SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 1 OCTOBER 2016

SHSP PROCESS APPROVAL CHECKLIST

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) statute (23 U.S.C. 148) requires States to have an updated, approved Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). A State’s SHSP update process will be approved if: (1) the SHSP is consistent with section 148(d) and 

148(a)(11); and (2) the process the State used to update the SHSP is consistent with the requirements of section 148. (23 U.S.C. 

148(d)(2)(B)). The updated SHSP should be submitted to the FHWA Division Administrator (23 U.S.C. 148 (d)(2)(A)(ii)). The Division 

Administrator will notify the State that the updated SHSP process has been reviewed and approved. 

This SHSP Process Approval Checklist is a tool to help Division Offices assess the process and completeness of a State’s SHSP update. It 

is meant for FHWA internal use and recordkeeping. The factors outlined represent the required process elements of a State-developed 

SHSP as outlined in the HSIP statute (23 U.S.C. 148) and in the implementing regulations (23 CFR Part 924). The SHSP Guidance and 

HSIP Regulation (found at: http://safetytest.fhwa.dot.gov/legislationandpolicy/fast/) include additional information on these elements 

and should be used as reference documents for this checklist. 

This checklist consists of three columns: 

A. SHSP Requirements: Column A lists the key SHSP requirements, by topic area, for the SHSP and the specific reference in the 

HSIP statute or regulation.

B. Indicators: Column B provides indicators that the State meets the requirement.

C. Requirement Status: Column C provides a place for the Division Office to document the determination for each requirement 

(meets or does not meet) and to document supporting information for whether the State has satisfied or not satisfied the 

requirement.

There is also a space to indicate the period (years) covered by this SHSP and the approval date. The approval date is the date the 

Governor, or Governor’s designee signs/approves the SHSP. This date determines the due date for the next SHSP update, which is no 

later than 5 years from the date of the previous approved version. 

Period Covered by SHSP: _____________________________________________________________

SHSP Approval Date: _____________________________________________________________

Next SHSP due no later than (5 years from approval date): ___________________________________________
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 2 OCTOBER 2016

A. SHSP REQUIREMENTS B. INDICATORS THAT STATE MEETS 

REQUIREMENTS

C. REQUIREMENT STATUS 

CONSULTATION

23 U.S.C. 148(a)(11); 23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(ii)

An SHSP update shall... 

Be developed by the State DOT in consultation with 

safety stakeholders. 

23 U.S.C. 148(a)(11)(A); 23 CFR 924.3

Safety stakeholder means, but is not limited to: 

• A highway safety representative of the 

Governor of the State;

• Regional transportation planning organizations 

and metropolitan planning organizations, if any;

• Representatives of major modes of 

transportation;

• State and local traffic enforcement officials;

• A highway-rail grade crossing safety 

representative of the Governor of the State;

• Representatives conducting a motor carrier 

safety program under section 31102, 31106, or 

31309 of title 49;

• Motor vehicle administration agencies; 

• County transportation officials; 

• State representatives of non-motorized users; 

and

• Other Federal, State, tribal, and local safety 

stakeholders.

 The State conferred with stakeholders early in the 

SHSP update process, considered their input prior to 

decision making, and routinely informed them about 

actions taken regarding SHSP development.

 There was local and tribal involvement.

 Stakeholders from a variety of disciplines were 

involved and representatives from all “4 E’s” 

(engineering, enforcement, education and EMS) 

participated in the development of the SHSP. 

 Stakeholders’ concerns were given adequate 

consideration.

 If a stakeholder was not consulted during the SHSP 

update process, is there a satisfactory explanation 

for its absence.

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

DATA

23 U.S.C. 148(d)(1)(B); 23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(vi)

An SHSP update shall ...

 The State has used the best available safety data to 

identify critical highway safety problems (i.e., 

 MEETS REQUIREMENT
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 3 OCTOBER 2016

A. SHSP REQUIREMENTS B. INDICATORS THAT STATE MEETS 

REQUIREMENTS

C. REQUIREMENT STATUS 

Analyze and make effective use of safety data to 

address safety problems and opportunities on all 

public roads and for all road users.

emphasis areas) and safety improvement 

opportunities on all public roads. 

o Safety data means crash (e.g., fatality and 

serious injury), roadway, and traffic data on 

a public road, and, includes, in the case of a 

railway-highway grade crossing, the 

characteristics of highway and train traffic, 

licensing, and vehicle data. 

