Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation 

in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of 

the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.

The U.S. Government does not endorse products of manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective 

of the document.

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve 

Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and 

processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.

Cover and Banner Image Sources:

Left – Check point: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

Middle Left – Woman: Comstock Images.

Middle Right – Rumble Strip: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

Right – Don’t Text: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

SHSP Process Logo – Federal Highway Administration.
Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No.

FHWA-SA-12-034

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Strategic Highway Safety Plans – A Champion’s Guidebook to Saving Lives, 

Second Edition

5. Report Date

March 2013

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

100 CambridgePark Drive, Suite 400

Cambridge, MA 02140

10. Work Unit No.

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH61-05-D-00026

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

Office of Safety, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Final Report

May 2012-September 2012

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

FHWA: Jennifer Warren, Office of Safety

16. Abstract

This document reviews the basic principles and important considerations concerning the development, implementation, and 

evaluation of a Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). It is intended as a resource for States to consult during examination of

their SHSP process, as well during SHSP updates. It is also a valuable reference for professionals new to safety and planning or 

newly involved in the SHSP process. 

This document addresses the SHSP fundamentals of champions, leadership, organizational structure, safety partners, and 

collaboration; data collection and analysis; content; preparation (of document); and implementation and evaluation. The 

original Champion’s Guide published in April 2006, provided guidance to States as they developed their first SHSPs. This 

revised second edition, while not guidance, is consistent with current legislation and builds upon more than five years of States’ 

experiences implementing SHSPs. It is designed to encourage practitioners to revisit their SHSP with effective practices and 

processes in mind, and includes a helpful checklist at the end of each chapter with recommended steps for achieving these 

standards. The document concludes with a list of additional tools and references.

17. Key Words 

Transportation safety, SHSP development, 

SHSP implementation, transportation planning, SHSP fundamentals, safety data and 

analysis, SHSP emphasis areas, safety goals 

and objectives, SHSP content, SHSP 

evaluation.

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National 

Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161.

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page) 

Unclassified

21. No of Pages 

40

22. Price

N/A

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed pages authorized
Foreword

The original Champion’s Guide to Saving Lives, published in April 2006, provided guidance to States 

as they developed Strategic Highway Safety Plans (SHSP), required for the first time by SAFETEA-LU. 

Since then, all States have developed and implemented their SHSPs and many have updated them at 

least once. Through its data-driven and collaborative process, the SHSP is helping States identify and 

prioritize their most pressing road safety needs, and develop a program of strategies with the greatest 

potential to save lives and reduce injuries. 

The SHSP process is ongoing and cyclical; therefore, it is helpful to periodically revisit its elements. 

Strategic Highway Safety Plans: A Champion’s Guidebook to Saving Lives, Second Edition addresses 

the fundamental and effective steps for the SHSP development process. While this Second Edition is 

not legislative guidance, it is consistent with MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century) 

and is intended to be a resource for States that are updating their SHSPs or reviewing their SHSP 

process. It is intended as a reference for professionals new to safety and planning. It describes the 

fundamentals of SHSP safety champions, leadership, organizational structure, safety partners, and 

collaboration and communication and how to incorporate them into the SHSP process. It identifies 

helpful data collection and analysis techniques, describes typical content elements of SHSPs, provides 

a sample SHSP format, and describes helpful implementation and evaluation strategies. Included in the 

document are recommendation checklists and resources to assist practitioners through the SHSP process.

Every SHSP update is an opportunity to revisit and strengthen the State’s safety priorities, performance 

measures, goals, objectives, and strategies. This Guidebook describes how a commitment to a 

data-driven, performance-based, collaborative, and multidisciplinary SHSP can dramatically improve 

SHSP efforts and transportation safety. 

Sincerely yours,

Anthony Furst

Associate Administrator for Safety

Federal Highway Administration
i

Table of Contents

Overview .................................................................................................1

History and Background...................................................................... 1

Legislative and Regulatory Requirements............................................... 1

Benefits of SHSPs................................................................................ 2

SHSP Cycle........................................................................................ 3

Chapter 1 – SHSP Fundamentals................................................................4

Introduction ....................................................................................... 4

Champions........................................................................................ 4

Leadership ......................................................................................... 5

Organizational Structure ..................................................................... 6

Safety Partners ................................................................................... 8

Collaboration and Communication ..................................................... 9

Checklist.......................................................................................... 10

Chapter 2 – Data Collection and Analysis.............................................11

Introduction ..................................................................................... 11

Types of Data ................................................................................... 12

Data Integration ............................................................................... 13

Data Collection and Management..................................................... 13

Data Analysis................................................................................... 14

Data Sharing ................................................................................... 15

Checklist.......................................................................................... 16

Chapter 3 – SHSP Content .....................................................................17

Introduction ..................................................................................... 17

Performance Management ................................................................ 17

Strategic Goals and Objectives.......................................................... 18

Emphasis Areas................................................................................ 19

Checklist.......................................................................................... 20

Chapter 4 – SHSP Preparation .............................................................21

Introduction .................................................................................... 21

SHSP Format.................................................................................... 21

Checklist.......................................................................................... 22

Chapter 5 – SHSP Implementation and Evaluation ..............................23

Introduction ..................................................................................... 23

SHSP Implementation........................................................................ 23

SHSP Evaluation............................................................................... 27

Checklist.......................................................................................... 29

Conclusion .............................................................................................30

Resources...............................................................................................31

1

Overview

The Strategic Highway Safety Plan Champion’s Guidebook, Second Edition is 

intended to provide an overview of the fundamental elements of the SHSP 

process. It will serve as a resource for States that are updating their Strategic 

Highway Safety Plans (SHSP) or assessing their SHSP development process, as 

well as provide a reference for professionals new to safety and planning. 

An SHSP is a data-driven, comprehensive, multidisciplinary plan integrating 

the “4 E’s” of safety – engineering, education, enforcement, and emergency 

medical services. It establishes statewide performance measures, goals, 

objectives, and emphasis areas and describes a program of strategies to 

reduce or eliminate safety hazards. It is developed by the State Department of 

Transportation (DOT) in consultation with Federal, State, local, and tribal 

safety stakeholders. 

History and Background

To prevent the devastating human and economic consequences of traffic 

crashes, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation 

Officials (AASHTO) published an SHSP1 in 1997 that identified 22 emphasis 

areas where progress could be made on reducing transportation-related 

fatalities and serious injuries. States were encouraged to develop SHSPs by 

addressing the emphasis areas in the AASHTO plan. At that time, some States 

already had produced SHSPs, and others began to work on them after the 

AASHTO plan was published. 

In 2005, Congress passed legislation2

 requiring States to develop SHSPs. By 

October 1, 2007, all States and the District of Columbia had complied with the 

requirement, and many have since updated the original SHSP at least once. All 

States are implementing SHSPs, and many are experiencing remarkable results 

in roadway safety. 

Legislative and Regulatory Requirements

The SHSP is a requirement of the Highway Safety Improvement Program 

(HSIP).3

 The goal of the HSIP is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic 

fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. The SHSP supports that goal 

because it is intended to drive State HSIP investment decisions by ensuring 

projects correspond to the emphasis areas and strategies identified in the SHSP. 

1 AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan. 2 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act – A Legacy for Users 

(SAFETEA LU). 3 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21).

Engineering

EMS

Education Enforcement

Source: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
2

Other SHSP requirements4 include:

•	 Based on crash and other safety data analyses to identify safety issues on 

all public roads;

•	 Developed after consultation with a broad range of stakeholders;

•	 Addresses the 4 E’s of safety through a multidisciplinary approach;

•	 Describes a program of strategies to reduce or eliminate safety hazards;

•	 Considers other State highway safety plans and processes.

