Page 1 of 39

MASSACHUSETTS

2021 ANNUAL REPORT

U.S. Department ofTransportation 

Federal Highway Administration 

HIGHWAY SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 

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

Page 2 of 39

Table of Contents

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

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence............................................................. 3

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

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

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

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

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

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................11

Funds Programmed.........................................................................................................................11

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................13

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................16

General Highway Safety Trends......................................................................................................16

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................23

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................26

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................27

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................27

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................28

Project Effectiveness.......................................................................................................................33

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................35

Optional Attachments..........................................................................................................................38

Glossary..............................................................................................................................................39
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 39

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence

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

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

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action 

for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, 

schedules, lists, or other data.

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

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

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action 

for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, 

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

surveys, schedules, lists, or data compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning 

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

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

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

not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for 

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

such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 39

Executive Summary

A Massachusetts HSIP Task Force was established in 2009 to develop guidelines for HSIP-eligible projects 

and programs. The Task Force consisted of FHWA, MassDOT Highway, MassDOT Planning and MARPA 

(Massachusetts Association of Regional Planning Agencies)/MPOs. Criteria for HSIP projects were defined. 

But the role of the Task Force was not to select individual projects and programs. The Task Force had met 

annually or as needed. In 2019, the Task Force was updated to include additional member in an effort to help 

move HSIP projects to advertise in a timely manner. MassDOT District Project Development Engineers were 

added and additional MPO members. The guidelines for HSIP projects was updated (in draft) to emphasize 

systemic projects and projects combined with other project types to broaden the impacts of the HSIP program. 

This should help to reinvigorate the HSIP Task Force so that the project selection for HSIP can be more fluid 

and nimble and responsive to the needs of SHSP strategies and ensure project readiness and ability of 

projects to be advertised in a timely manner. This became easier with the development of the IMPACT Safety 

Analysis Module which enables users to visualize, query and export information on the top crash-based and 

top risk-based locations ( https://apps.impact.dot.state.ma.us/sat/landing ). This was initial developed in spring 

of 2021 and is being finalized. This will necessitate an update to the HSIP guidance (due in fall 2021).
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 39

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. 

A Massachusetts HSIP Task Force was initially established in 2009 to develop guidelines for HSIP-eligible 

projects and programs. The Task Forces role was to develop HSIP guidelines not to select individual projects. 

At the time, the Task Force consisted of FHWA, MassDOT Highway, MassDOT Planning and MARPA 

(Massachusetts Association of Regional Planning Agencies)/MPOs. It was determined that an HSIP eligible 

project was defined as one that contains a hot spot crash location (a cluster in which the total number of 

“equivalent property damage only” crashes in the cluster is within the top 5% of all clusters in a specific region), 

systemic fixes or any strategy, activity or project on a public road that is consistent with the data-driven State 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) and corrects or improves a hazardous road location or feature or 

addresses a highway safety problem. 

The equivalent property damage only (EPDO) calculations were changed in 2018 to reflect the FHWA 

methodology for crash costs. Rather than the previous system of 10 points for a fatal crash, 5 points for an 

injury crash and 1 point for a property damage only crash, the new EPDO calculations are based on weighted 

average costs of crashes. So as not to be chasing fatal crashes only, the combined weighting of fatal and 

injury crashes is 21 times that of a property damage only crash. This new weighting was used in hot spot 

selection. This is described in the Top Crash Locations Report. https://www.mass.gov/doc/2017-top-crashlocations-report/download . To view the HSIP eligible clusters, go to: 

https://gis.massdot.state.ma.us/topcrashlocations/ . Recently developed in 2021, MassDOT has been using 

crash predictive methods and developed Safety Performance Functions for various types of collector and 

arterial roadways. This was then input into a new IMAPCT network screening tool so that users can query, 

visualize, and export data for the Top 5% of segments (segments with the greatest difference between 

expected and predicted crashes). This is available in the Massachusetts crash data portal, IMPACT. 

https://apps.impact.dot.state.ma.us/sat/HotSpotNetworkScreening While the guidelines have not yet been 

updated to reflect this but the Top 5% locations are also HSIP eligible. Furthermore, MassDOT is moving to a 

more proactive systemic approach and has developed risk model for many of the emphasis areas within our 

SHSP. These models, and their detailed reports explaining the derivation of the models, were recently added 

to IMPACT in late summer 2021 and can be found at 

https://apps.impact.dot.state.ma.us/sat/NetworkEmphasisArea . Although HSIP guidelines have not yet been 

updated, Top risk locations will be eligible for systemic HSIP projects.

MassDOT Federal Aid Programming and Reimbursement Office and MassDOT Planning allocate the Federal 

funds into various categories for the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), including 

Statewide HSIP funds and HSIP funds for each of the regions under “Intersection Improvements” and “Safety 

Improvements”. HSIP projects are selected based on the HSIP guidelines, the MPO processes, priority and 

readiness (regardless of roadway jurisdiction). Once an HSIP project (hot spot) has been identified, an early 
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 39

requirement is a Road Safety Audit which helps to guide the recommended improvements.

In late 2019, an expanded HSIP Task Force reconvened and slightly tweaked the HSIP Guidelines so that the 

project selection for HSIP can be more fluid and nimble and responsive to the needs of SHSP strategies. This 

is still a work in progress and the new information from network screening still needs to be added (due fall 

2021).

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Engineering

MassDOT does not have specific "HSIP staff". However, the people who design and develop HSIP guidelines 

and eligibility as well as review Safety aspects and conduct Road Safety Audits sit within Traffic and Safety 

Engineering at MassDOT.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Formula via MPOs

• Other-combination

The MPOs collectively receive about 1/3 of the FHWA funds available to us each FFY (after ABP GANS 

payments), and the MARPA formula simply distributes that 1/3 by % for each region (Boston gets 43%, for 

example). HSIP is assigned for project eligibility across regional and statewide priorities as opposed to a 

required minimum by region.

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

Working with the 13 Regional Planning Agencies (RPAs) and the 13 Metropolitan Planning Organizations 

(MPOs) that encompass the entire geographic area of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, HSIP funds are 

allocated not only to projects that are eligible within the statewide Highway Safety Improvements Program but 

also to eligible projects programmed by the MPOs, which may include local roads and tribal roads. Because 

most of the project proponents in the Commonwealth are municipalities, these projects are locally initiated, 

driven, and coordinated with MassDOT through the project initiation and development process. There is close 

coordination between our Traffic Safety division staff and MPO/RPA staff on the sharing of data and identifying 

crash cluster locations and prioritizing safety improvements to assist local entities and the MPOs in making 

sound safety investment decisions. 

