitigated, a review of crash patterns, and a review of the crash modification factor used. Upon completion of 

final review and quantitative and qualitative analysis by HQ TSE staff of projects submitted by CDOT Regional 

traffic and safety engineering, the projects are either approved or denied and budgeted accordingly against the 

projected regional allocation for the fiscal year in which the funding is needed. In an effort to increase safety 

overall across the state, thorough dialogue between HQ and the requesting region occurs on a project-byproject basis when additional information, background, or data are needed in the event that a project appears 

to fall short of eligibility. Additionally, because projects that are awarded HSIP funding are required to address 

individual areas of focus as defined within the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), as part of the review and 

analysis process, our group confirms that such projects do in fact fall within the SHSP areas of focus. 

Upon approval of such HSIP funding the CDOT regions are responsible for final project delivery on-system. In 

the event that a local agency is receiving HSIP funding for off-system safety improvements, the CDOT regional 

staff coordinate with such local agencies regarding HSIP funding to enable these local agencies to deliver 

these projects. 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Engineering

HSIP is managed in the Traffic and Safety Engineering Branch, under the Office of the Chief Engineer.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Formula via Districts/Regions

Based off historical crash distribution, within each region.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 41

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

Under this program all public roadways are eligible for participation, including roads on tribal lands (there are 

two tribes in Colorado, Ute Mountain and Southern Ute). Submittals for projects not located on the State 

Highway system are solicited from local authorities through the various Metropolitan Planning Organizations 

(MPO's) and the Special Highway Committee of the Colorado Counties, Inc. and the Colorado Municipal 

League. These candidate proposals for safety improvement projects are submitted for locations identified using 

the locals’ own high hazard locations identification system. As with the Region applications, all submittals will 

be required to meet the minimum criteria. Copies of project applications received in the Safety and Traffic 

Engineering Office from locals are submitted to the Region offices for comments, evaluation and approval. The 

Region offices are specifically requested to verify project cost estimates, and when necessary, are also 

requested to make project cost adjustments with the submitting local authorities’ concurrence. It is our hope 

that increased outreach and education by CDOT, in consort with local agency efforts, that more applications for 

HSIP funding will be received in future solicitations. 

Approximately one half of the HSIP funding is allocated toward off-system locations (including tribal lands) 

because approximately half of all statewide crashes occur off system. The allocation is based on statewide 

crash distribution. In recent years, there have not been enough off-system safety improvement projects to use 

the full allocated amount. In such cases, the state will apply those unused funds for state highway safety 

improvement projects. CDOT will look to offer more support in helping local agencies submit enough projects 

to account for their full allocation in the future with the help of a new Safety Circuit Rider (SCR) program.

The purpose of the SCR is to provide safety related education, training, outreach and support to local agency 

safety stakeholders under the direction of the Colorado Local Technical Assistance Program (CLTAP) and 

CDOT. The need for a SCR program is clearly manifested by the fact that most local agencies in the Colorado, 

particularly the ones in smaller communities, lack resources and technical expertise to properly and routinely 

identify, diagnose, treat safety deficiencies and/or implement adequate countermeasures- all the resources 

and tools typically afforded by CDOT and some of the larger cities and counties in the State. The SCR program 

will greatly enhance technical capabilities at the local level and will help bridge existing safety related expertise 

gab resulting in overall reduction of crashes on local roads, which typically experience about 40% of the 

statewide annual fatalities. CDOT is also working to promote and develop more county Local Road Safety 

Plans (LRSP) with the assistance from the SCR to better serve our local agency partners in improving 

roadways safety for the traveling public.

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning. 

• Design

• Districts/Regions

• Governors Highway Safety Office

• Maintenance

• Operations

• Planning

• Traffic Engineering/Safety

• Other-Office of Financial Management & Budget

• Other-Division of Transportation Development (DTD)

Describe coordination with internal partners. 

The CDOT HQ Traffic and Safety Engineering (TSE) branch actively engages with regional staff to coordinate 
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 41

efforts to research and analyze the need for safety improvements on segment and intersections statewide. The 

group provides subject matter expertise in safety and crash analyses to all roadway projects delivered by the 

Regions.

The TSE staff periodically produces a statewide composite listing of potential locations for crash reduction is 

compiled for all highway segments and intersections performing at a sub-standard level of service of safety 

(LOSS) as well as identifying crash patterns that are over-represented at those locations. This listing is 

provided to each of the five CDOT Regions where their respective traffic units, roadway design staff and 

transportation planners can coordinate and select appropriate safety improvement projects with the goal of 

reducing roadway fatalities and serious injuries. The Regions use the listing along with other information such 

as their own operational reviews, input from citizens, staff and city/county personnel as well as other ongoing 

or scheduled construction activities in order to determine the most feasible and beneficial candidate safety 

projects. The Region may also choose to nominate other safety project locations besides those mentioned on 

the listing. Applications for new highway safety improvement projects are sent from the Regions to the TSE 

branch for evaluation to determine safety program (both HSIP and FASTER Safety) eligibility and level of 

funding. 

