Page 1 of 47

KANSAS

HIGHWAY SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 

2021 ANNUAL REPORT

U.S. Department ofTransportation 

Federal Highway Administration 

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

Page 2 of 47

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 .......................................................................................................................20

Funds Programmed.........................................................................................................................20

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................22

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................28

General Highway Safety Trends......................................................................................................28

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................33

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................36

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................37

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................37

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................37

Project Effectiveness.......................................................................................................................42

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................43

Optional Attachments..........................................................................................................................46

Glossary..............................................................................................................................................47
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 47

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 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 47

Executive Summary

In Kansas we continue to spend our HSIP dollars in a variety of independently managed sub-programs, 

including intersections, signing, pavement markings, lighting, highway-rail grade crossing, HRRR, guardrail, 

and general safety improvements. This is the ninth year HRRR is reported with the HSIP report. Collectively, 

these programs cover all 140,000 centerline miles of public roads in Kansas while applying a multitude of 

proven countermeasures designed to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes statewide.

Worth highlighting is the significant increase in serious injuries since 2018. Between 2009 and 2018 serious 

injuries fell from 1,675 to 1,003. In 2019 Kansas adopted the new definition of "suspected serious injury" for 

severity A on the KABCO scale, to replace what was called "disabling injury". As expected, serious injuries (A) 

increased to 1,401 in 2019 and then to 1,586 in 2020 as, presumably, more law enforcement agencies 

adjusted to the new definition. This created a challenge in generating meaningful safety performance 

measures for serious injuries.

Since submitting our 2020 HSIP Annual Report, we completed an HSIP Assessment, published our 2020-2024

Strategic Highway Safety Plan, developed an evaluation framework for each HSIP sub-program, and prepared 

our FFY 2022 HSIP Implementation Plan. It is our goal that each of these documents substantively inform and 

improve our overall HSIP process.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 47

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. 

Our HSIP is managed via eight independent sub-programs, including Intersections, Signing, Pavement 

Markings, Lighting, Rail-Highway Grade Crossing, High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR), Guardrail, and General 

Safety Improvements. Each of these programs is described in detail within this report.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-Planning and Design

The HSIP is administered by the State Highway Safety Engineer in the Bureau of Transportation Safety within 

the Division of Planning and Development. Seven of the eight sub-programs are now managed within the 

Division of Engineering and Design: Intersections, Signing, Pavement Markings, and Lighting are managed in 

the Bureau of Traffic Engineering; HRRR is managed by the Bureau of Local Projects, and Rail-Highway 

Grade Crossing and Guardrail by the Bureau of Road Design. General Safety Improvements is managed by 

the Bureau of Transportation Safety. See section below titled "Describe HSIP program administration practices 

that have changed since the last reporting period" for significant organizational changes within the reporting 

period.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Other-Headquarters

A committee made up of the HSIP Program Manager, FHWA Division Safety Engineer, sub-program 

managers, and management meet monthly to measure program progress based on planned obligations and to 

estimate and distribute allocations moving forward. The discussion begins based on historical precedent, but 

actual distribution is based on anticipated needs over the next two years. As we work to improve our HSIP, we 

intend to work toward a more data-driven distribution of dollars to each sub-program.

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

Our HSIP program is made up of eight sub-programs: Lighting, Pavement Markings, Signing, Rail-Highway 

Grade Crossing, Intersections, HRRR, Guardrail and General Safety Improvements. Lighting, Pavement 

Markings, Signing, and Guardrail are exclusive to the State Highway System, although projects may impact 

intersecting non-state roads. Intersections, General Safety Improvements and Rail-Highway Grade Crossing 

projects may include local roads, that is, public roads not a part of the State Highway System. HRRR is 

exclusive to local roads, not a part of he State Highway System.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 47

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

• Design

• Districts/Regions

• Local Aid Programs Office/Division

• Maintenance

• Operations

• Planning

• Traffic Engineering/Safety

Describe coordination with internal partners.

Lighting sub-program: Projects are selected with input from the structural engineer in our State Bridge Office 

responsible for foundations for lighting, as well as field information from our Area Offices, and road safety 

audits performed by our Bureau of Traffic Engineering.

Signing sub-program: This blanket replacement program was originally programmed to cover the entire state 

highway system in ten years. We are currently on our second cycle of replacement. Our Area Offices complete 

a sign inventory for each project. In recent years, projects that are primarily on conventional roads the Area 

Offices typically installed the new signs and posts; however, due to staffing and other considerations we have 

moved back to contractor let. Projects that are on urban expressways and freeways have been and will 

continue to be contractor let. Area Offices then administer the construction engineering duties.

Pavement Marking sub-program: Our pavement marking technician (sub-program manager) works closely with 

our district maintenance engineers to identify recommended routes based on field experience and retroreflectivity data. The sub-program manager works with the Bureau of Traffic Engineering to identify locations in 

need of improved markings for safety.

Intersections sub-program: Projects are identified through solicitation to cities and their recommendations. 

Additionally, projects may be identified through studies such as Traffic Engineering Assistance Program 

reports (TEAP) and traffic studies. When the intersection is located on the State Highway System, our District 

and Area Offices are made part of the discussion as well. Once locations are identified, a competitive process 

for funding begins using Part B of the Highway Safety Manual and engineering judgment.

