Page 1 of 61

MONTANA

2018 ANNUAL REPORT
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 2 of 61

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 ......................................................................................................................................... 17

Funds Programmed ........................................................................................................................................... 17

General Listing of Projects ............................................................................................................................... 20

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

General Highway Safety Trends ....................................................................................................................... 33

Safety Performance Targets .............................................................................................................................. 46

Applicability of Special Rules .......................................................................................................................... 48

Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. 50

Program Effectiveness ...................................................................................................................................... 50

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements ...................................................................... 51

Year 2017 .............................................................................................................................................................. 51

Project Effectiveness ......................................................................................................................................... 55

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 56
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 3 of 61

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.” 
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 4 of 61

Executive Summary 

In the reporting period, the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) successfully utilized MDT's allotted 

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds on public roads in Montana. All 2017 sites were approved 

by the Transportation Commission within the reporting period (State Fiscal Year) and the remaining projects 

are being processed for programming from FHWA at this time. MDT identified potential locations using its 

Safety Performance Functions (SPF's) and diagnostic norms in connection with its Roadway Departure Study. 

MDT's newer Safety Information Management System (SIMS) continues to provide an effective and efficient 

tool to identify, analyze and track HSIP projects.

Montana continues to improve the accuracy of the database as new screening options are investigated. This 

includes tying all intersection data to an intersection specific geonode allowing for easier intersection crash 

identification as well as working with the Montana Highway Patrol to continue and improve the data being 

transferred to MDT's crash database (SIMS).

Overall, fatalities and serious injuries were both down in 2017. Nonetheless, MDT continues efforts to cut fatal 

and serious injury crashes in half by 2030 by addressing crash clusters on all public roads.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 5 of 61

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. 

The HSIP Program is a centrally administered program through the Safety Engineering Section which is within 

MDT's Traffic and Safety Bureau. 

Each year, the Safety Engineering Section develops criteria to identify potential hot-spot crash locations for 

review. The Section also identifies potential systemic improvements for longer roadway segments and/or 

corridors. Sites are then reviewed through an established process which includes reviewing Montana Highway 

Patrol crash records, completing an office review and usually a field review. The last step is completing a 

benefit cost for a potential safety countermeasure that addresses the identified crash trend. 

The sites that meet the minimum benefit cost threshold established by FHWA and are within the HSIP 

available funding, are nominated as HSIP Funded Safety Projects.

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 Highway Safety Improvement Program is administered centrally by the MDT Traffic and Safety Bureau 

within the Engineering Division.

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.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 6 of 61

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

All crashes investigated by the Montana Highway Patrol (MHP), or submitted to the MHP by a local 

enforcement agency, are available to MDT. In 2014 MDT implemented a new crash database system. This 

system allows MDT staff to query local road crash data by route and reference post as well as spatially via GIS 

tools. Fatal crash data is available for the Tribal reservations; however, other crashes investigated by the Tribal 

enforcement agencies or Bureau of Indian Affairs are not consistently submitted. MDT solicits participation 

from local and Tribal agencies, who can submit documentation of sites to be evaluated and prioritized under 

the Highway Safety Improvement Program. A nomination/application for HSIP projects is included on the MDT 

internet page at: http://www.mdt.mt.gov/publications/docs/forms/hsip_application.pdf .

Potential HSIP projects on local and Tribal roads are currently evaluated using the same methodologies as are 

applied to potential projects on the state owned system. 

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

are involved with HSIP planning.

Design

Planning 

Maintenance

Operations 

Districts/Regions

Governors Highway Safety Office 

Other-District Personnel

Other-Motor Carriers

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

Describe coordination with internal partners.

The MDT Planning Division coordinates the safety activities and administers the Comprehensive Highway 

Safety Plan (CHSP). The CHSP has recently undergone an update. The CHSP update was completed in May 

2015. The updated CHSP is available at: http://www.mdt.mt.gov/visionzero/docs/chsp/current_chsp.pdf

The Highway Safety Improvement Program is administered centrally by the MDT Traffic and Safety Bureau. 

Crash clusters are identified by roadway system and by various criteria. Enforcement agencies identify 

locations and request site reviews. Local and Tribal agencies can forward potential safety projects or request 

MDT evaluate areas of interest. MDT District Offices also submit sites for investigation and participate in the 

engineering study to determine crash trends and countermeasure selection. Project selection is currently 

based on the benefit/cost ratio method. MDT has advanced some systemic improvements (curve signing and 

centerline rumble strips - as examples) based on the strategies outlined in the CHSP. 

Appropriate entities within MDT are invited to participate in Corridor Safety Audits (CSA's). These entities 

include, but may not be limited to, the State Highway Traffic Safety Section, Planning Division, Motor Carrier 

Services, Road Design, Traffic Operations, Maintenance, and District personnel.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 7 of 61

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

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

Local Government Agency 

Other-Tribes

Other-Law Enforcement

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

Describe coordination with external partners.

MDT routinely receives requests for specific sites identified for review from law enforcement, local government 

entities and tribal governments. MDT coordinates with these governments during the field review process to 

gather additional input for addressing the crash trends. MDT coordinates with the MPO's in the same manner; 

however, the coordination is done through MDT's District and Planning Division Offices rather than the Traffic 

and Safety Bureau.