The TSE branch coordinates efforts with the Office of Transportation Safety (OTS) to ensure that safety 

programs align with each other’s objectives. The OTS handles most behavioral safety projects and contributes 

greatly to the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) implementation and update process. The TSE branch 

also coordinates with the Division of Transportation Development (DTD) and the Maintenance Division for 

information exchange and for better organization to achieve shared safety goals. The DTD provides roadway 

data for all CDOT projects, including roadway characteristics and traffic counts. The Maintenance department 

attempts to coordinate replacement and maintenance work with safety standards and improvements to 

roadway safety. The TSE branch works with the Office of Financial Management & Budget (OFMB) to 

determine the amount of HSIP funding available for the current fiscal year as well as how much is anticipated 

to be available in future fiscal years for HSIP project planning and scheduling. The TSE branch also works with 

OFMB to obtain status updates on HSIP obligation and expenditure amounts for ongoing projects.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning. 

• FHWA

• 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. 

In an effort to maintain consistency in data, analysis, and understanding of safety needs statewide, and 

subsequent implementation of such safety improvement projects, the CDOT HQ Traffic and Safety Engineering 

staff communicates and works directly with external entities and governing bodies such as FHWA, state and 

local law enforcement officials, other state agencies,

MPOs, municipalities, counties, and other interested parties. Additionally, at the regional level, the Regions 

coordinate more directly with local government officials, the citizenry, other such

stakeholders having traffic and safety concerns that are specific to their Region, and media relations. These 

individual areas of focus enable the Regions to be more directly in touch with local needs for which HSIP 

funding may be eligible. This then translates to CDOT's overall ability to integrate HSIP funded solutions 

utilized within any specific Region into the statewide efforts to

reduce crash severity, crashes overall, and progress toward the goal of zero deaths.

The Colorado Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) is a great tool to unify safety efforts in the state, as it is a 
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 41

comprehensive plan for transportation safety. Local agencies are invited and encouraged to participate in the 

SHSP update and subsequent implementation. They often participate in the emphasis area teams, for safety 

program or project design and implementation.

The CDOT HQ Traffic and Safety Engineering branch is involved with the Statewide Traffic Records Advisory 

Committee (STRAC). The STRAC consists of many state and local agencies involved in traffic safety, including 

law enforcement. The STRAC attempts to unify efforts across the state to provide accurate, complete and 

timely traffic records data, which is instrumental to program and project selection and coordination.

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

elaborate. 

CDOT was notified that our 5 year average fatality rate has increased on rural roadways for the last reporting 

period, and thus would need to obligate approximately $2.8 million for High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR) in 

Federal FY 2019 to address this concern.

In addition to HSIP, CDOT utilizes other sources of safety funding. The Funding Advancement for Surface 

Transportation and Economic Recovery Act of 2009 (FASTER) established the Road Safety Fund to support 

the construction, reconstruction, or maintenance of projects that the state Transportation Commission, a 

county, or municipality determine are needed to enhance the safety of a state highway, county road, or city 

street. The fund dollars are allocated based on a statutory formula: 60% to CDOT, 22% to counties, and 18% 

to municipalities. For CDOT, FASTER provides approximately $80 million per year in safety funds.

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes? 

Yes

FileName:

HSIP_2016.pdf

Colorado is currently working on revising our current HSIP manual to address recent input regarding 

recommended improvements by FHWA. In addition to addressing several improvement recommendations, 

CDOT will be specifically adding a systemic approach methodology as well as including an evaluation process

to this manual.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

• HRRR

• HSIP (no subprograms)

• Other-General

Many of the projects selected for HSIP funding fit one of these program types. However, there is no over-riding 

program, or a different unit of CDOT or agency manages the program.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 41

Program: HRRR

Date of Program Methodology:4/4/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• FHWA focused approach to safety

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 Traffic 

Volume Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

• Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

• Level of service of safety (LOSS)

• 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? 

• Competitive application process

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 41

Program: HSIP (no subprograms)

Date of Program Methodology:9/1/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Regional Distribution By Crash Totals

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes Traffic 

Volume Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

• Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

• Level of service of safety (LOSS)

• 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? 

• Competitive application process

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on net benefit:2

Cost Effectiveness:1

Projects must meet a minimum B/C and LOSS rating.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 41

Program: Other-General

Date of Program Methodology:1/1/2000

What is the justification for this program? 

• FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Regional Distribution By Crash Totals

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes Traffic 

Volume Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

• Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

• Level of service of safety (LOSS)

• 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? 

• Competitive application process

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 41

Projects must meet a minimum B/C and LOSS rating.

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements? 

 10

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? 

• Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

• Cable Median Barriers

• Horizontal curve signs

• Install/Improve Lighting

• Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

• Install/Improve Signing

• Pavement/Shoulder Widening

• Rumble Strips

• Safety Edge

• Upgrade Guard Rails

• Wrong way driving treatments

Colorado is planning to integrate more systemic projects as part of the HSIP in upcoming years.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

• Crash data analysis

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

• Engineering Study

• Road Safety Assessment

• SHSP/Local road safety plan

• Stakeholder input

• Other-Requests by local agencies for investigations

• Other-Independent Research & Peer State Communication

SHSP is being renewed now, adhering to the FHWA checklist.

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

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

HSIP funding can be provided to connected vehicle and ITS technology projects which incorporate 

components that are known to mitigate crashes or crash types. Many of these advanced technology 

applications can now be found on the CMF clearinghouse or through other viable research papers.

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

Yes
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 41

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

Quantitative analysis methodology as described within the 1st Edition (2010) of the Highway Safety Manual 

(HSM) is incorporated into the software, manual techniques, and systemic analysis processes that are 

employed by the CDOT Traffic & Safety Engineering staff who are charged with responsibly determining HSIP 

funding eligibility for safety related projects statewide. Subject matter from the HSM that is incorporated into 

CDOT's HSIP efforts includes but is not limited to the following: Fundamentals, Data Requirements, CMF/CRF 

Selection, Safety Performance Functions(s) (SPF's) Development, Diagnostics, Countermeasure Selection, 

Economic Appraisal (Benefit/Cost analysis), Predictive Methodology, Network Screening, etc..

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

elaborate.

In addition to the HSM methodology that Colorado has incorporated into the HSIP efforts, CDOT and its 

consultants have developed, and continue to develop and refine Safety Performance Functions (SPF's) 

baseline normative crash expectancy details that are specific to Colorado roadways, highways, freeways, 

interchanges, and intersections. CDOT believes this method allows the agency to be better prepared to 

address the specific safety concerns on Colorado roadways with respect to Colorado ADT, specific driving 

conditions, and driving habits.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 41

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding. 

State Fiscal Year

State Fiscal Year 2019 (July 1, 2018 - June 30, 2019)

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $20,287,248 $14,678,654 72.35%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$2,129,041 $1,614,522 75.83%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$11,361,130 $11,361,130 100%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $33,777,419 $27,654,306 81.87%

Obligation totals may include amounts programmed from previous fiscal years.

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

safety projects?

$2,259,314

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

$2,787,197

Obligation totals may include amounts programmed from previous fiscal years which is why obligated amounts 

exceed programmed amounts.

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

$1,289,011

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

$791,750
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 41

Obligation totals may include amounts programmed from previous fiscal years.

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. 

CDOT's Office of Financial Management and Budget (OFMB) does not typically obligate HSIP funding until the 

project has invoices submitted while under construction. The purpose of this is limit the possibility of having 

inactive projects. However, this does impact Colorado HSIP obligation rates as this tends to result in delayed 

obligation of funds for HSIP projects. There are longer than expected start up times for safety improvement 

projects, especially those run by local agencies. Special attention will now be given to construction scheduling 

and priority for fund programming will be given to projects that can deliver on a timely basis. 

Only 7% of HSIP funding was programmed towards local (non-state highway) safety projects in FY 2019. 

Based on the survey responses and interviews from a 2018 HSIP assessment, some of the reasons for this 

include lack of local agency knowledge of the opportunity, lack of readily available data, non-existent technical 

support, cumbersome federal aid program laws and regulations, lack of time and matching funds.

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

which the State would like to elaborate. 