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

• Design

• Districts/Regions

• Maintenance

• Operations

• Planning

• Traffic Engineering/Safety

Describe coordination with internal partners.

Previously, the HSIP Task Force consists of seven members: 2 FHWA representatives (one from 

Massachusetts Division Office in Planning and one from the Massachusetts Division Office in Safety), 2 
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 39

representatives from MassDOT Highway Division (Chief Engineer and Safety Engineer), one from MassDOT 

Office of Transportation Planning and two representatives from the Regional Planning Agencies (RPAs), the 

technical arm of the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). The initial role of the Task Force was to 

establish HSIP guidelines based on input and feedback from others. The continuing role of the Task Force is to 

meet annually or as needed, (“meetings” could be via email or in person) to review and update the HSIP 

guidelines. The HSIP Task Force does not select the individual projects / programs. However, in 2019, the 

Task Force was expanded to include additional members from MassDOT’s Project Development Engineers 

and additional MPOs as a means to move projects along more quickly and to be more nimble and responsive 

to safety needs.

Program and project selection occurs both in MassDOT HQ, MassDOT District and at the regional MPO level. 

Once projects are selected, the MassDOT Planning Office works with the MassDOT Safety Group to allocate 

the funding type to the STIP categories so that the full pot of HSIP funds are programmed.

For hot spot locations, Road Safety Audits are required and there is participation from a variety of disciplines 

both internal and external to MassDOT. MassDOT personnel include: MassDOT Safety and MassDOT District 

personnel as well as needed from MassDOT Highway Design, MassDOT Project Management, Complete 

Streets Engineer and others.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

• Academia/University

• FHWA

• Governors Highway Safety Office

• Law Enforcement Agency

• Local Government Agency 

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

• Other-SHSP Emphasis area team members

• Other-Advocacy groups

• Other-Public Health

Describe coordination with external partners.

All HSIP projects must be based on strategies identified in the SHSP which has been developed with the 

assistance from our internal and external partners. The SHSP was updated and approved in December 2018 

and involved participation from over 200 participants from more than 25 agencies (including all of those 

external partners mentioned in the response to Question 9) and entities and the strategies identified in the 

SHSP are those that can be used for the HSIP eligible projects. Furthermore, all HSIP-eligible spot 

improvement projects require Road Safety Audits which ensures coordination with external partners. Project 

selection has a significant amount of external input through the MPO public process. Some specific programs 

are based on an Ad Hoc basis, as needed. As an example of this is when we were developing the 

pedestrian/bicyclist safety campaign (a Statewide HSIP program), we developed a committee consisting of 

Governors Highway Safety Office, Public Health, MPOs, advocacy groups, local police and community 

officials, etc. to assist with the specifics and to guide the program.

As stated earlier, there is an existing HSIP Task Force that develops the HSIP guidelines and identifies 

eligibility of HSIP projects (but does not select the specific projects).

Describe HSIP program administration practices that have changed since the last 

reporting period.

A new tool was built to assist MassDOT internal and external partners as well as the public to better view and 

understand HSIP eligible locations. This can be found through the network screening tools of IMPACT: 
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 39

https://apps.impact.dot.state.ma.us/sat/landing However, it should be noted, that this was developed in spring 

2021 and the HSIP guidelines have not yet been updated.

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes?

Yes 

On the MassDOT website are links to the HSIP Criteria that defines what is HSIP eligible. 

https://www.mass.gov/service-details/highway-safety-improvement-program . As stated earlier, this HSIP 

eligibility guide needs to be updated to reflect the new use of crash-based and risk-based network screening. 

However, since those models were recently completed and posted to IMAPCT, the guide has not yet been 

updated. This update will be completed in fall 2021.

Also, on that webpage is a link for MassDOT Safety: Alternatives Analysis Guide (SAAG) which details how to 

evaluate effectiveness of project alternatives. The guide also include MA-preferred CMFs. This SAAG is being 

updated and the version on the website is being updated as well.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• HSIP (no subprograms)

We do not have specific "programs" administered under HSIP. We have guidelines where HSIP eligibility is 

determined. Previously, guidelines were based on strategies identified in the SHSP and EPDO for hot spot 

locations. But this is all changing because we developed risk based models and network screening which will 

be used in the future. We are also developing an HSIP Implementation Plan to help guide project/program 

selection.

Program: HSIP (no subprograms)

Date of Program Methodology:9/30/2019

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-Based on EPDO and data for intrsecitons nad other hot spot clusters

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Other-intersections EPDO (FI = 

21 and O = 1) • Traffic

• Median width

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 39

• Crash rate

• Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-eligibility and readiness

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Other-readiness:100

Total Relative Weight:100

Project readiness has been a difficulty for us. But we recently developed network screening, risk based 

analysis and SPFs along with the longstanding availability of hot spot intersection/bicyclist/pedestrian crash 

clusters based on EPDO. So it will be easier to integrate safety into other programmed projects and to develop 

projects/programs moving forward. To date, all HSP hot spot projects were required to have road safety audits 

conducted and the recommendations were integrated into the projects.

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 28.5

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Cable Median Barriers

• Wrong way driving treatments

Note that the calculation of systemic percentage is the total cost of the two systemic projects divided by the 

total costs of all projects that have HSIP components. But note that not all funding for the systemic projects or 

other projects relate to safety. Some aspects of the cost relate to other purposes and needs for the projects.

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

• Stakeholder input
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 39

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

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

MassDOT definitely considers connected vehicles and ITS technologies as part of the safety solution. We are 

in the process of implementing a pilot project for Wrong Way Vehicle Detection systems at 17 key interchange 

ramps around Massachusetts. The project will use advanced technology to identify wrong way vehicles in real 

time and send alerts to our HOC and Mass State Police. The pilot project is scheduled to become operational 

in mid 2022. This project used HSIP funding. MassDOT has also begun construction for the Route 9 

Connected Corridor project that will add connected vehicle technology and adaptive control at 37 intersections 

along Route 9 from Worcester, MA to Wellesley, MA. Phase 1 of this project is expected to be completed in 

late 2021. This project used CMAQ funding. MassDOT has been implementing smart work zone technologies 

since 2009 and has been awarded a USDOT Grant for the purpose of working cooperatively with other states, 

vendors and FHWA to have defined field device and traffic data added to the standardized WZ data feed 

specification, extending the static work zone information to include dynamic real time information. MassDOT 

utilizes SWZ applications to provide real time feedback to drivers regarding travel times and congestion 

information, incidents, temporary closures and other information that will enhance the safety of road users and 

workers. MassDOT is also currently scoping and designing the Districts 1 and 2 Signal Safety project that will 

provide connected vehicle technology capabilities on all signals in D1 and D2. This project will use HSIP 

funding but will be advertised in 2021. Previously, MassDOT worked with WAZE to install beacons in our 

tunnel system to aid driver navigation where GPS is lost. (Although no Federal funds were used for this). 