HRRR sub-program: The Bureau of Local Projects manages the program and utilizes a scoring rubric to score 

and rank potential projects. District Offices provide construction oversight.

General Safety Improvements sub-program: The Bureau of Transportation Safety manages the program. 

Projects are selected and scoped in partnership with other KDOT divisions upon request.

Guardrail 3R: Projects are selected and scoped in partnership with District and Area Offices based on KDOT 

Road Memorandum 18-03 KDOT 3R Policy. 3R projects are pavement driven. The guardrail is assessed along 

with other roadway features and alignment.

Guardrail Set-aside: Projects are selected and scoped in partnership with District and Area Offices based on 

the Guardrail Set-Aside Program MOU dated August 19, 2019. Bridge Management, Coordinating Section 

(Rail), and Traffic Engineering are also involved.

All sub-programs: The Bureau of Transportation Safety manages and reports on crash data as needed.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 47

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

• FHWA

• Local Government Agency 

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

• Other-Program Management Consultant

Describe coordination with external partners.

Intersections sub-program: Projects are identified through solicitation to cities and their recommendations. 

Additionally, projects may be identified through studies such as Traffic Engineering Assistance Program 

reports (TEAP) and KDOT traffic studies.

HRRR sub-program: Projects are identified through solicitation to counties and their recommendations. 

Additionally, projects may be identified through studies such as Traffic Engineering Assistance Program 

reports (TEAP), road safety audits, and Local Road Safety Plans.

Guardrail sub-programs: Due to staffing issues within KDOT, JEO Consulting Group is contracted with KDOT 

to serve as PMC for the guardrail programs.

All sub-programs: The FHWA is involved in oversight and providing program guidance as needed. The MPOs 

are involved in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) approval process.

Describe HSIP program administration practices that have changed since the last 

reporting period.

The former Bureau of Transportation Safety and Technology within the Division of Planning and Development 

was split into three new bureaus: Transportation Safety (formerly Traffic Safety Section) remained in the 

Division of Planning and Development. This bureau includes the management of crash data, management of 

behavioral safety programs, and the State Highway Safety Engineer (SHSE) who administers the HSIP 

including this annual report, safety performance targets, and (when required) the annual implementation plan. 

The SHSE also manages the general safety improvements sub-program. The Bureau of Traffic Engineering 

(formerly Traffic Engineering Section) moved to the Division of Engineering and Design and continues to 

manage four sub-programs: intersections, signing, pavement markings, and lighting. The third new bureau, 

Bureau of ITS (formerly ITS Section) also remained in the Division of Planning and Development but is not 

involved in the HSIP program. Finally, the Bureau of Local Projects, which manages HRRR, and the Bureau of 

Road Design, which manages guardrail and rail, remains in the Division of Engineering and Design.

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

elaborate. 

A total of $25,952,175 ($19,403,402HSIP and $6,548,773 Rail) was apportioned in FFY-2021, distributed 

to each sub-program as follows: 

• Lighting: $500,000 

• Pavement Marking: $5,000,000 

• Signing: $5,000,000 

• HWY/RR Grade Crossing:

o $803,402 HSIP 

o $6,548,773 Rail 
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 47

• Intersection Safety: $3,200,000 

• General Safety Improvements: $0 

• HRRR: $4,900,000 

• Guard Rail: $0 

A total of $60,224,032.97 ($39,506,427.71 HSIP, $7,893,139.08 Rail and $12,824,466.18 ACHSIP) was 

obligated in each sub-program as follows:

• Lighting: $3,990,437.72 HSIP 

• Pavement Marking: $7,792,647.66 HSIP 

• Signing: $10,248,748.74 HSIP 

• HWY/RR Grade Crossing: $8,853,528.33:

o $677,059.16 HSIP 

o $7,893,139.08 Rail 

o $283,330.09 ACHSIP 

• Intersection Safety: $2,736,940.06:

o $1,557,553.06 HSIP 

o $1,179,387.00 ACHSIP 

• KDOT Safety: $8,152,183.02:

o $213,917.93 HSIP 

o $7,938,265.09 ACHSIP 

• HRRR: $7,386,794.38 HSIP 

• Guard Rail: $11,062,753.06:

o $7,639,269.06 HSIP 

o $3,423,484 ACHSIP 

These dollar figures are provided as supplemental information only. Only the HSIP portion of HWY/RR Grade 

Crossing is included in this report; the Rail portion is included in the RHCP Report. Projects funded with 

advanced construction (ACHSIP) are not included in this report but will be reported when funds are converted. 

For the purpose of this question, apportioned is that dollar amount made available to each subprogram prior to 

the beginning of the fiscal year; this value--which varies from year to year based on anticipated need--does not 

include carry-over. Please note that the values for obligations may include adjustment made on projects 

reported in a previous report or may include PE on projects we will report in a future report and should not be 

expected to match totals from the project listing table below.

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes?

No

KDOT and the FHWA Division Office completed an HSIP Assessment in March 2021. One of three key 

recommendations from the assessment is based on this observation:"Currently only the Intersection Program 

uses a robust data-driven safety approach to select and prioritize projects but still only considers locations 

submitted for funding. The rating rubric used in the HRRR program indirectly provides a measure that relates 

to safety performance for submitted projects. Likewise, the use of mobile retro data is an excellent tool to 

identify routes approaching minimum retro-reflectivity levels but does not relate directly to safety performance." 