CDOT's Office of Financial Management & Budget (OFMB) is working with the HSIP program managers to find 

ways to manage Section 164 penalty funds so that those funds can be obligated immediately. It is anticipated 

that Section 164 penalty funding will continue into future fiscal years in Colorado.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 41

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 

STRATEG

Y

I-70 GW Canyon 

Variable Speed Signing

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Dynamic message signs 17 Miles $5998787 $8009618 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate17,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

SH96A ABRIENDO - 

ORMAN Signals Improv

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

1 Intersection

s

$916212 $2641796 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal ArterialOther19,267 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

SH 21 Research 

Interchange

Interchange 

design

Convert at-grade intersection 

to interchange

1 Intersection

s

$500000 $3000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

43,800 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 24 AT 31ST 

STREET 

INTERSECTION

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

2 Intersection

s

$1839999 $2502398.9

6

Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

31,500 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

SH-67 Sedalia 

Resurfacing

Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

1 Intersection

s

$435109 $1576872 HRRR 

Special 

Rule (23 

U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

36,855 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

I-70 Avon to Vail Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

0.5 Miles $474287 $13171555 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate41,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

FY19 PIKES PEAK 

AREA SIGNAL 

REPLACEMENT

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

3 Intersection

s

$400000 $3010150 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

40,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

HWY 94 & PEYTON 

HWY

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add 

acceleration lane

0.2 Miles $173846 $175000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal ArterialOther2,800 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

I-70 

SILVERPLUMEGuardr

ail and Barrier

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add left-turn 

lane

0.2 Miles $710000 $3839329 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate36,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

I-25 NB Off-Ramp 

Intersection with 

SH52A

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add 

acceleration lane

1 Intersection

s

$481484 $484984 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther111,00

0

State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

SH1 & CR54 

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersection

s

$42300 $47000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 7,300 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

WCR 2 / I-76 Frontage - 

Signalization

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersection

s

$416880 $463200 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 19,760 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 41

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 

STRATEG

Y

R2 WRONG WAY 

PREVENTION

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection signing - add 

enhanced regulatory sign 

(double-up and/or oversize)

2 Intersection

s

$1624376 $2569663 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate76,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Mesa County 

Guardrail/Intersect 

Improve

Roadside Barrier- metal 0.58 Miles $224834 $249816 HRRR 

Special 

Rule (23 

U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

SH40 & SH83 

INTERSECTION 

SAFETY IMP

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - modify leftturn lane offset1 Intersection

s

$1754081 $1772136 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther48,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

EL PASO COUNTY 

ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

Noninfrastructure Road safety audits 1 Numbers $270000 $300000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Data

Various Intersection 

Imps in the COA

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal timing - 

left-turn phasing (permissive 

to protected/permissive)

1 Intersection

s

$192060 $213400 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Local Road or 

Street

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

ARAPAHOE COUNTY 

LOCAL ROAD SAFETY 

PLAN (

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety planning 1 Plan $117000 $130000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Data

136TH AVE:TEJON ST 

TO LEGACY HS -

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add right-turn 

lane

0.4 Miles $139397 $154885 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Local Road or 

Street

15,000 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 40 Fraser 

Pedestrian Trail

Pedestrians 

and bicyclists

Medians and pedestrian 

refuge areas

6 Raised 

Medians

$607439 $1112432 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther11,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US40 & Crescent Drive 

Sidewalk Imp-Craig

Pedestrians 

and bicyclists

Modify existing crosswalk 1.45 Miles $837000 $930000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther4,100 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians

CCD FY18 HSIP PKG 1 

-

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

2 Intersection

s

$103500 $115000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Local Road or 

Street

15,000 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

CCD FY18 HSIP PKG 2 

-

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

5 Intersection

s

$493998 $494000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Local Road or 

Street

30,000 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

CCD FY18 HSIP PKG 3 

-

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

2 Intersection

s

$540000 $600000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Local Road or 

Street

2,500 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 41

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 

STRATEG

Y

I-70 Exit 26 DDI 

Modifications

Interchange 

design

Interchange design - other 1 Intersection

s

$1177999 $1194289 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate18,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

CAPISTRANO AVE. 

TURN LANES

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add right-turn 

lane

1 Intersection

s

$342000 $380000 HRRR 

Special 

Rule (23 

U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor Collector 2,500 County 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

PLATTEVILLE BLVD. 

TURN LANES

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add right-turn 

lane (free-flow)

1 Intersection

s

$303480 $337200 HRRR 

Special 

Rule (23 

U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor Collector 3,200 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

SPAULDING 

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - two-way stop 

to roundabout

1 Intersection

s

$83826 $93139 HRRR 

Special 

Rule (23 

U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor Collector 3,650 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

RAMP METERING Interchange 

design

Ramp metering 19 Ramps $3213901 $3959962 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Principal ArterialInterstate0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersection

s

SH2 & SH95 CCD 

SIGNALS & MEDIANS 

FY20

Access 

management

Raised island - install new 8 Intersection

s

$430500 $789000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal ArterialOther50,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

SOUTH FEDERAL 

BLVD SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

5 Intersection

s

$2966599 $2974000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal ArterialOther39,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

SIGNAL CONST 

PACKAGE A FOR 

21793

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

3 Intersection

s

$2062503 $3362503 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther37,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

AURORA SIGNAL 

IMPROVEMENT FY 18

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

2 Intersection

s

$2000000 $3245513 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate41,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

SH225 AND 17TH 

PLACE 

IMPROVEMENTS

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersection

s

$139538 $157385 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 287 & SH 52 

Intersection Impv.

