Illinois

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2015 Annual Report

Prepared by: IL
ii

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery & Admission into Evidence

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

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

subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered 

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

addressed in the reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or other data.” 

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

or data compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety 

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

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

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

highway funds shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State 

court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any 

occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
iii

Table of Contents

Disclaimer...................................................................................................................................................... ii

Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3

Program Structure ........................................................................................................................................ 3

Program Administration ........................................................................................................................... 3

Program Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 7

Progress in Implementing Projects............................................................................................................. 36

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................. 36

General Listing of Projects.................................................................................................................. 39

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets .................................................................................... 54

Overview of General Safety Trends........................................................................................................ 54

Application of Special Rules.................................................................................................................... 69

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................71

SHSP Emphasis Areas.............................................................................................................................. 73

Groups of similar project types............................................................................................................... 78

Systemic Treatments............................................................................................................................... 83

Project Evaluation................................................................................................................................... 89

Glossary....................................................................................................................................................... 91
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

Executive Summary

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a data-driven, performance based, strategic 

approach targeted to infrastructure improvements administered by Federal Highways Administration 

(FHWA). Illinois has set its target to reduce the frequency of fatalities and serious injuries, as well as the 

exposure rates of fatalities and serious injuries per million vehicle miles traveled. In addition to these 

rates, Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) has identified and prioritized safety emphasis areas 

where performance measures are also narrowed down by functional class of roadways to understand 

the safety problems and implement appropriate countermeasures to curb the preventable fatalities and 

serious injuries with federal support. 

The collaborative working efforts between Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) with Highway Safety 

Improvement Program (HSIP), Highway Safety Plan (HSP), Commercial Vehicle Safety Plan (CVSP), 

Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) - Long Range plan with metropolitan level is 

envisioned to provide consistency of data collection and management, integrated safety initiatives, and 

identification of data-driven performance measures with safety performance assessment. This 

coordination of safety programs helps IDOT to prioritize safety in planning and programming stage to 

utilize limited funding with safety improvement potentials to set effective goals, targets with safety 

performance matrix and assessments in future. 

HSIP is administered and monitored by the Illinois Department of Transportation Bureau of Safety 

Engineering (BSE). IDOT works with safety partners to direct limited program dollars to areas with the 

greatest potential for safety improvement on the transportation system. IDOT uses safety performance 

functions and the systemic approach for identifying areas of improvement. Projects are selected based 

on their potential to reduce fatal and severe crashes economically using the IDOT benefit-cost 

evaluation tool. The HSIP roadway funding split between state and local routes remains the same as last 

year, 80/20. IDOT provides significant technical support in addition to the HSIP roadway safety 

investment. IDOT works with local agencies to increase obligation rates for HSIP projects approved. 

Overall the program has seen a plateau in fatalities over the last few years, but 2014 has shown an 

approximately 15% decrease compared to this time last year. Detailed crash data analysis has shown 

that fatalities and severe injuries on the state route system continue to steadily decrease year after 

year. The local system fatalities and severe injuries have increased slightly, sparking the Illinois Safety 

Program Local Roadways Initiative focusing on county wide data analysis, Local Roads FIVE PERCENT 

analysis, roadway safety assessment support, development of County Strategic Highway Safety Plans, 

and technical support. Illinois continues to monitor progress, evaluates programs and modifies the 

screening, project identification and project approval approach to achieve Zero Fatalities on Illinois 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

roadways. 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

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 MAP-21 Reporting Guidance dated February 13, 2013 and consists 

of four sections: program structure, progress in implementing HSIP projects, 

progress in achieving safety performance targets, and assessment of the 

effectiveness of the improvements. 

Program Structure

Program Administration

How are Highway Safety Improvement Program funds allocated in a State? 

Central

District

Other

Describe how local roads are addressed as part of Highway Safety Improvement Program.

Twenty percent of the HSIP roadway funding is allocated to local roadways. Prior to SAFETEA-LU, local 

agencies received less than $1 million aunnualy; in recent years, that amount has been increased to 

between $12 - $15 million annualy. This is a substantial increase from program allocation prior to 

SAFETEA-LU.