The recommendation follows: "Develop program procedures to better reflect data-driven safety performance 

approaches. This may include the expanded use of HSM techniques or systemic approaches tied to proven 

countermeasures. This would provide the basis for performing evaluations discussed above. It is recognized 

that this may require improved processes for advancing KDOT’s capabilities for safety data collection and 

analysis." Or, as noted in the conclusion, "Develop program procedures to better reflect data-driven 

safety performance approaches, and document in a program manual."
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 47

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• Intersection

• Local Safety

• Sign Replacement And Improvement

• Other-Pavement Marking

• Other-Lighting

• Other-General Safety Improvements

• Other-Guardrail

• Other-Rail

Our HRRR Program may also be referred to as Local Safety since it applies exclusively to locally-owned roads.

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology:8/25/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Must satisfy a need based on the HSM, address crashes, and have a B/C>1.

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Other-Fatal and SI crashes

• Traffic

• Volume

• Population

• Lane miles

• Functional classification

• Other-Turn lanes

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

• Other-B/C ratio

• Other-Observed crashes and patterns

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?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 47

Process is same except local road projects include a periodic solicitation letter to all cities with 

population of 5,000 or greater requesting project proposals.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Competitive application process

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:3

Other-Crash patterns:1

This program is increasingly focused on low-cost safety improvements as well as higher-cost that addresses

observed crash patterns. Additionally, HSM tools such as Safety Analyst help us rank and quantify the

countermeasures to address intersections with the greatest potential to improve safety.

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology:2/11/2011

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Traffic

• Volume

• Population

• Lane miles

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

• Other-Shoulder width, sign 

sheeting type, past projects, 

cost, RSA, county priority, and 

LRSP

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Probability of specific crash types
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 47

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?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

This program applies only to local roads (non-state owned and operated.)

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Competitive application process

• Other-Scoring rubric

• selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:2

Other-Scoring rubric:1

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2006

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-10 year sign replacement for retro-reflectivity per the MUTCD

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Other-Sign inventory

• Other-Sign tracking

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Projects are programmed based on a blanket replacement program
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 47

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Projects are programmed based on a blanket replacement program.

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Other-Per established cyclical program:1

This program was established in 1996 to address necessary sign replacements on the State Highway System

due to pending (now final) federal requirements for minimum retro-reflectivity of highway signs. This program

schedules sign replacements based upon highway route-mileage statewide and the total mileage of all the

routes in each District Sub-Area with multiple Sub-Areas in each District being addressed each year. This

program excludes signs on any other state project that include sign replacement for that highway route in the

same year. This program also excludes any signs that were replaced within seven years of the scheduled date

of the replacement project. This is the 15th year KDOT has used HSIP funds to improve permanent signing.

The projects in the program are administered using two separate methods. Sub-Areas comprised primarily of

routes classified as freeways and expressways with interchanges are let to contract via normal letting

procedures. Sub-Areas with routes that are classified as expressways and conventional roads were

administered by releasing contracts to purchase the signs and posts with installation performed by KDOT

maintenance crews. However, due to KDOT maintenance work-force reductions, the program will rely on

contractors to install the signs regardless of route classification moving forward.

Program: Other-Pavement Marking

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2006

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes • Volume

• Population

• Other-Retro-reflectivity.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 47

• Other-If we considered only 

traffic volumes, only high 

volume districts (1 and 5) would 

get funded, thus population is 

taken into account. At the 

district level, we then consider 

higher volume routes first and 

take into account retroreadings.

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Other-Mobile retro-reflectivity data

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Pavement Marking Specialist works closely with district maintenance engineers to select 

projects.

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:1

This set-aside program was established in FY 1996 to address pavement marking necessary due to pending

new federal requirements for minimum retro-reflectivity of pavement markings. Improvements in this category

utilize high-performance, long-life pavement marking materials. Efforts are also made to identify those marking

materials with wet-weather retro-reflectivity. This program is limited to projects that do not have high 

performance markings included under any other KDOT program. Projects are selected by the Bureau of Traffic 

Engineering based on a roadway's traffic volumes, past performance of marking material, geometry, surface 

condition, surface

type, crash history, and, in the case of new marking materials, the research benefit. We are also expanding our

use of mobile retro-reflectivity data to identify potential projects. This is the 16th year KDOT has used HSIP

funds to improve pavement markings.

Program: Other-Lighting

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2006
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 47

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Other-Night-time unlit crashes • Volume • Other-Road type: Interchanges

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Locations are identified by District Engineers and public

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Lighting Unit

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:1

Because lighting is beneficial to the safety and operation of the highway system, this set-aside program was

established in FY 2000. Projects are selected by the Bureau of Traffic Engineering based on the roadway's 

volume and the potential for night-time crash history. This program is limited to

projects which are not included under any other KDOT program. Projects are scheduled until the available

lighting funds are exhausted. This is the 16th year KDOT has used HSIP funds to improve lighting.

Program: Other-General Safety Improvements

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2020

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

Page 15 of 47

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-As needed

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

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?

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Other-As needed:1

The original General Safety Improvement Program is being reinvented as a state-funded safety program 

focused on passing lanes, intersections, and segments. This funding category continues to exist for special 

projects as needed or when consistent with our Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

Program: Other-Guardrail

Date of Program Methodology:8/19/2019

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Traffic

• Volume • Roadside features
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 47

• Other-Speed • Other-NHS

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Tiered approach based on AADT and posted speed, then strategically bundled by 

geography

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Memorandum of Understanding

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:1

The information above is specific to the blunt-end set-aside program. No set-aside projects are listed in the 

project listing because--while projects were programmed--the dollars were obligated using advanced 

construction (AC). The projects will be listed in fiscal year the funds are converted. The set-aside is based on a 

Memorandum of Understanding dated August 19,2019 and includes the following program criteria:

• Projects will focus on removal and replacement of blunt ends on the mainline lanes along the NHS 

routes.

• Where existing guardrail installations are entirely replaced, the replacement will be consistent with 

KDOT’s Roadside Safety Hardware Eligibility Process.

• Each blunt end guardrail location will be evaluated for the appropriate treatment but will focus on the 

blunt end terminal.

• Some set-aside projects may require right-of-way (ROW) acquisition. Where ROW is required the 

project schedule will be such to allow adequate time for environmental reviews and ROW acquisition to 

take place.

• The set-aside projects are expected to be categorical exclusion environmental classification.

The three guardrail projects in this year's project listing are from the 3R program consistent with KDOT Road 

Memorandum 18-03 KDOT 3R Policy. 3R projects are pavement driven. The entire guardrail is assessed along 

with other roadway features and alignment and replaced as necessary.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 47

Program: Other-Rail

Date of Program Methodology:9/24/2021

What is the justification for this program? 

• Other-Originated under Section 130 of the 1973 Federal-Aid Highway Act 

What is the funding approach for this program? 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Traffic

• Other-Train traffic • Other-Warning devices

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Priority formula hazard index (see below)

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-Prioritization process

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:1

Other-Priority formula:2

When Rail projects are funded with HSIP dollars, the projects are selected consistent with our Section 130 

program. Please reference the RHCP report for more information. In SFY 2021, we obligated two PE only 

projects using HSIP funds. Please see the project listing for details.

The priority formula “Hazard Index” is used to rate the relative hazard potential for all crossings and is based 

on highway traffic, train traffic, and a warning device factor. The formula is described below:

Priority Formula for Railroad Crossings
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 47

Hazard Index = AADT * T * W

AADT = Average Annual Daily Traffic

T = Average Number of Trains Per Day

W = 0.1 for Gates

W = 0.6 for Flashing Lights

W = 1.0 for Cross Bucks

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 87

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Clear Zone Improvements

• Horizontal curve signs

• Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

• Install/Improve Signing

• Other-Active grade crossings

• Pavement/Shoulder Widening

• Upgrade Guard Rails

For HSIP reporting purposes, a systemic improvement means an improvement that is widely implemented 

based on high-risk roadway features that are correlated with particular severe crash types. This does not 

include system wide projects where a safety treatment is applied to the entire system without data 

considerations. Based on this definition, the following programs are being reported as systemic based on risk 

factors noted:

• Pavement Marking: Retro-reflectivity 

• Signing: Sign age 

• Guard Rail: Speed and traffic volume 

• Rail: Train and traffic volumes 

• HRRR: Markings and signing 

Percentage reported above is based exclusively on HSIP project costs in the project listing below.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

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

• Engineering Study

• Road Safety Assessment

• SHSP/Local road safety plan

• Other-10-year replacement cycle

• Other-Risk factors for systemic programs

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

No

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

Yes 
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 47

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

The intersection program uses the Highway Safety Manual Part B along with Part C for the expected, predicted 

and observed crash frequency. We also use the Level of Service of Safety along with crash patterns and 

Benefit/Cost to determine a qualifying project for funding.

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

elaborate.

Yes. In summer of 2021, Kansas established a CMF task force which will be guided by a project consultant. 

The outcome of this work will provide KDOT with approved crash modification factors (CMF) to be applied to 

projects across the state for both estimating expected changes in crashes and for use in benefit-cost analyses. 

A compilation of approved CMFs allows for consistency in projects across the state. The consistency in 

application of CMFs will allow the state to streamline the review of safety projects in addition to communicating 

the expected benefits of safety countermeasures to stakeholders.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 47

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $19,403,402 $39,506,428 203.61%

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)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $2,383,165 $2,105,007 88.33%

Totals $21,786,567 $41,611,435 191%

HSIP values were provided by our Management Systems Analyst; State and Local values were provided by 

our WinCPMS Administrator. Both persons in our Division of Program and Project Management. State and 

Local values are based on programmed original estimates and obligations that occurred between 07/01/2020 

and 06/30/2021.

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

safety projects?

$8,100,000

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

$7,836,794

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

$2,485,580

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

$2,485,580

Non-infrastructure funding goes toward Local Road Safety Plans, Traffic Engineering Assistance Program, 

State Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Action Plan, and collection of pavement marking retro-reflectivity data.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 47

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.

Lighting sub-program: Two distinct issues have caused delays in this program. First, a one-million dollar 

project in the Kansas City Metro Area (I-70 and I-670) has been delayed by coordinating efforts with UPRR. 

The original project was created end of 2019. This portion was broken out into a stage two project mid 2020 

because of railroad coordination, and has been delayed several times. The current letting is scheduled for 

January 2022. Second, a fluid dynamic study being performed by the University of Kansas to evaluate how the 

existing High Mast Light Towers react to the new LED luminaire profile, which is more aerodynamic. Until this 

study concludes, structural engineers in KDOT are advising against upgrading any existing pole to LED lights.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 47

General Listing of Projects

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

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

KA-6009-01 Lighting Interchange 

lighting

1 Interchanges $203731 $203759 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther14,800 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

KA-6010-01 Lighting Interchange 

lighting

1 Interchanges $323426 $323465 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate19,200 75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

KA-6011-01 Lighting Lighting - other 2 1 

Interchange/1 

Intersection

$222069 $222096 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 14,000 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

KA-6012-01 Lighting Interchange 

lighting

1 Interchanges $170729 $170757 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate13,500 75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

KA-6013-01 Lighting Interchange 

lighting

1 Interchanges $183498 $183571 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate12,300 75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

KA-6014-01 Lighting Interchange 

lighting

1 Interchanges $179444 $179471 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate13,300 75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

KA-4744-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) -

new or updated

9.693 Miles $593260 $593721 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4744-03 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) -

new or updated

11.36 Miles $155288 $155288 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4744-04 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) -

new or updated

50.809 Miles $5190796 $5190820 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Principal ArterialInterstate0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4745-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) -

new or updated

128.982 Miles $692878 $693025 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4745-02 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) -

new or updated

54.551 Miles $365923 $366004 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4746-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) -

new or updated

31.612 Miles $130488 $130488 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 47

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

KA-4746-04 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

205.011 Miles $1369227 $1369518 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4747-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

85.555 Miles $434431 $434539 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4748-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

36.651 Miles $228520 $228520 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4748-02 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

49.231 Miles $237562 $237562 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4748-03 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

66.939 Miles $790124 $790290 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4749-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

57.451 Miles $356777 $356878 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4749-02 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

56.82 Miles $658983 $659716 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-5893-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

91.617 Miles $162613 $162679 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

KA-4746-02 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

62.011 Miles $332676 $333610 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

U-2362-01 Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $450000 $563000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 9,947 35 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

KA-5176-01 Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

1 Intersections $1348000 $1748000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 5,015 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

C-4683-01 Roadside Roadside grading 1.1 Miles $79993 $668553 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

C-4790-04 Miscellaneous Local road safety 

plans

19 Counties $950580 $950580 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads Local Road 

Safety Plans

C-4855-21 Miscellaneous Miscellaneous -

other

10 Studies $200000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 Other Local 

Agency

Committee 

selection

Local Roads Traffic 

Engineering 
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 47

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

Assistance 

Program

C-4928-01 Alignment Horizontal curve 

realignment

0.4 Miles $248174 $273835 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

C-4938-01 Roadside Increase clear 

zone – outside of 

curve

0.2 Miles $508164 $520518 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

C-4964-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

50 Miles $100987 $100987 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4965-01 Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

signing –other

0.5 Miles $389304 $510393 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

C-4967-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

53 Miles $150831 $150831 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4968-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

48 Miles $74709 $74709 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4969-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

71 Miles $150834 $150834 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4971-01 Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings – new

200 Miles $518873 $519128 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

C-4972-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

75 Miles $383689 $383689 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4973-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

120 Miles $333634 $333634 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4974-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

63 Miles $168159 $168159 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4975-01 Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

1.7 Miles $611734 $679749 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

C-4976-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

101 Miles $325784 $325784 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 47

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

C-4977-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

238 Miles $441024 $441024 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4978-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

138 Miles $155101 $155101 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4979-01 Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings – new

53 Miles $211635 $211635 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

C-4981-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

39 Miles $38189 $38189 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4982-01 Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings – new

46 Miles $227831 $227831 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

C-4984-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

55 Miles $125975 $125975 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4985-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

53 Miles $207707 $207707 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4987-01 Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings – new

170 Miles $594031 $594031 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

C-4993-01 Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings – new

53 Miles $418328 $418328 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

C-4994-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

50 Miles $105873 $105873 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4995-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

120 Miles $293006 $293006 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-4996-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

210 Miles $395540 $395540 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

C-5058-01 Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

19.2 Miles $131432 $131432 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Local Roads

KA-5510-02 Roadside Barrier- metal 12 Locations $1365000 $1420646 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Barrier
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 47

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

KA-5606-02 Roadside Barrier- metal 26 Locations $1591692 $1591692 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Barrier

KA-5889-01 Roadside Barrier- metal 8 Locations $849739.65 $849739.65 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Barrier

X-2216-22 Railroad grade 

crossings

Railroad grade 

crossings - other

1 PE project $200000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A N/A 0 Systemic

X-3122-01 Railroad grade 

crossings

Railroad grade 

crossings - other

1 Plan $585000 $585000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A N/A 0 Required 

plan

KA-5671-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

8.158 Miles $387841.88 $387841.88 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-5672-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

4.836 Miles $104879.45 $107879.45 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-5919-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

5.97 Miles $635606.41 $635606.41 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate15,802 75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-5920-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

19.411 Miles $2011845.13 $2011845.13 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate18,450 75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-5993-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

2.38 Miles $134364.2 $134364.2 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

7,222 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6004-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

27.91 Miles $7519.9 $7519.9 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther13,538 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6005-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

24.305 Miles $393478.19 $393478.19 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther2,918 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6032-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

11.064 Miles $325200.52 $325200.52 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 3,590 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6051-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

7.524 Miles $713286.53 $713286.53 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate103,809 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6052-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

3.998 Miles $393617.29 $393617.29 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate73,924 60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 47

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

KA-6081-21 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

$200000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6147-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

3.943 Miles $781627.16 $781627.16 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Multiple/Varies 58,982 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6160-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

8.486 Miles $857959.91 $857959.91 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

17,820 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6188-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

9.574 Miles $227900 $227900 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

19,722 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6189-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

0.421 Miles $38915 $38915 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther11,672 30 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6190-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

6.416 Miles $166625 $166625 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther5,711 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6191-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

4.36 Miles $110725 $110725 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther3,321 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6192-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

10.63 Miles $218870 $218870 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 2,744 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6194-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

9.49 Miles $252625 $252625 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 2,916 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

EDC5-

Pavement 

Markings

KA-6077-01 Roadway 

delineation

Improve 

retroreflectivity

$750000 $750000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 Systemic Data Collect and 

inventory 

roadway 

data
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 47

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 405 350 384 355 429 461 403 410 426

Serious Injuries 1,596 1,456 1,204 1,195 1,176 1,030 1,000 1,400 1,586

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.328 1.159 1.250 1.131 1.340 1.431 1.252 1.287 1.534

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

5.235 4.820 3.921 3.808 3.673 3.198 3.107 4.396 5.710

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

41 33 32 29 50 39 35 28 52

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

117 115 99 107 111 100 103 125 122
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 47

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Annual Fatalities

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Annual Serious Injuries
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 47

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

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

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

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

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

Page 31 of 47

Describe fatality data source.

State Motor Vehicle Crash Database

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

29.6 57.8 0.09 0.19

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

12.2 29 0.04 0.09

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

68 115.2 0.22 0.37

Rural Minor Arterial 50.2 102.2 0.16 0.33

Rural Minor Collector 10.8 19 0.04 0.06

Rural Major Collector 41.8 114.6 0.13 0.37

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

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

Page 32 of 47

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 Local Road or 

Street

47 104.4 0.15 0.33

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

25.8 77.2 0.08 0.25

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

15.4 43.8 0.05 0.14

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

26.4 81.6 0.09 0.26

Urban Minor Arterial 23.2 149.8 0.07 0.48

Urban Minor Collector 2.4 19.4 0.01 0.06

Urban Major Collector 14.8 88.2 0.05 0.29

Urban Local Road or 

Street

47.6 122.6 0.15 0.39
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 47

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

211.6 449.4 0.68 1.45

County Highway 

Agency

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency 200.8 749.4 1.37 4.02

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority 13.4 38.2 0.04 0.12

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

Indian Tribe Nation

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2022 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:407.0

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

Page 34 of 47

The 2022 five-year moving average projection based upon the trendline indicates 444 fatalities. An eight 

percent reduction would derive our goal of 407 fatalities in 2022. Based upon recent history, the trendline of the 

target, the eight percent reduction goal is realistic and attainable. The 2022 HSP and 2022 HSIP five-year 

moving average targets are equal.

Number of Serious Injuries:1164.0

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

The 2022 five-year moving average projection based upon the trend line indicates 1,265 serious injuries. An 

eight percent reduction in this projection would derive our target of 1,164 serious injuries in 2022. With the 

change in definition to suspected serious injury, there was a sharp increase in crashes meeting the definition. 

This is an artificial increase, not an actual degradation of safety. In order to re-establish a trendline for this 

category, it was determined to "back-cast" how many suspected serious injuries would have occurred in past 

years with the new definition. We used a conversion factor to inflate previous years' crashes by 1.46 (46% 

increase). This allows for a steady, downward trend that we predict would have occurred apart from the 

definition change. 2020 defied that trend with a rise in suspected serious injuries, but we do not expect that to 

continue, that suspected serious injuries will resume falling. It is this trend upon which we based our suspected 

serious injury target. Based upon recent history, the trendline of the target, the eight percent reduction goal is 

realistic and attainable. The 2022 HSP and 2022 HSIP five-year moving average targets are equal. 

The data reflects serious injuries as defined by the NHTSA/FHWA conversion table. In Kansas, that equates to 

the number of disabling injuries as recorded in our state crash database. In 2019 the definition of serious injury 

changed to meet current federal guidelines. The name also changed from disabling injury to suspected serious 

injury in the states crash database.

Fatality Rate:1.280

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

The 2022 five-year moving average projection based upon the trendline indicates a fatality rate of 1.38. A 

seven percent reduction in this projection would derive our goal of 1.28 fatality rate in 2022. Based upon recent 

history, the trendline of the target, the seven percent reduction goal is realistic and attainable. The 2022 HSP 

and 2022 HSIP five-year moving average targets are equal. 

