Page 1 of 49

CALIFORNIA 

2020 ANNUAL REPORT 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 49

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................18

Funds Programmed .........................................................................................................................18

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................21

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................29

General Highway Safety Trends ......................................................................................................29

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................35

Applicability of Special Rules ...........................................................................................................36

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................38

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................38

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................39

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................43

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................44

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................48

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................49
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 49

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 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 49

Executive Summary

The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act or “MAP-21” (Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405), was 

signed into law July 6, 2012, and continued the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) as a core 

program under title 23 United States Code section 148 to reduce fatalities and injuries on all public roadways. 

Title 23 United States Code section 148(h) requires each state to submit an annual report to the Federal 

Highway Administration (FHWA) regarding its HSIP implementation and effectiveness and title 23 Code of 

Federal Regulations sections 924.15(a)(1) and 924.15(a)(2) specify that the report be submitted no later than 

August 31 of each year. This annual report describes the progress being made to implement projects and the 

status of program evaluations for the HSIP as described in Title 23 United States Code section 148, and for 

High-Risk Rural Roads (HR3) (23 U.S.C. § 148(g)). The Railway-Highway Crossings (23 U.S.C. § 130(g)) 

report is submitted to FHWA directly by the California Public Utility Commission as a separate report. Under 

the “MAP-21” (Pub. L. 112-141, July 6, 2012; 126 Stat. 405), the High-Risk Rural Roads program was merged 

into the HSIP for safety improvements on public rural roadways that meet the functional classification 

requirements of title 23 United States Code section 148(a)(1). In addition to the above, in accordance with title 

23 United States Code section 164 repeat intoxicated transfer funds, approximately $60.79 million was 

obligated for alcohol impaired driving countermeasures. Caltrans' Division of Safety Programs provided 

information on the State Highway System (SHS) for this report, and Caltrans' Division of Local Assistance 

(DLA) for local roads. The Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act was signed into law on 

December 4, 2015 and continued the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) with only minor changes. 

The FAST Act confirmed the overall purpose of this program is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic 

fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads through the implementation of infrastructure-related highway 

safety improvements. 

Caltrans recently formed a new Traffic Safety Division to lead and champion the new traffic safety paradigm 

throughout Caltrans. The historical processes and procedures of the State’s HSIP are a key component of 

implementing new safety strategies and Caltrans will use this HSIP annual report to identify opportunities to 

improve the HSIP process.

The Office of Safety Programs is now under the Direction of the Chief Safety Officer. Caltrans new Strategic 

Management Plan Goal 1 will focus exclusively on safety. The Office of Safety Programs will support the 

implementation plan for the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) and Zero Traffic Fatalities Task 

Force recommendations.

HSIP projects are the Department’s highest priority. A pilot program was introduced with the mission to deliver 

safety projects in the shortest timeframe possible by expediting the programming and delivery of safety 

improvement projects. To continue the goal of protecting the safety of all road users, particularly our most 

vulnerable road users such as bicyclists and pedestrians, we are incorporating equity as we work towards zero 

deaths.

The HSIP and Asset Management branches are working together to identify, collect and manage datasets. 

Integrating safety datasets are integral to developing a robust safety program and fundamental to making 

informed decisions about safety strategies and investments. Consultant services are necessary to develop a 

program to integrate proactive safety (systemic) into asset management and meet the goals of the California 

Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and Federal HSIP requirements. Consultant expertise is needed to 

take the state’s inventory of safety assets and implement cutting-edge identification, tracking, management 

and integration of safety datasets that can be used to incorporate safety into asset management projects. In 

addition, the maintenance and collection of roadway infrastructure data will be an on-going process because of 

new construction, roadway repair and rehabilitation or relinquishments, and processes need to be established 

for updating the inventory and asset condition as Caltrans moves forward. Working with Districts 3 in Marysville 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 49

and 4 in Oakland, CHP and local partners, the HSIP branch conducted three Road Safety Audits (RSA) on 

Routes 74, 49 and 17.

Caltrans uses collision data from California Highway Patrol’s SWITRS (Statewide Integrated Traffic Record 

System) database. Collision data for the state highway system is imported into the Transportation System 

Network (TSN) Caltrans database, which includes volume and inventory data.

Caltrans has been working with 400 stakeholders from 170 public & private agencies including tribes, the local 

technical assistance program, and universities to develop the CA-SHSP. Projects developed are consistent 

with SHSP strategies. Caltrans’ DLA with local agencies are involved in planning projects on local roads. 

SB137 allows local agencies to expedite the delivery of safety projects on local roads by exchanging federal 

dollars for state dollar on a one for one ratio. The mission is to deliver safety projects in the shortest timeframe 

possible by expediting the program and delivery of safety improvement projects on local roads. The overall 

goal is to achieve significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries by reducing the time it takes to 

plan and implement safety projects to the next phase of project development.

California started work on their SHSP update in July of 2018 and was signed January 21, 2020. Additional 

stakeholders and agencies will be asked to participate, which in turn will make for better HSIP projects and 

help to reduce fatal and serious injuries on all roads.

California did not meet or make significant progress on four out of the five 2018 safety performance targets. 