MassDOT signed on for the EDC Use of Crowdsourcing in Operations. FHWA and the contractor have begun 

helping us to pilot this. There are aspects of this that will help with Safety as well but HSIP funds were not used 

for this. MassDOT contracted with RITIS/INRIX and Streetlight to make use of travel time, speed and volume 

data to supplement our permanent count station program and can be used on our projects and in Planning 

features (but not using HSIP funds). We continue to look forward to other technologies that will enhance safety 

and reduce fatalities and injuries on the public roadways.

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

Yes

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

MassDOT uses both the predictive methodology and the empirical-Bayes method described in the Highway 

Safety Manual to support administrating the HSIP. MassDOT just completed the network screening process to 

consider the difference between expected and predicted crashes using HSM methodologies and 

Massachusetts-specific safety performance functions. These models are visualized in a public-facing tool so 

any user (internal or external) can easily query, visualize, and export the Top 5% crash segments ( 

https://apps.impact.dot.state.ma.us/sat/landing ). Furthermore, a systemic risk-based network screening was 

also developed for nearly all of the emphasis areas in the SHSP. This, too, is available in the in the publicfacing IMAPCT tool. 

During RSAs (especially for HSIP projects), MassDOT uses HSM methodologies so expected crash frequency 

can be used for discussion, diagnosis, and countermeasure selection.

MassDOT also uses HSM methodologies to evaluate HSIP projects at the site-, project-, and countermeasure 

level. The empirical-Bayes method is used to estimate the number of crashes expected in the after period had 

no change occurred to compare with what was observed in the after period.
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 39

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Federal Fiscal Year

The report describes projects funded in FFY 2020. The crash data and data related questions are by calendar 

year.

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED %

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $28,094,694 $28,454,771 101.28%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$56,253,545 $55,935,873 99.44%

State and Local Funds $14,187,897 $17,552,402 123.71%

Totals $98,536,136 $101,943,046 103.46%

This information was provided directly from FAPRO office via email on 5/20/2021

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

safety projects?

9%

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

9%

Two projects, Auburn and Chicopee, are local jurisdiction projects

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

0%

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

0%

We would really like the ability to focus on all of the "Es" and have the flexibility to include as an integrated 

program with HSIP funding.
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 39

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.

There are two main impediments to obligating HSIP funds. One is project readiness. If a programmed project is 

not able to advertise (for any number of reasons), it is very difficult to just swap in another HSIP project 

because there are limited projects that already designed and ready to advertise. This could be because 

projects are rarely advanced in design unless they are already programmed on the STIP and even then, they 

are designed and reviewed to meet the advertising date. So if a programmed project is not able to advertise, 

we are often left with a hole to try and fill in a replacement project. 

The second major impediment to obligating HSIP funds is that we are struggling to develop low cost-short term 

systemic projects here in Massachusetts. We are not able to have local communities self-certify that project 

work all occurs within the public way. This must only be done with layout plans or survey. Therefore, any 

simple pavement marking and/or signage project (typically the low cost/short term type systemic projects) must 

include a survey which adds time and expense and precludes the short term / low cost projects. 

Based on the above two factors, it sometimes makes it challenging for MassDOT to obligate funds. This is 

especially true in cases in which we have short notice such as for High Risk Rural Roads Projects when we are 

informed 18 months before they must be obligated that we fall within the rule and must obligate a certain 

amount of money. It is too short of a time frame to develop a project (including ROW, environmental 

processes, etc.) so we struggle with what can be done.

There are steps we have taken to resolve these issues. A Project Manager from the MassDOT Design Section 

will be providing assistance to push projects along. With regards to the difficulties we face for systemic project, 

MassDOT Traffic and Safety Engineering has been meeting with FHWA ROW Section and MassDOT ROW 

Section to try to resolve ROW issues with regards to low cost systemic projects. In the short term, we 

anticipate testing out systemic projects on MassDOT roadways only where layouts are available (for pedestrian 

enhancements using RRFBs). In addition, we are testing out a systemic project for rural road departure by 

providing the municipally owned locations to the ROW Section with the idea that ROW Section will review each

location to know what layouts are available. Even though it is not a requirement for MassDOT to develop an 

HSIP Implementation Plan, we are doing so to highlight the project types that would be most effective to 

reducing our fatalities and injuries. By highlighting these types of projects (possibly systemic), there will be a 

greater urgency to resolve some issues.
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 39

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 

PROJEC

T 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

604434-CHICOPEERECONSTRUCTION 

& RELATED WORK 

ON FULLER ROAD, 

FROM MEMORIAL DR 

(RTE 33) TO 

SHAWNIGAN DR (2.0 

MILES)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

2 Miles $2008553 $14039944.4

4

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 19,10

0

40 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

605651-

LEOMINSTERRECONSTRUCTION 

ON ROUTE 13, FROM 

HAWES STREET TO 

PROSPECT STREET

Intersection 

geometry

Modify lane assignment 6 Intersection

s

$1186326 $6861072.22 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther28,06

4

30 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

606011-DEERFIELDWHATELYRESURFACING & 

RELATED WORK ON 

ROUTES 5&10, FROM 

OLD STATE ROAD TO 

CONWAY ROAD (1.1 

MILES)

Roadway Pavement surface - other 1.1 Miles $4572497 $4648643.9 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther15,45

5

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

606272-

BARNSTABLEINTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENTS AT 

IYANOUGH ROAD 

(ROUTE 28) AND 

YARMOUTH ROAD

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replaceme

nt

1 Intersection

s

$168924 $29024975.8

6

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther60,90

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

606635-NEEDHAMNEWTONRECONSTRUCTION 

OF HIGHLAND 

AVENUE, NEEDHAM 

STREET & CHARLES 

RIVER BRIDGE, 

WEBSTER STREET 

TO RTE 9 (NEWTON)