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add left-turn 

lane

3 Lanes $778254 $815000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal ArterialOther28,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Grand Junction Horizon 

Drive Crosswalks

Pedestrians 

and bicyclists

Medians and pedestrian 

refuge areas

1 Intersection

s

$225000 $250000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Local Road or 

Street

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 41

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 

STRATEG

Y

Intersection 

Prioritization Study PH 

II

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety planning 1 Plan / 

project list

$220721 $220722 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 Local and 

County 

agencies

Study for 

project 

prioritization

Data

I-25 SEG3A RE-PKG 

120TH TO E470

Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

2.03 Miles $5180996 $28868063 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate132,00

0

State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Crash 

Mitigation

E ARAPAHOE RD @ 

YORK ST SAFETY IMP 

- Cen

Intersection 

geometry

Splitter island - remove from 

one or more approaches

1 Intersection

s

$99000 $110000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Local Road or 

Street

33,000 Other Local 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

I-25 RAMP METER 

INSTALLATION

Interchange 

design

Ramp metering Ramps $4861464 $4861465 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Principal ArterialInterstate0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersection

s

CDOT SAFETY 

SUMMIT SUPPORT

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety planning 1 Plan / Study $16410 $16410 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Study for 

project 

prioritization

Data

SH75:BOWLES & 

MINERAL 

INTERSECTION IMP

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

1 Intersection

s

$158215 $175795 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 11,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians

AURORA SIGNALS 

2019

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

2 Intersection

s

$35000 $75000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther45,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

FEDERAL HSIP 

SIGNAL 

IMPROVEMENTS

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

6 Intersection

s

$274137.1

5

$294000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther36,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians

R1 WWD TRAFFIC 

CONTROL 

ENHANCEMENT

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Advanced technology and ITS 

- other

10 Highway 

Segments

$343496 $381662 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersection

s

2019 COLORADO 

SHSP UPDATE

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety planning 1 Plan / Study $450000 $500000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 All public 

roads

Systemic Data

SAFETY CIRCUIT 

RIDER 2019

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety planning 1 Year-Help 

develop 

many plans, 

reports, 

tranings, 

etc.

$290700 $323000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 All public 

roads

Systemic Data
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 41

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Fatalities 450 447 474 481 488 547 608 648 632

Serious Injuries 3,106 3,178 3,246 3,215 3,222 3,202 2,955 2,879 3,195

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

0.959 0.959 1.013 1.026 0.996 1.085 1.166 1.214 1.171

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

6.617 6.819 6.941 6.845 6.577 6.348 5.666 5.393 5.922

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

48 55 91 64 75 78 100 108 112

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

387 396 408 492 472 490 439 427 424
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 41

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

2600

2700

2800

2900

3000

3100

3200

3300

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 41

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 41

Describe fatality data source. 

State Motor Vehicle Crash Database

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

ownership. 

Year 2018

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

47.4

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

1

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

82.6

Rural Minor Arterial 45.6

Rural Minor Collector 22

Rural Major Collector 36.6

Rural Local Road or 

Street

22.8

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 41

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)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

47.6

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

20.6

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

139.8

Urban Minor Arterial 66

Urban Minor Collector

Urban Major Collector 21

Urban Local Road or 

Street

31.2
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 41

Year 2015

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway 

Agency

298.8

County Highway 

Agency

85.6

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

2.2

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

97

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

0

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

0

Other State Agency 0

Other Local Agency 3.4

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

0

Railroad 0

State Toll Authority 0

Local Toll Authority 0

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

0

Indian Tribe Nation 0

Provide additional discussion related to general highway safety trends. 

Following the trend seen across the country, fatalities have seen a decrease in Colorado in 2018. Even with 

increased VMT, fatality rates have also decreased. When comparing 2018 to the previous year, the data has 

shown that there are four specific areas where the fatalities increased from 2017: Urban, Older Driver (age 65 

or older), Bicyclist, and Alcohol Impaired. The number of motorcycle fatalities in 2018 were the same as the 

previous year. Serious injuries increased in 2018, although the five year average did slightly decrease.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 41

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets 

Calendar Year 2020 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:618.0

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

CDOT analyzed fatal crash data going back to 2002, developed multiple models, created best fit 

curves, and determined targets based on examination of the various predicted values. Contributing 

factors were considered, including the following: population growth, increases in VMT, economic 

growth, potential funding changes, and legislative changes. All of the models indicated flattening 

trend in fatal crash numbers, resulting in short term targets with a decrease in fatal crashes. The 

SHSP is an aspirational goal of moving Colorado towards zero deaths and is the long term vision for 

the state. The targets recognize the uptick in fatalities and the need to focus on programs to reduce 

crashes in order to pursue the aspirational goal. The target of 618 is the predicted five year rolling 

average.