Therefore, it was required to develop a HSIP Implementation Plan. During the development of the HSIP 

Implementation Plan, the State engaged both internal and external stakeholders to determine program needs 

and potential solutions. The stakeholder outreach contained two different components: internal interviews of 

Caltrans staff associated with implementation of the HSIP and an internal/external online stakeholder survey. 

The HSIP Implementation Plan has identified an opportunity to develop a strategic stakeholder engagement 

and communications strategy for the implementation of the SHSP, HSIP, and target setting to increase local 

and regional collaboration and participation in the process. This strategy will be developed through the 

collaborative process of the oversight structure of the SHSP and will be used to ensure that local and regional 

input is received at key decision points in the process related to target setting, HSIP and SHSP 

implementation.

The Executive Leadership agreed to institutionalize the following four guiding principles into the 

Implementation Plan to make the SHSP more reflective of new thought and safety strategies: Integrate Equity, 

Implement Safe System Approach, Double Down on What Works, and Accelerate Advanced Technology. 

Under the Integrate Equity principle, Caltrans proposes to increase participation from people and agencies that 

represent traditionally underserved populations to ensure outreach activities include or target those 

populations.

Caltrans continues with its efforts to meet MIRE FDE requirements by September 30, 2026. Caltrans has 

executed a contract that will aid in getting MIRE FDE on all non-state public roads.
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 49

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 Division of Safety Programs administers the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) for the state 

highway system and The Division of Local Assistance administers the HSIP funds for local and tribal roads.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-Division of Safety Programs and Division of Local Assistance

Recently a new Safety Programs Division has been created under Director’s Office. State HSIP staff were 

relocated under the Division of Safety Programs

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

 Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process

 SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

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

The Caltrans Division of Local Assistance (DLA) uses an HSIP application benefit-cost tool to provide a 

consistent, data-driven methodology for ranking local roadway (non-State owned and operated) project 

applications on a statewide basis. This tool, known as HSIP Analyzer, was developed by DLA. DLA also 

provides the Local Roadway Safety Manual for California local road owners and directly incorporates UC 

Berkeley’s Transportation Injury Mapping System website to assist applicants applying for local HSIP funds. 

These tools and resources encourage local agencies to proactively analyze their roadway networks for the 

highest crash locations to develop and submit applications with the greatest chance of reducing fatalities and 

serious injuries using low cost proven systemic countermeasures. The DLA HSIP application process is also 

open and available to the tribes that would like to submit an application for HSIP funds. DLA also provides set 

aside funding for low cost systemic countermeasures where collisions are not required as part of the 

application. Funding is limited for each set aside and one application for each set aside per agency.

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

 Design
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 49

 Districts/Regions

 Local Aid Programs Office/Division

 Operations

 Planning

 Traffic Engineering/Safety

 Other-Research Innovation and system performance

Describe coordination with internal partners.

Due to the Traffic Collisions Record (TCR) backlog reduction efforts, Caltrans switched the network screening 

from quarterly to annually to allow us to investigate more recent collisions in a more timely manner. This 

change did not omit any collisions from this network screening process

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

 Academia/University

 FHWA

 Governors Highway Safety Office

 Law Enforcement Agency

 Local Government Agency 

 Local Technical Assistance Program

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

 Tribal Agency

 Other-Emergency Response Team

Describe coordination with external partners.

Meeting over the summer of 2020, state transportation leaders decided that bringing down the number of 

deaths and serious injuries on public roadways required a pivot to be even bolder and have more focused 

efforts than what was outlined in the recently adopted SHSP. The group agreed to institutionalize the following 

guiding principles into the plan, to make the SHSP more reflective of new thought and safety strategies: 

integrate equity, Implement Safe System Approach, Double down on what works, and accelerate advanced 

technology. Under integrate equity principle, Caltrans proposes to increase participation from persons or 

agencies that represent traditionally underserved populations and ensure outreach activities include or target 

those populations.

As part of the HSIP Implementation Plan 2020, the State engaged both internal and external stakeholders to 

determine program needs and potential solutions. The stakeholder outreach contained two different 

components: internal interviews of Caltrans staff associated with implementation of the HSIP and an 

internal/external online stakeholder survey. Also, HSIP Implementation plan has identified an opportunity to 

develop a strategic stakeholder engagement and communications strategy for the implementation of the 

SHSP, HSIP, and target setting to increase local and regional collaboration and participation in the process. 

This strategy will be developed through the collaborative process of the oversight structure of the SHSP, and 

will be used to ensure that local and regional input is received at key decision points in the process related to 

target setting, HSIP and SHSP implementation.

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

elaborate. 

Recently a new Safety Programs Division has been created under Director’s Office. State HSIP staff were 

relocated under the Division of Safety Programs.
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 49

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes?

Yes

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

 Bicycle Safety

 HSIP (no subprograms)

 Local Safety

 Pedestrian Safety

 Roadway Departure

 Wrong Way Driving

 Other-Systemic Wrong Way

 Other-Crossover Collision Monitoring Program

The Median Barrier is combined with the 2 and 3 lane cross Centerline collisions monitoring program to form 

the newly created -Crossover Collision Monitoring Program.

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology:4/20/2018

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 Other-High Collision Concentration Location

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  Volume

 Lane miles  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

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

program?

No
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 49

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Competitive application process

 Other-compete with all projects and funding is set aside.