Each Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) District has a traffic safety committee that coordinates 

with the IDOT Bureau of Local Roads and local agencies to provide technical support. 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

Illinois leads regular meetings with the MPOs to discuss safety performance targets and county SHSP 

development and implementation.

RSAs are provided to local agencies free-of-charge at the request of local agencies. IDOT BSE coordinates 

team members and facilities, provides technical analysis, presents the kick-off and team findings and 

prepares the RSA reports. 

The IDOT Bureau of Safety Engineering is an active participant of the Illinois Association of County 

Engineers Traffic and Safety Committee to discuss the SHSP, HSIP, data issues, and ways to advance 

transportation safety in Illinois on local roadways. 

After identifying increased fatalities on the local roadway system, the IDOT increased focus on local 

roadways by launching the Local Road Safety Initiative. The Local Road Safety Initiative is a multipronged approach to provide the tools and data along with program training and facilitation to organize 

local transportation safety committees. The participation continues to grow and the quality of 

applications have improved significantly Each county is provided with County Strategic Highway Safety 

Plans (SHSP) Elements that include crash data trees, Emphasis Area tables, heat maps and effective 

countermeasures and strategies to address the potential safety improvements. The county SHSPs have 

been completed for 37 counties so far with the remaining 65 plans targeted for completion in 2015-

2016. IDOT has identified site specific improvements using the FHWA Systemic Tool for 8 counties to 

date. 

In early 2014, IDOT developed the FIVE PERCENT location list for the local system to address high 

priority locations and support system-wide initiatives. 

In 2013, IDOT also embarked on a pilot program for 9 counties in the use of usRAP for county routes. 

The DOT coordinates safety 4E workshops that encourage coordination and training locals on HSIP best 

practices. Based on the technical support provided, local agencies apply for HSIP funds for 

implementation. The HSIP applications are reviewed by the IDOT Central Office traffic safety committee 

to approve projects, recommend changes or refinements and consult with local agencies to ensure 

safety investments address program goals. 

Identify which internal partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Design

Planning

Maintenance
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Other: Other-Local agencies

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

IDOT BSE provides statewide data analysis to develop the Safer Roads Index (SRI) for all state routes, the 

local FIVE PERCENT locations and systemic safety initiatives; such as wrong way driving, pedestrian, 

curves. This information is provided to the Districts and local agencies through avenues such as the 

Safety Portal. 

Each District has a safety committee comprised of representative in design, planning and operations. 

This committee reviews the Safety Tier locations, systemic analysis results, performs safety data analysis 

and field reviews, and identifies potential HSIP projects based on priority and safety needs. The 

Districts review local HSIP applications and provide input and recommendations prior to submitting 

applications to IDOT Central Office.

IDOT BSE utilized the HSIP SharePoint site to coordinate internally with Districts, Office of Planning and 

Programming and Office of Budget and Fiscal Management and other IDOT Offices, including FHWA 

Illinois Division Office. 

IDOT Bureau of Safety Engineering leads a Transportation Safety Committee in Central Office that 

review and approve, deny or make recommend changes to all statewide HSIP projects. The committee 

includes members of IDOT BSE, IDOT Bureau of Design and Environment, IDOT Bureau of Local Roads 

and FHWA.

Identify which external partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Other: Other-Local agencies

Other: Other-Law enforcement

Identify any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since 

the last reporting period.

Multi-disciplinary HSIP steering committee

Other: Other-IDOT continues to use a safety committee to help administer the program

Other: Other-Established the Safer Roads Index with Safety Tiers to better utilize HSIP funding and 

maximize other funding sources. Developed the local FIVE PERCENT locations for local agency project 

identification.

Describe any other aspects of Highway Safety Improvement Program Administration on which you 

would like to elaborate.