Number of Serious Injuries:3271.0

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

CDOT analyzed serious injury crash data going back to 2002, developed multiple models, created 

best fit curves, and determined targets based on examination of the various predicted values. 

Contributing factors were considered, including the following: population growth, increases in VMT, 

economic growth, potential funding changes, and legislative changes. All of the models indicated 

future increases in serious injury crash numbers, resulting in short term targets with an increase in 

serious injury crashes. The SHSP is an aspirational goal of moving Colorado towards zero deaths 

and is the long term vision for the state. The targets recognize the uptick in serious injury crashes and 

the need to focus on programs to reduce crashes in pursuit of the aspirational goal. The target of 

3271 is the predicted five year average.

Fatality Rate:1.140

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

CDOT analyzed fatal crash data going back to 2002, developed multiple models, created best fit 

curves, and determined targets based on examination of the various predicted values. The fatality 

rate is based on the assumption that fatal crashes and VMT are both increasing in the near term. 

Contributing factors were considered, including the following: population growth, increases in VMT, 

economic growth, potential funding changes, and legislative changes. All of the models indicated 

future decreases in fatality rates, resulting in short term targets with a decrease in the fatal rate. The 

SHSP is an aspirational goal of moving Colorado towards zero deaths and is the long term vision for 

the state. The targets recognize the uptick in the fatality rate and the need to focus on programs to 

reduce crashes in order to pursue the aspirational goal. The target of 1.143 is based on the five year 

moving average.

Serious Injury Rate:6.075
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 41

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

CDOT analyzed serious injury crash data going back to 2002, developed multiple models, created 

best fit curves, and determined targets based on examination of the various predicted values. 

Contributing factors were considered, including the following: population growth, increases in VMT, 

economic growth, potential funding changes, and legislative changes. The serious injury rate is based 

on the assumption that serious injury crashes and VMT are both increasing in the near term. The 

SHSP is an aspirational goal of moving Colorado towards zero deaths and is the long term vision for 

the state. The targets recognize the uptick in serious injury crashes and the need to focus on 

programs to reduce crashes in pursuit of the aspirational goal. The target of 6.075 is the predicted 

five year average.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:670.0

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

CDOT analyzed the non-motorized fatalities and serious injury data going back to 2007, developed 

multiple models, created best fit curves, and determined targets based on examination of the various 

predicted values. Contributing factors were considered, including the following: population growth, 

increases in VMT, economic growth, potential funding changes, and legislative changes. All of the 

models indicated increases in the non-motorized crashes. The SHSP is an aspirational goal of 

moving Colorado towards zero deaths and is the long term vision for the state. The targets recognize 

the uptick in the fatality rate and the need to focus on programs to reduce crashes in order to pursue 

the aspirational goal. The target of 670 is based on the five year moving average.

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

safety performance targets. 

The CDOT offices of transportation safety (which is also the SHSO) and traffic engineering coordinated with 

the Colorado Department of Health and Environment to evaluate historical crash data and develop various 

trend models. CDOT and the MPO’s participated in FHWA training on the new rule making and requirements 

for establishing targets. Various meetings have been held with CDOT management, planners, MPO’s, and 

CDPHE staff to review CDOT’s proposed targets. CDOT has memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the 

MPO's which details each agency's roles and responsibilities in this process. Meetings are ongoing with 

individual MPO’s to present data, review CDOT’s process, and provide assistance in the establishment of 

individual MPO goals or adoption of the statewide goals. The MPO’s continue to work toward establishing their 

targets or adopting CDOT’s targets. They are aware of the February 2020 deadline and are working toward 

this goal. CDOT will continue to coordinate with these organizations to support this effort. The HSIP safety 

performance targets data source is the same as the HSP.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2018 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. 

Number of Fatalities

Calendar Year 2018 Target: 610
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 41

The observed 5-year rolling average for 2018 was 584.6, which meets the target. The number of fatalities in 

2018 were less than the previous year, which was the first time since 2011 that fatalities have decreased 

annually in Colorado.

Number of Serious Injuries

Calendar Year 2018 Target: 3,350

The observed 5-year rolling average for 2018 was 3,090.6, which meets the target. Although the number of 

serious injuries had increased in 2018, they had been decreasing annually for several years prior to 2018.