 Other-Data and Criteria

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

Other-meet minimum criteria:100

On the California State Highway System, if a proposed project meets data requirements and approved 

countermeasures, it will be funded from the set-aside funding. DLA does not have a bicycle safety 

improvement monitoring program; however, it has bicycle safety improvement projects that compete with all 

the B/C projects as well as set-aside funding. 

Program: HSIP (no subprograms)

Date of Program Methodology:6/20/2017

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  Volume

 Lane miles

 Median width

 Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

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

program?

No
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 49

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Competitive application process

 Other-meet minimum criteria

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

Other-meet minimum criteria:100

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology:1/1/2015

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Competes with all other safety projects and set-aside funding

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

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

program?

Yes

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

No

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

Local Agencies take the lead in identifying projects within their own juristrictions 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 49

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).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:1

Available funding:2

Other-set asides:1

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology:7/20/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 Other-High Collision Concentration Location

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-State is set-aside. DLA both competes with all projects and set-aside.

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Volume

 Lane miles  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

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

program?

No

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

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

Page 12 of 49

 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).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Other-meet minimum criteria:100

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology:11/15/2004

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 

 Other-see the optional 

description

 Volume

 Lane miles

 Other-Fatal and injury crashes 

on Wet Pavement 

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

 Other-Fatal and injury crashes 

resulting in Overturned Vehicle 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

 Other-see the optional description for this question

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-see the optional description for this question
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 49

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

Other-100% top 25% of run-off-road concentration locations with higher scores +100% of identified 

long segments selected based on collision frequency, roadway type, geometric characteristics and 

traffic volume. :100

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Wrong Way Driving

Date of Program Methodology:1/15/1985

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  Volume

 Lane miles  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

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

program?

No

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

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. 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 49

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

Other-crash frequency and crash rate:100

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Other-Systemic Wrong Way

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2020

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  Volume

 Lane miles  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Other-Wrong Way Notification

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-All projects meeting established criteria can be programmed.

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 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 49

Program: Other-Crossover Collision Monitoring Program

Date of Program Methodology:1/15/1985

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 

 Fatal crashes only  Volume

 Lane miles  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Other-All projects meeting established criteria can be programmed

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).

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements? 

 73

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

 Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal 

 Cable Median Barriers 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 49

 Clear Zone Improvements

 High friction surface treatment

 Horizontal curve signs

 Install/Improve Lighting

 Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

 Install/Improve Signing

 Other-Pedestrian 

 Pavement/Shoulder Widening

 Rumble Strips

 Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation

 Upgrade Guard Rails

 Wrong way driving treatments

California does incorporate tapered edge (also known as safety edge), systemically in projects; however, has 

not used HSIP funds to fund tapered edge projects.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

 Crash data analysis

 Engineering Study

 Road Safety Assessment

 SHSP/Local road safety plan

 Stakeholder input

 Other-Benefit Cost Ratio

We are in the process of implementing Data-driven safety analysis tools (HSM, CMF) to identify potential 

countermeasures.

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

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

The team has not met yet. It's premature at this time to make determination at this time. Emerging 

technologies is a new challenge area in the SHSP 2020 - 2024. When the State HSIP has data on emerging 

technologies, the state will report on the HSIP annual report.

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.

Integrating HSM methodology into the network screening and cost/benefit processes with a 2021 goal. 

Incorporating HSM methods into project alternative analysis

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

elaborate.

For the most part, Local HSIP and State highway HSIP use the cost/benefit methodology as a qualifying 

criteria for HSIP funds with some differences. For State highway HSIP, the benefit / cost tool, called the safety 

index, is used for projects at spot locations whereas Local HSIP utilizes the benefit / cost methodology for both 

spot and systemic type of projects. The Local HSIP utilizes set asides for low cost countermeasures. For cycle 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 49

10 which is the current call for Local HSIP projects, pedestrian crossing enhancements at non-signalized 

locations, edge line striping, guardrail upgrades and tribal roads are ones that local agencies can select from. 

These set asides do not require crash data to receive HSIP funding but is limited to a maximum dollar amount 

per agency and only specific low cost countermeasures can be selected.
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 49

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed 

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

Reporting period, July 01, 2019 to June 30,2020 

Funding Category Descriptions: HSIP (23 U.S. C 148) is Federal HSIP Funding for Caltrans State and Local 

side; State and Local Funds are combination of Federal HSIP Funding and State HSIP Funding, which 

includes State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Funds. 

Penalty Funds and Other Federal-aid Funds are included in the programmed State HSIP until funds are 

obligated for specific projects and phases. 

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $596,968,787 $465,336,743 77.95%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $213,399 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $39,079,070 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$76,644,143 $76,644,143 100%

State and Local Funds $80,109,200 $81,430,200 101.65%

Local HSIP $111,900,000 $110,206,910 98.49%

Totals $865,622,130 $772,910,465 89.29%

HRRR Program has ended, currently there is no programmed amount, the $213,399 shown under obligated is 

funds left over from previous programmed projects. 

The Penalty Funds(23 U.S.C. 164) and Other Federal-aid Funds has no programmed amount. The obligated 

amount of $39,079,070 and $76,644,143 is assigned from the Office of Federal Resources. 