The Districts and local agencies submit HSIP applications through the HSIP SharePoint site for review and 

approval by a Central Transportation Safety Committee. Since 2013, the IDOT Districts have taken a 

more active role in supporting the local roadway safety program. If there are large HSIP funding requests 

or longer term projects, the committee may recommend that a Road Safety Assessment be conducted 

to identify low cost safety improvements that could be implemented quickly along with verification of 

the longer term, high cost projects to ensure the best and most appropriate use of HSIP funds to 

maximize results.
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

Median Barrier Intersection Safe Corridor

Horizontal Curve Bicycle Safety Rural State Highways

Skid Hazard Crash Data Red Light Running Prevention

Roadway Departure Low-Cost Spot Improvements Sign Replacement And 

Improvement

Local Safety Pedestrian Safety Right Angle Crash

Left Turn Crash Shoulder Improvement Segments

Other: Other-Wrong Way 

Driving

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology: 6/1/2009

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness 1

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology: 6/30/2011

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury Population Functional classification
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

crashes only

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other-Traffic control, urban 

versus rural areas, the number of 

intersection legs

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other-Safer Roads Index, Potential for Safety Improvement Tiers

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

Yes

No

If no, describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

Network screening based on weighted critical rate and systemic risk based approaches and site specific 

crash history based approaches

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness 1
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology: 8/16/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other-Weighted crash rate

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

Cost Effectiveness 1

Program: Skid Hazard

Date of Program Methodology: 7/6/2014

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other-selection based on priority list

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

Rank of Priority Consideration
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness 1

Program: Crash Data

Date of Program Methodology: 8/1/2010

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other-Identifcation of crash locations for local safety program data analysis and project prioritzation

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other-Data collection program

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).
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

data collection 1

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology: 6/30/2011

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other-benefit to cost analysis

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

If no, describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

Systemic risk based approaches and site specific crash history based approaches

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness 1

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement

Date of Program Methodology: 6/30/2011

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other-benefit cost analysis

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

22

Yes

No

If no, describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

State routes are not eligible for this Rural Road Sign Upgrade Program

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness 1

Program: Local Safety
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

Date of Program Methodology: 6/30/2011

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

Other-Systemic Risk based approach, local knowledge

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

If no, describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

Local road safety projects are identified through the local FIVE PERCENT report, heat maps, data trees, 

systemic safety analysis, road safety assessments and local knowledge.

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

25

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness 1

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 2/3/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

26

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

27

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

BC 1

Program: Left Turn Crash

Date of Program Methodology: 1/2/2011

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

28

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

Program: Segments

Date of Program Methodology: 6/30/2011

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other-Number of lanes, urban 

versus rural, median type

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

30

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

If no, describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

Systemic risk based approaches and site specific crash history based approaches

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

31

selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness 1

Program: Other-Wrong Way Driving

Date of Program Methodology: 8/3/2014

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury Population Functional classification
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

32

crashes only

Other-Wrong way driving 

incidents

Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other-Contributing factors 

related to interchange type and 

features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

33

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness 1

What proportion of highway safety improvement program funds address systemic improvements? 

40

Highway safety improvement program funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements?
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

34

Cable Median Barriers Rumble Strips

Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation Pavement/Shoulder Widening

Install/Improve Signing Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or 

Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails Clear Zone Improvements

Safety Edge Install/Improve Lighting

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal Other 

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Other: 

Identify any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since the 

last reporting period.

Highway Safety Manual

Road Safety audits

Systemic Approach

Other: Other-Methods shown are currently being used for program identification. Advances have 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

35

taken place in both the use fo the HSM, greater use of RSAs and systemic applications such as curves, 

rumble strips and flashing yellow arrow intersection improvements

Describe any other aspects of the Highway Safety Improvement Program methodology on which you 

would like to elaborate. 

The HSIP process continues to improve each year. One area that continues to evolve is multi-year 

programing that allows Districts to establish program priorities and needs over multiple years. This helps 

to administer the program an ensure smooth and efficient use of funds on effective safety 

improvements.
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

36

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Calendar Year

State Fiscal Year

Federal Fiscal Year

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

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) 104652000 98 % 43573151.76 99 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) 2619000 2 % 256380.31 1 %

HRRR Special Rule

Penalty Transfer -

Section 154

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

Incentive Grants - 

Section 163

Incentive Grants 

(Section 406)

Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STP, NHPP)

State and Local Funds
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

37

Totals 107271000 100% 43829532.07 100%

How much funding is programmed to local (non-state owned and maintained) safety projects? 