Serious Injury Rate:3.576

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

The 2022 five-year moving average projection based upon the curvilinear trendline indicates 3.887 serious 

injury rate per 100 million VMT. An eight percent reduction in this projection would lead to our goal of 3.576 

serious injury rate per 100 million VMT in 2022. With the change in definition to suspected serious injury, there 

was a sharp increase in crashes meeting the definition. This is an artificial increase, not an actual degradation 

of safety. In order to re-establish a trendline for this category, it was determined to "back-cast" how many 

suspected serious injuries would have occurred in past years with the new definition. We used a conversion 

factor to inflate previous years' crashes by 1.46 (46% increase). This allows for a steady, downward trend that 

we predict would have occurred apart from the definition change. 2020 defied that trend with a rise in 

suspected serious injuries, but we do not expect that to continue, that suspected serious injuries will resume 

falling. It is this trend upon which we based our suspected serious injury target. Based upon recent history, the 

trendline of the target, the eight percent reduction goal is realistic and attainable. The 2022 HSP and 2022 

HSIP five-year moving average targets are equal. 
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 47

The data in this table reflect serious injuries as defined by the NHTSA/FHWA conversion table. In Kansas, that 

equates to the number of disabling injuries as recorded in our state crash database. In 2019 the definition of 

serious injury changed to meet current federal guidelines. The name also changed from disabling injury to 

suspected serious injury in the states crash database.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:157.0

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

With the change in definition to suspected serious injury, there was a sharp increase in crashes meeting the 

definition. This is an artificial increase, not an actual degradation of safety. In order to re-establish a trendline 

for this category, it was determined to "back-cast" how many suspected serious injuries would have occurred in 

past years with the new definition. We used a conversion factor to inflate previous years' crashes by 1.46 (46% 

increase). This allows for a steady, downward trend that we predict would have occurred apart from the 

definition change. Back-casting serious injuries for non-motorized leads to a descending trend (as opposed to 

the ascent in the raw data). From there, and including fatalities the projected point for 2022 is 171. To be 

consistent with our target for fatalities and serious injuries, the target was set 8% below projection at 157.

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

safety performance targets. 

The state of Kansas is fortunate in that both the SHSP and HSP administrators are in the KDOT Bureau of 

Transportation Safety, making coordination simple. Both plans rely heavily on the same data sources to 

establish strategies and goals. These data sources include, but are not limited to: FARS, the statewide crash 

database, and observational surveys. The three identified performance measures – fatalities, fatality rate, and 

serious injuries – have the same definition and goals. We have been and will continue to provide each MPO 

with the data necessary to calculate their 2022 targets. At present, we are not certain whether individual MPOs 

will adopt the state targets or their own.

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 411.0 425.8

Number of Serious Injuries 907.0 1238.4

Fatality Rate 1.250 1.369

Serious Injury Rate 2.750 4.017

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

131.0 153.0

Despite an upward trend in fatal and serious injury crashes Kansas has chosen to set targets with the goal of a 

decreasing trend.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 47

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

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

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

63 50 78 74 64 75 79

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

88 93 106 108 94 135 151

As noted elsewhere, our definition of serious injury changed in 2019 leading to a significant increase in injuries 

coded as "suspected serious injury" across the board.

The numbers above reflect our interpretation of the older driver rule. Specifically, these are only older drivers 

and pedestrians who have died or been seriously injured. These numbers do NOT include older passengers,

or, for example, fatal crashes where an older driver was involved but did not have serious injuries.
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 47

Evaluation 

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

• Other-HSIP sub-program evaluations

During the reporting period, KDOT worked with the FHWA Division Office to complete an HSIP Assessment. 

The assessment recommended program level evaluation and included an appendix detailing how each of the 

sub-programs could be meaningfully evaluated. A one-size fits all approach was not an option since each of 

the programs are unique. For this report, we have completed an evaluation for the Pavement Marking subprogram consistent with the methodology recommended in the assessment. It follows.

It is our goal to evaluate the Signing and Lighting sub-programs in preparation for the 2022 HSIP Annual 

Report.

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

the State's program level evaluations.

Longitudinal pavement marking (LPM) facilitates the motorist with continuous roadway information which 

cannot be served by other traffic control devices. LPM delineates the travel lanes and assists the motorists to 

keep the vehicle in the appropriate lane to improve traffic safety. In Kansas, some of the pavement markingrelated programs have been achieved as a part of the Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) 

to address roadway departure (RwD) crashes as an emphasis area and improves the roadway delineation. 

RwD crashes were the leading cause of fatalities in Kansas, and it was the first harmful event in 1,157 fatalities 

between 2014 and 2018. This report focuses on evaluating the safety effectiveness and estimating the benefitcost ratio of conducted pavement marking within HSIP on US 160, US 166, and US 169 in 2018 using crashes 

that occurred one year before (2017) and one year after (2019). It was observed that the number of lane 

departure crashes that occurred in 2017 and 2019 was not sufficient to make any conclusive statistical 

decision on the effectiveness of pavement marking in safety and monetary terms. A copy of the Pavement 

Marking Program evaluation is included with the attachments.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program?

• HSIP Obligations

• Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

• Increased focus on local road safety

• More systemic programs

• Organizational change

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2020
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 47

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

 (per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious 

Injury Rate

 (per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Roadway Departure Accident Location - 11 = 

Non-Intersection; 15 = 

Interchange Area; 20 = 

Shoulder; 21 = Roadsie 

(not shoulder); 22 = 

Median, CWOV FHE - 01 

= Headon; 04 = 

Sideswipe; opp dir; 05 = 

Sideswipe; same dir, 

Accident Class - 01 = 

OverT/RollO; 08 = Fixed 

Obj

229.8 529.8 0.74 1.72

Intersections Accident Location - 12 = 

Intersection; 13 = 

Intersection-Related

96.4 389.4 0.31 1.26

Pedestrians Pedestrian Type - 21 = 

Pedestrian

33.8 76.2 0.11 0.24

Bicyclists Pedestrian Type - 22 = 

Pedal Cycle

5.4 32.4 0.02 0.1

Older Drivers (65+) Driver age between 65 

and 99; Seat Type - 01 = 

Driver

109.4 247 0.33 0.73

Motorcyclists/Mopeds Vehicle Body Type - 02 = 

Motorcycle; 03 = Motor 

scooter or Moped

55.6 196.2 0.18 0.64

Work Zones " On-Road 

Construction/Maintenance 

- 01 = Construction Zone; 

02 = Maintenance Zone; 

03 = Utility Zone"

6.2 20.4 0.02 0.07

Horizontal Curves " On-Road Surface 

Characteristics- 04 = 

Curved & level; 05 = 

Curved on grade/slope; 06 

= Curved on hillcrest"

78.6 192.6 0.25 0.63

Impaired Driving Alcohol Flag - Driver Cc 02 

= Under the influence of 

alcohol; Substance Use - 

AC = Alcohol contributed; 

or a Positive Test Result, 

Drug Flag - Driver Cc - 01 

= Under the influence of 

illegal drugs; DC = Illegal 

122.4 217.8 0.39 0.71
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 47

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)

drugs contributed; or a + 

drug test res

Teen Drivers (14-19) Driver age between 14 

and 19; Seat Type - 01 = 

Driver

46.8 203.2 0.15 0.66

Occupant Protection 

(unbelted)

All 180.4 331.2 0.58 1.08

Large Commercial 

Vehicles

Vehicle Body Type - 10 = 

Single heavy truck 

>10,000 lbs; 11 = Truck & 

trailer(s); 12 = Tractortrailer(s) 

81.2 114.4 0.26 0.37

Local Roads -State System Flag Y = 

located on the state 

highways (I = Interstate, U 

- US Route, K - State 

Route)

200.8 749.4 0.65 2.44
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 47

0

50

100

150

200

250

Fatalities

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

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Serious Injuries

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

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 47

Specific emphasis areas in the current SHSP include Intersections, Pedestrians & Cyclists, Older Drivers, 

Impaired Driving, Occupant Protection, Roadway Departure, Teen Drivers, and Local Roads. Additionally, a 

Data Support team is identified in the SHSP.

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Fatality Rate

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

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Serious Injury Rate

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

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 47

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)

Nothing to 

report at this 

time
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 47

Compliance Assessment

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

 07/26/2017

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2015 To: 2019

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

 2022

On October 1, 2020 Kansas published and posted online its 2020-2024 Strategic Highway Safety Plan. While the plan is the current working version of safety efforts in Kansas, it has not yet been officially approved so the approval date 

and years of coverage are unchanged. Following some minor modifications to the current plan we anticipate approval during the next reporting period.

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

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

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12) [12]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 

[8]

100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9) [9]

100 99

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21) [21]

100 100

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20) [20]

100 99 100 100

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100 50 100 50

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

99 98
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 47

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Median Type (54) 

[55]

99 50

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 95

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

99 99

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

99 99 90 90

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

98 98 90 90

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 98 80 80 80 80

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

97 97

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

97 97

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

97 97

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

70 60

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

50 20

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

100 90

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 90

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

97 97

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

99 99
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 47

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]

99 99

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201) [191]

99 99

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

99 99

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

99 99

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

99 99

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

20 20

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

50 50

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

50 50

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

85 85

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 99.67 93.61 88.50 81.00 81.73 81.73 95.56 90.00 96.00 96.00

*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.

K-Hub is KDOT’s new Linear Referencing and Transportation Database System, and it is in production and contains all 140,000 public road miles in Kansas. It was set up to have the event data items for MIRE FDE.

KDOT has a LiDAR data collection and extraction project underway that will collect LiDAR data on the State Highway system and extract four Esri geodatabases including intersection data, guardrail data, signs, and roadway shoulder 

data.

KDOT is participating in the Application of Enterprise GIS for Transportation (AEGIST) Pooled Fund Study which helps States migrate to the enterprise level for creating, maintaining, and governing data related to roadways and their 

characteristics, elements, and events. It is based on a consensus best practices approach to the management of technology, data, and transportation system assets. 

KDOT staff attends webinars on MIRE data collection, to learn what other States are doing.
Page 46 of 47

2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Optional Attachments 

Program Structure:

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

KDOT HSIP Subprogram Evaluation_Evaluation of the Pavement Marking Program in Kansas.docx

Compliance Assessment:
2021 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 47

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.