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

safety projects? 

$111,900,000
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 49

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

$110,206,910

Note: this number is noted in the table above to distinguish between state HSIP and Local HSIP. HSIP funds 

are split 50/50 between state and local roads and administered separately. 

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

$1,500,000

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

$1,500,000

$1,500,000 is being used in this reporting cycle for 2020- 2024 Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). 

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

Caltrans contributes an additional 2.5 to 3 times the Federal HSIP amount every year, in addition to the 

Federal HSIP funds from the SHOPP. 

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

the future. 

As noted in previous annual reports, local HSIP continues to improve project delivery by enforcing our project 

delivery policies by providing (1) monthly update of delivery status reports posted on the DLA website, (2) 

HSIP manager’s phone calls and emails to district focal-point contacts responsible for monitoring project 

delivery, (3) setting deadlines for late projects in various previous project cycles, (4) requesting local agencies 

to send HSIP program an official delivery commitment letter for project delay request, and (5) efforts made by 

various Local HSIP Advisory Committee members. Because of these ongoing efforts, the Local HSIP delivery 

reached its highest funding obligations this FFY since the start of the Local HSIP program. 

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

which the State would like to elaborate. 

Starting in the FFY 20/21, Local HSIP will utilize the option of transferring federal HSIP funds back to the state 

HSIP in return for state highway funds on a dollar for dollar bases as described under California Senate Bill 

137. The funds exchanged will not change the purpose for which the funds were for under federal legislation 

requirements. This change will help local agencies deliver their safety projects more efficiently, less support 

costs and improved project delivery. 

Local HSIP is moving ahead with requiring local agencies to have an approved Local Road Safety Plans or 

equivalent in order to be eligible to receive HSIP grant funds starting in 2022 which is Cycle 11. For Cycle 10, 

which is this year, LRSPs are recommended and agencies that do have LRSPs will be considered first on the 

set aside applications should there be more applications than funding available. 

The State HSIP is now part of the newly formed Division of Safety Programs where HSIP is 

elevating the focus and approach to the Strategic Highway Safety Plan Toward Zero Deaths goal. 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 49

To expedite the programming of Safety projects they are funded under the State Highway Operations and 

Protection Program (SHOPP) reservation resources entitling eligible projects for continuous programming at 

every California Transportation Commission (CTC) meeting that are held approximately every other month.

To avoid delays when developing a Project Initiation Document for Safety Improvement projects, every effort 

must be made to focus on addressing the Safety need only, to avoid scope creep which can delay or disqualify 

the improvement as a Safety project.

This pilot will reduce the time from when a Safety project is conceptually approved to when it is programmed. 

The Conceptual Report includes substantial project information currently reported at the Project Initiation 

Document phase. By simply transferring this information from the Conceptual Report to the Project Initiation 

Document, significant rework is avoided reducing the amount of time and resources to develop the Project 

Initiation Document . The proposed process is anticipated to reduce the time it takes from the beginning of the 

conceptual approval process to the completion of the Project Initiation Document by four (4) to six (6) months
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 49

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

0G130-

01-DN199-10.2

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

0.5 Miles $1,595,000 $1,595,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

4,400 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0G510-

01-HUM101-87.8

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

4 Miles $1,273,000 $1,273,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

3,700 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0F690-01-

HUM-299-

R14.7

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or shoulder 1 Miles $1,584,000 $1,584,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

4,800 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0F460-01-

HUM-299-

20.5

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or other 10 Miles $7,488,000 $7,488,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

4,800 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0F470-01-

HUM--

30.7

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

8 Miles $11,407,000 $11,407,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

5,600 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0F680-01-

HUM-299-

38.96

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or other .70 Miles $2,805,000 $2,805,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

5,600 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0G330-

01-LAK020-5.1

Roadway Roadway widening - curve .70 Miles $9,150,000 $9,150,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

11,500 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0E720-01-

LAK-029-

12.7

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or other 2.2 Miles $14,139,000 $14,139,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

10,500 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0E730-01-

LAK-029-

17.7

Roadway Roadway widening - travel lanes 3 Miles $7,659,000 $7,659,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

12,500 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Truck 

Climbimg 

lanes and 

shoulder

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0C550-01-

MEN-001-

41.8

Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder treatments - other .5 Miles $3,815,000 $3,815,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

1,800 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 49

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

0G060-

01-MEN001-71.2

Roadway Roadway widening - curve .2 Miles $2,254,000 $2,254,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

4,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0G430-

01-MEN020-24.7

Roadway Superelevation / cross slope .2 Miles $2,063,000 $2,063,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

4,400 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

2H990-02-

SHA-044-

51.6

Roadway Roadway widening - curve .8 Miles $3,114,000 $3,114,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

2,100 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1H970-02-

TEH-036-

12.6

Roadway Roadway widening - curve .5 Miles $3,216,000 $3,216,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

770 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

2H630-02-

TEH-036-

26.6

Roadway Superelevation / cross slope 1 Miles $4,276,000 $4,276,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

800 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1H740-02-

TEH-036-

87.8

Roadway Rumble strips - transverse 2.3 Miles $5,220,000 $5,220,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

1,750 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

2H050-02-

TRI-036-

R34.8

Roadway Superelevation / cross slope .6 Miles $6,187,000 $6,187,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