 Safety analysis tools, (e.g., the HSM SafetyAnalyst, 

IHSDM) and methods (e.g., trend analyses, 

benefit/cost analysis) were used to help identify

safety issues and to determine strategies for 

improvements.

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

23 U.S.C. 148 (a)(11)(D)

An SHSP update shall...

Consider the safety needs of, and high-fatality 

segments of, all public roads including non-Stateowned public roads and roads on tribal land.

 SHSP emphasis areas and strategies address State 

and non-State-owned public roads and roads on 

tribal land, when applicable.

 The State engaged local and tribal agencies in the 

SHSP update process.

 The data analysis included data for non-Stateowned roads and roads on tribal land. 

 There are specific emphasis areas or strategies 

targeting the safety needs of non-State-owned 

roads and roads on tribal land. If not, did the data 

warrant the exclusion?

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(vii)

An SHSP update shall...

Identify key emphasis areas and strategies that 

have the greatest potential to reduce highway 

fatalities and serious injuries and focus resources on 

areas of greatest need.

 The SHSP includes emphasis areas and strategies 

based on data with the greatest potential to reduce 

highway fatalities and serious injuries.

 High priority was given to those strategies that can 

significantly reduce roadway fatalities and serious 

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 4 OCTOBER 2016

A. SHSP REQUIREMENTS B. INDICATORS THAT STATE MEETS 

REQUIREMENTS

C. REQUIREMENT STATUS 

injuries in the SHSP emphasis areas.

 The State considered systemic improvements and 

low-cost countermeasures.

23 U.S.C. 148 (d)(1)(B)

An SHSP update shall...

Take into consideration, with respect to updated 

strategic highway safety plans—

• the fin dings of road safety audits

• the locations of fatalities and serious injuries

• the locations that do not have an empirical 

history of fatalities and serious injuries, but 

possess risk factors for potential crashes

• rural roads, including all public roads, 

commensurate with fatality data

• motor vehicle crashes that include fatalities 

or serious injuries to pedestrians and 

bicyclists

• the cost-effectiveness of improvements

• improvements to rail-highway grade 

crossings

• safety on all public roads, including nonState-owned public roads and roads on 

tribal land.

 A variety of data (as listed in column A) and safety 

programs were analyzed, reviewed and considered 

when determining SHSP Emphasis Areas and 

strategies in the updated SHSP. 

Below are some examples:

 The State considered the findings of road safety 

audits (RSA). RSA findings should be analyzed in the 

aggregate to identify common countermeasure 

recommendations for systemic improvements.

 The State used its safety data systems to identify 

hazardous locations, sections, and elements that are 

a danger to all road users, including vehicle 

occupants and non-occupant users of the roadway 

(e.g., pedestrians and bicyclists), and to identify 

fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads by 

location.

 The State considered the systemic approach in the 

SHSP development process, e.g., the State 

identified/considered low cost countermeasures that 

can be deployed widely across the system. 

 The State conducted a benefit/cost analysis 

associated with countermeasures (e.g., crash 

reduction, etc.), expressed in monetary terms, to the 

cost of implementing the countermeasures, and to 

help it prioritize countermeasures or projects and 

optimize the return on investment.

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 5 OCTOBER 2016

A. SHSP REQUIREMENTS B. INDICATORS THAT STATE MEETS 

REQUIREMENTS

C. REQUIREMENT STATUS 

 The State considered the relative risk of fatalities 

and serious injuries at railway-highway grade 

crossings compared to other high risk areas of 

roadway safety in the State. States could 

accomplish this by evaluating the number and rates 

of fatalities and serious injuries at railway-highway 

grade crossings compared to other potential 

emphasis areas or priority areas. In addition, when 

evaluating the risks at crossings, States should review 

the inventory and collision data (inventory data 

include the location of the crossing, volumes of 

highway and train traffic over the crossing, and 

physical elements of the crossing).

 The State coordinated its data analysis with other 

agencies (within State, local, and tribal jurisdictions).

 The State considered whether motor vehicle related 

bicycle or pedestrian fatalities or serious injuries 

have increased; if so, an emphasis area or strategy 

to address the problem could be included in the 

SHSP.

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(v) 

An SHSP update shall ...

Adopt performance-based goals that:

• Are consistent with safety performance measures 

established by FHWA in accordance with 23 

U.S.C. 150; and

• Are coordinated with other State highway 

safety programs

 The SHSP goals are consistent with 23 U.S.C. 150 

and are based on analysis of crash and other safety 

data.