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Install sidewalk 1.7 Miles $4500000 $28513526.1 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther34,70

0

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

607733-AUBURNREHABILITATION OF 

AUBURN STREET, 

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

On road bicycle lane 0.5 Miles $735132 $5751658.55 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 11,84

0

35 Town or 

Township 

Spot Bicyclists Incorporate 

safety 

elements 
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 39

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJEC

T 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

FROM WALSH 

AVENUE TO 

MILLBURY STREET

Highway 

Agency

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

607756-GREAT 

BARRINGTONINTERSECTION & 

SIGNAL 

IMPROVEMENTS ON 

US 7 (SOUTH MAIN 

STREET) AT SR 23 & 

SR 41 (MAPLE 

AVENUE)

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – Modern 

Roundabout

1 Intersection

s

$2339521 $8322984.91 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 24,42

8

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

608088-BROCKTONCORRIDOR 

IMPROVEMENTS ON 

ROUTE 123 

(BELMONT STREET), 

FROM ANGUS 

BEATON DRIVE TO 

WEST STREET

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replaceme

nt

0.5 Miles $386938 $7778744 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther24,40

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

608347-BEVERLYINTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENTS @ 3 

LOCATIONS

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replaceme

nt

3 Intersection

s

$4247549 $5945612.09 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther40,87

4

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

608378-DANVERSTOPSFIELDBOXFORD-ROWLEYINTERSTATE 

MAINTENANCE AND 

RELATED WORK ON 

I-95

Roadside Barrier – cable 20.3 Miles $2000000 $26591890.5

5

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate86,88

7

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

608575-CHICOPEE 

TO HOLYOKE-GUIDE 

AND TRAFFIC SIGN 

REPLACEMENT ON I391

Roadway signs 

and traffic

control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

4.7 Miles $1861310 $2350681 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate57,65

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

statewide, 

systematic 

update

Older 

Drivers

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 39

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJEC

T 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

609299-FALL RIVERWESTPORTINSTALLATION OF 

SIGN PANELS AND 

SUPPORTS AT 

EIGHT LOCATIONS 

ON I-195 AND ROUTE 

24

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

1.9 Miles $1000000 $1001195 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

statewide, 

systematic 

update

Older 

Drivers

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

609414-STATEWIDEWRONG WAY ENTRY 

COUNTERMEASURE

S

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Wrong-way Driving 

Detection System

$3000000 $2724501 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Principal ArterialInterstate0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Impaired 

Drivers and 

Older 

drivers

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

610646-DISTRICT 1-

DISTRICT 2-

DISTRICT 3-

CONVERSION OF 

INTERSTATE AND 

FREEWAY EXIT 

SIGNS TO 

MILEPOST-BASED 

NUMBERING

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

$1163876 $1195361 HSIP (23

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Principal ArterialInterstate0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

statewide Assist with 

emergency 

response

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e

610699-DISTRICT 4-

DISTRICT 5-

DISTRICT 6- 

CONVERSION OF 

INTERSTATE AND 

FREEWAY EXIT 

SIGNS TO 

MILEPOST-BASED 

NUMBERING

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

$1163876 $1389182 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Principal ArterialInterstate0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

statewide Assist with 

emergency 

response

Incorporate 

safety 

elements 

into 

infrastructur

e design and 

maintenanc

e
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 39

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 383 351 354 344 387 347 355 336 345

Serious Injuries 3,587 3,197 3,031 2,931 2,983 2,573 2,560 2,737 2,354

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

0.649 0.589 0.581 0.569 0.628 0.554 0.532 0.518 0.643

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

6.076 5.365 4.977 4.848 4.838 4.106 3.834 4.218 4.384

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

99 86 84 93 88 84 82 82 64

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

511 432 479 433 447 413 381 437 340
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 39

310

320

330

340

350

360

370

380

390

400

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Annual Fatalities

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Annual Serious Injuries
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 39

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

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

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

Page 19 of 39

The fatality data was provided to us by FARS Analyst in March 2021. The Serious Injuries came from the 

IMPACT crash data portal from March 2021. Note that data from 2019 and 2020 are not final and change over 

time. It is likely that these data will change before the final file closes.

Describe fatality data source.

Other

If Other Please describe

Pre 2018, the fatality data came from FARS. But 2018-2020 came from FARS Analyst as of March 

2021

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

ownership.

Year 2020

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Interstate

2.2 9 0.26 1.02

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0.6 1.6 0.48 1.3

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other

2 8 0.72 2.46

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

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

Page 20 of 39

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 Minor Arterial 5.4 14.6 1.12 3.07

Rural Minor Collector 2.4 12 2.01 10.06

Rural Major Collector 5.6 27.4 0.9 4.47

Rural Local Road or 

Street

5.4 26.6 1 4.9

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

55.6 236.2 0.34 1.45

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

13.6 122.6 0.22 1.94

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

100 757.8 0.83 6.25

Urban Minor Arterial 90 779.4 0.76 6.6

Urban Minor Collector 0.4 0

Urban Major Collector 30.2 265.6 0.74 6.53

Urban Local Road or 

Street

39.8 286 0.49 3.53

Local Highway Agency 

(combined City/Town)

180.4 1,612.2 0.69 6.17

Federal/Army/Navy/Air 

Force

0 0.2 0 0.49

Unaccepted 3 34.8 0.26 3.02
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 39

Year 2020

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway Agency 151.6 836.4 0.46 2.52

County Highway 

Agency

0 0 0 0

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

0 0 0 0

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

0 0 0 0

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

0.4 0.8 0.48 0.95

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

0 0 0 0

Other State Agency 8.2 40.8 0.91 4.44

Other Local Agency 0 0 0 0

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

0.2 0.6 0.84 1.64

Railroad 0 0 0 0

State Toll Authority 0 0 0 0

Local Toll Authority 0 0 0 0

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

0 0.2 0 0.51

Indian Tribe Nation 0 0 0 0

Local Highway Agency 

(combined City/Town)

180.4 1,612.2 0.69 6.17

Federal/Army/Navy/Air 

Force

0 0.2 0 0.49

Unaccepted 3 34.8 0.26 3.02

Unaccepted 

• Vehicle mile traveled data are taken from the MassDOT GIS VMT Viewer 

(https://gis.massdot.state.ma.us/dataviewers/vmt/) for 2017-2019 with adjustments from the Planning
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 39

office. Earlier years are from Federal Highway Administration Office of Policy Information website 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2007/vm2.cfm (link shown for 2007 but used for 

other years) and then checked against VMT information provided by the MassDOT Planning Office. 

2020 VMTs for Federal Functional Classification were obtained from the 2020 HPMS submittal. 2020 

VMTs for Jurisdiction were pro-rated (reduced by 16.81% which is the total amount that VMTs changed 

decreased between 2019 and 2020) because these VMTs were not available from the MassDOT 

Planning Office. 

• The fatality data for functional classification and jurisdiction came from FARS where available but 

updated based on updated data in the statewide system. The serious injury data for functional 

classification and for jurisdiction was obtained from IMPACT crash portal 

(https://apps.impact.dot.state.ma.us/cdp/home) from the Cross Tabulation tool. Fatal data for 

jurisdiction for years 2018-2020 were obtained from the IMPACT crash portal.

• Although the crash data is separated by urban major and minor collector, the VMTs are not and 

therefore, the two categories were combined. Major and minor collector crash numbers were pulled 

from the IMPACT crash portal.

• Non-geocoded crashes that contain no jurisdiction or functional classification were not included so 

totals may not add up.

• The category of “City OR Town Highway Agency” was added because Massachusetts did not make a 

distinction between these roads and the FARS data may not have been allocated to the official 

governance of the municipality type.

• Mapping of jurisdiction between FARS and MassDOT is below 

MassDOT 

Code MassDOT Jurisdiction FARS Code FARS Ownership

0 Unaccepted by city or town ? 26 Private (other than Railroad)

1 MassDOT ? 01 State Highway Agency

2 City or Town accepted road ? 03 OR 04 Town or Township Highway Agency OR City or 

Municipal Highway Agency (use chart)

3 Dept. of Conservation and 

Recreation ? 21 Other State Agency

5 Massachusetts Port 

Authority ? 21 Other State Agency

6 State Park or Forest ? 11 State Park, Forest, or Reservation Agency

7 State Institutional ? 40 Other Public Instrumentality (i.e., Airport)

8 Federal Park or Forest ? 66 National Park Service

9 County Institutional ? 40 Other Public Instrumentality (i.e., Airport)

B State college or university ? 40 Other Public Instrumentality (i.e., Airport)

C US Air Force ? 72 Air Force

D US Army Corps of 

Engineers ? 72 Air Force

E Federal Institution ? 40 Other Public Instrumentality (i.e., Airport)

F Other Federal ? 60 Other Federal Agency

G Federal Bureau of Indian 

Affairs ? 62 Bureau of Indian Affairs

H Private ? 26 Private (other than Railroad) OR (only if open to public 

travel, otherwise null)

I US Army ? 74 Navy/Marines

J US Navy ? 74 Navy/Marines
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 39

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2022 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:340.0

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

Per FHWA guidance, our target setting process began with a trend line projection based on the most recent 

available data. The 2019 fatalities were not finalized on the NHTSA FARS website when we began this 

process so the Massachusetts FARS statistician provided us with the 2019, 2020 and 2021 fatalities to date. 

Due to COVID and the shutdowns, our 2020 fatalities were not following the trend and we did not want to base 

our target setting on 2020. So we took this opportunity as a restart and based our trendline and targets from 

2019 and ignored 2020. We assumed our 2021 fatalities would be the same as our 2019 fatalities (based on 

how the total fatalities were trending year-to-date). We then assumed a 2.5% reduction from 2021 to 2022 for 

annual fatalities. Based on assumptions above that brings our 2022 5 year average fatalities projection to 

340. While we had to reset our targets because of COVID and the increases we had (based on preliminary 

information only) from behavioral components like speeding, unbelted, impaired, we are projecting that the 

fatalities will decrease based on our work efforts. MassDOT continues our efforts with HSIP, closely aligned 

work with our Highway Safety Office (NHTSA funded), joint efforts with our Sustainable transportation (bicyclist 

and pedestrian safety), commitment on several EDC programs and more. We recently started a Speed 

Management focus, a Safe Systems focus and are beginning planning for our SHSP that will be updated in 

2023. This target was developed in coordination with the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security – 

Highway Safety Division (EOPSS/HSD) (required to submit targets to NHTSA), the MassDOT Office of 

Transportation Planning (OTP) working closely with the MPOs, and the Office of Performance Management 

and Innovation (OPMI, which produces an annual performance report called Tracker that serves the public and 

State Legislature) and senior leadership. Moreover, it should be noted that our overarching goal is towards 

zero deaths and we will continue to work towards that goal by implementing SHSP strategies. 

Number of Serious Injuries:2504.0

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

FHWA guidance, our target setting process began with a trend line projection based on the most recent 

available data. The 2019 serious injuries were not finalized when we began this process so the most current 

serious injury data in the statewide crash system for 2019, 2020 and 2021 were used. On January 1st, 2019, 

Massachusetts moved from "incapacitating injuries" to "suspected serious injuries" on the crash form, as per 

Federal requirements. Some police departments had not yet fully converted over so 2019 is still a mix of injury 

severities and the full impact of moving to suspected serious injury is not fully known. However, it appears that 

2019 serious injuries went up compared to previous years and then settled back down in 2020 (we also 

compared to hospitalizations which did not show a dramatic spike). Furthermore, COVID and the shutdowns, 

may have also impacted the number of serious injuries. So we took this opportunity as a restart. We assumed 

a 3% reduction in the annual serious injuries from 2020 to 2021 and then a 4% annual reduction from 2021 to 

2022. Based on assumptions above that brings our 2022 5 year average serious injuries projection to 

2,504. MassDOT continues our efforts with HSIP, closely aligned work with our Highway Safety Office (NHTSA 

funded), joint efforts with our Sustainable transportation (bicyclist and pedestrian safety), commitment on 

several EDC programs and more. We recently started a Speed Management focus, a Safe Systems focus and 

are beginning planning for our SHSP that will be updated in 2023. This target was developed in coordination 

with the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security – Highway Safety Division (EOPSS/HSD) (required to 

submit targets to NHTSA), the MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning (OTP) working closely with the 
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 39

MPOs, and the Office of Performance Management and Innovation (OPMI, which produces an annual 

performance report called Tracker that serves the public and State Legislature) and senior leadership. 

Moreover, it should be noted that our overarching goal is towards zero deaths and serious injuries and we will 

continue to work towards that goal by implementing SHSP strategies. 

Fatality Rate:0.560

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

The fatality rate is simply math. So once we have our projections for fatalities and have our projected VMTs, 

the fatality rate is simply the 5 year average fatalities divided by the 5 year average VMTs. Like nearly every 

other state, COVID greatly impacted our VMTs so our rates spiked in 2020 with significantly lower VMTS and 

slightly higher fatalities. The projection is now 0.56 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled for 2022 

(5 year average of 2018-2022). The long term goal is towards zero deaths, so the long term fatality rate target 

is 0.0 fatalities per 100 million VMTs.

Serious Injury Rate:4.110

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

The serious injury rate is simply math. So once we have our projections for serious injuries and have our 

projected VMTs, the serious injury rate is simply the 5 year average serious injuries divided by the 5 year 

average VMTs. Like nearly every other state, COVID greatly impacted our VMTs so our rates spiked in 2020 

with significantly lower VMTS and slightly lower serious injuries. The projection is now 4.11 serious injuries 

per 100 million vehicle miles traveled for 2022 (5 year average of 2018-2022). The long term goal is 

towards zero deaths and serious injuries, so the long term serious injury rate target is 0.0 fatalities per 100 

million VMTs.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:471.0

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

As with all the other target setting measures, FHWA's guidance is to start with a trend line forecast and then 

consider external factors and planned implementation in order to set targets. Using historical data to create a 

trend line, the number of fatalities and serious injuries for non-motorists had been going up until 2016 when the 

annual numbers of fatalities and serious injuries for non-motorists went consistently down through 2018. We 

saw a large jump in 2019 in serious injuries, however, fatalities continued to trend downward. Again, the 

increase in the 2019 serious injuries could have been due to the reporting change of the injury type from 

incapacitating to suspected serious. In 2020, during the COVID pandemic, we experienced a steep decline in 

both fatalities and serious injuries. Because of the high fluctuations in numbers, to establish our target, we 

assumed 2021 non motorist fatalities and suspected serious injuries to be equal to the average of 2018, 2019 

and 2020. To project the non motorist fatality and serious injuries for 2022, we assumed an overall 2% drop. 

Overall, this translated to a 2022 5 year average of 471 fatalities and serious injuries combined for nonmotorists. Massachusetts is actively working on strategies to ameliorate non-motorist fatality and injuries, 

while promoting and encouraging walking and cycling. The 2018 Strategic Highway Safety Plan, the 2019 

Statewide Pedestrian Plan and the 2019 Statewide Bicycle Plan identify new multi-disciplined and multi-agency 

strategies to implement to eliminate fatalities and serious injuries of people walking and bicycling. The new 

focus on Speed Management and a Safe Systems approach should also help to drive down the fatalities and 

serious injuries. There also may be some implementation of low-cost systemic projects related to pedestrian 

safety in an effort to further drive down fatalities and serious injuries. Therefore, we hope to experience at least 

this reduction in non-motorist fatalities and serious injuries, which is working towards our ultimate goal towards 

zero deaths and serious injuries. 
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 39

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

safety performance targets. 

The targets were developed in coordination with the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security – Highway 

Safety Division (EOPSS/HSD) (required to submit targets to NHTSA), the MassDOT Office of Transportation 

Planning (OTP) working closely with the MPOs, and the Office of Performance Management and Innovation 

(OPMI, which produces an annual performance report calledTracker that serves the public and State 

Legislature) and senior leadership. The Secretary of Transportation and Administrator of Highways for 

MassDOT approved the targets based on several meetings.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2020 Safety Performance Targets (based 

on data available at the time of reporting). For each target, include a discussion of any 

reasons for differences in the actual outcomes and targets.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES TARGETS ACTUALS

Number of Fatalities 347.0 354.0

Number of Serious Injuries 2689.0 2641.4

Fatality Rate 0.560 0.575

Serious Injury Rate 4.300 4.276

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

505.4 483.6

Both the fatalities and the fatality rates did not meet the targets. Some of that was the unpredictability during 

COVID where speeding, impaired, distracted and unbelted behaviors increased (based on feedback received). 

Specifically, the VMTs dropped 17% between 2019 and 2020 yet the fatalities year to year increased between 

2019 and 2020. Regardless the reason, this showcased the need to make changes. Although it was not yet 

required, MassDOT started development of an HSIP Implementation Plan so that HSIP projects can be more 

efficient and effective. The Secretary of Transportation began bi-weekly fatality review meetings to discuss 

fatality trends and specific fatalities that have occurred during the previous two weeks. Discussions center 

around infrastructure, licensing, awareness/education and enforcement with attendees from the Secretary's 

office, MassDOT Highway Division, Registry of Motor Vehicles and the Executive Office of Public Safety and 

Security Highway Safety Division. MassDOT is also beginning to update our SHSP and the framework is 

intended to use Safe System. 

While the serious injuries and serious injury rates exceeded our target, our goal is zero deaths and serious 

injuries so we are taking the measures described above which should also have an impact on the serious 

injuries to bring them closer to our goal.

The non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries exceeded our target, much of that was due to the dramatic 

drop in 2020. But we cannot just accept this because already in 2021 the pedestrian fatalities are nearly back 

to 2019 levels. Therefore, we need to take the measures described earlier to try and move towards zero 

deaths and fatalities.
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 39

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

While it does not appear that the HRRR rule applies to Massachusetts, we re in the process of developing a 

rural run off the road systemic project based on our newly developed network screening risk models. We hope 

to be able to advertise this project and others like it.

Provide the number of older driver and pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries 65 

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

59 65 75 49 77 77 73

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

271 281 297 265 273 296 224

Note for fatalities, that 2019 is from FARS but from the early release data and 2020 is from our State system 

and not from FARS. Other fatality information is from FARS. All serious injury information is from our statewide 

system.
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 39

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

• Benefit/Cost Ratio

• Change in fatalities and serious injuries

• Economic Effectiveness (cost per crash reduced)

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

the State's program level evaluations.

Since 2014, Massachusetts has experienced, on average, a decline of 3.6 fatal injuries per year. The five-year 

rolling average number of fatal injuries also indicate this decreasing trend. From 2014 to 2019, five-year 

average statewide fatalities dropped 2.4 percent, compared to the national trend, which saw an increase from 

32,744 fatalities in 2014, rising to a peak in 2016 of 37,806 fatalities, to the most recent measure of 36,096 in 

2019, a 10-percent increase since 2014. Even with a modest decrease in fatalities, Massachusetts has 

performed better than the national average.

Massachusetts has also seen a decline in annual suspected serious injury occurrence in recent years. On 

average, suspected serious injuries (called incapacitating injuries until 2019) have decreased by approximately 

86 per year in the period from 2014 to 2019. The five-year rolling average of suspected serious injuries 

decreased 18 percent from 2014 to 2019. However, 2019 did see an increase in suspected serious injuries 

across the state following decreases three out of the previous four years. While happy with the downward 

trends, Massachusetts would like to see larger annual reductions in fatalities and suspected serious injuries 

and feels improvements to the HSIP can help achieve further reductions.

Massachusetts also focuses on the economic effectiveness of their program, both in terms of benefit-cost 

analysis and the number of dollars spent per crash reduced. A recent evaluation of Massachusetts’s HSIP 

program showed that for HSIP projects reported in the 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020 HSIP reports (projects 

completed in 2013 through 2016, respectively), Massachusetts saw a benefit/cost ratio of 1.46. This implies 

recent Massachusetts HSIP projects have returned $1.46 in safety benefits over the expected service life for 

every $1 spent. For the HSIP projects reported this year, which were completed in 2016, the projected 

benefit/cost is 1.48 for the service life based on three years of after data, a similar value to what has been 

observed in previous years. It should be noted that the calculations for benefit/cost included all funds spent on 

the projects not just HSIP funds and, in many cases, HSIP funding was a small portion of the funding because 

the project was primarily a mobility project or some other type of project and there are many other benefits

realized besides safety. So the benefit/cost indicated here is understating the comprehensive benefits. Further, 

the HSIP funding for these projects is expected to reduce 198.6 fatal or injury crashes over the 20-year service 

lives of the improvements, an average of $129,276 spent to reduce one crash.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program?

• # RSAs completed

• HSIP Obligations

• Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

• More systemic programs
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 39

Massachusetts programmed $28,094,654 of HSIP Federal funds in 2020 and $28,454,771 of Federal funds 

were obligated. While that is one indicator of success, a better indicator is using the HSIP funds in the most 

efficient manner to reduce fatalities and injuries. This is why we are preparing an HSIP Implementation Plan to 

provide the best indicators of the types of projects MassDOT should focus on. Of the 15 projects funded at 

least partially with HSIP funds, four involve sign projects, of which two are systemwide updates to exits and 

two are systematic upgrades to guide signs. Another project is a systemic wrong way driving signage and 

marking project. The remaining 10 projects are hot spot locations and all 10 of them have had road safety 

audits conducted as part of the design and development process in order to diagnose the safety issues and 

identify countermeasures. During the design process, the design is compared against the RSA 

recommendations to ensure the project is moving in the right direction. This road safety audit process helps to 

ensure safety issues will be addressed. The fact that 10 out of 10 spot location projects have had an RSAs is 

another good indicator. 

MassDOT is also in the process of finalizing a safety alternatives analysis guide and complementary statepreferred CMF lists and tools to standardize alternatives analysis. This will allow for the expansion of datadriven safety analysis as part of standard MassDOT business, especially when incorporated as part of 

MassDOT’s new Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) protocol. The production of the HSIP Implementation 

Plan and presentation to leadership will also expand the knowledge of data-driven safety analysis at the 

executive leadership level. Finally, MassDOT’s addition of a safety analysis module to the IMPACT website will 

allow all users to identify potential safety projects through crash-based and risk-based network screening, 

while also providing crash tree and test of proportions tools for users to easily identify safety issues in their 

communities. The risk-based maps also help with MassDOT’s goal of increasing the number of systemic 

projects in the HSIP.

Describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting 

period.

MassDOT is in the process of completing an HSIP Implementation Plan that will document proposed changes 

to the HSIP. Primarily, this plan will attempt to quantify the benefits of a future systemic component of the 

HSIP, something lacking in Massachusetts. MassDOT’s addition of risk factor network screening maps on the 

IMPACT portal will assist with the development of this new systemic program. MassDOT currently has 3 

systemic projects on the STIP.

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2020

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 647.2 1.06

Impaired Driving 214.8 0.35

Occupant Protection 347.2 0.57

Speeding related 159.6 0.26

Intersection related
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 39

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)

Pedestrian 72 293.8 0.12 0.47

Older driver related 502.8 0.81

Motorcycle 51.2 315 0.08 0.52

Younger Driver related 353.6 0.58

Truck Involved 159.4 0.26

Distracted driving 241.8 0.4

Bicycle 8.2 98.4 0.02 0.16

Work Zone 51.6 0.08

Grade Crossing 1.4 0
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 39

0

50

100

150

200

250

Fatalities

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

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Serious Injuries

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

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 39

The 2019 fatal and serious injury data are not finalized and may change. The 2020 fatal data is based on 

information from the FARS statistician and not the FARS website and is only available for a few of the 

emphasis areas. 2020 serious injury data are based on the statewide crash data system and are preliminary 

only.

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

Fatality Rate

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

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Serious Injury Rate

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

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 39

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the 

reporting period?

Yes

Please provide the following summary information for each countermeasure 

effectiveness evaluation. 

CounterMeasures: Flashing Yellow Arrow 

Description: 

This was a preliminary naïve before/after 

study for various FYA configurations 

(3SG, 4SG with one FYA, 4SG with two or 

more FYA) and various crash types (by 

severity, by left turn crashes, rear end 

crashes, etc) See report for details. A 

detailed study will be performed after we 

have an adequate number of crash years 

post implementation. The attached report 

has all the detailed breakdowns of crash 

types but this is simply providing an overall 

summary of total crashes for all FYA 

types. 

Target Crash Type: All 

Number of Installations: 166 

Number of Installations: 166 

Miles Treated: 

Years Before: 1 

Years After: 1 

Methodology: Simple before/after 

Results: 

See attached report since this summary 

only provides total crashes for all crash 

types and FYA configurations so is not 

really useful in itself. This report is 

PRELIMINARY only since it is simply 

naïve before/after with only 1 years of data 

in most cases. A detailed evaluation will 

be performed once there are multiple 

years of data. 

File Name: dot_pln_FYA_ReportFinal_04292021.pdf
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 39

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)

602182 - GREAT 

BARRINGTONRECONSTRUCTION 

OF MAIN STREET 

(ROUTE 7)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

On road bicycle lane 66.00 66.00 11.00 6.00 77.00 72.00 1.09

603457 - WEST 

BRIDGEWATERINTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENTS 

AT ROUTE 106 & 

ROUTE 28 

(CENTRAL 

SQUARE)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

52.00 72.00 10.00 16.00 62.00 88.00 -1.24

604553 - ADAMSROUNDABOUT 

CONSTRUCTION 

AT ROUTE 8 & 

FRIEND STREET

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – Modern 

Roundabout

21.00 26.00 3.00 4.00 24.00 30.00 -0.29

605668 - RAYNHAMSIGNAL & 

INTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENT @ 

ROUTE 44 (NEW 

STATE HIGHWAY), 

ORCHARD STREET 

& ROUTE 24 (NB) 

OFF-RAMP

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

71.00 36.00 4.00 1.00 26.00 10.00 101.00 47.00 4.59

606071 - EASTONSIGNAL & 

INTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENTS @ 

ROUTE 138 

(TURNPIKE 

STREET) AND 

ROUTE 106 

(FOUNDRY 

STREET) 

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

22.00 27.00 2.00 1.00 10.00 6.00 34.00 34.00 2.37

606298 - ANDOVERTEWKSBURYINTERSECTION & 

SIGNAL 

IMPROVEMENTS 

AT DASCOMB 

Rural Major 

Collector

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – new traffic 

signal

5.00 7.00 2.00 5.00 9.00 -1.29
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 39

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)

ROAD, EAST 

STREET & 

SHAWSHEEN 

STREET

606904 - HOLYOKESIGNAL 

INSTALLATION & 

IMPROVEMENTS 

ON CHERRY 

STREET @ I-91 

(INTERCHANGE 16)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – new traffic 

signal

38.00 31.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 21.00 12.00 62.00 44.00 6.74

607223 -

GREENFIELDINTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENTS 

AND RELATED 

WORK (INCLUDING 

SIGNALS) AT 

ROUTE 2A 

(MOHAWK TRAIL) 

AND SHELBURNE 

ROAD/RIVER 

STREET

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

16.00 9.00 6.00 2.00 22.00 11.00 3.17

607745 - LENOXINTERSECTION & 

SIGNAL 

IMPROVEMENTS 

AT US 7 & US 20 

(VETERAN'S 

MEMORIAL 

HIGHWAY) @ SR 

183 (WALKER 

STREET)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

13.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 18.00 8.00 3.48

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

MassDOT reported on the safety and economic effectiveness of nine HSIP projects which were completed in 2016, thus having three years of complete “after” data for evaluation. From a naïve standpoint, the project sites had a total of 

405 crashes in the three years before the projects and 343 crashes in the three years after, an average annual reduction of 20.7 crashes. When looking at fatal and injury (FI) crashes, there were 101 FI crashes in the three years before 

and 65 FI crashes in the three years after. While these naïve results are promising, MassDOT used Empirical Bayes and crash rates to estimate how many crashes were expected to happen in the after years, thus being able to determine 

how many were reduced. In total, the nine projects are expected to reduce 9.9 FI crashes and 14.3 total crashes per year. Additionally, MassDOT used the reduced crashes – the difference between expected and observed – to estimate 

annual monetary benefits of the reduction. Overall, the reported projects cost $25.7 million and are expected to return $38.0 million in benefits over the projects’ service life – a benefit/cost ratio of 1.48. It should be noted that the 

calculations for benefit/cost included all funds spent on the projects not just HSIP funds and, in many cases, HSIP funding was a small portion of the funding because the project was primarily a mobility project or some other type of 

project and there are many other benefits realized besides safety. So the benefit/cost indicated here is understating the comprehensive benefits.
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 39

Compliance Assessment 

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

 12/31/2018

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2012 To: 2016

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

 2023

MassDOT does prepare interim updates to our SHSP which includes updates on the Action Plan. An update was prepared in March 2020 ( https://www.mass.gov/service-details/strategic-highway-safety-plan ) . However, a complete 

revision will be prepared and completed in 2023. We have already begun some high level discussion of connecting it to the Safe Systems approach.

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

*Based on Functional Classification (MIRE 1.0 Element Number) [MIRE 2.0 Element Number]

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NONSTATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12) [12]

1 1 1 1 1 1

Route Number (8) 

[8]

1 1

Route/Street Name 

(9) [9]

0.997843349046747 0.999445648943059

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21) [21]

0.998772301509386 0.999162296660252

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20) [20]

1 1 1 1

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

0.996019992360286 0.997415003564396 1 1

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

1 1 1 1 1 1

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

1 1 1 1 1 1

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

1 1

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

0.998998983068699 0.999527592379749
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 39

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NONSTATE

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

1 1 1 1 1 1

Median Type (54) 

[55]

0.998089429517049 0.995183413293783

Access Control (22) 

[23]

0.994447627521098 0.997456734254667

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

0.99765735288513 0.996974281591317

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

0.998431813923494 0.996968787582517 0.994375887800542 0.985794300118418

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

0.999845002385621 0.999946245877989 0.950183013605771 0.980764369760676

AADT Year (80) [82] 0.999845002385621 0.999946245877989

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

1 1 1 1 1 1

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

1 1

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

1 1

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

1 1

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

1 1

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

0.541723171503481 0.723116638467844

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

0.999896336634012 0.999946245877989

AADT Year (80) [82] 0.999896336634012 0.999946245877989

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

1 1
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 39

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NONSTATE

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201) [191]

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

1 1

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

0.9742782490452 0.985211391248016

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

0.9742782490452 0.985211391248016

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

1 1

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

1 1

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.97 0.45 0.45 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00

*Based on Functional Classification (MIRE 1.0 Element Number) [MIRE 2.0 Element Number]

Describe actions the State will take moving forward to meet the requirement to have complete access to the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads by September 30, 2026.

MassDOT is in relatively good shape. Our largest deficiencies are with the intersections. To overcome that, we assembled an intersection collection tool (using HSIP funds) and two procured two contracts with University of Massachusetts 

students (using HSIP funds) to collect the intersection MIRE FDE. There are approximately 70,000 intersections to be collected and, based on recent performance measures, each intersections takes approximately 8 minutes. We are just 

about complete and UMASS is just running through QA/QC processes now. We anticipate this will be completed within a few months. While AADTs are available on nearly 96% of all roadways (State owned and non-state owned), we are 

still looking into a process to have some quality control.
Page 38 of 39

2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Optional Attachments 

Program Structure:

hwy_HSIP_Criteria_07-2020.pdf

dot-hwy_safety_analysis_guide080220.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

dot_pln_FYA_ReportFinal_04292021.pdf

Compliance Assessment:
2021 Massachusetts Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 39

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.