1,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

2H240-03-

BUT-7.6

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Numbers $4,121,000 $4,121,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

22,600 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

3H710-03-

BUT-070-

8.8

Roadway Roadway widening - travel lanes 3.5 Miles $23,610,000 $23,610,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

17,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot 2-way left turn 

and CRZ

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

3H720-03-

BUT-070-

5.6

Roadway Roadway widening - travel lanes 3.5 Miles $28,570,000 $28,570,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

17,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot 2-way left turn 

and CRZ

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

2H630-02-

TEH-162-

18.4

Roadway Roadway widening - travel lanes 1.5 Miles $15,720,000 $15,720,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

21,500 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot 2-way left turn 

and CRZ

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 49

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

3H640-03-

NEV-049-

2.0

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add 

acceleration lane

.5 Miles $2,110,000 $2,110,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

0 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

3H650-03-

NEV-049-

8.3

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - modify two-way 

left-turn lane

.4 Miles $2,360,000 $2,360,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

0 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot 2-way left turn 

and 8' 

shoulder

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1H240-03-

PLA-049-

2.2

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - no control to 

roundabout

1 Numbers $5,578,000 $5,578,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

0 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

4H550-03-

PLA-065-

R7.8

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

4 Numbers $2,300,000 $2,300,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

0 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

2H640-03-

SAC-012-

0.4

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - no control to 

two-way stop

2 Numbers $5,310,000 $5,310,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

25,200 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

3H400-03-

SIE-049-

44.1

Roadway Superelevation / cross slope .3 Miles $1,815,000 $1,815,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

0 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

2H230-03-

SUT-099-

40.0

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - two-way stop to 

all-way stop

1 Numbers $3,900,000 $3,900,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

19,400 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

4F380-03-

YUB-070-

16.2

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or other 9.6 Miles $85,935,000 $85,935,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

15,400 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

3J700-04-

ALA-080-

4.5

Access 

management

Median crossover - close 

crossover

3.1 Miles $14,612,000 $14,612,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate280,400 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

4J750-04-

ALA-084-

R0.7

Access 

management

Median crossover - close 

crossover

3 Miles $18,840,000 $18,840,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

74,600 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

4J730-04-

ALA-880-

R0.7

Interchange 

design

Ramp metering 1 Numbers $4,170,000 $4,170,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

240,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 49

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

4G210-

04-Napa121-0.5

Roadway Roadway widening - travel lanes .5 Miles $14,099,000 $14,099,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

28,900 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

4J390-04-

SFO-101-

0.0

Roadway Pavement surface - 

miscellaneous

4.2 Miles $21,990,000 $21,990,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

22,700 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

2K140-04-

SCL-017-

0.0

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

3.4 Miles $8,891,000 $8,891,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

58,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0J800-04-

SCL-152-

21.8

Access 

management

Median crossover - directional 

crossover

14.4 Miles $11,044,000 $11,044,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

41,500 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

3J710-04-

SCL-280-

11.4

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

1 Numbers $1,162,000 $1,162,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

135,000 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

4G561-

04-SOL012-19.2

Noninfrastructure Non-infrastructure - other .2 Miles $170,000 $170,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

18,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Environmental 

mitigation

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0G680-

04-SON121-3.4

Roadway Roadway narrowing (road diet, 

roadway reconfiguration)

3.1 Miles $37,981,000 $37,981,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

20,900 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1H930-05-

SLO-046-

R17.2

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - no control to 

roundabout

1 Numbers $5,596,000 $5,596,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

6,500 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1H060-05-

SCR-001-

16.7

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - 

realignment to align offset cross 

streets

1 Numbers $6,469,000 $6,469,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

62,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

16990-05-

SCR-129-

1.4

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - no control to 

roundabout

1 Numbers $5,230,000 $5,230,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

12,900 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0V280-06-

KER-184-

L0.9

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - no control to 

roundabout

1 Numbers $5,150,000 $5,150,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

12,400 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 49

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

34170-07-

LA-001-

2.8

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal timing - leftturn phasing (permissive to 

protected-only)

1 Numbers $1,054,000 $1,054,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

28,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

33980-07-

LA-001-

6.0

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal timing - leftturn phasing (permissive to 

protected-only)

1 Numbers $529,000 $529,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

34,500 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

33260-07-

LA-010-

R12.3

Access 

management

Raised island - modify existing 3.2 Miles $23,453,000 $23,453,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

336,000 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

33290-07-

LA-138-

49.5

Intersection 

traffic control

Systemic improvements - 

signal-controlled

1 Numbers $1,240,000 $1,240,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

15,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

31880-07-

LA-605-

23.4

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - 

realignment to align offset cross 

streets

1 Numbers $4,597,000 $4,597,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

146,000 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1C850-08-

RIV-074-

0.0

Roadway Roadway widening - travel lanes 5.8 Miles $53,620,000 $53,620,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

41,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1E060-08-

SBD-018-

97.0

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 1 Numbers $9,659,000 $9,659,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

30,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1H770-08-

SBD-215-

4.5

Roadway Roadway widening - travel lanes 1.3 Miles $6,458,000 $6,458,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

140,000 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1F780-08-

SBD-095-

9.6

Roadway Roadway - restripe to revise 

separation between opposing 

lanes and/or shoulder widths 

24 Miles $1,400,000 $1,400,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

2,900 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1F770-08-

SBD-247-

20.3

Roadway Roadway - restripe to revise 

separation between opposing 

lanes and/or shoulder widths 

56.5 Miles $1,963,000 $1,963,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

13,300 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1F460-10-

SJ-004-

4.1

Roadway Roadway widening - curve .8 Miles $8,693,000 $8,693,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

11,400 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 49

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

1E531-10-

SJ-088-

22.1

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

1 Numbers $6,350,000 $6,350,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

8,700 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

42470-11-

SD-005-

R13.5

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

.9 Miles $2,660,000 $2,660,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate171,000 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0Q280-

12-ORA001-27.0

Roadway Roadway - restripe to revise 

separation between opposing 

lanes and/or shoulder widths 

2.9 Miles $1,148,000 $1,148,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

44,350 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0Q850-

12-ORA005-34.5

Roadside Barrier- metal 2.9 Miles $6,236,000 $6,236,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate263,900 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0P520-12-

ORA-022-

R9.4

Roadside Barrier - concrete .5 Miles $4,485,000 $4,485,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

133,900 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0Q840-

12-ORA055-2.0

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including post) - 

new or updated

2.8 Miles $1,500,000 $1,500,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

220,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0N860-12-

ORA-073-

23.7

Interchange 

design

Installation of new lane on ramp 1 Numbers $7,735,000 $7,735,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

175,200 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0P030-12-

ORA-074-

11.5

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

5.1 Miles $35,451,000 $35,451,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

10,300 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0Q420-

12-ORA090-4.0

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

1 Numbers $775,000 $775,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

63,800 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0N060-12-

ORA-133-

3.1

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - extend 

acceleration/deceleration lane

.5 Miles $775,000 $775,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

20,100 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0P400-12-

ORA-405-

5.6

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

additional signal heads

1 Numbers $1,781,000 $1,781,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

268,400 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 49

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

0C971-01-

HUM-101-

79.9

Roadway Roadway - other 6.4 Miles $2,114,000 $2,114,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

40,200 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Environmental 

mitigation

Environmental 

mitigation

0E650-01-

HUM-101-

88.3

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other 1 Numbers $4,587,000 $4,587,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

40,200 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0G050-

01-MENVAR

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning signs and 

flashers

30 Numbers $2,331,000 $2,331,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

4G500-

02-TRI299-1.9

Roadside Removal of roadside objects 

(trees, poles, etc.)

.4 Miles $4,266,000 $4,266,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

2,500 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0J470-04-

ALA-VAR

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian warning signs - 

overhead

Numbers $5,130,000 $5,130,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

3J890-04-

SF-001-

VAR

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Crosswalk 6 Numbers $5,805,000 $5,805,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Multiple/Varies 0 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

1F490-05-

SLO-101-

54.9

Roadside Barrier - concrete .8 Miles $3,771,000 $3,771,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate70,500 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0R142-08-

SBD-040-

R125.0

Roadway Superelevation / cross slope 29.6 Miles $28,654,000 $28,654,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

13,800 13800 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

36370-09-

INY-168-

16.0

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add two-way 

left-turn lane

1.7 Miles $1,238,000 $1,238,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

6,700 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0Y600-10-

MAR-140-

21.2

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Medians and pedestrian refuge 

areas

.6 Miles $1,982,000 $1,982,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

9,600 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0Y110-10-

MER-140-

42.1

Roadside Barrier- metal 42.1 Miles $5,128,000 $5,128,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

1,400 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 49

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

1C970-10-

SJ-005-

Var

Roadside Barrier end treatments (crash 

cushions, terminals)

Numbers $1,152,000 $1,152,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

42500-11-

IMP-Var

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning signs and 

flashers

Numbers $1,848,000 $1,848,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

42030-11-

SD-052-

0.4

Roadside Barrier - concrete 14.4 Miles $3,982,000 $3,982,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

42490-11-

SD-Var

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning signs and 

flashers

Numbers $4,350,000 $4.350,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

0N720-12-

ORA-073-

10.0

Roadside Barrier end treatments (crash 

cushions, terminals)

18 Miles $23,700,000 $23,700,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

93,200 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Fatalities and 

Serious 

Injuries

For Local Programs obligated projects see attached excel spreadsheet.
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 49

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 2,720 2,966 3,107 3,102 3,387 3,837 3,602 3,798 3,665

Serious Injuries 10,423 10,864 10,664 10,995 11,942 13,258 14,180 16,130 16,400

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

0.880 0.908 0.944 0.927 1.011 1.130 1.131 1.021 1.055

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

3.194 3.324 3.240 3.285 3.514 3.867 4.118 4.646 4.723

Number nonmotorized fatalities701 782 881 838 955 1,088 982 1,173 1,161

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

2,598 2,743 2,710 2,795 2,874 3,102 3,273 3,397 3,496
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 49

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Serious Injuries

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

Page 31 of 49

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

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

Page 32 of 49

Describe fatality data source. 

State Motor Vehicle Crash Database

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

ownership. 