Benefits of SHSPs

The primary goal of an SHSP is to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on all 

public roads. The collaborative process of developing and implementing an 

SHSP brings together, and draws on, the strengths and resources of all safety 

partners. An SHSP should help safety partners better leverage limited 

resources and work together to achieve common safety goals. The SHSP 

offers the following benefits:

•	 Establishes common statewide goals and priorities; 

•	 Strengthens existing partnerships; 

•	 Builds new safety coalitions; 

•	 Promotes data, knowledge, and resource sharing; 

•	 Avoids redundant activities and leverages existing resources, such as 

funding, personnel, and leadership; and

•	 Incorporates both behavioral and infrastructure strategies and countermeasures to more effectively reduce highway fatalities and serious injuries 

on all public roads.

4 23 U.S.C. 148(a)(12).

Source: Louisiana Department

of Transportation and

Development.
3

SHSP Cycle

The SHSP process is continuous and cyclical. It begins with development and 

continues as States implement, evaluate, and update their plans on a regularly 

recurring basis. Regulation5 establishes the requirements for the SHSP evaluation and update process. At any point in this cycle, it is helpful to revisit the 

fundamental elements of SHSP development.

The SHSP development process begins by “laying the groundwork” or having 

in place the fundamental elements needed to organize the effort and see it 

through to implementation and evaluation (a champion, leadership, organizational structure, safety partners, and collaboration and communication) 

(Chapter 1). The remaining elements of the SHSP development process 

include data collection and analysis (Chapter 2); performance management, 

establishing strategic goals, emphasis areas, objectives, strategies and countermeasures (Chapter 3); preparing the SHSP (Chapter 4); and consideration 

of next steps, including implementation and evaluation of the SHSP (Chapter 

5). The chapters in this document provide an overall framework along with 

strategies States may use to support and enhance SHSP development efforts. 

A checklist is provided at the end of each chapter that recommends steps to 

improve a State’s SHSP, both the plan itself and the processes by which a State 

manages their SHSP.

5 23 CFR 924; MAP-21 requires the Regulation to be updated by 2013.

Source: Federal Highway

Administration.
4

Chapter 1–

SHSP Fundamentals

Introduction

In the complex, multidisciplinary world of transportation safety, leaders bring 

together the diverse interests and concerns of engineers, planners, law 

enforcement officers, education officials, emergency response personnel, and 

others. Because people who work within this diverse set of disciplines have 

the potential to improve safety, it is important they work collaboratively. A 

partnership among these disciplines during every stage of the SHSP process is 

critical. At a minimum, the collaborative effort should result in the communication and adoption of the SHSP vision, mission, goals, and performance 

measures among the agencies. This chapter discusses the fundamental need 

for an SHSP Champion, leadership, safety partners, collaboration, and 

communication and suggests strategies to help integrate these elements into 

the SHSP process. 

Champions

Successful SHSP efforts call for at least one “champion” to assist in gathering 

all critical safety partners into a collaborative group. Champions provide 

enthusiasm and support for the SHSP and must be credible and accountable, 

have excellent interpersonal and organizational skills, and be a skilled expediter. Safety champions help secure the necessary leadership, resources, 

visibility, support, and commitment of all partners. Sometimes the champion is 

appointed by the department of transportation (DOT) leadership or the leadership of the primary sponsoring agency. A safety champion can reside at any 

level within the organizational structure and perform various functions. For 

example, a safety champion may lead the working group that develops and 

implements the SHSP and is responsible for maintaining the group’s cohesion, 

focus, and effectiveness. In this case, champions sustain the working group’s 

interest and momentum and promote communication and collaboration 

among the partners. Where relationships are not fully developed, the champion may have to put in additional effort in keeping the full range of safety 

partners committed and actively participating.
5

Leadership

Leaders are an instrumental part of any planning process, and the SHSP 

process is no exception. They bring people together, provide essential direction, and motivate people to participate in and implement the SHSP. Leaders 

should be engaged and actively involved in the SHSP process. Leadership 

support should come from the State DOT, State Highway Safety Office or 

Governor’s Highway Safety Office (SHSO/GHSO), State Commissioners (e.g., 

of Health, Education, Police), etc. Good leaders influence policy direction, set 

priorities, and define performance expectations. They energize the SHSP 

process and see to it that the plan, once developed, is implemented. They are 

risk takers, problems solvers, and creative thinkers committed to doing what is 

necessary to advance the cause, which sometimes means breaking traditional 

institutional barriers, such as working in “silos” and balancing competing 

agency priorities. Leaders are needed throughout all stages of SHSP development, implementation, and evaluation. They communicate the SHSP vision 

and goals and support a collaborative framework that enables safety stakeholders to actively participate in SHSP implementation. 

To expand leadership support, begin with the safety partners already committed to the SHSP concept and process. Encourage the leadership of those 

partners to contact their peers, explain the significance of this effort, and 

marshal support. Their endorsement of the SHSP should include encouraging 

staff to stay engaged and build relationships across organizational boundaries 

and traditional areas of responsibility. Leadership support affects agencies or 

organizations internally by granting permission to dedicate time and resources 

to the effort, and holds those responsible for the SHSP accountable. Support 

must be sustained throughout the process for continuous implementation and 

evaluation. Leadership should recognize this is an ongoing process and 

institutionalize the change in the safety decision-making culture. 

SHSP leadership also includes SHSP program managers who manage and 

attend to the day-to-day tasks of arranging, facilitating, and documenting 

meetings, tracking progress, and moving discrete activities through to completion. The SHSP program manager may perform either as a part- or full-time 

permanent role; experience demonstrates that a dedicated role is preferable.

In some cases, a single person may fulfill the Champion, Leadership, and 

Program Manager role, but it is more often the case that these responsibilities 

are assumed by multiple people.

Source: Louisiana Department

of Transportation and

Development.
6

Organizational Structure

The SHSP process depends upon collaboration among engineers, law enforcement personnel, emergency responders, outreach professionals, and other 

safety stakeholders. A formal organizational structure facilitates the SHSP 

management process. It helps the stakeholders understand their role and 

establishes a decision-making hierarchy. 

The organizational structure will vary from State to State. Regardless of the 

form it takes, it should function to oversee the SHSP process; from development 

and implementation to evaluation. 

An example of an SHSP organizational structure could be:

An executive committee or leadership council is typically made up of members who are leaders of departments and agencies, such as transportation, 

State highway safety offices (SHSO), public safety, statewide law enforcement 

organizations, licensing agencies, departments of health and education, and 

others. States form executive committees to provide leadership for SHSP 

development, implementation, and evaluation. Executive committees are 

typically comprised of top management representatives from the stakeholder 

agencies, which helps gain consensus at a high level. The members of this 

committee have the authority to commit agency resources to the planning 

process and promote the SHSP within individual agency plans. Executive 

committees typically meet one or more times a year and are responsible for 

the overall direction and administration of SHSP activities. SHSP executive 

committees are generally responsible for defining priority issues and providing 

direction to steering committees or working groups. 

Executive Committee

State and Community Elected and Appointed Officials

Steering Committees/Working Groups

Agency Managers Community Coalitions

Emphasis Area Teams

Agency Managers Safety Stakeholders Technical Experts

SHSP Program 

Coordinator 

or Manager

Source: Nevada Department

of Transportation.

Source: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
7

To facilitate a consultative and comprehensive approach to safety, many States 

have found it beneficial to establish a steering committee (or sometimes called 

a working group) to guide the SHSP process. This committee will typically 

oversee the ongoing development and implementation of the plan. They 

usually meet quarterly or on an established schedule to review progress in 

each of the plan’s emphasis areas, and to receive updates on SHSP-related 

strategies and programs. They also provide assistance when appropriate to 

overcome barriers or solve problems, and provide recommendations to the 

Executive Committee on SHSP initiatives or areas that require a higher-level 

solution. 

