Page 1 of 51

CONNECTICUT
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 2 of 51

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

General Highway Safety Trends ....................................................................................................................... 23

Safety Performance Targets .............................................................................................................................. 36

Applicability of Special Rules .......................................................................................................................... 38

Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. 40

Program Effectiveness ...................................................................................................................................... 40

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements ...................................................................... 40

Project Effectiveness ......................................................................................................................................... 45

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 46
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 3 of 51

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 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 4 of 51

Executive Summary 

The reporting period for 2017 is from October 1, 2015 to September 30, 2016. 

The HSIP is administrated and managed by the Safety Engineering Section located within the Division of 

Traffic Engineering, Bureau of Engineering and Construction.

This reporting period, CTDOT has obligated more systemic safety improvements in the HSIP program 

compared to past reporting periods. While CTDOT's traditional site analysis approach, known as the suggested 

List of Surveillance Study Sites (SLOSSS), results in safety investments at specific locations, the systemic and 

systematic approach leads to widespread implementation of projects to reduce the potential for fatalities and/or 

serious injuries, whether or not crashes have occurred at any given site. Because many of CT's fatal and serious 

injury crashes are spread out across all public roads, the systematic/systemic approach provides an alternate 

method to identify and implement low-cost safety countermeasures addressing specific risk factors across the 

entire roadway network. Systemic analysis is a compliment to site-specific analysis, and can be very effective in 

implementing low-cost safety improvements.
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 5 of 51

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. 

CTDOT's Safety Engineering Section, which is located within the Division of Traffic Engineering, Bureau of 

Engineering and Construction utilizes both the spot improvement approach and the systemic approach to 

identify, select, implement HSIP projects. The spot improvement approach, known as the Suggested List 

of Surveillance Study Sites (SLOSSS), results in safety investments at specific locations while the systemic 

approach leads to widespread implementation of treatments to reduce the potential for fatalities and/or 

serious injuries, whether or not crashes have occurred at any given site. Since many of CT's fatal and 

serious injury crashes are spread out across all public roads, the systemic approach provides an alternate 

method to identify and implement low-cost safety countermeasures addressing specific risk factors across 

the entire roadway network. As data becomes available, spot improvement projects are evaluated to 

determine their effectiveness. 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Engineering 

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

The HSIP staff is located within the Division of Traffic Engineering's Safety Engineering Section.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

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

The HSIP funds are administered and allocated by the central office at CTDOT.

Describe how local and tribal roads are addressed as part of HSIP.
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 6 of 51

Local Roads are addressed by the Local Road Accident Reduction Program (LRARP). The LRARP 

provides federal funding for safety-related improvements on the non-state maintained roadways, to 

address hazardous elements identified at specific locations and along roadway sections. Local road 

crash data is available at the crash repository at the UCONN. Since traffic volume data for the 

majority of local roads is not available, an analytical analysis of crashes on non-state maintained 

roadways to determine project selection has not been possible. Therefore, the Department annually 

solicits the nine Council of Governments (COGs) in CT for recommended improvements on behalf of 

their member towns, to address identified hazardous elements. These improvements may address 

traffic signal enhancements, minor geometric improvements, roadside obstacles, sight line 

conditions, hazards to pedestrians and poor or unmarked roadways. In the future when more 

local data is available, the methodology for selection of improvements under the LRARP will be reevaluated. In recent years, the Department has expanded the LRARP to consider systemic 

improvement projects designed to address run-off-road fixed-object collisions on local roads. The 

project costs is capped at $500,000 per location and the local agencies are typically responsible for 

the non-federal share as well as 100% of the costs for preliminary engineering and rights-of-way. All 

locations are reviewed and investigated by the Division of Traffic Engineering's Safety Engineering 

Section and the Division of Highway Design.

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

are involved with HSIP planning.

Traffic Engineering/Safety

Design

Maintenance

Operations 

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

Describe coordination with internal partners.