Year 2018

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

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

Rural Minor Arterial

Rural Minor Collector

Rural Major Collector

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

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

Page 33 of 49

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 Local Road or 

Street

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

Urban Minor Arterial

Urban Minor Collector

Urban Major Collector

Urban Local Road or 

Street

0 0 0 0
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 49

Year 2018

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

3,772 16,039 1.02 1.02

County Highway 

Agency

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

Provide additional discussion related to general highway safety trends.

The five-year average for fatalities, serious injuries, non-motorized fatal and serious injuries and the fatal and 

serious injury rates are on an upward trend; however, between 2017 and 2018, the number of fatalities 

decreased while the number of serious injuries has increased. The definition of serious injuries was changed to 

include suspected serious injuries and was implemented in mid-2017. The first full year of suspected serious 

injuries resulted in an increase of 18% from the last full year using the old definition. Serious injuries for the first 

half of 2018 were 7,725 and for the first half of 2019 serious injuries were 7,623, a decrease of 1.30%.
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 49

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2021 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:3624.8

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

The target was set by reducing fatalities annually at 2.88 which is the current trend in the reduction of fatalities 

between 2017 and 2018 in California. This target support and consistent with CA Strategic Highway Safety 

Plan (SHSP) goals of Toward Zero Death by 2050 . Through the Highway Safety Improvement Program, many 

California cities are developing or updating Local Roadway Safety Plans the focus on reducing crashes 

throughout the state. There has been a 25% increase in the number of OTS grants that will continue to assist 

California in reducing roadway fatalities.

Number of Serious Injuries:15419.4

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

In California, between the first half of 2018 and the first half of 2019, there was a 1.3% decrease in serious 

injuries. This target support and consistent with CA Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) goals of Toward 

Zero Death by 2050. Through the Highway Safety Improvement Program, many California cities are 

developing or updating Local Roadway Safety Plans the focus on reducing crashes throughout the state. There 

has also been a 25% increase in the number of OTS grants that will continue to assist California in reducing 

roadway fatalities.

Fatality Rate:1.044

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

This target was set by reducing fatalities annually at 2.88% which is the current trend in reduction of fatalities 

between 2017 and 2018 in California. This target support and consistent with CA Strategic Highway Safety 

Plan (SHSP) goals of Toward Zero Death by 2050. Through the Highway Safety Improvement Program, many 

California cities are developing or updating Local Roadway Safety Plans the focus on reducing crashes 

throughout the state. There has also been a 25% increase in the number of OTS grants that will continue to 

assist California in reducing roadway fatalities.

Serious Injury Rate:4.423

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

In California, between the first half of 2018 and the first half of 2019, there was a 1.3% decrease in serious 

injuries. This target support and consistent with CA Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) goals of Toward 

Zero Death by 2050. Through the Highway Safety Improvement Program, many California cities are 

developing or updating Local Roadway Safety Plans the focus on reducing crashes throughout the state. There 

has also been a 25% increase in the number of OTS grants that will continue to assist California in reducing 

roadway fatalities.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:4340.8

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

Page 36 of 49

For the fatalities involved with this performance measure, this target was set by reducing fatalities annually at 

2.88% which is the current trend in reduction of fatalities between 2017 and 2018 in California. This target 

support and consistent with CA Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) goals of Toward Zero Death by 2050. In 

California, between the first half of 2018 and the first half of 2019, there was a 1.3% decrease in serious 

injuries. Through the Highway Safety Improvement Program, many California cities are developing or updating 

Local Roadway Safety Plans the focus on reducing crashes throughout the state. There has also been a 25% 

increase in the number of OTS grants that will continue to assist California in reducing roadway fatalities.

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

safety performance targets. 

The State held a workshop on July 20, 2020 with MPOs and other stakeholders to set the 2021 safety 

performance targets. Caltrans and OTS met prior to the meeting to discuss and agree on the methodology to 

set the three core safety performance targets.

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 3445.4 3657.8

Number of Serious Injuries 12688.1 14382.0

Fatality Rate 0.995 1.070

Serious Injury Rate 3.661 4.174

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

3949.8 4300.2

The data available at the time of reporting is through 2018. The trend-based values shown in the table above 

for 2019 are estimates that were developed during the target setting process for 2021 targets. Based on these 

estimates, Caltrans will not meet any of the targets set for 2019. The 2019 targets were set based on the 

aspirational goal of trending towards zero fatalities in 2050, as well as cutting serious injuries in half by 2050. 

The difference in the target and what is anticipated is due to the use of aspirational targets instead of targets 

tied to activities and projects. 

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

2019 data is currently not available.
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 49

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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

380 391 416 434 540 487 517

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

606 666 729 845 986 1,036 1,263

The definition of serious injuries was changed to include suspected serious injuries and was implemented in 

mid-2017 that resulted in a big jump.
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 49

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness 

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

 Benefit/Cost Ratio 

 Change in fatalities and serious injuries 

 Other-3 - year before and after 

Caltrans safety targets were established aspirationally using an annual fatality reduction in support to "Toward 

Zero Deaths by 2050 and a serious injury reduction of 50% by 2050. 

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

the State's program level evaluations. 

The 2018 preliminary fatality numbers show a reduction in fatalities, but the serious injury continues to 

increase. This increase in serious injuries is due to change in the definition of serious injuries to include 

suspected serious injuries. Caltrans has a structured process to strengthen the correlation between the State's 

safety-related efforts and the resulting investment in programs, strategies, and actions that continually prioritize 

safety. 

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

 # RSAs completed 

 HSIP Obligations 

 Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process 

 Increased focus on local road safety 

 More systemic programs 

 Organizational change 

Describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting 

period.

Caltrans new Strategic Management Plan Goal 1 will focus exclusively on Safety. In May of 2020 Caltrans 

changed the structure of the Division of Traffic Operation, making a dedicated Division for Safety Programs. 

Director Omishakin has challenged us to elevate our focus and approach to the Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Toward Zero Deaths. 

The Office of Traffic Safety participated in 3 Road Safety Audits, where Caltrans took the lead in the 

Bay Area, Northern California, and Southern California. 

The DLA continues to investigate, with the help of locals and FHWA the delays caused by unnecessary 

environmental requirements in streamlining HSIP projects. 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 49

The DLA initiated the first ever tribal HSIP set-aside for $2 M for safety improvements on tribal lands. As a 

result $1.2 M was programmed into the Local HSIP.

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2018

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 All 1,666.8 5,804.8 0.48 1.67

Intersections All 726.2 3,296.4 0.21 0.95

Pedestrians All 905.6 2,037.6 0.26 0.59

Bicyclists All 161.4 984.6 0.05 0.28

Older Drivers All 546.4 1,707.2 0.16 0.49

Motorcyclists All 530.2 2,739.8 0.15 0.79

Work Zones All 61 178.4 0.02 0.05

Increase Use of Safety 

Bels and Child Safety 

Seats

All 646.8 1,410.4 0.19 0.41

Reduce Young Driver 

Fatalities

All 453.8 1,793.4 0.13 0.52

Aggresive Driving All 1,182.6 4,568.2 0.34 1.32

Impaired Driving All 1,255 3,162.8 0.36 0.91

Distracted Driving All 151.4 640.4 0.04 0.18

Commercial Vehicles All 372.2 769 0.11 0.22
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 49

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 49

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the 

reporting period?

No

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 49

Caltrans has not completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the reporting period. 

Caltrans seldom conducts countermeasure effectiveness evaluations and typically refers to the CMF 

clearinghouse for countermeasure effectiveness.
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 49

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)

01-Lak-20-pm 

1.1/3.9

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Speed 

management

Radar speed 

signs

4.00 39.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 15.00 10.00 23.00 53.00

There are additional projects, from both state and DLA this is the part that kept deleting, so I attached spreadsheets. I will reattach. 

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

Caltrans understands the benefit of reviewing current processes and performance standards to determine how best to revise existing and/or establish new procedures. Reviewing past performance is used to determine 

ways to substantially improve the effectiveness and transparency of safety implementation.

The HSIP review provides, an opportunity to identify best practices nationally and worldwide that could be incormporated into the program, and discuss safety goals for specific targets.
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 49

Compliance Assessment

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

 01/21/2020

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2020 To: 2024

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

 2025

The SHSP Implementation Plan is currently being developed and is expected to be completed in February of 2021.

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

Route Number (8) 

[8]

100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9) [9]

100 100

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21) [21]

100 100

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20) [20]

100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 49

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

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100 100

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]

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

100

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 49

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]

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

100

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

100

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

100

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 100.00 83.33 75.00 25.00 63.64 0.00 0.00 77.78 0.00 0.00

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

The assumptions for MIRE FDE compliance has changed between last year and this year. for this year, the MIRE FDE compliance is based on the information from HPMS. 

If the HPMS of local road information is full extend (e.g. mandatory), then the item that is related to it in MIRE FDE is considered 100%. If the HPMS is partial extend (e.g. optional), then the item is considered 0%. For Non-state, 

the percentage is reflecting on what is being reported under HPMS, it does not reflect the completeness and quality of data. Some datasets require extensive update and cleanup. 

Notes: 

1. For Non-state, the percentage is reflecting on what is being reported under HPMS, it does not reflect the completeness and quality of data. Some datasets require extensive update and cleanup. 

2. For State, the percentage is reflecting on the current data being maintained in TSN, it does not reflect the completeness and quality of data. 

3. 100% assumes it's in the TSN for the state highway system or reported in HPMS for local roads that is full extend. 

4. 0% assumes is reported in HPMS for local roads that is sampling or partial extend. 

5. 0% is based on the TSN has no local raods information including "Location Identifier for Road 2 Crossing Point" element 

6. "n/a" assumes in the TSN there are no functional class 7 roads or unpaved roads as part of the state highway system. 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 49

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. 

Caltrans will continue with its efforts to continue collecting data and update MIRE Fundamental data elements annually to meet the requirement by September 30, 2026. Caltrans has executed a contract that will aid in getting MIRE 

Fundamental data elements on all non-state public roads. 
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 49

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

Programmed LOCAL_HSIP_ORT_Data_2020_SHSP (003).xlsx

2017 STATE HSIP GUIDELINES FINAL.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

STATE HSIP Before After Collisions 2020 Annual#46 Report.xlsx

LOCAL_HSIP Annual Report_Real BCRs for Completed Safety Projects.xlsx

Compliance Assessment:
2020 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 49

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.