The steering committee also should consist of representatives from the agencies across engineering, education, enforcement, emergency medical services 

(EMS), public health, and other disciplines. This is consistent with the Federal 

requirements for State DOTs to develop and implement a strategic highway 

safety plan (SHSP) in consultation with:

•	 The Governor’s highway safety representative;

•	 Regional and metropolitan transportation planning organizations; 

•	 Representatives from the major transportation modes;

•	 State and local traffic enforcement officials;

•	 The Governor’s highway-rail grade crossing representative;

•	 Representatives conducting a motor carrier safety program;

•	 County transportation officials;

•	 State representatives of nonmotorized users;

•	 Motor vehicle administration agencies; and

•	 Other major Federal, State, tribal, and local safety stakeholders.6

In addition to Federally required safety partners, the working group also may 

include other safety advocates from government, academia, special interest 

groups, and the private sector. These members should be selected based on 

their level of expertise and commitment to highway safety. Participants can be 

appointed by leadership or invited to participate by the SHSP champion. DOT, 

Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and regional transportation 

planners should be involved. Likewise, given the high number of highway 

fatalities and serious injuries that occur on non-State roads, local, regional, 

and tribal agencies should be invited and encouraged to participate. Local/

Tribal Technical Assistance Programs (LTAP/TTAP) also can help represent local 

need and issues. 

6 23 U.S.C. 148(a)(12)(A).

Source: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
8

Some working groups develop a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to 

facilitate communication among transportation professionals within the participating organizations. The MOU briefly describes the common goal of 

improved highway safety and emphasizes the commitment to work as a team 

to achieve a shared vision. A MOU reminds members of their mission and 

goals, emphasizes the importance of each participant’s contribution, helps the 

group remain focused, and can increase understanding and trust among the 

agencies and organizations.

States may form an emphasis area team for each emphasis area. Emphasis 

areas are based on analysis of the safety data and input from safety stakeholders. Emphasis area teams conduct further analyses of safety data and 

develop emphasis areas action plans (see Chapter 4). Reducing highway 

fatalities and serious injuries is contingent upon a multiagency collaborative 

effort. These emphasis area teams are usually comprised of representatives 

from agencies representing the 4 E’s. The benefits of participation include 

the ability to influence strategic priorities and resource allocation. Team 

members include technical specialists knowledgeable in the emphasis area 

and safety professionals whose program plans are directly affected by the 

emphasis area strategies.

Most States also have an SHSP program coordinator who is responsible for 

overall management of the day-to-day SHSP activities.

Many States use some version of the structure described above, but again this 

will vary among States. The goal is to create a structure that will help States 

effectively administer and manage the SHSP process and best meet their 

organizational needs. 

Safety Partners 

The organizational structure of State agencies and interagency working relationships are important factors to consider when bringing safety partners 

together. Rather than create entirely new committees, a State should build 

upon existing relationships, interagency working groups, and committees. 

Many States currently have functioning transportation safety committees such 

as Traffic Records Coordinating Committees (TRCC), and impaired driving or 

safety belt coalitions. Some States have revitalized past Safety Management 

Systems. Regardless of how safety partners are brought together and organized to contribute to the SHSP process, States should look for ways to expand 

membership to include a broad range of partners, such as insurance, trucking, 

and motor coach companies, fire and rescue, local businesses, and others. 

Each State and community has its own character, but with local input, the 

“movers and shakers” can be identified and recruited. SHSP partners typically 

include those that are Federally required (see previous section) as well as 

emergency medical services providers, health and education departments, 

“Coming together is an

accomplishment, stayi

together is progress, 

working together is

success

- Henry For

Source: PhotoDisc, Inc.
9

Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) managers, local agencies, 

tribal governments, special interest groups (i.e., MADD, AAA), and others. 

With the emphasis on wide-ranging collaboration that includes many external 

partners, it can be easy to overlook the importance of broad DOT involvement 

as well. Early involvement of Design, Operations, Maintenance, etc. will 

enhance the implementation of SHSP strategies, especially if they are new 

or experimental. 

Some States bring partners together by convening a safety summit or meeting. 

This could be a large initial meeting to kickoff an SHSP update or a meeting of 

the SHSP working group or steering committee. It provides an opportunity to 

learn about each of the safety partner priorities and understand what they 

contribute. States should give participants the opportunity to describe their 

safety concerns and current programs. This may advance the discussion of 

critical safety issues, identify opportunities, and forge an agreement on how 

to proceed.

Collaboration and Communication 

Safety partners and organizations bring unique and valuable perspectives to 

bear on the transportation safety problem. However, differing philosophies, 

competing priorities, and varying business cultures may make collaboration a 

challenge. Creating a basic foundation for effective collaboration and establishing a process to support collaborative efforts overcomes these barriers. 

Techniques for establishing a foundation include:

•	 Establishing common mission statements, performance measures, goals, 

and safety objectives; and incorporating them into each agency’s 

priorities;

•	 Implementing a data collection and analysis strategy to support collaborative safety planning and identifying mechanisms for sharing data and 

analysis results with local agencies and other safety partners; and

•	 Organizing and institutionalizing opportunities for interaction through 

workshops, forums, training courses, and conferences.

Once the foundation is established, States can support ongoing collaboration 

and communication by:

•	 Institutionalizing an analysis-driven process to focus all members and 

collaboration activities on the most pressing road safety problems;

•	 Adopting an implementation focus early in the process to define who will do 

what, by when, and identify the resources needed to accomplish the tasks;

Source: Nevada Department

of Transportation.
10

•	 Adopting an evaluation focus from the beginning; collaboratively defining 

performance measures and data collection needs required to monitor and 

evaluate the effectiveness of the SHSP efforts;

•	 Periodically reviewing the current organizational relationships among the 

different safety partners and identifying opportunities to strengthen these 

relationships; 

•	 Creating a memorandum of understanding or other type of agreement (if 

applicable) to institutionalize the collaborative process so it outlasts the 

current participants; 

•	 Establishing regular communication with safety partners. Utilizing collaborative technology, such as listservs, chat rooms, web sites, and other 

electronic forms of communication to encourage greater interaction;

•	 Developing emphasis area action plans (see Chapter 4) for the specific 

emphasis areas in the SHSP to encourage partners to maintain their role 

in SHSP implementation; 

•	 Providing regular status updates in the SHSP focus or emphasis areas so 

partners understand the impact of their role in implementing the SHSP;

•	 Examining the effectiveness of both formal and informal interagency 

communications; and

•	 Identifying resource and training needs to support the collaborative 

safety effort.

Checklist

Following the recommended steps in the checklist below will help build SHSP 

fundamentals into SHSP development and implementation.

•	 Identify one or more SHSP Champions.

•	 Keep SHSP leaders engaged and actively involved.

•	 Establish an organizational structure to oversee the SHSP process.

•	 Involve organizations representing engineering, education, enforcement, 

and EMS in developing the SHSP.

•	 Identify both traditional and nontraditional safety partners and enlist their 

support in the SHSP effort.

•	 Establish strategies to support ongoing collaborative efforts.

•	 Establish regular communication with safety partners. 

Source: Maryland Highway

Safety Office.
11

Chapter 2 – 

Data Collection and Analysis

Introduction

The SHSP is a data-driven process. All elements of the SHSP process, from 

development to evaluation, require States to analyze and make effective use of 

State, regional, local and tribal safety data.

Data enable managers to identify safety problems, select proper strategies and 

countermeasures, monitor progress toward achieving SHSP goals and objectives, measure the effectiveness of SHSP strategies, identify needed improvements, and direct limited resources to the highest potential for reducing 

fatalities and serious injuries. A variety of strategies can be employed to 

improve and collect data, perform analysis, and allow SHSP stakeholders 

access to the data and analysis. For example, States may qualify for a State 

Traffic Safety Information System Grant (NHTSA Section 405) for data 

improvement activities, such as improving the timeliness, accuracy, completeness, uniformity, integration, and accessibility of data that is needed to identify 

priorities for Federal, State, and local highway and traffic safety programs. In 

some States, multiple agencies provide funding for data collection and management through interagency agreements.

States should strive to improve the safety data needed to identify priorities for 

Federal, State, regional, tribal and local highway and traffic safety programs. 

When developing their SHSP, they should use the best available data to identify 

SHSP initiatives and plan data improvements, if needed.

To advance data gathering capabilities, States should develop an active 

partnership with the TRCC. TRCCs are responsible for identifying data system 

enhancement strategies that can affect access to data, as well as its accuracy 

and timeliness. FHWA and NHTSA data improvement programs, such as the 

Crash and Roadway Data Improvement Program (CDIP), the Roadway Data 

Improvement Program (RDIP), and NHTSA’s Traffic Records Assessments, also 

provide opportunities to improve data systems. They are designed to assess 

the strengths and weaknesses of State safety data systems and offer expert 

consultation and recommendations for corrections and other improvements. 

Availability of complete and accurate crash data for all public roads is a 

critical highway safety issue. Some States identify the need to upgrade, 

improve, and standardize the traffic records information system as an 

Source: Cambridge

Systematics, Inc.
12

emphasis area in the SHSP to improve the completeness and accuracy of the 

safety data. This makes safety data improvements a priority, which will lead to 

a better SHSP in the future. 

Types of Data

A variety of data are available to support the development of SHSPs. These 

include the following:

•	 Crash Data – Type of crash (lane-departure, intersection, rear-end, etc.), 

weather conditions, time of day, day of week, vehicle type, person type 

(driver, occupant, bicyclist, pedestrian, etc.), number and severity of 

injuries, traffic law violations, crash location, manner of collision, number 

of vehicles involved, alcohol or drug impairment, direction of travel, crash 

diagram, narrative description of the crash;

•	 Injury Surveillance – EMS response time, hospital injury severity 

assessment, hospital length of stay and cost, rehabilitation time and cost;

•	 Roadway and Traffic – Functional classification and ownership, roadway inventory data (i.e., roadway segment, intersection, ramp/interchange 

data), traffic control devices, location referencing system, rail grade 

crossings, structures (bridges, tunnels), traffic volume, locations that do not 

have an empirical history of fatalities and serious injuries, but possess risk 

factors for potential crashes, vehicle types on the roadway, road safety 

audit findings;

•	 Vehicle – Vehicle Identification Number (VIN), registration information 

and plate, age/model/year, weight, owner information, Commercial 

Motor Vehicle (CMV) data (e.g., U.S. DOT number, carrier information, 

inspection/out-of-service records;

•	 Driver – Age and date of birth, driver history (previous convictions and 

crashes), license status, gender, ethnicity, education, training;

•	 Law Enforcement – Citations, prosecutions, convictions, sentencing, 

case tracking, adjudication; and

•	 Other – Statewide occupant protection use survey, insurance data (carrier, 

policy number, claims cost), demographic data, etc.

The data may be collected from various sources, including State and local 

crash data systems and roadway inventory files, the National Fatality Analysis 

Reporting System (FARS), the General Estimates System (GES), the Motor 

Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS), the National Emergency 

Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS), the Crash Outcome Data 

Source: Comstock Images.
13

Evaluation System (CODES), Federal Railroad Administration Highway-Rail 

Crossing Inventory Data, and others. 

Data Integration

Data integration refers to connecting to, combining, and/or linking data 

residing in various systems to provide a unified view of the data. With respect 

to highway safety, data integration can help SHSP leaders better understand 

highway safety needs and develop effective strategies for addressing them. 

Currently, each State maintains a crash database to which local agencies are 

required to submit crash reports. However, crash data alone do not typically 

provide sufficient information on the characteristics of the roadway, vehicle, 

driver experience, or medical consequences. When crash data are linked to (or 

integrated with) roadway inventory, driver licensing, vehicle registration, citation, conviction, EMS, death certificate, census, and other data, it is possible to 

evaluate the relationship among the roadway, vehicle, and human factors at 

the time of the crash. Linkage to medical information clarifies level of injury 

and other crash outcomes. For example, plotting lane departure crashes by 

location can provide valuable information about where these crashes have 

occurred in the past. Combining lane departure crash location data with 

roadway inventory data (shoulder widths, rumble strips/stripes, cable median 

barriers, curve configurations, hills, etc.) provides greater understanding of the 

relationship between roadway configuration and lane departure crashes and 

enables SHSP leaders to develop effective strategies to reduce them. The 

integration of these two datasets (crash data and roadway inventory) provides 

more and better information than either of them provide individually. In addition, integrating databases promotes collaboration among the agencies, which 

can lead to data collection improvements. 

Data Collection and Management

Safety data are fundamental to SHSP development. Data enable managers to 

identify safety problems, select proper strategies and countermeasures, monitor progress toward achievement of SHSP goals and objectives, measure the 

effectiveness of SHSP strategies, identify needed improvements, and direct 

limited resources to where they have the highest potential for reducing fatalities and serious injuries. Of all the data types needed to develop and evaluate an SHSP, perhaps the most frequently used are crash data. But other safety 

data (e.g., vehicle, roadway, behavioral) also can and should be used to 

effectively inform SHSP decisions.

Safety data collection is a complex process that requires collaboration among 

agencies, organizations, modes of transportation, and disciplines. One 

method for establishing collaboration is accomplished through the State Source: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
14

TRCC, which facilitates project planning, coordination, and implementation 

designed to improve a State’s traffic records system and oversees the State 

Traffic Records Strategic Plan, which details the critical traffic records data 

issues. Typically, all levels of law enforcement are represented on the TRCC. 

Some States develop a data emphasis area team to work in collaboration with 

the TRCC to improve crash data collection, distribution, and management 

processes and to determine what data to analyze as well as appropriate 

analysis methods. This may help all involved organizations to not only understand the need for data improvements, but also to agree on the priority areas 

identified through data analysis. 

Data Analysis

States must analyze the available safety data to identify the critical highway 

safety issues and safety improvement opportunities.7 The analysis is used to 

develop emphasis area goals, objectives, and strategies and action plans; 

monitor and evaluate results; and provide feedback for future updates to the 

SHSP. 

Analysis can involve simple statistical investigations of crash trends, types, and 

contributing factors, or use advanced methods such as those presented in the 

Highway Safety Manual (HSM). The basic data analysis required to support 

the SHSP process is usually performed in-house. If States feel like they need 

additional data analysis assistance, this can often be provided by university 

research centers, other State agencies that work with similar data, etc. Data 

are used as a foundation for identifying SHSP priorities for the SHSP process 

and serve as the basis for the following: 

•	 Identification of emphasis areas – By identifying and describing 

safety problems quantitatively, an agency knows the magnitude of the 

problem and can focus its efforts on areas with the greatest potential to 

improve safety. 

•	 Identification of crash type – Data analysis is used to discern trends in 

the frequency of certain types of crashes (e.g., rear-end collisions, lane 

departures, impaired driving, etc.). Crash type data are used to identify 

SHSP emphasis areas and develop action plans.

•	 Strategy and countermeasure selection and prioritization –

Analysis of safety data helps managers to select and prioritize strategies 

and countermeasures. High priority should be given to those strategies 

and countermeasures that could significantly reduce highway fatalities and 

serious injuries in the key emphasis areas. Consideration also should be 

given to systemic safety improvements, which address high-risk roadway 

features that are correlated with specific severe crash types, rather than 

crash frequency. Low-cost countermeasures (e.g., rumble strips) are ideal 

to apply on a systemic basis.

7 23 U.S.C. 148(a)(12)(B).

Source: Louisiana Department

of Transportation

and Development.
15

•	 Performance-based program management – Analysis of safety data 

allows managers to determine the extent to which the SHSP is achieving its 

goals and objectives.

•	 Monitoring and evaluation – Data monitoring and evaluation helps 

managers make course corrections as the SHSP is implemented; develop 

new programs using more effective countermeasures and strategies; 

improve existing programs; and direct resources toward implementation of 

the most effective programs, policies, and projects.

•	 Resource justification – Data-driven prioritized road safety projects 

provide transportation planners, engineers, law enforcement officers, and 

others with justification for additional resources.

Data Sharing

Local governments, MPOs, advocacy groups, and others require safety data 

for conducting safety planning and project-related activities. Some State 

agencies provide raw data, as well as filtered datasets that can be readily used 

by local agencies. Collaboration is fostered by providing stakeholders with 

access to safety data and training on analysis techniques. Data sharing also 

promotes local efforts to improve data accuracy.

Stakeholder access to reliable data helps provide consistency between the 

SHSP and other transportation and safety plans. Some effective and efficient 

data sharing practices include:

•	 Provide a mechanism for State and local agency partners to access data 

(such as a data fact book or a web-based centralized data site) to promote the consistent use of data and information among partners; 

•	 Provide safety data and analysis to both internal and external partners;

•	 Develop policies to establish data dissemination schedules; 

•	 Develop a standard procedure for handling data requests that clearly 

identifies who will manage requests and how they will be processed; 

•	 Host forums to discuss data issues and enhancement strategies (for MPOs, 

local agencies, etc.);

•	 Encourage MPOs to conduct safety analysis for their member jurisdictions, 

including crash location mapping;

•	 Work with the Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) personnel and 

others to support safety planning efforts at the local level by providing 

data for non-State highways; 

Source: Virginia Department

of Transportation.
16

•	 Develop a highway basemap, which is a representation of all public roads 

that can be used to geolocate attribute data on roadways; and 

•	 Provide training to State and local agency partners on the collection and 

analysis of safety data to enhance their ability to generate and share 

reliable data.

Checklist

Following the recommended steps in the checklist below will help support the 

data collection, management, analysis, and sharing procedures necessary for 

developing an SHSP.

•	 Develop a data emphasis area team to collaborate with the State TRCC to 

improve crash data collection, distribution, and management processes 

and to determine what data to analyze as well as appropriate analysis 

methods.

•	 Analyze the available data to identify critical highway safety issues, safety 

improvement opportunities, and emphasis areas.

•	 Provide a mechanism for State and local agency partners to access consistent data (such as a data fact book or a web-based centralized data site).

•	 Conduct forums to discuss safety data issues and enhancement strategies.

•	 Provide safety data and analysis to internal and/or external partners to 

support safety efforts.

•	 Encourage MPOs to conduct safety analysis for their member jurisdictions. 

Source: Cheyenne Metropolitan

Planning Organization.

Source: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
17

Chapter 3 – SHSP Content

Introduction

The SHSP is the State’s guiding highway safety plan. Its success is dependent 

upon the State’s ability to effectively implement and evaluate the plan. To 

accomplish this, the SHSP should include the following critical content: performance measures; strategic goals and objectives; emphasis areas; and emphasis areas goals, objectives, strategies, and countermeasures.

States should use safety data to identify emphasis areas and establish strategic 

goals and objectives. This helps direct limited resources to the most critical 

safety needs. Performance measures are essential to monitor progress of 

statewide and emphasis area safety goal(s) and objectives. 

Performance Management

Performance management is critical for any strategic planning process. 

Through performance management a State can monitor the status of SHSP 

implementation efforts and measure progress toward SHSP goals. This is 

accomplished by establishing performance measures.

Safety issues vary across the country; therefore, no single set of performance 

measures is applicable to all States. However, it is important that what is 

measured is directly tied to the goals and objectives that the State establishes 

in the SHSP. In addition, legislation requires the U.S. Department of Transportation to establish performance measures for the Federal-aid program.8 In the 

area of safety these measures are the number and rate of serious injuries and 

fatalities. States will be required to set targets for and report on these performance measures, so they should be considered when developing SHSP 

performance measures as well.

Performance measures are used to streamline the tracking and evaluation 

process by establishing consistent data and reporting methods from one 

period to the next. Performance measures provide quantifiable evidence of 

progress and helps managers determine whether the SHSP is meeting its stated 

goals and objectives. Ideally, performance measures should be developed 

prior to implementation to track progress by emphasis area and identify the 

data that must be collected. 

Performance measures can be classified as “output” or “outcome” measures. 

•	 Output measures are quantitative and indicate the level of activity or 

effort. For example, an output measure for rumble strips would be the 

8 MAP-21 requires these performance measures to be established and defined in 

Regulation by 2014.

Performance Meas

NHTSA and the Governor’s 

Highway Safety Association 

(GHSA) developed a set of core 

performance measures. Some 

of them are:

•	 Number of traffic fatalities (three- or five-year 

moving averages);

•	 Number of serious 

injuries in traffic crashes;

•	 Number of speedingrelated fatalities;

•	 Number of pedestrian 

fatalities; and

•	 Observed seat belt use 

for passenger vehicles.

For a list of all NHTSA/GHSA 

performance measures, please 

see this jointly developed report: 

Traffic Safety Performance 

Measures for States and Federal 

Agencies. 

States can also review A Primer 

on Safety Performance Measures for the Transportation 

Planning Process, developed by 

FHWA, for help in creating 

safety performance measures.
18

number of center line miles along which rumble strips are installed. 

Output measures also can be used to track cost and productivity. 

•	 Outcome measures provide an indication of the effectiveness of the 

SHSP strategies or actions in meeting the fundamental objectives of the 

SHSP. An example of an outcome measure would be the number of 

run-off-the-road fatalities.

Strategic Goals and Objectives

Every State should establish SHSP goals and measurable objectives that 

address traffic safety. These goals and objectives should include behavioral as 

well as infrastructure issues and opportunities on all public roads (which 

include non-State-owned roads, rural roads, and roads on tribal land). Strategic goals are high-level, longer-term goals that usually span an extended time 

period. For example: Move toward zero deaths and reduce traffic-related 

fatalities and serious injuries.

The SHSP strategic goals should be consistent with the State highway safety 

program and commercial vehicle safety plan (CVSP). In turn, the strategic safety 

goals in the State’s other transportation plans should align with those in the 

SHSP. States should review the safety goals and plans of participating agencies 

(Highway Safety Plan (HSP), CVSP, etc.), and agree on mutually acceptable 

goals or collaboratively review safety trends and forecast performance. 

The SHSP also defines the measurable, time bound objectives – what the plan 

will accomplish by when. Some States may prefer to adopt an objective 

expressed in the total number or percentage reduction in highway fatalities 

and serious injuries in combination with a timeframe or express the objectives 

as a fatality rate per vehicle-miles traveled. Example objectives are “reduce 

statewide roadway fatalities 10 percent by 2015,” “lower highway fatalities to 

no more than 400 fatalities per year by 2020,” and “reduce the fatality rate to 

1.0 by 2015.”

It is important to set criteria when developing objectives so it can be determined if the State is accomplishing what it set out to do. One set of objective 

setting rules commonly used is known as S.M.A.R.T. This criterion establishes 

objectives that are: Specific, Measurable, Action-Oriented, Reasonable, and 

Time Bound. These are briefly described below.

•	 An objective is not general; it identifies exactly what the State wants 

to happen.

•	 A measurable objective is quantifiable and can detect changes over time.

•	 An action-oriented objective can be counted or observed.

•	 A reasonable objective is realistic and reachable, versus what is simply 

desired. 

•	 A time-bound objective establishes a deadline.

Creating

S.M.A.R.T. 

Objective

Specific

Measurable

Action-oriented

Reasonable

Time bound

Source: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
19

Emphasis Areas

Each State should identify emphasis areas based on analysis of the available 

safety data and input from safety stakeholders representing the 4 E’s of safety. 

Emphasis areas may change during SHSP updates based on the results of 

ongoing safety data analysis. 

Many States have found a fewer number of emphasis areas (usually between 

four and eight) helps direct efforts and makes the SHSP a more “strategic” and 

effective plan. For example, a State may review annual fatality and serious 

injury data for the preceding five years. The top five areas representing the 

most fatalities and serious injuries are then selected for the SHSP. 

States also may weigh other factors when considering emphasis areas, such as 

injury severity, high-risk roadway features that are correlated with particular 

crash types, risks associated with certain vehicle types, etc. For example, if a 

State has experienced a catastrophic bus crash, they may include in their data 

analysis a review of the number and severity of the injuries, the characteristics 

of the road where the crash occurred, the safety performance of the motor 

carrier operating the bus, and the volume of bus traffic on the road. After 

weighing these factors, they may determine that bus safety is a priority because, 

while bus crashes may be relatively infrequent, when they do occur they can 

cause a significant number of fatalities or serious injuries in a single event. 

Recommendations on emphasis areas should be reviewed by the Steering 

Committee or Working Group, and then by the Executive Committee, which will 

typically make the final decision. A review by the SHSP committees will help 

ensure that emphasis areas represent a balance of resources and priorities.

Goals and Objective

States should develop goals and measurable objectives for each SHSP emphasis area. Measurable objectives enable States to gauge progress. For example:

•	 Emphasis Area: Roadway Departure.

•	 Goal: Reduce the occurrence and consequence of leaving the roadway.

•	 Objective: By 2017, reduce the number of fatalities attributed to vehicles 

leaving the roadway by 15 percent from their 2012 level.

Strategies and Countermeasu

Once goals and objectives have been established, strategies and countermeasures for achieving each of them should be established.

The difference between strategies and countermeasures is subtle, and often the 

terms are used interchangeably. In this Guidebook, a strategy is defined as a 

plan or method to help achieve a goal, while a countermeasure is a specific 

action designed to support and implement the strategy.

Potential Emphas

Area

•	 Graduated drivers 

licensing

•	 Licensed, competent 

drivers

•	 Older drivers

•	 Impaired drivers

•	 Keeping drivers alert 

•	 Seatbelts and air bags 

•	 Bicyclists 

•	 Motorcyclists

•	 Heavy trucks

•	 In-vehicle enhancements

•	 Vehicle-train crashes

•	 Keeping vehicles on the 

road

•	 Minimizing consequences of leaving road

•	 Intersections 

•	 Aggressive driving

•	 Driver safety awareness

•	 Pedestrians

•	 Head-on and cross 

median crashes 

•	 Work zones 

•	 Increasing EMS 

capabilities 

•	 Improving decision 

support systems 

•	 Processes and safety 

management systems

Source: AASHTO.
20

For example, if the Emphasis Areas is Speed/Aggressive Driving, the strategies 

might be:

•	 Deter aggressive driving in specific populations, including those with a 

history of the behavior, and in specific locations; and 

•	 Implement traffic calming measures.

The countermeasures may then include:

•	 Tailored high-visibility enforcement;

•	 Sanctions against repeat offenders;

•	 Public awareness and education campaigns;

•	 Installation of speed bumps; and

•	 Installation of roundabouts.

As countermeasures are considered to address key emphasis areas, the 

following questions should be addressed: 

•	 What evidence-based and effective countermeasures are available for a 

particular emphasis area? 

•	 Are the countermeasures cost-effective?

•	 What countermeasures lend themselves to cooperative efforts and how 

can partner resources be leveraged? 

The SHSP is required to address engineering, management, operation, education, enforcement, and emergency services elements of highway safety9 as key 

factors in determining strategies. High priority should be given to those 

strategies that could significantly reduce highway fatalities and serious injuries 

in the key emphasis areas. Systemic improvements and low-cost and achievable countermeasures also should be given consideration. 

Checklist

Following the recommended steps in the checklist below will help ensure that 

the critical content is included in the SHSP.

•	 Use safety data to develop comprehensive statewide safety goals 

and objectives.

•	 Develop goals and S.M.A.R.T. objectives for each emphasis area.

•	 Analyze the data and solicit safety stakeholder input to select 

emphasis areas.

•	 Define performance measures for each emphasis area that correspond 

to the goals.

•	 Establish strategies and countermeasures to achieve the goals and objectives. 

9 23 U.S.C. 148(a)(12)(C).

Evidence-Bas

Countermeasures

It is best to use countermeasures based on evidence 

from the research. These 

can be found in a variety of 

sources, including:

•	 NCHRP 500 Series; 

•	 FHWA Crash 

Modification Factors 

Clearinghouse; 

•	 Highway Safety Manual, 

Countermeasures that 

Work; and 

•	 NCHRP 622: 

Effectiveness of 

Behavioral Highway 

Safety Countermeasures. 

If the effectiveness of countermeasures or programs are 

not known, strategies should 

be accompanied by an 

evaluation plan to demonstrate effectiveness.
21

Chapter 4 – SHSP Preparation 

Introduction 

The SHSP should clearly and concisely describe the State’s safety problem and 

describe a program of priorities and strategies to reduce fatalities and serious 

injuries on all roadways in the State. While the State DOT is ultimately responsible for the development, implementation, and evaluation of the SHSP, the 

safety partners should agree with the plan and its components. In addition, as 

part of FHWA’s oversight and stewardship responsibilities, FHWA Division 

Administrators will verify that the State has followed a process that is consistent 

with SHSP requirements. The Governor or a responsible State agency must 

provide approval and sign the final SHSP.10

SHSP Format

The format of the SHSP should be discussed among the safety partners and 

the final format should be broadly supported among them. Some States have 

found it beneficial to structure the SHSP so that frequently updated sections, 

such as Emphasis Area Action Plans, are kept separate from the main document. During development, a review process should be established so 

appropriate parties have the opportunity to review and edit the SHSP and 

approve the final version. To monitor progress, a person (or persons) should 

be assigned the responsibility to prepare the SHSP or SHSP sections.

A recommended SHSP format is outlined below:

•	 Table of Contents.

•	 Executive Summary: This section summarizes or provides a snapshot of 

the contents of the SHSP. It may highlight significant achievements, the 

mission, vision, and goal of the SHSP, the emphasis areas, etc.

•	 Mission, Vision, and Goal Statements: This section highlights the 

mission, vision, and goal of the SHSP. These are usually high-level statements that capture the safety values and aspirations of the State.

•	 Safety Partners: This section lists and thanks all of the safety partners 

involved in the SHSP effort. It is an opportunity to highlight the collaborative nature of the SHSP and acknowledge the work of all involved.

•	 Introduction and Background: This section summarizes past accomplishments, challenges, and ongoing SHSP efforts as well as highlights 

directions for the future.

•	 Development Methods or Approach: Legislation requires a detailed 

description of the SHSP update process. States can include a section in 

10 23 U.S.C. 148(a)(12)(G).

Source: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
22

their SHSP that provides this description, such as the data analysis and 

problem identification methods used, as well as other considerations 

incorporated into the update. 

•	 Emphasis Areas: This section describes the States priority safety problems that will be addressed. Each emphasis area should contain:

− Goals;

− Performance Measures;

− Measurable Objectives; and

− Strategies and Countermeasures.

•	 SHSP Implementation: This section describes and documents the 

State’s implementation approach (strategies and processes). 

•	 SHSP Evaluation: This section describes and documents the State’s 

monitoring and evaluation methods.

•	 Emphasis Area Action Plans: These action plans identify specific action 

steps for each countermeasure, responsible agency or agencies, timelines, 

etc. They may be included as appendices, a separate chapter, or prepared separately from the SHSP document. Some States have separated 

the emphasis area action plans from the master SHSP document to 

facilitate modifications. See Chapter 5 for more details on developing 

emphasis area action plans. 

SHSPs are dynamic plans and the emphasis areas goals, strategies, and 

countermeasures are adjusted based on monitoring, course corrections, and 

the achievement of performance goals. Because of its dynamic nature, the 

SHSP should be written in a format that facilitates updating. A process must 

be established to develop, implement, and update the SHSP regularly and 

according to regulatory requirements.11

Checklist

Following the recommended steps in the checklist below will help with the 

preparation of the SHSP document. 

•	 Designate a person (or persons) to prepare the SHSP or SHSP sections.

•	 Gain consensus on the SHSP format (such as the contents, chapters, etc.). 

•	 Develop an SHSP format that is conducive to updates. Establish a process 

for review and approval of the draft SHSP and SHSP process by the 

appropriate parties (e.g., FHWA) and to incorporate feedback into the 

final version.

•	 Obtain approval and signature by the Governor or designee.

•	 Establish a process and schedule to facilitate future updates.

11 23 CFR 924; MAP-21 requires the Regulation to be updated by 2013.

Source: iStock Photo.
23

Chapter 5 – 

SHSP Implementation and 

Evaluation

Introduction

The development of the SHSP is the first stage of the SHSP cycle and creates 

the foundation for the SHSP process. However, the SHSP can only become a 

dynamic process if steps are taken to implement and evaluate the plan on an 

ongoing basis. SHSP leadership and key staff are encouraged to review not 

only this Champion’s Guidebook, but also the SHSP Implementation Process 

Model (IPM) and Evaluation Process Model (EPM) before and during all stages 

of the SHSP effort. Knowing what needs to be accomplished to successfully 

implement the SHSP and to evaluate its effectiveness can pay substantial 

dividends. 

SHSP Implementation

There are several key steps to successful SHSP implementation. These include 

creating emphasis area teams and action plans, integrating the SHSP with 

existing transportation safety plans, and marketing the plan. These are covered 

in detail in the SHSP IPM, but a brief description is provided below. 

Emphasis Area Action P

SHSP emphasis area action plans provide a road map to give stakeholders 

and partners direction. While emphasis areas may be defined differently, they 

should be supported by action plans that provide specifics such as measurable 

objectives, performance measures, strategies, action steps, tracking measures 

for action steps, and funding sources. Action plans turn SHSP concepts and 

ideas into reality.

Action plans eliminate guesswork, prevent shot gun approaches, and focus 

resources where most needed. They create a link between the goals and 

objectives of the SHSP and the prioritization and selection of projects within 

existing transportation planning and programming activities (e.g., HSPs, HSIPs, 

CVSPs, S/TIPs, etc.). SHSP action plans can be posted on the Internet to 

promote transparency and offer opportunities for additional stakeholders to 

participate in or support SHSP implementation.

Source: Comstock Images.
24

The first step in developing an emphasis area action plan is to establish an 

action planning framework. To develop the framework:

•	 Review the goals for the SHSP and for the emphasis areas;

•	 Document the measurable objectives and performance measures for each 

emphasis area;

•	 Determine the data requirements for each performance measure;

•	 Identify the required resources and action steps for implementing each 

countermeasure; 

•	 Identify a process to track countermeasure and action step implementation; and

•	 Regularly monitor the extent to which emphasis area goals and objectives 

are being met.

The SHSP does not provide funding for specific programs and activities, but 

identifying potential resources as part of the action plan helps managers 

allocate resources more effectively when project selection occurs. Types of 

resources typically required include: partners whose cooperation and coordination is required; funding source(s); personnel; data and information; 

equipment and materials, and; training. 

Action plans are living documents and should be revisited and amended as 

necessary. Teams can add, remove, or revise strategies and countermeasures 

over time so the action plan remains relevant. For instance, dramatic changes 

in data may warrant a fresh look at all SHSP elements, including action plans. 

States may consider developing a process or format for adding, deleting, or 

amending emphasis areas, strategies, or countermeasures to ensure the 

partners are in agreement with how the plan is modified in the future. This 

avoids loss of momentum while waiting for the next SHSP update cycle. 

Figure 1 provides an example template for developing an emphasis area 

action plan. 

Figure 1. Emphasis Area Action Plan Template

Source: Alaska Department

of Transportation

and Public Facilities.

Source: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

Objective #1

Objective #2
25

Integrating te SHSP with Other Program

Effective SHSPs leverage the resources of existing transportation planning and 

programming activities to reduce fatalities and serious injuries. Integrating the 

State’s SHSP safety goals and efforts into statewide and metropolitan plans 

and programs advances the safety agenda because these plans and programs 

reflect statewide priorities, provide a blueprint for action for key agencies, and 

influence resource distribution. Safety professionals should participate in 

planning activities such as working groups, task forces, and advisory committees that are convened for the various State and local plans. Active involvement in this area can strengthen the partnership between planners and safety 

professionals and provide access to decision-makers and resources beyond 

the traditional limited safety funding sources. 

One of the programs where integration of the SHSP is most evident is the 

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). The purpose of the HSIP is to 

achieve a significant reduction in the occurrence of and the potential for 

fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. This is accomplished through 

a data-driven program consisting of planning, implementation, and evaluation 

components. The strong tie between HSIP and SHSP is the HSIP requirement 

that States develop, implement, evaluate, and update an SHSP. HSIP projects 

(defined as strategies, activities, or projects on a public road) also are required 

to be consistent with the SHSP. 

Brief descriptions of SHSP integration into other transportation plans and 

programs are provided below.

•	 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) – LRTPs identify transportation 

goals, objectives, needs, and performance measures over a 20-year 

horizon and provide policy and strategy recommendations for accommodating those needs. SHSP goals and priorities should be adopted into the 

LRTP and MPO long-range plan, or at a minimum reflected in the transportation planning process based on safety data and analysis. 

Incorporating the SHSP into the LRTP impacts the degree to which the 

SHSP is implemented because projects that are later prioritized and 

programmed in the Statewide and Metropolitan Transportation 

Improvement Program are connected to the LRTP goals, objectives, and 

strategies. Project prioritization weighting or ranking schemes also should 

address safety considerations.

•	 Statewide and Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program 

(S/TIP) – S/TIPs, developed at the State and MPO levels, are resourceconstrained capital programming documents. They identify projects and 

funding reflecting the State’s prioritized mobility, operational, and safety 

needs. Therefore, they should reflect the emphasis areas and strategies 

in the SHSP.

Source: Rhode Island Department

of Transportation.
26

•	 Highway Safety Plan (HSP) – HSPs address behavioral safety areas, such 

as occupant protection (safety belts, child safety seats, motorcycle and 

bicycle helmets), impaired driving, police traffic services, emergency 

medical services, motorcycle safety, and other program areas. The HSP is 

an annual plan identifying program activities supported by Federal funds 

targeting identified behavioral safety problems. These activities typically 

support traffic safety law enforcement, media and public education, 

prosecution and adjudication, training, and other actions designed to 

reduce crash-related injuries and fatalities. States are required to coordinate their highway safety plan, data collection, and information systems 

with the SHSP. While the emphasis areas, goals, and objectives of the 

SHSP and HSP may not be identical, they are based on consistent data 

and should jointly support and help achieve progress in the State’s safety 

priority areas and performance measures. When emphasis areas do 

align, strategies selected in the HSP should be consistent with those in the 

SHSP, which are identified through analysis of the same data and a review 

of evidence-based strategies and countermeasures.

•	 Commercial Vehicle Safety Plan (CVSP) – The CVSP is a performancebased annual plan that outlines a State’s commercial motor vehicle (CMV) 

safety objectives, strategies, activities, and performance measures. The 

CVSP aims to improve motor carrier, CMV, and driver safety and to reduce 

the number and severity of crashes and fatalities resulting from such 

crashes involving a CMV (e.g., motor coach/bus, semi truck, trailer, etc.) 

through consistent, uniform, and effective CMV safety programs. For 

example, performance objectives and related strategies in a CVSP may be 

to decrease the number of bus crashes to less than the five-year average 

by increasing the number of passenger-carrying vehicle inspections during 

that fiscal year. States must coordinate the CVSP, data collection, and 

information systems with State highway safety programs.12 The SHSP 

should influence the development of the CVSP mission and goal statements, the identification of CMV safety problems, and the development of 

State-specific objectives, strategies, and activities. Likewise, the SHSP 

should complement the CVSP. 

•	 Other Plans within the State – Other plans within a State, such as 

Pedestrian Safety Action Plans, Bicycle Safety Action Plans, Freight Plans, 

etc., also support the statewide safety effort. In some States, local agencies and organizations are also developing Local Road Safety Plans (LRSP). 

These plans represent a variety of agencies, organizations, both public 

and private that have an interest in safety. The SHSP should provide input 

into these plans. Similarly, these plans can inform the SHSP process and 

help identify specific safety issues. 

12 49 U.S.C. 350.201.

Source: Digital Stock.
27

Figure 2 illustrates the relationships among these transportation planning and 

programming processes and how the various safety planning processes 

interact with them.

Figure 2. Coordinated Transportation Safety Planning

Marketi

A well-designed marketing strategy performs several functions, including 

informing the general public on transportation safety issues, educating key 

political leaders on their role in saving lives, and encouraging active participation in SHSP implementation activities among safety partners. Marketing to 

individuals both inside and outside of the transportation community and to 

nonparticipating partners helps build and maintain support for SHSP implementation. It also broadens the reach of the SHSP to those who may not 

participate in implementation activities on a regular basis.

Effective SHSP marketing strategies include, among other things, news events, 

web sites, newsletters, and a branding theme that stakeholders and the public 

can identify with.

SHSP Evaluation

States are required to evaluate their SHSP on a regular basis13 to ensure the 

accuracy of the data and priority of proposed strategies. In addition to this 

requirement, evaluation is essential to any strategic planning process. Evaluation 

enables States to maintain an SHSP process that is open to continuous examination, change, and improvement. It includes establishing continual monitoring 

and feedback to track progress and communicate results. 

13 23 U.S.C. 148(c)(1)(C).

Source: Federal Highway Administration.

Source: Nevada Department

of Transportation.
28

Tracking and Monito

An evaluation process or framework should be developed early so that appropriate data are collected for tracking and monitoring SHSP implementation 

and progress in meeting goals and objectives. States should incorporate a 

feedback loop into the process to ensure: 1) leadership and stakeholders are 

informed; and 2) information is regularly used to make course corrections as 

implementation takes place. 

Program Evaluation and te SHSP Ev

Process Mod

In addition to the continual monitoring that occurs during SHSP implementation, a structured SHSP program evaluation provides SHSP managers and 

practitioners with important information about their SHSP at a specific point in 

time. Program evaluation is a high-level examination of a State’s SHSP. It 

helps States examine how they develop, manage, and implement their SHSP 

and identifies if the goals and objectives are being met. 

The SHSP Evaluation Process Model (EPM) was developed to assist States with 

conducting a program evaluation of their SHSP. SHSP program evaluation is 

composed of two equally important components – process evaluation and 

performance evaluation. Process evaluation assesses the procedural, administrative, and managerial aspects of the SHSP (such as leadership, SHSP structure, 

partners, collaboration, and communication, etc.). Performance evaluation 

examines the outputs and outcomes resulting from SHSP implementation. 

The specific timing of SHSP evaluation is determined by the State, but must 

take into consideration Federal requirements as well as the needs and 

circumstances of the State. Some likely times are:

•	 Before or as part of an SHSP revision or update, to base update on solid 

evaluation results;

•	 After several years of implementation to gauge progress; or

•	 In response to a leadership request on the status and impact of SHSP. 

Please refer to the EPM for more information about SHSP program evaluation.

Source: Federal Highway

Administration.
29

Checklist

Following the recommended steps in the checklist below will help with SHSP 

implementation and evaluation efforts.

•	 Develop emphasis area actions plans that:

− Document the measurable objectives and performance measures for 

each emphasis area;

− Determine the data requirements for each performance measure;

− Identify the required resources and action steps for implementing each 

countermeasure; 

− Identify a process to track countermeasure and action step implementation; and

− Regularly monitor the extent to which emphasis area goals and objectives are being met.

•	 Integrate the SHSP with other transportation safety plans.

•	 Market the SHSP through branding, news events, web sites, newsletters, etc.

•	 Monitor and track regularly the extent to which emphasis area strategies 

are being implemented.

•	 Monitor and track regularly the extent to which emphasis area goals and 

objectives are being met.

•	 Plan a comprehensive SHSP program evaluation to examine the SHSP’s 

process and performance. Source: Rhode Island Department

of Transportation.
30

Conclusion

The task of saving lives on the nation’s roadways is monumental. Success is 

only possible when organizations and agencies combine their skills and work 

together toward a common mission. The SHSP is making a difference! Through 

its data-driven and collaborative process, the SHSP is helping States identify and 

prioritize their most significant road safety needs, and develop a program of 

strategies with the greatest potential to save lives and reduce injuries. 

The SHSP is a dynamic and “living” document. While specific legislative 

requirements may evolve or change over time, following the recommended 

strategies in the Champion’s Guidebook to Saving Lives sets the foundation 

for State, regional, and local agencies and coalitions to have a well-defined 

SHSP process, from development and implementation to evaluation. 

“Never doubt that

small group o

thoughtful committ

citizens can cha

the world: indeed it is

the only thing that

ever has.”

- Margaret Mea
31

Resources

The hyperlinked resources below provide additional tools and references for 

the information in the Champion’s Guidebook to Saving Lives.

SHSP Fundamentals

•	 Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) Development Course.

•	 Transportation Safety Planning (TSP) Course.

•	 Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Overview Course.

•	 Champion’s Guide to Saving Lives (Original version).

•	 SHSP Implementation Process Model.

•	 SHSP Technical Assistance:

» FHWA Roadway Safety Peer-to-Peer Program.

» FHWA Office of Safety.

» FHWA Division Offices and Resource Center.

Data Collection and Analysis

•	 FHWA Data Analysis and Tools. 

•	 Traffic Records Coordinating Committee.

•	 Data Technical Assistance:

» Crash Data Improvement Program (CDIP).

» Roadway Data Improvement Program (RDIP).

» NHTSA Traffic Records Assessment.

•	 FMCSA Analysis and Information Online.

» FMCSA State Safety Data Quality.

•	 National EMS Information System (NEMSIS) Website.

Emphasis Area Action Plans/Strategy Selection

•	 FHWA Office of Safety Proven Safety Countermeasures.

•	 NHTSA Countermeasures That Work.

•	 FHWA Crash Modification Factors Clearinghouse.

Source: Federal Highway

Administration.
32

•	 NCHRP 500 Series: Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan Transportation Research.

•	 NCHRP 622: Effectiveness of Behavioral Highway Safety 

Countermeasures.

•	 The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Manual.

•	 The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Overview Course.

•	 The Highway Safety Manual. 

SHSP Implementation and Evaluation

•	 SHSP Implementation Process Model.

•	 SHSP Evaluation Process Model.

•	 Strategic Highway Safety Plan Implementation Course. 

•	 A Primer on Safety Performance Measures for the Transportation

Planning Process.

•	 Traffic Safety Performance Measures for States and Federal Agencies.

•	 The Art of Appropriate Evaluation. 

Federal Web Sites

•	 The U.S. Department of Transportation.

•	 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

•	 FHWA Office of Safety.

•	 FHWA Office of Planning, Environment and Realty.

•	 FHWA Division Offices and Resource Center.

•	 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

•	 Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).

Local Road Safety Plans

•	 Developing Safety Plans: A Manual for Local Rural Road Owners. 

Source: Federal Highway

Administration.