Fatality Rate

Calendar Year 2018 Target: 1.20 

The observed 5-year rolling average for 2018 was 1.126, which meets the target. Although the Fatality Rate 

had decreased in 2018, it had been increasing annually for several years prior to 2018, which accounts for a 

higher trend and target.

Serious Injury Rate

Calendar Year 2018 Target: 6.79

The observed 5-year rolling average for 2018 was 5.981, which meets the target. The Serious Injury Rate in 

2018 was more than the previous year, but 2018 was the first time since 2012 that Serious Injury Rate has 

increased annually in Colorado.The 5-year average has also decreased every year since 2014.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Calendar Year 2018 Target: 586

The observed 5-year rolling average for 2018 was 545, which meets the target. The number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries in 2018 was slightly less than the previous year.

Applicability of Special Rules

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

Yes

Colorado must obligate $2,826,084 of HRRR in Federal FY 2019

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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

57 68 55 74 92 90 91

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

241 250 228 226 235 240 272

2018 serious injury totals are considered preliminary and are subject to change. Annual fatalities and serious 

injuries from previous years have been revised and updated in this report.
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 41

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

• Benefit/Cost Ratio

• Lives saved

• Other-Before and After Studies

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

the State's program level evaluations. 

Overall, the HSIP in Colorado has had a positive impact on reducing crashes at select locations. CDOT 

routinely evaluates the observed crash history at locations after an HSIP project has been implemented. The 

output of each evaluation is a calculated benefit/cost (B/C) ratio of the project which helps CDOT assess its 

effectiveness of the HSIP.

Prior to this reporting period, 48 completed HSIP projects have been evaluated. Each project have sufficient 

post-installation crash data available (typically three to five years) to determine a realized B/C ratio which was 

then compared to those calculated at the time of project HSIP eligibility review. These reports can be found at 

the following location:

https://www.codot.gov/library/traffic/hsip/studies

CDOT is continuing this process with the evaluation of 29 new HSIP projects. A final report describing the 

findings of this endeavor is expected to be issued within the next reporting period.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

• # miles improved by HSIP

• HSIP Obligations

• Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

• Increased focus on local road safety

• More systemic programs

• Organizational change

• Other-Realized Positive B/C Ratio

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures. 

Year 2018

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 66.8 207.2 0.13 0.4
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 41

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury 

Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Roadway Departure 230.2 891.8 0.44 1.72

Intersections 175.8 1,364.2 0.34 2.64

Pedestrians 79 305 0.15 0.59

Bicyclists 15.6 152.2 0.03 0.3

Older Drivers 80.4 241 0.16 0.47

Motorcyclists 104 520.2 0.2 1.01

Work Zones 8.2 33.6 0.02 0.07
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 41

0

50

100

150

200

250

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 41

2018 serious injury totals are considered preliminary and are subject to change. Annual fatalities and serious 

injuries from previous years have been revised and updated in this report.

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 41

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the 

reporting period? 

No

Over the next reporting period, a new 2019 study that evaluates the effectiveness of 29 HSIP projects will be 

posted to the website below. The website already contains previously conducted before and after studies that 

have evaluated a total of 48 HSIP projects.

https://www.codot.gov/library/traffic/hsip/studies
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 41

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)

Colfax Avenue 

(US 40) / 

Youngfield 

Street

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

25.00 13.00 1.00 10.00 6.00 36.00 19.00 3.33

The above described project is one example of a before and after evaluation that was completed by CDOT & its consultants to evaluate and aid in understanding the overall effectiveness of the HSIP in Colorado. In the case of the 

example, the project was designed to mitigate rear end and right angle crashes. In this example, the intersection was realigned to improve turns and add a protective/permissive southbound left turn lane. Span wire was also replaced with 

mast arms. 

In the interest of being concise for this portion of this annual HSIP report, we have only provided this one example; however, for further examples of various HSIP projects for which before and after studies were completed, please review

the reports entitled "2015 Study" and "2016 Study" on the following CDOT public website:

https://www.codot.gov/library/traffic/hsip/studies
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 41

Compliance Assessment

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

 03/16/2015

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2015 To: 2020

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

 2020

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

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

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

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9)

100 100

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21)

100 100

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20)

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 100 100 100 100

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10)

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13)

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18)

100 100

Functional Class 

(19)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Median Type (54) 100

Access Control (22) 100 100
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 41

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

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

One/Two Way 

Operations (91)

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31)

100 100 100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79)

100 50 100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 50

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120)

100

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122)

100

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123)

100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

100

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79)

100 50

AADT Year (80) 100 50

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

100

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197)

100

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

100

Ramp Length (187) 100
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 41

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

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

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

100

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199)

100

Interchange Type 

(182)

100

Ramp AADT (191) 100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192)

100

Functional Class 

(19)

100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 100.00 88.89 87.50 12.50 100.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

*Based on Functional Classification

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. 

