Page 1 of 42

WYOMING

2020 ANNUAL REPORT 
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 42

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

Program Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 6

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................21

Funds Programmed .........................................................................................................................21

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................23

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................26

General Highway Safety Trends ......................................................................................................26

Safety Performance Targets ............................................................................................................31

Applicability of Special Rules ...........................................................................................................33

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................34

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................34

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................34

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................37

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................38

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................41

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................42
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 42

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence 

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

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

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

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

schedules, lists, or other data. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 42

Executive Summary

WYDOT has an established an HSIP program with processes in place for the collection of data, 

implementation of projects, and annual reporting. Each fiscal year, historically, Wyoming obligates a majority of 

their HSIP apportionments, these funds are obligated on projects, which are eligible under the requirements of 

the program. WYDOT effectively manages the HSIP and their Highway Safety Program manager is 

responsible for both the behavioral and engineering aspects of the program, reporting to both NHTSA and 

FHWA. This overarching management of the program provides for a consistent approach to addressing 

highway safety needs throughout the State. 

The Highway Safety Program continues to be process driven and consistent when approaching HSIP projects 

and reporting requirements. WYDOT is currently inconsistent between the Highway Safety Program and other 

programs within the DOT. Safety elements are often included on projects that are funded through sources 

other than HSIP. WYDOT is working towards a standard process of coordination between programs to ensure 

that safety projects and safety project elements are being identified and prioritized before the funding is 

utilized. This ensures WYDOT efficiently and effectively utilizes the available funding on high value projects 

and project elements. 

Progress is being made through the Safety Innovation Team that consists of the Highway Safety Program, 

Traffic Program, Planning Program and Highway Development Program. The Highway Safety Program has 

established a new position to oversee Safety Management. 

WYDOT is also improving their process for the evaluation of safety benefits from projects and project elements 

that are implemented using HSIP funding. The Safety Management System provides a mechanism for 

quantifying the benefits of safety treatments which in turn allows for more effective utilization of HSIP funds on 

future HSIP projects and project elements. 

WYDOT Highway Safety continues to implement the HSIP through strategies, activities, and/or projects on 

public roads that are consistent with their data driven Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) with the goal of 

reducing fatal and serious injury crashes.
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 42

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 is based upon the goals and areas identified in the SHSP. HSIP eligibility policies focus on 

addressing the greatest safety needs within the State. Rural road safety needs are addressed through the 

HRRR program (which is a subset of the HSIP) managed through an agreement with the UW LTAP Center. 

The greatest safety needs are identified through the Safety Management System (SMS) which establishes a 

mechanism for the prioritization of HSIP funding.

WYDOT considers crash, roadway and traffic data when identifying potential HSIP projects. The SMS allows 

for various programs and Districts to optimize the use of safety funds on the State's roadways. The SMS 

allows WYDOT decision makers to identify the locations that warrant attention and then select the most cost 

effective safety treatments to propose at each potential project location.

WYDOT implements both spot location treatments for high-crash/high-risk locations as well as systemic safety 

improvement projects. Due to the rural nature of Wyoming the majority of HSIP projects address rural road 

safety needs. Safety strategies proven to be effective on rural roads are applied using HSIP funds.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Operations

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

 SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

 Other-Safety Management System

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

The local county roads and tribal roads are included in the HSIP by the Wyoming rural road safety program 

(WRRSP) administered by the UW LTAP center. The program reviews crash and roadway feature data to 

develop high risk road locations. The work done by the LTAP then includes assistance in putting projects 

together with the local jurisdictions to address the identified roadway safety needs. 

There are two MPO's in Wyoming and they are represented on the Safety Mangagement Committee that 

identifies emphasis areas for the SHSP. Projects are proposed and developed by the MPO's with regard to 

their own identified needs and assistance is provided in data and information.
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 42

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

 Districts/Regions

 Governors Highway Safety Office

 Local Aid Programs Office/Division

 Operations

 Planning

 Traffic Engineering/Safety

Describe coordination with internal partners.

Internal partners are asked to provide their expertise in the various areas that they represent. The coordination 

is required at many levels based upon the policies of WYDOT. Information is developed and disemminated by 

the Highway Safety Office. The information is used to make decisions regarding project programming and 

design by the other WYDOT programs responsible for that part of the project development and 

implementation.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

 Governors Highway Safety Office

 Local Government Agency 

 Local Technical Assistance Program

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

 Tribal Agency

Describe coordination with external partners.

WYDOT is structured with the WHP and Governors Rep for Highway Safety (NHTSA) within its organization. 

The Highway Safety Office chairs a Safety Management Committee that meets 3-4 times per year to discuss, 

investigate, plan and direct the numerous safety partners throughout the state on the SHSP and other higher 

level issues regarding Highway Safety.

Program areas and strategies are discussed to assist other safety partners in their efforts to reduce fatal and

serious injury crashes in the State.

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

elaborate. 

The Highway Safety Office has developed a Safety Management System (SMS) for WYDOT. The SMS is 

maturing rapidly and becoming the go to place for counter measures and projects that have higher benefit/cost 

ratios. The SMS is based upon the principles contained in the Highway Safety Manual and is very dependent 

upon data. The SMS development has been a long process but it is now driving the HSIP project selection 

process for WYDOT.

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes?

Yes
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 42

WYDOT has updated two operating policies regarding the Highway Safety Process and the HSIP Execution. 

OP 13-03 Highway Safety Process and OP 13-09 HSIP Execution have been approved by the Department and 

are in operation. 

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

 Horizontal Curve 

 HRRR

 Intersection 

 Local Safety 

 Low-Cost Spot Improvements 

 Median Barrier 

 Roadway Departure 

 Rural State Highways 

 Shoulder Improvement 

 Sign Replacement And Improvement 

 Other-Guardrail upgrade/replacement 

Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic

 Volume

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Probability of specific crash types

 Relative severity index

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?
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 42

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Competitive application process

 Other-Disrtict and Traffic operations input

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: HRRR

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 Other-local rural road safety program

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes

 Traffic

 Volume

 Population

 Median width

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

 Other-Site survey

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Other-Wyoming Rural Road Safety Program methodology

 Relative severity index

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

program?

Yes
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 42

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.

Separate methodology developed through the University of Wyoming LTAP Center

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Competitive application process

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic

 Volume

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

 Other-Rural Intersections and 

the type of traffic control present 

for example signalized or not

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Probability of specific crash types

 Relative severity index
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 42

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.

Rural off sytem intersections are studied independently from on system intersections. Urban 

intersections are also studied within the community that they exist. A statewide program does not 

currently exist.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Competitive application process

 Other-Disrtict and Traffic operations input

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 Other-HRRR subset of HSIP

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic

 Volume

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

 Other-A simple roadway drive 

through rating is used to identify 
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 42

roadway features needing 

improvement

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Excess proportions of specific crash types

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Probability of specific crash types

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

program?

Yes

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

No

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

The Wyoming Rural Road Safety Program (WRRSP) utilizes crash data and drive through surveys to 

rank and prioritize local road safety needs and assists in identifying projects to address needs.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Competitive application process

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 42

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic

 Volume

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

 Critical rate

 Excess proportions of specific crash types

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Probability of specific crash types

 Relative severity index

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Other-Disrtict and Traffic operations input

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 FHWA focused approach to safety
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 42

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic

 Volume

 Median width

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Excess proportions of specific crash types

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Probability of specific crash types

 Relative severity index

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 42

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic

 Volume

 Median width

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Excess proportions of specific crash types

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Probability of specific crash types

 Relative severity index

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.

The local roads utilize specific studies to determine project needs.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Other-District and Traffic operations input

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Rural State Highways

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 42

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic

 Volume

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Excess proportions of specific crash types

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Probability of specific crash types

 Relative severity index

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.

The local roads utilize specific studies to determine project needs.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Cost Effectiveness:1
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 42

Program: Shoulder Improvement

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic

 Volume

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Excess proportions of specific crash types

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Probability of specific crash types

 Relative severity index

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.

The local roads utilize specific studies to determine project needs.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 42

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 FHWA focused approach to safety

 Other-Systemic approach to Lane Departure/Roadway Departure

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic

 Volume

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

 Other-Age and condition of 

signs

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Excess proportions of specific crash types

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Other-Age of signs in combination with functional classification of the roadway is the main 

factor 

 Probability of specific crash types

 Relative severity index

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.