The Operations' Section within the Department's Division of Traffic Engineering reviews specific 

locations on the state highway system for possible highway safety improvements. The study 

locations typically originate from internal databases, such Suggested List of Study Surveillance Sites 

(SLOSSS), or via appointed and elected officials, town officials, or the public. Depending on the 

cost and scope of the countermeasure, the CTDOT’s Office of Maintenance may be requested 

to implement low-cost improvements such as traffic signal timing changes, installation of signs and 

pavement markings. In those situations where the scope of work is beyond the resources of 
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 7 of 51

maintenance, the Operations’ Section recommends a project for inclusion in the CTDOT’s capital 

improvement plan. These safety projects are further developed and plans, specifications, and 

estimates are undertaken by the Department's Division of Highway Design.

 

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

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

Academia/University

Other-Safety Circuit Rider Program

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

Describe coordination with external partners.

The Division of Traffic Engineering's Safety Section annually solicits the nine Council of Governments (COGs) in 

CT for recommended improvements on behalf of their member towns, to address identified hazardous elements 

on local roads. Due to limited HSIP funding, each COG must prioritize the applications received and forward only 

two potential projects to CTDOT for consideration. CTDOT evaluates all the projects received and notifies the 

COG if the project is approved for funding. The COG's inform the member towns accordingly. 

The Department's Safety Section works in partnership with the CT's Safety Circuit Rider Program (CT SCR) 

which provides safety-related information, training, and technical assistance to local agencies. Some of the 

initiatives include coordination of Road Safety Assessments (RSA’s), collection and analysis of traffic volume 

data, identification of low cost safety improvements, assistance in the development of Local Road Safety Plans, 

development of a Connecticut Toolbox of Safety Resources, development of a series of Roadway Safety Briefs, 

and delivery of Local Road Safety Training. The CT SCR program also provides assistance to local agencies in 

understanding the capabilities of the new CT Crash Data Repository at UCONN and provides accurate information to local 

practitioners to make informed roadway safety decisions.

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 Transportation Safety Research Center at UCONN has assumed the role of transportation safety planning 

for the agency which was formerly the responsibility of the Department's Bureau of Policy and 

Planning. UCONN is in the process of developing a new safety management system for the Department. The 

beta version of the network screening and diagnostic tools are currently being tested. 

Are there any other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate?
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 8 of 51

Yes

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

Projects can qualify for the Department's HSIP funds and placement on the HSIP Safety Project Plan when they 

are initiated from the following sources:

-Suggested List of Surveillance Study Sites (SLOSSS)

-Local Road Accident Reduction Program (LRARP) 

-Railway-Highway Grade Crossing Program (RHGCP)

-Projects supporting SHSP Emphasis Areas 

-Section 402/405 Safety Programs (NHTSA) 

-Section 154 (Open Container Requirements) 

-High Risk Rural Roads 

Program Methodology

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

and evaluation processes?

Yes

To upload a copy of the State processes, attach files below.

File Name:

CT's HSIP safety program.pdf

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

Horizontal Curve 

Local Safety

Pedestrian Safety

Other-spot improvement (SLOSSS) 

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

Program: Horizontal Curve 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2015 

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]

Competes with all projects
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 9 of 51

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes Volume 

Horizontal curvature 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

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

Probability of specific crash types

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.

Horizontal curves projects on local roads are based on risk factors. 

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 : 100 

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

Program: Local Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2008 

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

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 10 of 51

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

Competes with all projects

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Other-As supplied by the applicant Functional classification 

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

Crash frequency

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

Yes

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

No

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

Submittals by the regional planning organizations. The submittals that meet the program's criteria are funded.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-Submittals are checked for accuracy and if the improvement yields a b/c ratio greater than 1.0, the 

submittals are forwarded to financial to obtain funding 

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 : 50 

Available funding : 50 

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

Program: Pedestrian Safety 
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 11 of 51

Date of Program Methodology: 9/1/2014 

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]

Competes with all projects

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

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

Crash frequency 

Probability of specific crash types

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

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

Submittals by the regional planning organizations. The submittals that meet the program's criteria are funded.

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

Available funding : 100 

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

Page 12 of 51

Program: Other-spot improvement (SLOSSS) 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/1967 

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]

Competes with all projects

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes Volume 

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?

Yes

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

Submittals by the regional planning organizations. The submittals that meet the program's criteria are funded.

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

Incremental B/C : 100
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 51

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

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 78

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

apply.

Rumble Strips

Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation

Install/Improve Signing

Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

Horizontal curve signs

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

SHSP/Local road safety plan

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

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

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

No

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

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.

CTDOT, in partnership with the University of Connecticut, is currently updating the agencies safety analysis 

tools and methods that match the six-step safety management process as described in the HSM. For example, 
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 51

the CT's network screening module, which is used to identify and rank sites with a higher than expected crash 

frequency is being updated to allow screening for specific roadway types, crash types, or the presence of a 

specific traffic control device. Under the diagnosis module, users will soon be able to create collision diagrams 

using advanced GIS mapping capabilities. These diagrams are critical to the review process and help lead to the 

identification of contributing factors and crash patterns. Condition diagrams will also be built to provide a 

visual site overview and can be used in coordination with the collision diagram. CTDOT is also using IHSDM 

in the safety planning process to evaluate and compare design alternatives.

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

period?

No

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

No
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 51

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.

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $24,550,424 $27,252,099 111%

HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

$1,324,824 $1,574,824 118.87%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154) $6,235,113 $6,235,113 100%

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)

$2,216,808 $3,074,188 138.68%

State and Local Funds $1,184,882 $1,418,531 119.72%

Totals $35,512,051 $39,554,755 111.38%

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?

$6,834,600

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

$6,923,688

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

How much funding is programmed to non-infrastructure safety projects?
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 51

$3,372,266

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

$3,372,266

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.

None.

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

No
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 51

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

0093-0206PL Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records $73766 $73766 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Data data system 

improvements

0148-0200CN Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

1 Lanes $2000000 $2000000 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0093-0213PL Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records $1540000 $1540000 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Data data system 

improvements

0093-0214PL Non-infrastructure Transportation safety 

planning

$708000 $708000 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

0 State Highway 

Agency

transportation 

safety planning

transportation 

safety planning

0170-3360PL Non-infrastructure Transportation safety 

planning

$1801800 $2002000 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

0 State Highway 

Agency

transportation 

safety planning

transportation 

safety planning

0017-0182CN Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

1 Lanes $111547 $111547 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0171-0396PE Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians 

and bicyclists

$225000 $225000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians improve motorist 

awareness of 

crosswalks

0171-0401PE Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1 Intersections $52500 $52500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0173-0412CN+ Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

5 Intersections $116253 $116253 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0170-3380PL Non-infrastructure Educational efforts $945450 $1050500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

safety circuit rider 

program

transportation 

safety planning

transportation 

safety planning

0172-0438PE Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians 

and bicyclists

$258000 $258000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians improve motorist 

awareness of 

crosswalks

0017-0182RW+ Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

1 Lanes $337500 $375000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0034-0345RW Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane1 Intersections $63000 $70000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0034-0345RW+ Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane1 Intersections $51300 $57000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0148-0200PE+ Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

1 Lanes $135000 $150000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 51

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

0171-0372PE+ Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - audible 

device

125 Intersections $225000 $225000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0012-0095PE+ Alignment Horizontal curve 

realignment

1 Curves $72000 $80000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0034-0344CN+ Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

1 Intersections $45073 $50081 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0170-3336PE Roadway Rumble strips - center 74 Miles $25000 $25000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0170-3307CN Intersection traffic 

control

Systemic improvements -

stop-controlled

93 Intersections $626360 $626360 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections improve 

awareness of 

traffic control 

devices

0170-3306CN Intersection traffic 

control

Systemic improvements -

stop-controlled

112 Locations $734660 $734660 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections improve 

awareness of 

traffic control 

devices

0151-0317CN+ Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

1 Intersections $35106 $39007 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0173-0453CN Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians 

and bicyclists

28 Intersections $643740 $643740 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians improve motorist 

awareness of 

crosswalks

0174-0391PE+ Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1 Intersections $15000 $15000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0017-0183PE+ Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane1 Lanes $112500 $125000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0171-0352CN+ Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1 Locations $53984 $53984 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0174-0377CN Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

2 Intersections $722380 $722380 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0171-0372PE+ Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - audible 

device

125 Intersections $100000 $100000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0174-0394PE Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians 

and bicyclists

45 Locations $53000 $53000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians improve motorist 

awareness of 

crosswalks

0173-0460PE Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1 Intersections $52500 $52500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0170-3336CN Roadway Rumble strips - center 74 Miles $675700 $675700 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 51

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

0173-0470CN Roadway Rumble strips - center 43 Miles $390360 $390360 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0171-0410CN Roadway Rumble strips - center 30 Miles $446840 $446840 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0172-0452CN Roadway Rumble strips - center 46 Miles $536200 $536200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0132-0132CN Alignment Vertical alignment or 

elevation change

1 Curves $489870 $544300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Collector

0 Town or 

Township 

Highway Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0173-0412CN+ Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

5 Intersections $178920 $178920 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0170-3336PE+ Roadway Rumble strips - center 74 Miles $12000 $12000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0172-0424CN Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

2 Intersections $590500 $590500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0042-0315CN+ Roadway Roadway narrowing (road 

diet, roadway 

reconfiguration)

2.76 Miles $241576 $268418 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians improve motorist 

awareness of 

crosswalks

0012-0095CN+ Alignment Horizontal curve 

realignment

1 Curves $104773 $116415 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0174-0391PE Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1 Intersections $30000 $30000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0170-3310CN+ Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

58 Miles $23305 $23305 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic traffic incident 

management

improve clearance 

of highway 

incidents

0172-0450PE Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - audible 

device

17 Intersections $630000 $630000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0173-0468PE Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - audible 

device

17 Intersections $630000 $630000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0174-0405PE Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - audible 

device

16 Intersections $630000 $630000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0174-0394CN Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians 

and bicyclists

45 Locations $654580 $654580 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians improve motorist 

awareness of 

crosswalks

0173-0442PE+ Roadside Barrier- metal 9 Miles $385000 $475968 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0172-0424CN+ Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

2 Intersections $60807 $60807 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 51

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

0173-0412CN+ Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

5 Intersections $55101 $55101 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0173-0455PE+ Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1 Intersections $20000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0173-0438CN Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

3 Intersections $1718680 $1718680 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0173-0453CN+ Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians 

and bicyclists

28 Locations $10499 $10499 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians improve motorist 

awareness of 

crosswalks

0173-0469PE Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

195 Locations $60000 $60000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Town or 

Township 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0171-0396PE Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians 

and bicyclists

250 Locations $75000 $75000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections improve motorist 

awareness of 

crosswalks

0171-0372CN Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - audible 

device

125 Intersections $4464280 $4464280 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0171-0393PE Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1 Intersections $15000 $15000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0172-0435PE Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - audible 

device

8 Intersections $60000 $60000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0172-0435RW Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - audible 

device

8 Intersections $75000 $75000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0170-3336PE+ Roadway Rumble strips - center 74 Miles $45000 $45000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0170-3350PE Roadway Rumble strips - center 18 Miles $25000 $25000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0171-0378CN Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

2 Intersections $451700 $451700 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0017-0182CN Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

1 Lanes $800000 $800000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0102-0285RW Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane1 Intersections $751500 $835000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0148-0200CN Alignment Alignment - other 1 Intersections $1459038 $1459038 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 51

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

0173-0455PE Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1 Intersections $22500 $22500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0173-0418CN+ Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

7 Intersections $116682 $116682 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0173-0455RW Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1 Intersections $50000 $50000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0009-0098CN Alignment Horizontal and vertical 

alignment

1 Curves $616500 $685000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 Town or 

Township 

Highway Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0173-0469CN Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

195 Locations $246576 $246576 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Town or 

Township 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0153-0118CN+ Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane1 Intersections $149296 $165884 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0088-0188CN Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control -

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $3554010 $3973900 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0172-0451PE+ Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

425 Locations $250000 $250000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0171-0409PE Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

250 Locations $320000 $320000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 Town or 

Township 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0174-0406PE Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

413 Locations $580000 $580000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 Town or 

Township 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0173-0469CN Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

195 Locations $424824 $424824 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 Town or 

Township 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

keep vehicles on 

the roadway

0138-0212PE+ Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane1 Lanes $850000 $850000 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0059-0154CN+ Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane1 Lanes $7380 $7380 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0102-0346CN Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane1 Lanes $1937808 $2153120 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

0092-0681PE Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane1 Intersections $279000 $310000 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections implement spot 

location safety 

countermeasure

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

Page 22 of 51
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 51

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

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

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Fatalities 296 302 224 320 221 264 286 248 270

Serious Injuries 2,109 1,902 1,763 1,721 1,428 1,494 1,303 1,146 1,302

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 0.920 0.950 0.710 1.020 0.710 0.840 0.920 0.800 0.850

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

6.580 5.990 5.610 5.500 4.580 4.780 4.210 3.670 4.120

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

37 53 27 53 34 47 40 51 48

Number of non-motorized 

serious injuries

328 289 290 248 247 241 227 213 251
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 51

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Annual Serious Injuries

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

Page 25 of 51

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

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

Page 26 of 51

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

The annual performance measure data reported above is identical to the CT's 2017 Highway Safety Plan.

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

9.6 0 1.54 0

Rural Principal Arterial -

Other Freeways and 

Expressways

1 0 0.34 0

Rural Principal Arterial -

Other

11.6 0 2.54 0

Rural Minor Arterial 11.4 0 2.44 0

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 51

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Minor Collector 3.8 0 2.52 0

Rural Major Collector 10.4 0 1.19 0

Rural Local Road or Street 18 0 2.53 0

Urban Principal Arterial -

Interstate

32.8 0 0.34 0

Urban Principal Arterial -

Other Freeways and 

Expressways

20.6 0 0.52 0

Urban Principal Arterial -

Other

37.4 0 1 0

Urban Minor Arterial 45.4 0 0.89 0

Urban Minor Collector 0.2 0 0.09 0

Urban Major Collector 12.8 0 0.49 0

Urban Local Road or Street 25.8 0 1.04 0
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 51

Year 2016

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 189.4 824.2 0 0

County Highway Agency

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

78.6 731 0 0

City of Municipal Highway 

Agency

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
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 51

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Functional Classification 

5 Year Average

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

Page 30 of 51

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

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

Page 31 of 51

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

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

Page 32 of 51

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

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 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 51

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

State Highway Agency Town or Township Highway Agency

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Roadway Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 51

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

State Highway Agency Town or Township Highway Agency

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 51

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

State Highway Agency Town or Township Highway Agency

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 51

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

CTDOT crash repository does not have the capability to extract crashes by functional classification therefore no 

such data is available for serious injury crashes or fatality crashes.

FARS data was used to determine functional classification of fatal crashes.

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

elaborate?

No

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2018 Targets * 

Number of Fatalities 257.0 

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

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

State Highway Agency Town or Township Highway Agency

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 51

•While fatality figures have fluctuated during the five year reporting period, the five 

year moving average and trend has continued to decrease for the 2011-2015 baseline 

period. •Although the five year moving average decreased during the 2011-2015 

baseline period, preliminary 2016 data show the fatality total of 311 and the five year 

moving average of 275 to represent an increase in the five year moving average. •2017 

data show current fatality trends to keep pace with 2016 for the year to date. •For this 

reason, the fatality trend is expected to increase during the following calendar year. 

After reviewing the 2017-2021 SHSP goals, CTDOT chose to maintain the current 

five year moving average. 

Number of Serious Injuries 1571.0 

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

•While Serious (A) Injuries have fluctuated during the five year reporting period, the 

five year moving average and trend has continued to decrease for the 2011-2015 

baseline period. •Although the five year moving average decreased during the 2011-

2015 baseline period, preliminary 2016 data show the Serious (A) Injury total of 1,692 

and the five year moving average of 1,575 to represent an increase in the five year 

moving average. •Serious Injury totals have increased for consecutive years, for this 

reason, the Serious (A) Injury trend is expected to increase during the following 

calendar year. After reviewing the 2017-2021 SHSP goals and emphasis area 

strategies, CTDOT chose to maintain the current five year moving average. 

Fatality Rate 0.823 

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

•The five year moving average decreased from .859 (2007-2011) to .823 during the 

2011-2015 baseline period. •Although the five year moving average decreased during 

the 2011-2015 baseline period, preliminary 2016 data show the fatality total of 311 

and the five year moving average of 269 to represent an increase in the five year 

moving average. •2017 data show current fatality trends to keep pace with 2016 for the 

year to date. •Although 2016 VMT data was not available at the time of publishing 

(projected VMT was used in the 2016 figure in this graph), •Based on the anticipated 

increase in fatalities in 2016 and 2017 the Fatality rate per 100M VMT trend is 

expected to increase during the following calendar year. After reviewing the 2017-

2021 SHSP goals and emphasis area strategies, CTDOT chose to maintain the current 

five year moving average. 

Serious Injury Rate 5.033 

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

•While Serious (A) Injuries have fluctuated during the five year reporting period, the 

five year moving average and trend has continued to decrease for the 2011-2015 

baseline period. •Although the five year moving average decreased during the 2011-

2015 baseline period, preliminary 2016 data show the Serious (A) Injury per 100M 

VMT total of 4.830 and the five year moving average of 5.033 to represent an increase 
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 51

in the five year moving average. •Although 2016 VMT data was not available at the 

time of publishing projected VMT was used in the 2016 figure in this graph. •Serious 

Injury totals have increased for consecutive years, for this reason, the Serious (A) 

Injury per 100M VMT trend is expected to increase during the planning period. After 

reviewing the 2017-2021 SHSP goals and emphasis area strategies, CTDOT chose to 

maintain the current five year moving average. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 280.0 

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

•Although Pedestrian and Bicyclist Fatalities and Serious Injuries have maintained a 

fairly steady level over the reporting period, there has been an increase in this measure 

during the last two years. Preliminary 2016 and 2017 data show this increase to be 

maintained during the current year. •Though 2016 VMT data was not available at the 

time of goal setting for the 2018 planning period, this trend is expected to continue and 

possibly increase. For this reason, the fatality and serious injury trends are expected to 

increase during the planning period and maintaining the current number of pedestrian 

bicyclists killed and seriously injured was chosen. After reviewing the 2017-2021 

SHSP goals and emphasis area strategies, CTDOT chose to maintain the current 

number of pedestrian and bicyclists killed and seriously injured. 

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. 

The Department has quarterly Regional Planning Organization meetings, and on several occasions, CTDOT and 

FHWA have made presentations on safety target setting with the MPO's. Numerous stakeholders attended the 

February 22, 2017 state safety target coordination workshop held in CT. Meetings were held with the 

Department's Office of Highway Safety to ensure that the three safety performance targets in common to both 

the HSIP and HSP were identical.

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.

Applicability of Special Rules

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

Yes
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 51

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

CT's apportionment during the reporting period was $1,502,890 and all the funds were obligated. The HRRR 

projects are listed under question 29.

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

31 55 43 70 51 58 38

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Serious Injuries

194 164 118 139 114 112 123

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

0

50

100

150

200

250

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
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 51

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.

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

level evaluations.

Since the number of fatalities and serious injuries has increased over the last year, it is difficult to evaluate the 

State's HSIP program. CT finalized its new SHSP in July 2017 and it is anticipated that many of the 

infrastructure related strategies will be implemented resulting in fewer fatalities and serious injuries.

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

Highway Safety Improvement Program?

More systemic programs

Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

Increased focus on local road safety

HSIP Obligations

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

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 2016

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

Lane Departure 69.6 264.8 0.21 0.83
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 51

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 91 309.8 0.29 0.99

Intersections 88.4 983.6 0.28 3.11

Pedestrians 51.8 209.2 0.16 0.66

Bicyclists 5.8 77.8 0.01 0.26

Older Drivers 67 337 0.21 1.06

Motorcyclists 44.4 219.8 0.15 0.69

Work Zones 6.2 14.2 0.03 0.05
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 51

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 51

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

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

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 51

No

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

Page 45 of 51

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 to report

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

No evaluations were conducted during the review period.

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

No
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 51

Compliance Assessment

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

 05/18/2017

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?

 2022

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) 100 100 80 99 60 90

Route Number (8) 100 100

Route/Street Name (9) 100 100

Federal Aid/Route Type 

(21)

100 100

Rural/Urban Designation 

(20)

100 100 100 99

Surface Type (23) 100 100 80 99

Begin Point Segment 

Descriptor (10)

100 100 80 99 60 90

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

100 100 80 99 60 90

Segment Length (13) 100 100

Direction of Inventory (18) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100 100 99 100 90

Median Type (54) 68 50
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 51

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) 100 100

One/Two Way Operations 

(91)

100 100

Number of Through Lanes 

(31)

100 100 80 99

Average Annual Daily 

Traffic (79)

100 100 80 99

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100 100 99 100 90

INTERSECTION

Unique Junction Identifier 

(120)

0.75 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 1 Crossing Point 

(122)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Road 2 Crossing Point 

(123)

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

0.75 0

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

0.75 0

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road (79)

100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

0.75 0.75

INTERCHANGE/RAMP

Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Beginning of 

Ramp Terminal (197)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

100 100
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 51

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)

100 100

Interchange Type (182) 0 0

Ramp AADT (191) 100 100

Year of Ramp AADT (192) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100

Totals (Average Percent 

Complete):

98.22 97.22 50.38 50.09 81.82 81.82 86.67 99.00 76.00 90.00

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.

See the attached "TRCC Traffic Records Strategic Plan 2017-2018" (pages 187-191) which summarizes the State's actions and completion dates to have complete access to the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads.

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 Suspected Serious Injury (A) Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Report Form Instruction Manual Suspected Serious Injury (A) Yes As any injury other than fatal that results in 

one or more of the following:

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

Crash Database Suspected Serious Injury (A) Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Database Data Dictionary Suspected Serious Injury (A) Yes As any injury other than fatal that results in 

one or more of the following:

Yes A suspected serious injury is any injury 

other than

fatal which results in one or more of the 

following: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 

Yes
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 51

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 * 

minor lacerations;Significant burns (second 

and third degree burns over 10% or more 

of the body);Unconsciousness when taken 

from the crash scene;Paralysis

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.

2019

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

May 2019
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 51

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

CT's HSIP safety program.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Workshop Summary Report Connecticut SUBMITTED.pdf

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:

trcc_traffic_records_strategic_plan 2017-2018.pdf
2017 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 51 of 51

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.