 The SHSP includes multi-year objectives, which 

encourages monitoring of the status and progress of 

SHSP implementation efforts.

 The SHSP objectives are SMART (specific, 

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 6 OCTOBER 2016

A. SHSP REQUIREMENTS B. INDICATORS THAT STATE MEETS 

REQUIREMENTS

C. REQUIREMENT STATUS 

measurable, action-oriented, reasonable and time 

bound).

 The State involved the State Highway Safety Office 

and other relevant agencies in the development of 

SHSP goals and objectives to create consistency 

among safety plans and programs.

 The State considered how the goals and objectives 

can be adopted by other agencies.

MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH AND COORDINATION

23 U.S.C. 148(a)(11)(C); 23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(viii)

An SHSP update shall ...

Address engineering, management, operations, 

education, enforcement, and emergency services 

elements of highway safety as key features when 

determining SHSP strategies.

 The State considered the highway safety elements of 

engineering, education, enforcement and emergency 

medical services (the 4 Es) when determining 

strategies to address SHSP emphasis areas.

 The State has multidisciplinary, “4 E”, representation 

on SHSP committees and emphasis area teams. 

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

23 U.S.C. 148(a)(11)(E); 23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(ix)

An SHSP update shall...

Consider the results of State, regional, local, and 

tribal transportation and highway safety planning 

processes and demonstrate mutual consultation 

among partners in the development of transportation 

safety plans.

 The State coordinated with other planning processes, 

including but not limited to, the State’s Highway 

Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), Highway 

Safety Plan (HSP), Commercial Vehicle Safety Plan 

(CVSP), Statewide Transportation Plan, Metropolitan 

Transportation Plans, local road safety plans, tribal 

safety plans, etc.

 There is a process to align high level goals, 

performance measures, strategies and objectives 

among the plans. 

 The State considered how the SHSP emphasis areas 

compare with the priorities of the other plans or 

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 7 OCTOBER 2016

A. SHSP REQUIREMENTS B. INDICATORS THAT STATE MEETS 

REQUIREMENTS

C. REQUIREMENT STATUS 

processes.

 The State considered how the other plans and 

processes will play a role in implementing the SHSP.

23 U.S.C. 148 (a)(11)(H); 23 CFR 924.9(c)

The SHSP must be consistent with 23 U.S.C. 135(g), 

which pertains to the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP).

 Consistency with 23 U.S.C. 135(g) is demonstrated, 

for example, by showing that the SHSP and STIP 

were developed cooperatively by the same 

planning partners.

 The State considered how the emphasis areas and 

strategies in the SHSP will be implemented through 

the statewide transportation planning and 

programming process. 

 The State plans to implement the SHSP through the 

HSIP.

 There is a process in place to ensure that HSIP 

projects identified in the STIP are consistent with and 

address SHSP priorities.

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(x)

An SHSP update shall ...

Provide strategic direction for other State and 

local/tribal transportation plans, such as the HSIP, 

the Highway Safety Plan, and the Commercial 

Vehicle Safety Plan.

 State, local and tribal entities were actively involved 

in the SHSP update process and the development of 

the plans goals, priorities and strategies.

 Other plans and programs will incorporate the 

goals, emphasis areas, and strategies of the SHSP as 

appropriate.

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

IMPLEMENTATION

23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(xi)

An SHSP update shall ...

Describe the process and potential resources for 

implementing strategies in the emphasis areas. 

 The SHSP references how the strategies will be 

implemented, such as through annual safety plans 

and programs (e.g., the HSP, CVSP, HSIP), regional 

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 8 OCTOBER 2016

A. SHSP REQUIREMENTS B. INDICATORS THAT STATE MEETS 

REQUIREMENTS

C. REQUIREMENT STATUS 

safety coalitions, local agencies, etc.

 The SHSP references resources to help implement the 

SHSP; this can include the agency or champion that 

will implement the strategy and/or the funding 

source that may be considered for implementing the 

strategy. 

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

23 CFR 924.11 (c)

The SHSP update shall include or be accompanied 

by actions that address how the SHSP emphasis area 

strategies will be implemented.

 The State developed action steps for the strategies 

in the SHSP, which are included as an appendix or in 

a supplemental document (such as an emphasis area 

action or implementation plan).

 The action steps or plans include the agency and/or 

person that will champion implementation of the 

action, the resources and timeframe for completion.

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

EVALUATION

23 CFR 924.13 (a)(2)

The HSIP evaluation process shall include...