Sign replacement and improvement projects are done through the WRRSP methodology for 

Counties. For Urban communities these type of projects are done on a corridor basis.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 42

 Other-District and Traffic operatins input

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:1

Other-Relative age of signage and functional classification:2

Program: Other-Guardrail upgrade/replacement

Date of Program Methodology:7/23/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 Other-Systemic approach to Lane Departure/Roadway Departure

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes

 Traffic

 Volume

 Lane miles

 Median width

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Excess proportions of specific crash types

 Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

 Probability of specific crash types

 Relative severity index

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
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 42

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

Work with the LTAP center using the WRRSP

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 25

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

 Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

 Cable Median Barriers

 High friction surface treatment

 Horizontal curve signs

 Install/Improve Lighting

 Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

 Install/Improve Signing

 Pavement/Shoulder Widening

 Rumble Strips

 Upgrade Guard Rails

Although similar treatments use HSIP funds on a project by project basis, they are not considered part of our 

systemic treatment program.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

 Crash data analysis

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

 Engineering Study

 Road Safety Assessment

 SHSP/Local road safety plan

 Stakeholder input

 Other-WYDOT - Safety Management System

 Other-Use of Crash Information to identify over-represented crash types to be addressed
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 42

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

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

Projects included in the HSIP address information to drivers about roadway conditions primarily in winter 

weather. Also variable speed limits and other communication technologies are part of the HSIP.

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

Yes

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

HSM methodologies are part of the Safety Management System. The Safety Management System was 

developed based upon the HSM.
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 42

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Federal Fiscal Year

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $21,076,713 $23,565,064 111.81%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$400,000 $106,755 26.69%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$6,212,834 $5,819,198 93.66%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$5,946,628 $6,424,894 108.04%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $33,636,175 $35,915,911 106.78%

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

safety projects?

$600,000

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

$400,000

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

$0

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

$0

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
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 42

How much funding was transferred out of the HSIP to other core program areas during 

the reporting period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

$0

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

the future.

WYDOT doesn't have a problem obligating the HSIP funds.
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 42

General Listing of Projects

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

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

I806212 $0 $0 0 OTHER

N561043 $315000 $315000 0 INTERSECTIONS

0807007 $487015.27 $3246768.5 0 SYSTEMIC

HR19201 $104510 $104510 0 LOCAL 

COORDINATION 

EFFORTS

I254151 $271311.04 $1550348.8 0 ICY/SNOWY 

ROADS

I254151 $232552.32 0 COMMERCIAL 

MOTOR 

VEHICLES

I254151 $271311.04 0 SPEED/TOO 

FAST FOR 

CONDITIONS

B183016 $1705093.32 $1705093.32 0 SAFETY -

INTERSECTIONS

B193026 $603196 $603196 0 LANE & ROAD 

DEPARTURE 

CRASHES

HR19301 $40000 $40000 0 LOCAL 

COORDINATION 

EFFORTS

HR19302 $60000 $60000 0 LOCAL 

COORDINATION 

EFFORTS

HR19303 $110000 $110000 0 LOCAL 

COORDINATION 

EFFORTS

N104066 $11491100.27 $71819376.7 0 LANE & ROAD 

DEPARTURE 

CRASHES

0300039 $2485535.4 $8721176.86 0 SAFETY - RD 

DEPARTURE 

CRASHES
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 42

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

5349002 $3067962.7 $12271850.8 0 LANE & ROAD 

DEPARTURE 

CRASHES

B194023 $274175 $274175 0 SYSTEMIC

N433044 $1123689.37 $1321987.5 0 SAFETY - 

INTERSECTIONS

N433044 $198298.12 0 SAFETY - 

BICYCLE & 

PEDESTRIAN

P433041 $4630102.57 $10894359 0 LANE & ROAD 

DEPARTURE 

CRASHES

B145005 $1309706.64 $1309706.64 0 LANE & ROAD 

DEPARTURE 

CRASHES

B195009 $758963.5 $1517927 0 SYSTEMIC

CN10107 $110510 $110510 0 LOCAL 

COORDINATION 

EFFORTS

CN10108 $14815 $14815 0 LOCAL 

COORDINATION 

EFFORTS

HR19501 $110226 $110226 0 LOCAL 

COORDINATION 

EFFORTS

HR19502 $35003 $35003 0 LOCAL 

COORDINATION 

EFFORTS

N202069 $737816.02 $1475632.05 0 INTERSECTIONS

N203069 $1501243.55 $7506217.77 0 LANE & ROAD 

DEPARTURE 

CRASHES

N311097 $314078.54 $3140785.45 0 SAFETY - 

BICYCLE & 

PEDESTRIAN

N341113 $2667448 $5334896 0 LANE & ROAD 

DEPARTURE 

CRASHES

P142051 $141623.03 $809274.5 0 ICY/SNOWY 

ROADS
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 42

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

P142051 $121391.17 0 COMMERCIAL 

MOTOR 

VEHICLES

P142051 $141623.03 0 SPEED/TOO 

FAST FOR 

CONDITIONS

B199002 $852522 $852522 0 LANE & ROAD 

DEPARTURE 

CRASHES

B199003 $1689466.9 $1689466.9 0 INTERSECTIONS

B199005 $1137457 $1137457 0 SYSTEMIC

B199006 $933969 $933969 0 SYSTEMIC

B199007 $505725 $505725 0 LANE & ROAD 

DEPARTURE 

CRASHES

HRRR019 $200000 $200000 0 LOCAL 

COORDINATION 

EFFORTS

Drop down menus do not match Wyoming's reporting categories. More information could be provided if we are allowed to upload our own spreadsheet.
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 42

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fatalities 135 123 87 150 145 112 123 111 147

Serious Injuries 491 458 467 476 460 387 382 314 411

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.485 1.357 0.961 1.604 1.529 1.204 1.264 1.063 1.440

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

5.402 5.052 5.159 5.089 4.851 4.161 3.925 3.008 4.026

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

7 6 4 10 5 5 6 6 10

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

2,734 28 21 38 25 36 25 25 31
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 42

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 42

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 42

Describe fatality data source. 

Other

If Other Please describe

2019 data comes from State Database. All previous years come from FARS.

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

ownership. 

Year 2019

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

29.6 86.4 1.15 3.38

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

38 84 2.35 5.22

Rural Minor Arterial 10.6 27.2 1.95 5.04

Rural Minor Collector 3.8 18.6 0.46 2.38

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 42

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 Major Collector 16 41.8 2.52 6.48

Rural Local Road or 

Street

3.6 12 0.56 1.89

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

7.4 25.8 1.35 4.79

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0 0.6 0 5.02

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

6.8 38.6 0.88 5.13

Urban Minor Arterial 3 18.4 0.66 4.06

Urban Minor Collector

Urban Major Collector

Urban Local Road or 

Street

2.8 14.2 0.46 2.34
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 42

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

99.6 329

County Highway 

Agency

8.4 32.8

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

Indian Tribe Nation

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2021 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:128.0

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals.
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 42

The Safety Management System (SMS) Committee analyzes the 5 and 10 year running averages along with 

recent trends to determine the new performance targets. The SMS Committee is the coordinating body for the 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

Number of Serious Injuries:450.0

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

The Safety Management System (SMS) Committee analyzes the 5 and 10 year running averages along with 

recent trends to determine the new performance targets. The SMS Committee is the coordinating body for the 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

Fatality Rate:1.350

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

The Safety Management System (SMS) Committee analyzes the 5 and 10 year running averages along with 

recent trends to determine the new performance targets. The SMS Committee is the coordinating body for the 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

Serious Injury Rate:4.700

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

The Safety Management System (SMS) Committee analyzes the 5 and 10 year running averages along with 

recent trends to determine the new performance targets. The SMS Committee is the coordinating body for the 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:29.0

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

The Safety Management System (SMS) Committee analyzes the 5 and 10 year running averages along with 

recent trends to determine the new performance targets. The SMS Committee is the coordinating body for the 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

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

safety performance targets. 

Coordination meetings were held with the two MPO's in the State regarding the establishment of targets for the 

State. The MPO's were presented with the established targets at a formal meeting. Concurrence with the 

overall State targets was requested from both MPO's.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2019 Safety Performance Targets (based 

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

reasons for differences in the actual outcomes and targets.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES TARGETS ACTUALS

Number of Fatalities 130.0 127.6
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 42

Number of Serious Injuries 470.0 390.8

Fatality Rate 1.400 1.300

Serious Injury Rate 5.440 3.994

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

30.0 28.2

The state is on target to meet all performance measures for 2019.

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

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

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

14 23 25 28 23 27 40

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

80 73 86 74 71 54 97
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 42

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

 Other-Funding utilized for Safety related treatments

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

the State's program level evaluations.

The state analyzes the 5 and 10 year running averages of fatalities and serious injuries along with recent 

trends to determine the effectiveness of safety treatments.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program?

 HSIP Obligations

 Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

 More systemic programs

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2019

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury 

Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Lane Departure 105 294 1.07 3.01

Roadway Departure 84 228.4 0.86 2.33

Intersections 8.2 48.8 0.09 0.5

Pedestrians 6.4 16.8 0.06 0.17

Bicyclists 0.2 6.2 0 0.06

Older Drivers 22.2 59.6 0.22 0.61

Motorcyclists 19.4 65 0.2 0.67

Work Zones 3.6 7.2 0.04 0.07
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 42

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 42

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 42

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)

Test
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 42

Compliance Assessment

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

 07/10/2017

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2017 To: 2022

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

 2022

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

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

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12) [12]

100 96 100 90 100 71

Route Number (8) 

[8]

100 96

Route/Street Name 

(9) [9]

100 96

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21) [21]

100 96

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20) [20]

100 96 100 90

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100 96 100 90

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 96 100 90 100 71

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 96 100 90 100 71

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 96

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 96

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 96 100 90 100 71
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 42

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

Median Type (54) 

[55]

100 96

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 96

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 96

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 96 100 90

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 25 100 25

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 25

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 96 100 90 100 71

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

100

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

100

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

100

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

100 100
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 42

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201) [191]

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

50 100

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

50 100

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

50 100

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

50 100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

50 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

50 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

50 100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 100.00 88.11 100.00 0.00 68.18 100.00 100.00 82.78 100.00 71.00

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

With the large amounts of federal lands (paved and un-paved roadways) in Wyoming, it is required that the Federal Government agencies provide their roadway information to WYDOT so it can be included. 

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

The state is working with the local governments to obtain all required MIRE fundamental data elements. In order to meet the requirements on federal lands, the federal government agencies need to provide their roadway information to 

WYDOT.
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 42

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

OPR 13-09_HSIP_FINAL.pdf

Final OPR 13-03_Highway Safety Process and Project Delivery.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2020 Wyoming Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 42

Glossary

5 year rolling average: means the average of five individuals, consecutive annual points of data 

(e.g. annual fatality rate).

Emphasis area: means a highway safety priority in a State’s SHSP, identified through a data-driven, 

collaborative process.

Highway safety improvement project: means strategies, activities and projects on a public road 

that are consistent with a State strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous 

road location or feature or addresses a highway safety problem.

HMVMT: means hundred million vehicle miles traveled.

Non-infrastructure projects: are projects that do not result in construction. Examples of noninfrastructure projects include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities, 

improvements in the collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement 

activities.

Older driver special rule: applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and 

pedestrians over the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2-year period for which 

data are available, as defined in the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Interim Guidance 

dated February 13, 2013.

Performance measure: means indicators that enable decision-makers and other stakeholders to 

monitor changes in system condition and performance against established visions, goals, and 

objectives.

Programmed funds: mean those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP) to be expended on highway safety improvement projects.

Roadway Functional Classification: means the process by which streets and highways are 

grouped into classes, or systems, according to the character of service they are intended to provide.

Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP): means a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary plan, based on 

safety data developed by a State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148.

Systematic: refers to an approach where an agency deploys countermeasures at all locations across 

a system.

Systemic safety improvement: means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high 

risk roadway features that are correlated with specific severe crash types.

Transfer: means, in accordance with provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, a State may transfer from an 

apportionment under section 104(b) not to exceed 50 percent of the amount apportioned for the fiscal 

year to any other apportionment of the State under that section.