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

period?

No

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. 

Since 2006 Montana has had a Traffic Records Coordinating Committee (TRCC). The TRCC has 

representation from State agencies involved with safety records and Federal agencies for oversight and input. 

They meet regularly and attempt to coordinate and share projected record upgrades, new projects and 

pertinent records among participants. As the systems mature, the TRCC may include MPO and Tribal 

representation.

Starting September 2008, the Montana Highway Patrol (MHP) implemented the CTS America Public Safety 

System dispatch-crash-record systems, including a MMUCC based crash reporting form. MHP investigates 

approximately 50% of all statewide crashes. This CTS America System is presently only used by the MHP via 

a mobile client in each patrol unit; however, a web-based crash reporting system has been developed and is 

being used by several local agencies. This web based system allows local enforcement agencies to input 

crash information via the internet, if they choose to participate. The project is starting with the eight largest 

local Police Departments. These eight departments report about 80% of all local crashes.

In 2014, MDT implemented an upgrade to the safety database and analysis tools. This new software, referred 

to as the Safety Information Management System (SIMS), has been deployed and is now in production at 

MDT. This new system allows MDT to access the MMUCC compliant crash data being collected by the 
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 8 of 61

Montana Highway Patrol. The SIMS system also has access to many roadway data elements including many 

of the Fundamental Data Elements identified by FHWA. Additionally, MDT has access to the MHP crash 

investigator’s reports, if additional detail on the particular crash is required. The new system also allowed MDT 

to begin utilizing MHP citation data. 

The Traffic and Safety Bureau is actively involved in the implementation of the CHSP. Traffic and Safety is 

taking the lead in the areas of roadway departure crashes and intersection crashes.

Program Methodology

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

and evaluation processes?

No

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

File Name:

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

Although MDT has an outdated Safety Manual, MDT has a clearly defined and documented HSIP process in 

place. The existing MDT Safety Manual is currently being re-written for use by the Traffic and Safety Bureau 

and is anticipated to be complete by December 2018. This Safety Manual will include formal documentation of 

the HSIP Process from project selection through implementation and project evaluation.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

Intersection

Horizontal Curve 

Roadway Departure

HRRR

Other-Hot Spot 

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

Program: Horizontal Curve 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2015 

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

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

Other-Systemic Improvement

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

Competes with all projects
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 9 of 61

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Horizontal curvature 

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

Other-Ball Bank Threshold 

Other-Road Classification

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?

Other-By District

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).

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

MDT Traffic is currently designing the last two MDT District curve signing construction plans. These projects 

are being delivered through a Job Order Contracting Process.

Program: HRRR 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2015 

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

Other-HRRR Special Rule
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 10 of 61

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 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

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

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

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.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process 

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

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

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

Relative Weight in Scoring

Ranking based on B/C : 100 

Total Relative Weight : 100

Program: Intersection 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2015 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 11 of 61

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 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Traffic 

Volume 

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

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

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.

LOSS Intersection Models for local intersections have been developed. Phase II of the Intersection Safety 

Study will produce results from a statewide network screening list. It is anticipated to include state and local 

intersections of interest. 

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-Benefit Cost 

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).

Program: Roadway Departure 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2015 
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 12 of 61

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

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

FHWA focused approach to safety

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 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only Volume 

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

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

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.

LOSS models are not developed for local roads. Local road roadway departure crashes can be identified using 

other parameters and thresholds including collision type. 

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-Benefit Cost 

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).

Program: Other-Hot Spot 

Date of Program Methodology: 10/1/1989 
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 13 of 61

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

Other-All public roads 

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 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only Volume 

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

Other-Requests - Areas to be investigated as requested by any agency or individual 

Other-See additional description provided in question #15. 

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.

LOSS is not available for local roads. For the 2017 HSIP, local road projects were identified via request.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-Projects are evaluated and ranked on a benefit/cost system.

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 

Other-MDT has advanced some systemic projects (curve signing as an example) based on the strategies 

outlined in the CHSP without calculating a benefit/cost. : 1
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 14 of 61

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 15 

 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

Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

Horizontal curve signs 

Wrong way driving treatments 

Other-Flashing Yellow Arrows

Other-Reflective Backplates

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

Systemic projects may be stand-alone projects across a District (District curve signing or centerline rumble 

strips) or along a corridor (signing, striping, delineation, rumble strips, etc).

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.

MDT is currently completing a research project to determine the appropriate method to utilize in developing 

Local Road Safety Plans. During this process, MDT will coordinate with Montana's LTAP Office and other 

Stakeholders.

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.

As these technologies continue to evolve, the HSIP program may consider appropriate applications to address 

safety on Montana's roadways. However, at this time, the HSIP Program doesn't consider these technologies.

Does the State use the Highway Safety Manual to support HSIP efforts?
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 15 of 61

Yes

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

MDT developed its Roadway Departure Study using Montana specific Safety Performance Functions (SPF) 

and Levels of Service of Safety (LOSS). These SPF's and LOSS's were developed based on methodologies in 

the Highway Safety Manual. The Intersection Safety Study is also being developed based on similar 

methodology.