An evaluation of the SHSP as part of the regularly 

recurring update process to:

• Confirm the validity of the emphasis areas and 

strategies based on analysis of current safety 

data; and

• Identify issues related to the SHSP’s process, 

implementation, and progress that should be 

considered during each subsequent SHSP 

update.

 The State conducted a review of current data to 

determine the appropriate emphasis areas. The 

data analysis either confirmed the validity of the 

emphasis areas or they were modified based on the 

results.

 The State evaluated its progress in meeting SHSP 

goals and objectives (e.g., reductions in the number 

and rate of crashes, fatalities and serious injuries in 

the SHSP’s emphasis areas).

 Strategies and actions were reviewed to determine 

their effectiveness, to help the State determine if it

should modify strategies in the SHSP update. For 

example, project level evaluations can be consulted 

to see if it had the desired impact.

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 9 OCTOBER 2016

A. SHSP REQUIREMENTS B. INDICATORS THAT STATE MEETS 

REQUIREMENTS

C. REQUIREMENT STATUS 

 New research and data were considered in strategy 

selection.

 During the development of the SHSP update, 

attention was given to what will be measured and 

how progress will be determined for the period of

the current SHSP.

 The State has in place mechanisms for regularly 

tracking SHSP implementation and monitoring 

progress.

 An SHSP evaluation is planned as part of the State’s 

next SHSP update.

 The State’s evaluation process is documented in the 

SHSP update.

SPECIAL RULES

23 U.S.C. 148 (a)(1)

HIGH RISK RURAL ROAD - The term ‘high risk rural 

road’ means any roadway functionally classified as 

a rural major or minor collector or a rural local road 

with significant safety risks, as defined by a State in 

accordance with an updated State strategic 

highway safety plan.

 The updated SHSP includes the State’s definition of 

“High Risk Rural Road." This must be included even if 

the State is not subject to the special rule.

GUIDANCE LINK

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

23 U.S.C. 148 (g)(2)

OLDER DRIVERS AND PEDESTRIANS - If traffic 

fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers 

 If the State meets the special rule, the SHSP update 

includes strategies to address the increases in older 

driver and pedestrian traffic fatalities and serious 

 MEETS REQUIREMENT
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 10 OCTOBER 2016

A. SHSP REQUIREMENTS B. INDICATORS THAT STATE MEETS 

REQUIREMENTS

C. REQUIREMENT STATUS 

and pedestrians over the age of 65 in a State 

increases during the most recent 2-year period for 

which data are available, that State shall be 

required to include, in the subsequent Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan of the State, strategies to 

address the increases in those rates, taking into 

account the recommendations included in the 

publication of the Federal Highway Administration 

entitled ‘Highway Design Handbook for Older 

Drivers and Pedestrians’ (FHWA-RD-01-103) dated 

May 2001, or as subsequently revised.

injuries, if applicable.

GUIDANCE LINK

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

DESCRIPTION OF UPDATE PROCESS

23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(iii) 

An SHSP update shall...

Provide a detailed description of the update 

process. 

The updated SHSP includes a detailed description of the 

SHSP update process. The description includes a 

discussion of:

 Consultation

 Coordination

 Data-driven emphasis areas and strategies

 Performance-based approach

 Strategy selection

 Implementation and evaluation process

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

ADMINISTRATIVE

23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(i) 

An SHSP update shall...

Be completed no later than 5 years from the date of 

the previous approved version.

 The SHSP update was completed within 5 years from 

the date of the previous approved version. 

 MEETS REQUIREMENT

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

23 U.S.C. 148(a)(11)(G); 23 CFR 924.9 (a)(3)(iv) 

An SHSP update shall...

 SHSP is signed by the Governor or a responsible 

State agency designated by the Governor.

 MEETS REQUIREMENT
SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Page | 11 OCTOBER 2016

A. SHSP REQUIREMENTS B. INDICATORS THAT STATE MEETS 

REQUIREMENTS

C. REQUIREMENT STATUS 

Be approved by the Governor of the State or a 

responsible State agency official that is delegated

by the Governor.

o Signature could be in SHSP document (e.g., 

in cover letter) or in a transmittal letter.

 DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENT

The State’s SHSP update process is consistent with the requirements of section 148(a)(11) and 148(d) of title 23, 

United States Code, and with the HSIP implementing regulations at 23 CFR Part 924, and the State used such 

process to update the SHSP.

The State’s SHSP Update Process is:  APPROVED  DISAPPROVED

Division Office Signature: ______________________________ DATE:_________

FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS: