Intersections represent one-quarter of all traffic fatalities 

and one-half of all traffic injuries. Each intersection project 

is an incremental opportunity to enhance safety and take 

one more step toward zero deaths and serious injuries on 

our Nation’s roads.

Using a performance-based approach, Intersection Control 

Evaluation (ICE) is used to screen alternatives and identify 

optimal geometric and control solutions for an intersection.1

The goal of ICE is to help agencies make data-driven 

decisions when it comes to identifying and selecting 

strategies for intersection-related projects.2

By the end of 2019, 10 States had ICE policies and many 

more were developing ICE policies. Because ICE is a flexible 

and adaptable framework, specific policies and tools differ 

to allow each agency to best fit their program development 

and project delivery process. Some States have developed 

custom spreadsheet tools where users can input projectspecific information 

and facilitate consistent 

documentation of design 

selections.

1 FHWA. “Primer on Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE).” FHWA-SA-18-076. n.d. https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/ice/fhwasa18076/fhwasa18076.pdf. Accessed August 26, 2019.

2 Jenior, P., Butsick, A., Haas, P., and Ray, B. “Safety Performance for Intersection Control Evaluation (SPICE) Tool User Manual.” FHWA, FHWA-SA-18-026. 2018. https://www.pooledfund.org/

Document/Download/8250. Accessed August 26, 2019.

3 FHWA. “Primer on Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE).” FHWA-SA-18-076. n.d. https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/ice/fhwasa18076/fhwasa18076.pdf. Accessed August 26, 2019.

General benefits

States that have implemented ICE policies have seen 

many benefits,3

 which include:

• Integration of safety into all decisions for

intersection control.

• Implementation of more cost-effective solutions.

• Consistent documentation across projects.

• Increased awareness of innovative intersection

solutions.

• Emphasis on objective performance metrics.

• Consolidation and streamlining of existing

intersection-related policies.

• Flexible and scalable procedures.

AK

AZ NM

NC

VA

SC

ND

TN

SD

OH

FL

TX

UT

NV

OK

OR

WA

WV

CA

ID

IL

WI

KS KY

LA

IN

MI

MN

MS AL GA

MT

WY

NE

IA

MO

AR

CO

PA

ME

NY

CT

RI

HI

DE

NJ

VT

MD

MA

NH

Intersection

Control Evaluation

States with ICE Policies (As of 2019)

States without ICE Policies (As of 2019)
ICE should be conducted for new intersections or when substantive change is considered for the traffic control or geometry of existing intersections. ICE 

can be both a policy and process. Many States have produced flowcharts to more easily visualize their unique ICE processes.

Existing Resources and Tools 

There are ICE tools available to analyze safety and operations at both 

intersection and interchange types, including roundabouts, U-turn based 

intersections, like Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) and Median U-Turn 

(MUT), and crossover-based junctions, like Displaced Left Turn (DLT) 

intersections and Diverging Diamond Interchanges (DDIs).

The FHWA Intersection Control Evaluation website (https://safety.fhwa.dot.

gov/intersection/ice/) provides resources and tools that can help agencies 

create and conduct ICE policies and activities.

Stage I is a scoping stage to determine a short list from all possible 

alternatives that merit further consideration and analysis because they 

meet organizational goals, project needs, and are practical to pursue. Stage 

I screens out non-competitive options from being carried into Stage II.

Does the alternative...

• Address the project purpose and need? 

• Improve safety performance? 

• Improve or preserve operational performance? 

• Consider pedestrians, bicyclists, and other users? 

• Fit in with given site characteristics and context?

• Meet the needs and values of the local community and directlyaffected stakeholders?

Needed inputs

• Crash assessment (historic and future).

• Traffic volumes for safety and operational analysis.

• Planning-level cost estimates.

• Possible ROW and environmental impacts.

• Stakeholder feedback (if available).

Stage II is an alternative development and selection stage that objectively 

compares and differentiates among the alternatives brought forward from 

the Stage I scoping analysis. In this stage, the preferred alternative is 

determined based on more detailed evaluations that account for all users 

and are conducted during typical preliminary engineering activities, like 

safety performance, operational performance, lifecycle benefits and costs, 

environmental, utility, and right-of-way impacts, and specific multimodal 

accommodations.

• The Primer on Intersection Control Evaluation was developed in 2018 

to provide an overview of ICE, appropriate situations for ICE, and the 

general framework/process used by ICE States; it also highlights 

available resources and tools. 

• The Capacity Analysis for Planning of 

Junctions (CAP-X) Tool conducts critical 

movement analysis to gauge the potential 

performance of various intersection and 

interchange types, and also characterizes 

bicyclist and pedestrian accommodations.

• The Safety Performance for 

Intersection Control Evaluation 

(SPICE) Tool performs basic 

predictive safety analysis of certain 

at-grade intersection alternatives/

control types and ramp terminal intersections. It was developed to 

facilitate a user-friendly, HSM-based preliminary safety analysis for 

ICE Stage I

For more information contact:

NAME: ___________________________________________

AGENCY: _________________________________________

EMAIL: ___________________________________________

PHONE/WEBSITE: ___________________________________

Stage I

Stage II

Existing Resources and Tools

General Process

Intersection

Control Evaluation