MDT's Road Design is also beginning to integrate the HSM methodologies into their design process. To assist 

in this endeavor, FHWA is providing training to MDT Staff and Consultants through their Resource Center. This 

is currently scheduled for September 2018 at MDT's Headquarters Building.

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?

Yes

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

To identify potential locations for development of the 2018 HSIP, MDT has elected to screen the network using 

the following initial criteria: 1) Crashes involving bicyclists and/or pedestrians; 2) Road departure crashes 

occurring for injury and fatal crashes; 3) Intersections identified by the Bureau and/or District where new 

analysis models were available to use; 4) Requested Sites (By an Agency, District, Public Citizen, Safety 

Section).

Once the sites are identified, a preliminary office review identifies the sites where there are near-term 

reconstruction projects, currently programmed safety projects, or sites that were recently field reviewed. After 

the preliminary office review, further review establishes the sites that need on-site field reviews. The sites 

showing no crash trend are not field reviewed. The field review team establishes crash causations and 

contributing factors. The team members debate potential countermeasures. Conceptual designs are developed 

with cost estimates.

The project prioritization process is based on a benefit-cost analysis. The costs are the annualized cost of 

construction over the service life of the proposed improvement plus the annual increase in operation and 

maintenance costs due to the improvement. The benefits are the anticipated annualized cost reductions due to 

a lower number of crashes and lower crash severity. The projects with the highest benefit-cost ratios are 

nominated for improvements.

MDT has initiated several state-wide systemic projects including horizontal curve signing, interstate wrong-way 

signing upgrades and centerline rumble strips. These three projects are being installed on a large district-wide 

scale and are in various levels of design and/or construction. MDT is also looking at other large scale systemic 

projects including interstate median barrier and developing local road safety plans.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 16 of 61

MDT has also completed development of a Roadway Departure Study. This study included development of 

Safety Performance Functions (SPFs), Level of Service of Safety (LOSS), and diagnostic norms for rural onsystem routes. MDT is using these tools and methodologies for evaluation of the HSIP as well as analysis of 

other agency projects.

MDT has recently developed SPF's and diagnostic norms for intersections. These intersection tools are being 

used in the development of the 2018 HSIP List. They will also be utilized in analysis for other agency projects 

and future HSIP Lists.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 17 of 61

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

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

Montana's State Fiscal Year 2018 is the reporting period (July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018)

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $18,788,639 $18,788,639 100%

HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

$2,068,138 $2,068,138 100%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154) $0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 164) $8,216,157 $8,216,157 100%

RHCP (for HSIP purposes) (23 

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

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

$4,517,778 $4,517,778 100%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $33,590,712 $33,590,712 100%

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?

$5,248,616 

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

$5,248,616 

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?

$1,489,950 

How much funding is obligated to non-infrastructure safety projects?
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 18 of 61

$1,489,950 

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

The HSIP Administration Project, HSIP STWD (626), is a yearly project that funds the HSIP Planning Process 

for MDT. The funds identified above are for the FY 2019 HSIP Program (July 1, 2018 - June 30, 2019)

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.

The inability to utilize HSIP funding for non-infrastructure projects impedes MDT's HSIP Program. NHTSA has 

determined that 94% of crashes can be tied back to human error or bad decisions. By only focusing on 

infrastructure improvements, we are focusing on mitigating the result of the crash but not necessarily the 

contributing human factor cause to the crash (drinking, cell-phone usage, inattentiveness, distraction, occupant 

protection, etc). In order to move towards Vision Zero, drivers need continued awareness of their actions and 

how these actions are contributing to vehicular crashes.

In addition, MDT is required to participate in fall and spring media campaigns for occupant protection and seat 

belts. There is no additional funding available to provide media at other times of the year. However, Montana 

experiences its highest number of fatalities during the summer months and MDT has no active campaign 

during that time period. 

M DT is striving to improve public outreach to assist in this process. A new program has been implemented to 

increase public awareness during our construction projects. The intent is to send a consistent message of what 

is being constructed and in many cases how that benefits the traveling public's safety (for example, promoting 

the benefits of centerline rumble strips during the actual construction of those safety improvements).

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. 
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 19 of 61

Historically, MDT has been very successful in utilizing HSIP Funds and has strong support for the program 

from MDT Management.

MDT is currently developing a Safety Manual to (1) evaluate and document MDT’s current process for 

development of HSIP projects; (2) evaluate and document the current Fundamental Data Elements (FDE) 

contained in MDT’s Safety Information Management System (SIMS); (3) review and update, if necessary, 

MDT’s current process guidelines for completion of Road (Corridor) Safety Audits; (4) review, enhance, and 

consolidate current analytical processes, practices, and procedures for incorporation of safety enhancements 

into non-HSIP projects; (5) develop documentation and processes which combines documentation from the 

recently completed SIMS project, with the analytical tools developed as part of the Road Departure Study and 

the Intersection Study; and (6) prepare one chapter containing guidelines for inclusion of pedestrian safety 

countermeasures. The anticipated completion date for this manual is December 2018. 

MDT recently completed Phase I of its Intersection Safety Study. This study included development of Safety 

Performance Functions (SPF’s), Level of Service of Safety (LOSS), and diagnostic norms for urban and rural 3 

or 4 legged intersections. Over twenty SPF's were developed and are currently being utilized in developing the 

2018 HSIP Project List. Phase II is currently wrapping up and includes network screening of Montana's 

intersections for potential for crash reduction. This is anticipated to be complete in December 2018. 
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 20 of 61

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

2018 SFTY 

UTILITY FAST 

PROCESS

Roadway Roadway - other $45000 $50000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

2018-RAILROAD 

SAFETY 

PROGRAM

Non-infrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

$172960 $192177.777777778 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Non-Infrastructure 0 State Highway 

Agency

SAFETY 

MANAGEMENT 

PROGRAM (19)

Non-infrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

$1489950 $1655500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Non-Infrastructure 0 State Highway 

Agency

SF109-GR NE OF 

BOZEMAN

Roadway Roadway - other 5 Locations $270000 $300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,194 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF109-GR NE OF 

BOZEMAN

Roadway Roadway - other 5 Locations $431153 $479058.888888889 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,194 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF109-GR NE OF 

BOZEMAN

Roadway Roadway - other 5 Locations $24117 $24117 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,194 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF119-INT IMPGRASS RANGEIntersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $328491.32 $364990.355555556 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

1,173 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF119-INT IMPGRASS RANGEIntersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $177709.64 $177709.64 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

1,173 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF119-INT IMPGRASS RANGEIntersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $114000 $114000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

1,173 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 21 of 61

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

SF 129-GTFLS 

HRZNTAL CRV 

SIGNG

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related 

warning signs and 

flashers

1 District $361028 $361028 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF129-BILLINGS 

HRZNTL CRV 

SIGN

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related 

warning signs and 

flashers

1 District $269920 $269920 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 129 -SLOPE 

FLTTNNG 

BELGRADE

Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder 

treatments - other

1.9 Miles $2537054 $2930300.3003003 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,514 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 129 -SLOPE 

FLTTNNG 

BELGRADE

Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder 

treatments - other

1.9 Miles $59000 $59000 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,514 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 129 -SLOPE 

FLTTNNG 

BELGRADE

Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder 

treatments - other

1.9 Miles $2250000 $2250000 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,514 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 129 -SLOPE 

FLTTNNG 

BELGRADE

Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder 

treatments - other

1.9 Miles $279000 $310000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,514 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 129 -SLOPE 

FLTTNNG 

BELGRADE

Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder 

treatments - other

1.9 Miles $37301 $41445.5555555556 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,514 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

I-15 BRIDGES 

(RP 218-221)

Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

3 Miles $0 $0 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

4,420 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

I-15 BRIDGES 

(RP 218-221)

Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

3 Miles $484700 $538555.555555556 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

4,420 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 22 of 61

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

SF 139 - 

COTTONWOOD 

& STUCKY 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $713211.06 $713211.06 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,538 50 Other Local 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 139 - 

COTTONWOOD 

& STUCKY 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $1840644.94 $1840644.94 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,538 50 Other Local 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 139 - 

COTTONWOOD 

& STUCKY 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $500000 $500000 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,538 50 Other Local 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 139 - 

COTTONWOOD 

& STUCKY 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $1127095 $1127095 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major 

Collector

3,538 50 Other Local 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 139 - 

COTTONWOOD 

& STUCKY 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $367388 $367388 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,538 50 Other Local 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 139 - HLN 

FLTS 

INTERSECTION

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic 

control - other

1 Intersections $311198.39 $311198.39 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

12,284 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 139 - HLN 

FLTS 

INTERSECTION

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic 

control - other

1 Intersections $635307.61 $635307.61 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

12,284 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 139 - LAUREL 

GRD RAIL

Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

1 Locations $51211 $51211 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

852 State Highway 

Agency

Request Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 139 - SHANE 

CR RD SFTY

Roadway Roadway - other 4.2 Miles $330837 $367596.666666667 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

393 Other Local 

Agency

Request Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 23 of 61

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

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 139 - SHANE 

CR RD SFTY

Roadway Roadway - other 4.2 Miles $220665 $245183.333333333 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major 

Collector

393 Other Local 

Agency

Request Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 139 - SHANE 

CR RD SFTY

Roadway Roadway - other 4.2 Miles $5980 $5980 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

393 Other Local 

Agency

Request Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 139 - SHANE 

CR RD SFTY

Roadway Roadway - other 4.2 Miles $42000 $42000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major 

Collector

393 Other Local 

Agency

Request Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 139 - SHANE 

CR RD SFTY

Roadway Roadway - other 4.2 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

393 Other Local 

Agency

Request Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 139 - 

GREGSON BRDG 

REMOVAL

Roadway Roadway - other 2 Crossovers $32317 $35907.7777777778 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

11,026 80 State Highway 

Agency

Request Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 139 - SUN 

PRAIRIE TURN 

LANE

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

1 Intersections $760666 $760666 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Major 

Collector

7,258 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 139 - 

MISSOULA 

SIGNALS SFTY

Intersection traffic 

control

Systemic 

improvements - 

signal-controlled

2 Urban Routes $83950 $83950 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 139 - 

MISSOULA 

SIGNALS SFTY

Intersection traffic 

control

Systemic 

improvements - 

signal-controlled

2 Urban Routes $40291 $40291 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 24 of 61

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

SF 139-TURN 

LANES NW OF 

POLSON

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - 

add left-turn lane

1 Intersections $1582105 $1582105 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

4,412 70 State Highway 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

MT3-

ZIMMERMAN TR 

INTRSCT IMPRV

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $0 $0 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

11,098 50 State Highway 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

MT3-

ZIMMERMAN TR 

INTRSCT IMPRV

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $673417.06 $777797.482097482 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

11,098 50 State Highway 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

MT3-

ZIMMERMAN TR 

INTRSCT IMPRV

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $1700000 $1700000 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

11,098 50 State Highway 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF-149 S-201 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway 

delineation

Delineators postmounted or on 

barrier 

30 Miles $6263.54 $6263.54 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

302 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF-149 S-201 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway 

delineation

Delineators postmounted or on 

barrier 

30 Miles $53900 $53900 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major 

Collector

302 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF-149 

ROUNDUP SFTY 

IMPRV 

Roadway Rumble strips - 

unspecified or 

other

1 Curves $18436 $18436 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

536 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF-149 BIG 

TIMBER SFTY 

IMPRV 

Roadway 

delineation

Delineators postmounted or on 

barrier 

0.5 Miles $25353.64 $25353.64 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,996 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF-149 BLGS 

SOUTH SFTY 

IMPRV 

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection 

flashers - add 

advance 

intersection 

1 Intersections $102946 $102946 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

3,919 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 25 of 61

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

warning signmountedproblem 

identification.

SF 149 S OF HOT 

SPRINGS SLP FL

Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder grading 1 Miles $412226 $412226 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

431 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 149 

STOCKETT SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control - 

other

1 Curves $223571 $248412.222222222 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,273 70 State Highway 

Agency

Request Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 149 

STOCKETT SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control - 

other

1 Curves $48705 $48705 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,273 70 State Highway 

Agency

Request Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 149 

STOCKETT SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control - 

other

1 Curves $270000 $300000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major 

Collector

1,273 70 State Highway 

Agency

Request Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 149 DUCK LK 

FENCING

Roadside Fencing 7.5 Miles $281989 $281989 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

981 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Domestic Animal Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 149 DUCK LK 

FENCING

Roadside Fencing 7.5 Miles $354478 $354478 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major 

Collector

981 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Domestic Animal Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 149 - YORK 

RD 

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $150000 $150000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,749 60 State Highway 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 149 - YORK 

RD 

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $82678.97 $82678.97 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,749 60 State Highway 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 149 - YORK 

RD 

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $683894.03 $683894.03 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,749 60 State Highway 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 26 of 61

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

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 149-KING 

INTCH SFTY 

IMPRV

Intersection traffic 

control

Systemic 

improvements - 

signal-controlled

1 Interchanges $8050 $8050 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

25,570 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 149-KING 

INTCH SFTY 

IMPRV

Intersection traffic 

control

Systemic 

improvements - 

signal-controlled

1 Interchanges $30688 $30688 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

25,570 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 149-

COLUMBUS 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control - 

other

2 Curves $23401.34 $23401.34 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

770 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 149-WOLF 

POINT SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related 

warning signs and 

flashers

1.2 Miles $28766 $28766 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

251 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 

BROADUS SFTY 

IMPRV

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection 

flashers - add 

advance 

intersection 

warning signmounted

2 Intersections $89000 $89000 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

2,287 70 State Highway 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 159 

BROADUS SFTY 

IMPRV

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection 

flashers - add 

advance 

intersection 

warning signmounted

2 Intersections $230950 $230950 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

2,287 70 State Highway 

Agency

Request Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 159 BADGER 

CREEK S 

FENCING

Roadside Fencing 7 Miles $103000 $103000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,166 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Domestic Animal Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 DUCK 

LAKE INTX SFTY 

IMP

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related 

warning signs and 

flashers

1 Curves $64800 $64800 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,187 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 27 of 61

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

SF 159 GREAT 

FALLS DIST 

ELEC

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

2 Locations $89680 $89680 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 GREAT 

FALLS DIST 

ELEC

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

2 Locations $62816 $62816 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 HELENA 

REFLCT 

BACKPLATE

Intersection traffic 

control

Systemic 

improvements - 

signal-controlled

11 Intersections $47500 $47500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

0 Other Local 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 159 HELENA 

REFLCT 

BACKPLATE

Intersection traffic 

control

Systemic 

improvements - 

signal-controlled

11 Intersections $15738 $15738 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

0 Other Local 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce and 

mitigate 

intersection 

crashes through 

data-driven 

problem 

identification.

SF 159 S OF 

ROGERS PASS 

SAFETY

Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder grading 1 Locations $50000 $50000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

1,568 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 S OF 

ROGERS PASS 

SAFETY

Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder grading 1 Locations $43965 $43965 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

1,568 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 SO CUT 

BANK SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 3 Miles $63800 $63800 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

274 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 GREAT 

FALLS DIST 

SIGN

Roadway Roadway - other 4 Locations $53520 $53520 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 HAVRE 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 5 Locations $93032 $93032 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 28 of 61

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

SF 159 SW 

MONT SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 3 Locations $75690 $84100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 SW 

MONT SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 3 Locations $47000 $47000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 

GALLATIN SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 4 Locations $103040 $103040 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 BUTTE 

DISTRICT 

DELINEAT

Roadway Roadway - other 6 Locations $58410 $58410 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 BUTTE 

DISTRICT 

DELINEAT

Roadway Roadway - other 6 Locations $33773 $33773 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 BIGFORK 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 2 Locations $123889 $123889 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 

BITTERROOT 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 3 Locations $28980 $32200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 

BITTERROOT 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 3 Locations $47000 $47000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 

FLATHEAD SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 6 Locations $131149 $131149 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 29 of 61

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

SF 159 LAKE 

SANDERS SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 6 Locations $113300 $113300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 

SANDERS CO 

SFTY IMPRV 

Roadway Roadway - other 5 Locations $143086 $143086 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 159 HELENA 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 2 Locations $348659 $348659 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF-169 N24 

CLRS SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway Rumble strips - 

center

32 Miles $235155 $235155 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

4,495 70 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 E 

HELENA 

BARRIER SKID

Roadside Barrier - other 2.5 Miles $384070 $426744.444444444 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

21,485 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 E 

HELENA 

BARRIER SKID

Roadside Barrier - other 2.5 Miles $86580 $100000 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

21,485 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 E 

HELENA 

BARRIER SKID

Roadside Barrier - other 2.5 Miles $1072727 $1239000.92400092 Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

21,485 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 E 

HELENA 

BARRIER SKID

Roadside Barrier - other 2.5 Miles $324540 $360600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

21,485 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 E 

HELENA 

BARRIER SKID

Roadside Barrier - other 2.5 Miles $4000 $4000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

21,485 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 30 of 61

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

SF 169 E 

HELENA 

BARRIER SKID

Roadside Barrier - other 2.5 Miles $2267000 $2267000 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

21,485 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

E HELENA 

BARRIER SKID 

CONCRETE

Roadside Barrier - other 2.5 Miles $414229 $414229 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

21,485 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 

GLENDIVE 

NORTH CLRS

Roadway Rumble strips - 

center

375 Miles $235155 $235155 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 

GLENDIVE 

SOUTH SFTY

Roadway Rumble strips - 

center

265 Miles $235155 $235155 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 W OF 

WHITEFISH 

SFTY

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - 

paved or other

1 Miles $122486 $136095.555555556 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

3,419 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 MSLA 

CNTY SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

8 Locations $19557 $19557 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 Other Local 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 

FLATHEAD CNTY 

SFTY

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

12 Locations $105118 $105118 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 BLGS 

AREA SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

(including post) - 

new or updated

9 Locations $21314 $21314 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 I90 W 

KING AVE 

LIGHTING

Lighting Continuous 

roadway lighting

2 Miles $44799 $44799 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

31,872 65 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 31 of 61

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

SF 169 N57 SLDR 

WID & SLP FLAT

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - 

paved or other

2 Curves $212430 $236033.333333333 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

1,698 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 BLGS 

DISTRIC SFTY 

IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 9 Locations $31434 $31434 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 HELENA 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 6 Locations $68411 $68411 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 GT FALLS 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 5 Locations $99540 $99540 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 

CASCADE CNTY 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 4 Locations $35674 $35674 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 BUTTE 

DIST SFTY

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control - 

other

5 Locations $28029 $28029 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 BZMN 

SFTY IMPRV

Roadway Roadway - other 5 Locations $46947 $46947 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 169 BUTTE 

DIST DELIN

Roadway Roadway - other 2 Locations $13025 $13025 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

SF 179 

GLENDIVE 

HRZNTL CRV 

SIG

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related 

warning signs and 

flashers

1 District $137781 $137781 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 32 of 61

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

SF 179 

GLENDIVE 

HRZNTL CRV 

SIG

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related 

warning signs and 

flashers

1 District $116600 $116600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Various Roads 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce and 

mitigate roadway 

departure crashes 

through datadriven problem 

identification.

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 33 of 61

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

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

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatalities 222 192 211 205 229 192 224 190 186

Serious Injuries 1,100 995 967 1,129 1,102 965 1,000 835 731

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 2.010 1.690 1.790 1.740 1.910 1.580 1.840 1.520 1.471

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

10.100 8.900 8.200 9.600 9.200 8.000 8.200 6.700 5.800

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

16 10 16 9 24 12 15 14 15

Number of non-motorized 

serious injuries

70 50 58 48 61 57 49 63 52
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 34 of 61

0

50

100

150

200

250

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 35 of 61

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 36 of 61

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

The 2016 Serious Injury Rate was updated to reflect the correct rate (based on 835 serious injuries).

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 2017

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Interstate

29.8 113.2 1.18 4.52

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other

45.2 168 1.87 6.97

Rural Minor Arterial 24 101.8 2.25 9.54

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 37 of 61

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 12 50.4 2.28 10.12

Rural Major Collector 30.6 99 3.3 10.7

Rural Local Road or Street 29 127.2 2.07 9.38

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Interstate

6.2 32.4 1.02 5.43

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other

10 89 0.81 7.2

Urban Minor Arterial 7 42.4 1.1 6.67

Urban Minor Collector 0.6 2.6 2.32 8.68

Urban Major Collector 3.6 31.8 0.87 7.74

Urban Local Road or Street 6 72 0.58 7.05
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 38 of 61

Year 2017

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 146.2 606.2 1.67 6.94

County Highway Agency 23.4 120.6 1.62 8.47

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City of Municipal Highway 

Agency

14.4 142.4 0.72 7.28

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

0.25 2.75 2.86 29.05

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 12.8 23.8 7.14 13.7

Bureau of Indian Affairs 1 2.6 8.36 17.82

US Forest Service 6 31.8 1.79 9.84

Other Federal Agency 0 0.5 0 1.09

National Park Service 0 0 0 0
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 39 of 61

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Functional Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 40 of 61

0

50

100

150

200

250

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 41 of 61

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 42 of 61

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 43 of 61

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Roadway Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 44 of 61

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 45 of 61

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 46 of 61

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

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 2019 Targets * 

Number of Fatalities 187.4 

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

The 2019 Target is based on the 5-year rolling average using historical trends. This 

supports the SHSP (known as the Comprehensive Highway Safety Plan (CHSP) in 

Montana) by working towards the overall Vision Zero Goal and an interim safety goal 

of halving fatalities and serious injuries from 1,705 in 2007 to 852 in 2030. 

Number of Serious Injuries 892.8 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 47 of 61

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

The 2019 Target is based on the 5-year rolling average using historical trends. This 

supports the SHSP (known as the Comprehensive Highway Safety Plan (CHSP) in 

Montana) by working towards the overall Vision Zero Goal and an interim safety goal 

of halving fatalities and serious injuries from 1,705 in 2007 to 852 in 2030. 

Fatality Rate 1.462 

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

The 2019 Target is based on the 5-year rolling average using historical trends. This 

supports the SHSP (known as the Comprehensive Highway Safety Plan (CHSP) in 

Montana) by working towards the overall Vision Zero Goal and an interim safety goal 

of halving fatalities and serious injuries from 1,705 in 2007 to 852 in 2030. 

Serious Injury Rate 6.968 

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

The 2019 Target is based on the 5-year rolling average using historical trends. This 

supports the SHSP (known as the Comprehensive Highway Safety Plan (CHSP) in 

Montana) by working towards the overall Vision Zero Goal and an interim safety goal 

of halving fatalities and serious injuries from 1,705 in 2007 to 852 in 2030. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 73.2 

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

The 2019 Target is based on the 5-year rolling average using historical trends. This 

supports the SHSP (known as the Comprehensive Highway Safety Plan (CHSP) in 

Montana) by working towards the overall Vision Zero Goal and an interim safety goal 

of halving fatalities and serious injuries from 1,705 in 2007 to 852 in 2030. 

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. 

Montana's Safety Performance Target Setting is a collaborative effort between MDT Engineering, the 3 MPO's 

and the State Highway Traffic Office. Representatives from each group met in the spring of 2018 to establish 

the 2019 Safety Performance Targets. For the final step, these targets were then advanced to the CHSP 

Advisory Committee to vote their concurrence.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 48 of 61

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

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

For the 2017 HSIP List, the Montana definition of High-Risk Rural Roads is: any roadway functionally classified 

as a rural major or minor collector or a local road with significant safety risks. Per §23 USC 148(d)(2), MDT’s 

definition of significant safety risk is “information gathered through means such as field reviews, safety 

assessments, road safety audits, and local knowledge and experience.” Using information from observations in 

the field can identify high-risk locations that may not be identified through data analysis or by identifying 

roadway characteristics. 

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

older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Fatalities

26 24 16 34 24 32 26

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Serious Injuries

87 72 71 82 91 88 86
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 49 of 61

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

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

# of Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Years

Number of Older Driver and Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries by 

Year.

Fatalities Serious Injuries
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 50 of 61

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

Other-Observational before/after studies 

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

MDT utilizes observational before/after studies to evaluate the effectiveness of a particular safety improvement 

or groups of improvements. An observational before/after study requires crash data and volume data from both 

before and after the installation of a safety improvement.

MDT has elected to evaluate the HSIP based on groups of similar projects on an annual basis. At this time, the 

evaluation process focuses on nominated projects having a construction and construction engineering 

(CN+CE) cost exceeding $100,000. Additional evaluations or site specific evaluations are completed on a 

case-by-case basis. Typically, a minimum of 5-years of after data is used for the treatment sites.

The following steps highlight the process for MDT’s annual evaluation of safety improvements. It is not meant 

to be all encompassing and is meant to be a living process. Modifications to the following process will be made 

as additional data sets and analysis tools are available.

1. Identify completed projects with a construction plus construction engineering (CN+CE) cost of greater 

than $100,000 and which have sufficient crash data following completion of the project. 

2. Group the projects completed in the identified year by improvement type. The following project groups 

are identified to guide the evaluation: 

3. Geometric improvements at a specific location (curve realignment or shoulder widening as examples); 

4. Slope flattening or elimination of roadside hazards; 

5. Signing, striping and delineation including the installation of warning flashers; 

6. Installation of guardrail; 

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

level evaluations.

This method of program level evaluation is new to MDT with only a couple of years actual results. With MDT's 

recent Roadway Departure Study and newly implemented Intersection Safety Study, the program level 

evaluation will continue to be improved upon each year. One challenge of this form of program level evaluation 

is for low volume roads where 10 years of data is needed to determine a crash trend and ultimately a project 

being constructed. In addition, MDT's evaluation is based on 5 years "before" and "after" data which may not 

correspond with the original trend identification due to the regression to the mean. Consequently, the naïve 

before/after study may not produce results that are consistent with the anticipated CMF that was used. 

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

Highway Safety Improvement Program?
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 51 of 61

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.

Another method MDT uses to indicate the HSIP Program's Success is the ability to identify and obligate HSIP 

Funds to address safety needs throughout the state on all public roads. MDT's HSIP Funding has grown over 

the last several years which has allowed MDT to identify and fund more significant size safety projects. This 

has included large infrastructure type projects, including several roundabouts on non-MDT routes (local road 

safety).

The HSIP Program's success has also increased the awareness of safety within the agency as a whole. This 

has translated into more collaboration between bureaus as other projects are designed and implemented 

benefiting both the safety program and ultimately the traveling public.

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 2017 

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Roadway Departure 134 498 1.09 4.05

Intersections 21.6 195.6 0.18 1.59
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 52 of 61

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Roadway Departure Intersections

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Roadway Departure Intersections

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 53 of 61

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?

No

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

Roadway Departure Intersections

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Roadway Departure Intersections

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 54 of 61

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 55 of 61

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

IMPROVEMENT 

TYPE

PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

Geometric 

Improvements

Other Roadway Roadway - other 117.00 119.00 1.00 4.00 10.00 6.00 37.00 48.00 165.00 177.00 -6.12

Intersection 

Improvements

Other Interchange 

design

55.00 58.00 2.00 1.00 9.00 4.00 37.00 24.00 103.00 87.00 17.18

Signing Other Roadway signs 

and traffic control

77.00 39.00 2.00 4.00 11.00 10.00 27.00 24.00 117.00 77.00 -71.31

Guardrail Other Roadside 9.00 7.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 15.00 11.00 26.89

Fencing Other Roadside Fencing 15.00 7.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 21.00 8.00 1.76

Skid Treatment Other Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

17.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 25.00 6.00 119.11

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

MDT has a process to evaluate safety projects. At this time, the 2018 evaluation has not been completed and therefore it not referenced or included in this report. MDT's 2017 evaluation results are included. These are for a simple before 

/ after study using 5 years of before/after data. In addition, small projects with similar scope have been grouped together for analysis.

The challenge of completing a simple before/after study is that the 5-year before period may not be representative of the crashes that initiated the safety improvements or the data may be skewed due to the randomness of crashes on low 

volume roads.

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

No
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 56 of 61

Compliance Assessment

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

 05/01/2015 

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2015 To: 2020 

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

 2020 

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

The SHSP (CHSP) was signed off in May 2015 by MDT Agency Director Mike Tooley.

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) 100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 100 100

Route/Street Name (9) 100 100

Federal Aid/Route Type 

(21)

100 100

Rural/Urban Designation 

(20)

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 100 100 100 100

Begin Point Segment 

Descriptor (10)

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length (13) 100 100

Direction of Inventory (18) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100 100 100 100 100

Median Type (54) 100 100
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 57 of 61

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)

100 100 100 100

Average Annual Daily 

Traffic (79)

100 100 100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION

Unique Junction Identifier 

(120)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Road 1 Crossing Point 

(122)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Road 2 Crossing Point 

(123)

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

5 5

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road (79)

100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

100 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP

Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

100 100

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
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 58 of 61

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) 100 100

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):

100.00 100.00 88.13 88.13 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

*Based on Functional Classification

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.

MDT performed analyses to determine the number and location of the intersections on Non-local paved roads in 2017

MDT developed a plan and guidance documentation to collect the data element in 2017

MDT will collect the data element using in-house roadway images, Google Street View and field observation efforts - by 12/31/2019

MDT will qa/qc the collected data, format and load into our MIRE database - by 12/31/2020

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 Incapacitating Injury Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Report Form Instruction Manual Incapacitating Injury Yes Suspected Serious Injury - Any injury other 

than fatal which results in one or more of 

the following attributes:

Yes - Severe laceration resulting in exposure of 

underlying tissues/muscle/organ 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

Yes
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 59 of 61

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 * 

- Paralysis

Crash Database Incapacitating Injury Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Database Data Dictionary Incapacitating Injury Yes Determined by officer / No changes in 

crash database

Yes N/A 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?

Yes

Describe the purpose and outcomes of the State’s HSIP program assessment.

MDT's HSIP program assessment is currently underway. This assessment will result in the completion of the Montana Highway Safety Manual in December 2018.
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 60 of 61

Optional Attachments 

Program Structure:

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation: 

Compliance Assessment:
2018 Montana Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 61 of 61

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.