STRAC (TRCC) Strategic Plan (2019) - Appendix B. 

CDOT Plan to Collect MIRE Fundamental Data Elements

CDOT currently has approximately 6,950 intersection/junctions, 437 interchanges, 9,180 non-local paved roadway segments, 76,766 paved local roadway segments and 39,372 unpaved local segments. Of the date elements required, 

CDOT has the vast majority of them available through on-going collection programs. Notable exceptions are:

• Median Type for Off-System, non-local paved roadway segments that are not HPMS Samples; 

• AADT numbers for Rural Collector and Local paved roadway segments; 

• Intersection Geometry and Intersection Traffic Control for Off-System non-local paved intersections. 

Due to the magnitude involved with collecting the missing data elements and the potential system changes that will need to be made, CDOT intends to utilize the next 2-3 years to research and assess various methodologies to meet the 

10-year deadline for providing the required information. This planning stage will consist of the following assessment activities:

1. Contact other State DOT’s and survey what methodologies they are employing to meet these requirements. 

2. Research and monitor 3rd party big data providers. Technology and data collection is progressing rapidly; there is a possibility that companies aware of these requirements may move to collect this information for retail sale. 

3. Research other potential sources for the required data elements, including local jurisdictions and MPOs 

4. If 3rd party data is not available and other potential sources do not exist, we will move forward with developing a long term plan for collection, including locating and procuring funding. 

5. We have identified a tool that will be implemented this fall that will assist us to manage the intersections as an object that will encompass all required elements. 

MIRE Fundamental Data Elements for Non-Local (Based on Functional Classification) Paved Roads
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 41

Roadway segment CDOT

Segment Identifier (12) Currently available for all public roads

Route Number (8) Currently available for all public roads

Route/street Name (9) Currently available for all public roads

Federal Aid/Route Type (21) Currently available for all public roads

Rural/Urban Designation (20) Currently available for all public roads

Surface Type (23) Currently available for all public roads

Begin Point Segment Descriptor (10) Currently available for all public roads

End Point Segment Descriptor (11) Currently available for all public roads

Segment Length (13) Currently available for all public roads

Direction of Inventory (18) Currently available for all public roads

Functional Class (19) Currently available for all public roads

Median Type (54) Currently available for all On-System roadways and HPMS segments

Access Control (22) Currently available for all public roads

One/Two-Way Operations (91) Currently available for all public roads

Number of Through Lanes (31) Currently available for all public roads

Average Annual Daily Traffic (79) Currently available for all fed-aid roads. Will have to collect for Rural Collector roadway segments

AADT Year (80) Currently available for all fed-aid roads. Will have to collect for Rural Collector roadway segments

Type of Governmental Ownership (4) Currently available for all public roads

Intersection CDOT

Unique Junction Identifier (120) Currently available

Location Identifier for Road 1 Crossing Point (122) Currently available

Location Identifier for Road 2 Crossing Point (123) Currently available

Intersection/Junction Geometry (126) Currently available for On-System. Will need to be collected on the paved non-local OffSystem roads

Intersection/Junction Traffic Control (131) Currently available for On-System. Will need to be collected on the paved non-local OffSystem roads

AADT (79) [for Each Intersecting Road] Currently available for all fed-aid roads. Will have to collect for Rural Collector roadway segments

AADT Year (80) [for Each Intersecting Road] Currently available for all fed-aid roads. Will have to collect for Rural Collector roadway segments

Unique Approach Identifier (139) Will need to be created for all paved non-local roads

Interchange/Ramp CDOT

Unique Interchange Identifier (178) Currently available

Location Identifier for Roadway at Beginning Ramp Terminal (197) Currently available

Location Identifier for Roadway at Ending Ramp Terminal (201) Currently available

Ramp Length (187) Currently available

Roadway Type at Beginning Ramp Terminal (195) Element can be extracted from existing data

Roadway Type at Ending Ramp Terminal (199) Element can be extracted from existing data

Interchange Type (182) Currently available

Ramp AADT (191) Currently available

Year of Ramp AADT (192) Currently available

Functional Class (19) Element can be extracted from existing data

Type of Governmental Ownership (4) Element can be extracted from existing data
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 41

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

No

When does the State plan to complete its next HSIP program assessment.

2023
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 41

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

HSIP_2016.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2019 Colorado Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 41

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.