Page 1 of 47 

NEW MEXICO
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 2 of 47 

Table of Contents

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

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

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

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 6

Program Structure ................................................................................................................................................... 6

Program Administration...................................................................................................................................... 6

Program Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 9

Project Implementation ......................................................................................................................................... 15

Funds Programmed ........................................................................................................................................... 15

General Listing of Projects ............................................................................................................................... 17

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................................... 18

General Highway Safety Trends ....................................................................................................................... 18

Safety Performance Targets .............................................................................................................................. 32

Applicability of Special Rules .......................................................................................................................... 34

Older Driver and Older Pedestrian Data Query Process and Sources .................................................................. 35

Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. 36

Program Effectiveness ...................................................................................................................................... 36

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements ...................................................................... 36

Project Effectiveness ......................................................................................................................................... 41

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 42
2017 New Mexico 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. 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.” 
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 4 of 47 

Executive Summary

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) report is an annual update prepared by the 

Statewide Planning Bureau (SPB), housed under the New Mexico Department of Transportation 

(NMDOT) Asset Management and Planning Division (AMPD). The report is based on the best 

available data and information collected. To facilitate a transparent stakeholder process, the NMDOT 

SPB is coordinating with its internal and external safety partners through a comprehensive 

communication process. The preparation of the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), Highway Safety Plan (HSP), and the Commercial Vehicle 

Safety Plan (CVSP), are also being coordinated to provide consistency of data, integrated safety 

initiatives, and consistent identification of performance trends and safety performance assessment. 

This coordinated safety planning effort is allowing NMDOT to direct limited safety dollars to areas with 

the greatest safety needs and to develop effective goals, safety strategies, and performance targets. 

Overall, in New Mexico, from 2012 to 2016 there has been a 9.8% increase in fatalities from 366 to 

402. Suspected serious injuries (A) declined by 18.4% from 1,624 to 1,325 during the same reporting 

period. 

With respect to consideration of the five-year rolling fatality average, there has been a slight decrease 

in the overall trend in fatalities. A comparison of annual values of the five-year rolling average 

indicates a slight decrease of 1.7% in 2016, when compared with 2012. 

For suspected serious injuries (A) there has been a consistent reduction in New Mexico for the past 

five years (2012 to 2016) from 1624 to 1325, a decrease of 18.4%. Similar decreases in the five-year 

rolling average for the suspected serious (A) injury rate have been noted. 

There has been an increase in non-motorized fatalities and suspected serious injuries from 2012 to 

2016 from 157 to 229, an increase of 45.8% and an increase in the five-year rolling average of 20.6% 

In 2017, NMDOT continued to make significant progress in successfully programming and obligating 

HSIP funds, as well as continued implementation of a systematic process for funding and completing 

a backlog of projects. This included further development of a structured list of Road Safety Audits 

(RSAs) planned and performed, and a comprehensive and organized process of communication with 

internal and external project stakeholders.
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 5 of 47 

The updated NM Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) was approved and distributed to safety 

stakeholders in March 2017. 

In 2016-2017, NMDOT completed the establishment of performance targets for each of the five core 

performance measures for fatalities, suspected serious injuries (A), fatality rate, suspected serious 

injury (A) rate, and non-motorized fatalities and suspected serious Injuries (A). 

NMDOT initiated an effort to develop an HSIP Manual which is scheduled for completion in early 

2018. A pilot effort was initiated to develop a Multi Objective Decision (MODA) Process for the 

prioritization of current HSIP projects which may be refined in future years. 

To more effectively support the NMDOT HSIP program in 2016, the AMPD hired a full-time HSIP 

Coordinator.

Other accomplishments include continued improvements in crash data reporting and analysis as 

evidenced by the improved level of detail and quality of data in this year’s report. Over the past 

several years, there has been progress in the location of crashes, an improved ability to identify crash 

occurrence by functional class and ownership, and the ability to calculate on a statewide basis crash 

rates to assess trends. Local safety road projects are a key component in the HSIP with $1.5 million 

obligated for Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) reporting period of 2016. The NMDOT Safety Program is 

including a more detailed and extensive analysis of safety performance, Emphasis Areas based on 

the SHSP, and guidance on strategies to reduce fatalities and severe crashes on all roads in New 

Mexico.
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 6 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 program is currently in a major transitional stage. We are restructuring the program to focus on our 

worst Safety Performance Measure (SPM) locations. Once the locations exhibiting issues are identified, we 

will be working with the local entities to perform RSAs and identify treatments to address the issues being 

observed. We are taking this approach to most acutely focus on our problem areas, in hopes of demonstrating 

the highest improvement possible. 

The structure of the HSIP involves a multidisciplinary and multilevel inclusion of NMDOT and FHWA 

personnel. The HSIP is monitored by a committee including members from engineering, design, finance, rail, 

traffic, from within the NMDOT and environmental and safety from the FHWA. The committee oversees 

project selection and funding allocation to determine where the funds are most efficiently used and where the 

highest safety improvement can be realized.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Planning 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The HSIP is located in planning within the organizational structure of the NMDOT, however, all the listed 

groups are heavily involved in the administration and oversight of the HSIP. 

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 7 of 47 

New Mexico is currently developing a Multi Objective Decision Analysis (MODA) process. This process 

prioritizes projects locations that exhibiting poorly performing locations within the Safety Performance Measure 

(SPM) target areas.

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

Under the NM HSIP program all public roadways are eligible for participation. For the current program 

(FFY 2016), 8.6% of NM HSIP funds are obligated for local road projects, and 91.4% are obligated for 

Statewide DOT projects. With the exception of the District let projects, all HSIP projects programmed 

in the FFY 2016 STIP were approved by the Safety Committee using the previous application process 

where applications where submitted on a quarterly basis through the MPOs and RTPOs and then 

reviewed and prioritized by the NMDOT HSIP Committee, regardless of the project location. In other 

words, proposed HSIP projects on local roads were handled in the same manner as proposed 

projects on DOT roads. As the MODA process is fully developed and implemented this will continue 

to be the process in which prospective projects will be identified and constructed.

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

are involved with HSIP planning.

Traffic Engineering/Safety

Design

Planning 

Maintenance

Operations 

Districts/Regions

Governors Highway Safety Office 

Other-NMDOT Districts

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

A goal of the HSIP is to secure buy-in from the respective state transportation district. Consensus is sought 

between the Safety Committee, local stakeholder and applicable district. The safety committee ensures that the 

prospective project meets certain criteria to work toward achieving safety targets, local stakeholders must 

ensure the project is something desired and garners public support and the district ensures that the project fits 

within the greater transportation and scheduling plans.

Describe coordination with internal partners.

The internal NMDOT Safety Committee meets on a monthly basis to review the HSIP and ensure the 

program is meeting the goals and objectives of the NMDOT HSIP. The Safety Committee is 

composed of the following:

• HSIP Coordinator

• State Traffic Engineer

• STIP Coordinator

• Chief Engineer

• Field Operations Division Director

• Program Management Division Director

• Asset Management and Planning Division Director
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 8 of 47 

• Rail Bureau Chief

• Data Management Bureau Chief

• Office of Safety Programs Director

• Representatives from other NMDOT Departments, including Project Oversight Division, Traffic 

Safety Division and others.

The HSIP Coordinator also coordinates closely with the three (3) regional Design Centers on project 

tracking and oversight. In addition, the HSIP Coordinator, in overseeing the SHSP, coordinates 

closely with NMDOT Office of Safety Programs which is responsible for the Highway Safety Plan. The 

NMDOT representative to the Governor's Highway Safety Commission is the Director of the Highway 

Safety Office in the Office of Safety Programs.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

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

Governors Highway Safety Office 

Local Technical Assistance Program

Local Government Agency 

Tribal Agency

Law Enforcement Agency

Academia/University

FHWA

Other-Regional Transportation Planning Organizations 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe coordination with external partners.

All of the external partners listed in the previous question are involved at some point in the coordination and 

planning process. From data collection by local law enforcement, data consolidation by academia and data 

consideration when conducting RSAs. Local community members are also heavily involved in identifying 

location specific phenomena, lending their expertise and insight to the operational considerations when 

identifying roadway treatments that will best address the issues identified by the data. It has been found that the 

local expertise has been invaluable when considering what the issues are occurring resulting in poorly 

performing SPMs as well as conveying the cultural and contextual behavior that will be best served in tailoring 

proven counter measures. 

Have any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

Yes

Describe HSIP program administration practices that have changed since the last reporting period.

The program is in the middle of a transition. The project selection process is changing although full 

implementation has not been realized. The largest change has come in the project selection process. The 
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 9 of 47 

process is moving toward a heavy emphasis on addressing the worst performing locations to realize the largest 

improvement of the Safety Performance Measures on a statewide basis. 

Are there any other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

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

The NMDOT made significant progress in 2016-2017 to program and obligate HSIP funds and to 

provide a systematic process for funding a backlog of projects. This includes the development a 

structured list of RSAs planned and performed, and a more comprehensive and organized process of 

communication with internal and external stakeholders. 

Program Methodology

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

and evaluation processes?

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Currently, the manual is being developed, however, completion is anticipated by 2018. This manual will serve 

as a guide to the HSIP in the coming years. As the project selection, design and construction process is a 

multiyear endeavor, the realization of fully correlated improvement is not anticipated immediately. 

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

Median Barrier

Roadway Departure 

Sign Replacement And Improvement 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

All the "programs" on the list are aspects of roadway safety that are considered when identifying roadway 

projects. 

Program: Median Barrier 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2017 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 10 of 47 

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only Traffic 

Volume 

Median width 

Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash rate

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?

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Available funding : 70 

Ranking based on net benefit : 30 

Total Relative Weight : 100

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Program: Roadway Departure 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2017 
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 11 of 47 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes Volume Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash rate

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?

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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

Ranking based on B/C : 1 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement 
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 12 of 47 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2017 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

FHWA focused approach to safety 

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Critical rate

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?

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Available funding : 1 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 13 of 47 

 50 

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? Please check all that 

apply.

Cable Median Barriers

Rumble Strips

Install/Improve Signing

Upgrade Guard Rails 

Install/Improve Lighting

Other-Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? [Check all that apply]

Engineering Study 

Road Safety Assessment

Crash data analysis

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

Stakeholder input

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

As the program evolves, hotspots will be identified, RSAs will be conducted, countermeasures will be identified 

through crash data analysis, engineering studies and stakeholder input to identify high benefit to cost 

countermeasures to address root causes of crashes.

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

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

The HSIP in New Mexico is using considering ITS treatments when identifying projects. Their consideration is 

mainly applied in secondary crash types and disseminating road condition advisories to the traveling public. 

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.

The use is being increased. At this time training is the level of implementation being applied.

Have any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 14 of 47 

No

Are there any other aspects of the HSIP methodology on which the State would like to elaborate?

No
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 15 of 47 

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Federal Fiscal Year

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

2016 

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $20,282,506 $17,418,706 85.88%

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) $250,000 $250,000 100%

RHCP (for HSIP purposes) (23 

U.S.C. 130(e)(2))

$177,000 $159,300 90%

Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $20,709,506 $17,828,006 86.09%

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

$1,705,000 

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

$1,489,500 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The programmed amount entered reflects the original estimate during programming. I would like to point out 

that although the obligated amount is less, it reflects the difference between the Engineer's estimate and the 

actual obligation as opposed to a project not being constructed. Should these numbers be the same given the 
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 16 of 47 

fact that all projects programmed were constructed? In other words if 100% of the programmed projects were 

obligated should the numbers reflect 100%? 

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

$3,015,205 

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

$2,330,805 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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% 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Discuss impediments to obligating HSIP funds and plans to overcome this challenge in the future.

1. Changing definitions and contradictions to eligibility of funds. Local determinations of eligibility appear to 

contradict the CFR as well as locally established precedence. 

2. Design delivery. Having projects from the next FFY year ready to obligate in cases where current FFY 

projects are not deliverable

 

Does the State want to elaborate on any other aspects of it’s progress in implementing HSIP projects?

Yes

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

would like to elaborate. 

The NMDOT has hired a full-time HSIP Coordinator since the last reporting period.
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 17 of 47 

General Listing of Projects

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

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

see attachment 0

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

See attachment.
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 18 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Fatalities 366 361 349 350 366 311 386 298 402

Serious Injuries 1,940 1,899 1,922 1,709 1,624 1,314 1,249 1,329 1,325

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.390 1.390 1.380 1.360 1.430 1.240 1.520 1.090 1.435

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

7.380 7.300 7.600 6.660 6.350 5.240 4.930 4.840 4.730

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

46 43 41 44 68 55 80 61 80

Number of non-motorized 

serious injuries

129 118 118 113 89 120 118 156 109

non-motorized fatalities and 

serious injuries

175 161 159 157 157 175 198 217 189
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 19 of 47 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 20 of 47 

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 21 of 47 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Data Source: Fatalities FARS Query (2008-2015): Person Type: (5) Pedestrian, (6) Bicyclist, (7) Other 

cyclist, and (8) Persons on Personal Conveyances. 

0

50

100

150

200

250

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

50

100

150

200

250

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries

non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 22 of 47 

Data Source: (NMDOT) Non-motorized fatalities and suspected serious injury (A) Federal Fiscal Year 2018 

Safety Targets Technical Memorandum dated August 2, 2017: 

Describe fatality data source.

FARS

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

Year 2015

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 -

Interstate

42 66 0.96 1.5

Rural Principal Arterial -

Other Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal Arterial -

Other

30 92 0.87 2.67

Rural Minor Arterial 21 51 1.24 3.02

Rural Minor Collector 7 15 1.22 2.62

Rural Major Collector 28 62 1.7 3.76

Rural Local Road or Street 33 57 0.87 1.51

Urban Principal Arterial -

Interstate

16 48 0.61 1.83

Urban Principal Arterial -

Other Freeways and 

Expressways

0 0

Urban Principal Arterial -

Other

59 407 1.45 9.99

Urban Minor Arterial 12 178 0.63 9.32

Urban Minor Collector

Urban Major Collector

Urban Local Road or Street 23 200 1.3 11.34

Urban Collector 

(Combined)

23 126 1.59 8.71

Unknown functional 

classification

3 26
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 23 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)

Combined Urban and Rural 

Pricipal Arterial(Other 

Expressways)

1 1
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 24 of 47 

Year 2015

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway Agency 183 565 1.12 3.45

County Highway Agency 43 123 0.92 2.63

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City of Municipal Highway 

Agency

49 602 0.93 11.37

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, University)

Indian Tribe Nation

Federal Agency 1

BIA/Tribal 20 12 3.3 1.98

Unknown Ownership 3 26
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 25 of 47 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Functional Classification 

5 Year Average

2007-2011 2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 26 of 47 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2007-2011 2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 27 of 47 

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2007-2011 2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 28 of 47 

0

5

10

15

20

25

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2007-2011 2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 29 of 47 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

State Highway

Agency

County

Highway

Agency

City of

Municipal

Highway

Agency

Private (Other

than Railroad)

Federal

Agency

BIA/Tribal Unknown

Ownership

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Roadway Ownership 

5 Year Average

2007-2011 2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 30 of 47 

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

State Highway

Agency

County

Highway

Agency

City of

Municipal

Highway

Agency

Private (Other

than Railroad)

Federal

Agency

BIA/Tribal Unknown

Ownership

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2007-2011 2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 31 of 47 

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

State Highway Agency County Highway Agency City of Municipal

Highway Agency

BIA/Tribal

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2007-2011 2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 32 of 47 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

State Highway Agency County Highway Agency City of Municipal

Highway Agency

BIA/Tribal

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2007-2011 2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

* Blank or "0" cells indicate Not Applicable.

Fatality and Serious Injury by Functional Classification notes:

1. Source: New Mexico Department of Transportation 2011 to 2015 Crash Data received June 

30, 2017 (2012-215) and June 21, 2016 (2011). Arnold roadway data received June 2016.

1. Urban Collector is a combined total from Urban Minor and Urban Major Collectors.

1. Disclaimer: Results of the analyses are based on crash received from the New Mexico 

Department of Transportation. The data was used "as is" for analysis purposes and should be 

interpreted accordingly.

1. Source for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) data used to calculate the fatality rate by Roadway 

Functional Classification: Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS)/FHWA Office of 

Policy and statistics website: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/

Fatality and Serious Injury by Roadway Ownership notes:

Are there any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which the State would like to 

elaborate?

No

Safety Performance Targets
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 33 of 47 

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2018 Targets * 

Number of Fatalities 369.0 

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

Five-year average fatalities fell by 7 percent between 2011 and 2015, but are expected 

to rise in 2016 based on preliminary data. January through May 2017 data show a 

slight decline from the first 5 months of 2016, but the May 2017 data are very 

preliminary and are expected to rise. The 5- year trend line indicates an increase of 6.4 

percent from 2015 to 2018, and the State has determined this to be an achievable target 

for 2018. 

Number of Serious Injuries 1056.0 

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

Five-year average serious injuries fell by 22.8 percent between 2011 and 2015. The 

State anticipates a continued reduction in serious injuries and considers the projected 

reduction to 1,219.4 an achievable target for 2018. 

Fatality Rate 1.299 

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

Although fatalities are expected to increase in 2018 from 2015, the State determines 

that the projected 2018 5-year fatality rate is an achievable target. Five-year average 

2018 projections for urban and rural fatality rates are determined to be achievable 

targets. 

Serious Injury Rate 3.590 

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

Five-year serious injuries fell by 27.3% between 2011 and 2015. The State anticipates 

a continued reduction in serious injuries and considered the projected reduction to 3.59 

an achievable target by 2018. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 257.0 

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

Although fatalities are expected to increase in 2018 from 2015, the State determined 
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 34 of 47 

that the projected number of 228 non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries in 2018 

is an achievable target. 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

targets. 

Annually there is a day long workshop presenting the past performance, current trends -

nationally/statewide/locally, cultural trends nationally/statewide/locally as well as different entities sharing 

experiences to determine the goals of the state in setting safety for the coming year. 

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The NMDOT will keep our mission focused on the requirements set forth by the FHWA. Until such time the 

NMDOT feels comfortable with its performance and can expend the program without maintaining the 

performance of its core mission, the approach will maintain its focused approach. 

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Provide the number of older driver and pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Fatalities

37 31 35 50 30 28 29

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Serious Injuries

107 139 102 98 105 108 80
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 35 of 47 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

# of Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Years

Number of Older Driver and Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries by 

Year.

Fatalities Serious Injuries

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Older Driver and Older Pedestrian Data Query Process 

and Sources

1. Older driver fatalities were obtained from FARS; K Injury Severity, Age 65+, Person Type: Driver of 

motorized transport

2. Older pedestrian fatalities were obtained from FARS: K Injury Severity, Age 65+, Person Type: 

Pedestrian

3. Older driver serious (A) injuries were obtained from NMDOT Crash Database: Vehicle File dated 

August 28, 2015 (2009-2011), Vehicle File dated June 21, 2016 (2012-2014), and Vehicle File dated 

June 30, 2017 (2015): Driver Age 65+, Vehicle Type=Passenger Car, Pick-up, Semi, Bus, Motorcycle, 

Other, Van/Four-wheel Drive, and Unknown vehicle type; Driver Injury = A

4. Older pedestrian serious (A) injuries were obtained from NMDOT Crash Database: Vehicle File dated 

August 28, 2015 (2009-2011), Vehicle File dated June 21, 2016 (2012-2014), and Vehicle File dated 

June 30, 2017 (2015): Driver Age 65+, Vehicle Type=Pedestrian, Driver Injury = A
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 36 of 47 

Evaluation 

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

Change in fatalities and serious injuries

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

A reduction in Safety Performance Measures (SPM) would be considered a positive development. An increase 

may warrant and increased focus on the SPM(s) that increased from previous years.

Based on the measures of effectiveness selected previously, describe the results of the State's program 

level evaluations.

The overall trends for total fatalities and suspected serious injuries have been in decline in New Mexico. In 

2015, the most recent year for finalized data, although the total number of crashes increased the rates and totals 

saw significant declines.

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

Highway Safety Improvement Program?

Policy change 

Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

HSIP Obligations

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Obligation has increased significantly over the course of previous reporting periods. Steps taken include a 

focus on systemic projects to streamline the process. Design delays played a significant role in impeding 

project delivery and focusing on treatments that addressed network improvements through price agreement 

projects helped. Now a full-time HSIP coordinator has been hired to bring the program back to focus 

on location focused projects to improve Safety Performance Measures. This shift has been a result of the data 

driven analysis and personnel resources geared toward finding locations exhibiting rates above statewide 

averages in their respective functional classifications.

Are there any significant programmatic changes that have occurred since the last reporting period? 

No

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2012
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 37 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)

Other 1 Other 2 Other 3

Roadway Departure Multiple 164 420 0.64 1.64

Pedestrians Vehicle/pedestrian 57 63 0.22 0.25

Bicyclists Vehicle/bicycle 7 31 0.03 0.12

Older Drivers Multiple 74 204 0.29 0.8

Motorcyclists Multiple 49 215 0.19 0.84

Work Zones Multiple 1 19 0 0.07

Speeding and Aggressive 

Driving

Multiple 107 312 0.42 1.22

Non-use of Safety 

Restraints

Multiple 94 87 0.37 0.34

Driver Inattention Multiple 174 683 0.68 2.67

Young Drivers Multiple 57 63 0.22 0.25

Heavy Vehicles Multiple 42 76 0.16 0.3

Impaired Driving Multiple 147 230 0.58 0.9

Inclement Weather Multiple 34 117 0.13 0.46

Rail Crossings and 

Train-Pedestrians

8 3 0.03 0.01

Animals and Wildlife Vehicle/animal 3 16 0.01 0.06

Tribal Lands Multiple 34 49 0.13 0.19
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 38 of 47 

0

50

100

150

200

250

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2004-2008 2005-2009 2006-2010 2007-2011 2008-2012

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2004-2008 2005-2009 2006-2010 2007-2011 2008-2012
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 39 of 47 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Source: New Mexico Strategic Highway Safety Plan (March 2017)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2004-2008 2005-2009 2006-2010 2007-2011 2008-2012

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2004-2008 2005-2009 2006-2010 2007-2011 2008-2012
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 40 of 47 

Data are shown as annual values and not as five-year rolling averages.

Data are reported for Years 2008-2012. 

Data shown are fatal and serious injury crashes (class A).

The Driver Inattention emphasis area includes distracted driving and sleepy/fatigued driving crashes. 

 

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the reporting period?

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Although counter measure evaluations have not occurred since the most recent reporting period, project and 

countermeasure evaluations are anticipated in future years.
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 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 INJURY

BEFORE

ALL INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

nothing evaluated

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any other aspects of the overall HSIP effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate?

No
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 47

Compliance Assessment

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

 03/01/2017

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2017 To: 2021

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

 2021

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT

Segment Identifier (12) 1 1 1 0.5 1 0.5

Route Number (8) 0.99 0.1

Route/Street Name (9) 0.99 0.1

Federal Aid/Route Type 

(21)

1 1

Rural/Urban Designation 

(20)

1 1 1 1

Surface Type (23) 0.95 0.95 0.95 0

Begin Point Segment 

Descriptor (10)

0.99 0.99 1 0.5 0.99 0.5

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

0.99 0.99 1 0.5 0.99 0.5

Segment Length (13) 0.99 0.99

Direction of Inventory (18) 1 1

Functional Class (19) 1 1 1 1 1 1

Median Type (54) 0.99 0.97
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 47

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Access Control (22) 0.99 0.97

One/Two Way Operations 

(91)

0.99 0.99

Number of Through Lanes 

(31)

0.99 0.99 0.99 0.85

Average Annual Daily 

Traffic (79)

1 1 1 1

AADT Year (80) 1 1

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

0.99 0.8 1 0.2 1 0.2

INTERSECTION

Unique Junction Identifier 

(120)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 1 Crossing Point 

(122)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 2 Crossing Point 

(123)

0 0

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

0 0

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

0 0

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road (79)

0.8 0.8

AADT Year (80) 1 1

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

0 0

INTERCHANGE/RAMP

Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

1 1

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Beginning of 

Ramp Terminal (197)

1 1

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

1 1

Ramp Length (187) 1 1

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

1 1
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 47

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Roadway Type at End 

Ramp Terminal (199)

1 1

Interchange Type (182) 0 0

Ramp AADT (191) 1 1

Year of Ramp AADT (192) 1 1

Functional Class (19) 1 1

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

1 1

Totals (Average Percent 

Complete):

0.99 0.88 0.23 0.23 0.91 0.91 0.99 0.62 1.00 0.54

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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.

The NMDOT has made great strides towards fulfilling the FHWA's requirements due in 2026. MIRE data collection will continue through HSIP funding to collect the required data. The NMDOT is working with consultants to create 

dynamic collection and maintenance systems to collect and update as infrastructure around the state evolves and improves.

Provide the suspected serious injury identifier, definition and attributes used by the State for both the crash report form and the crash database using the table below. Please also indicate whether or not these elements are 

compliant with the MMUCC 4th edition criteria for data element P5. Injury Status, suspected serious injury. 

CRITERIA SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY 

IDENTIFIER(NAME) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY DEFINITION MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY ATTRIBUTES(DESCRIPTORS) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * 

Crash Report Form "Code A" or "Class A injury" Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Report Form Instruction Manual "Code A" or "Class A injury" Yes Any injury other than fatal that results in 

one or more of the following: [See 

Attributes]

Yes *Severe laceration resulting in exposure of

underlying tissues/muscle/organs or 

resulting in 

significant loss of blood

*Broken or distorted extremity (arm or leg)

 *Crush injuries

*Suspected skull, chest, or abdominal 

injury other 

than bruises or minor lacerations

*Significant burns (second and third degree 

burns 

over 10% or more of the body)

*Unconsciousness when taken from the 

crash scene

*Paralysis

Yes
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 47

CRITERIA SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY 

IDENTIFIER(NAME) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY DEFINITION MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY ATTRIBUTES(DESCRIPTORS) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * 

Crash Database "Code A" or "Class A injury" Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Database Data Dictionary "Code A" or "Class A injury" Yes Any injury other than fatal that results in 

one or more of the following:[See 

Attributes]

Yes ? Severe laceration resulting in exposure of 

underlying tissues/muscle/organs or 

resulting in significant loss of blood

? Broken or distorted extremity (arm or leg)

? Crush injuries

? Suspected skull, chest, or abdominal 

injury other than bruises or minor 

lacerations

? Significant burns (second and third 

degree burns over 10% or more of the 

body)

? Unconsciousness when taken from the 

crash scene

? Paralysis

Yes

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

No

When does the State plan to complete it’s next HSIP program assessment.

2017

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2017 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 47

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

Project Implementation:

HSIP 2017 Obligated Project List (FFY 2016) 08.31.17 .xlsm

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2017 New Mexico 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 non-infrastructure 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.