$24,773,000.00

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

$2,500,000.00

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

$2,500,000.00

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

$2,500,000.00

How much funding was transferred in to the HSIP from other core program areas during the reporting 

period?

$0.00
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

38

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

period? 

$0.00

$2.5M is obligated to support training, data improvements and safety analysis in support of the 

infrastructure safety program

Discuss impediments to obligating Highway Safety Improvement Program funds and plans to 

overcome this in the future.

Local agencies have a variety of challenges that delay obligating federal funds, such as scoping and 

design and the overall federal aid process. 

Describe any other aspects of the general Highway Safety Improvement Program implementation 

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

None at this time.
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

39

General Listing of Projects

List each highway safety improvement project obligated during the reporting period. 

Project Improvement Category Output HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Fundin

g

Catego

ry

Functiona

l 

Classificat

ion

AADT Spee

d

Roadwa

y 

Owners

hip

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strategy

20120301

5

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal - add 

additional signal heads

1 

Numb

ers

66600

0

74000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

8000 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Signalizatio

n

2012040

01

Roadway Roadway 

widening - travel lanes

4.14 

Miles

48735

32

62415

65

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

1850 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Pavement 

treatments, 

pavement 

marking

2012040

03

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics -

modify intersection 

corner radius

1 

Numb

ers

31640

00

75650

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

1117

5

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Sight 

distance

2012080

01

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add lane(s) 

along segment

3.4 

Miles

80000

00

80000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

8100 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Lane 

addition, 

rumble 

strips, 

pavement 

markings
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

40

2012120

24

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

1.19 

Miles

13500

00

15000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

1310

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Exclusive 

left turn

2013010

01

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

1 

Numb

ers

56700

0

56700

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

6600 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Left turn 

lane

2013030

03

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to 

protected/permissive)

1 

Numb

ers

31500

00

35000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

1410

0

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2013030

05

Intersection traffic control 

Systemic improvements -

signal-controlled

1 

Numb

ers

49613

17

49613

17

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

8425 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2013030

11

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

8.5 

Miles

19520

00

19520

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

2050 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Widen 

Paved 

Shoulder

2013040

08

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

5.74 

Miles

0 99130

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

3250 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Widen 

Paved 

Shoulder

2013050

02

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

5.41 

Miles

94170

0

94170

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

2400 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Other Paved 

shoulder, 

Rumble 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

41

strips

2013050

03

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add lane(s) 

along segment

0.3 

Miles

30060

00

33400

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

3000

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Large 

trucks

Provide 

TWLTL; 

Resurfacing

2013050

05

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

1.98 

Miles

34220

0

34220

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

2400 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Widen 

Paved 

Shoulder

2013070

01

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

1 

Numb

ers

12500

00

12500

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

3030

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2013080

02

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

4.64 

Miles

13560

00

13560

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

6700 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Widen 

Paved 

Shoulder

2013090

01

Roadway Roadway - other 1 

Numb

ers

15820

00

15820

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 65 City of 

Municip

al 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Roadway 

improveme

nts

2013100

03

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

3.1 

Miles

82200

0

82200

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Shoulder 

rumble 

strips

2013100 Intersection traffic control 1 21150 23500 HSIP Urban 7390 35 State Intersecti Protected 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

42

04 Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

Numb

ers

00 00 (Sectio

n 148)

Minor 

Arterial

0 Highway 

Agency

ons left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2013100

05

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

1 

Numb

ers

13950

00

15500

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

7450

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2013100

06

Intersection traffic control 

Intersection traffic control 

- other

1 

Numb

ers

54900

0

61000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

7090

0

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Pedestrian 

Signing; 

Pavement 

marking

2013100

07

Intersection traffic control 

Systemic improvements -

signal-controlled

1 

Numb

ers

60750

0

67500

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

2110

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Traffic 

signal

2013100

09

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

0.32 

Miles

36000

0

40000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

4760

0

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2013100

11

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protected2 

Numb

ers

13500

00

15000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

3340

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

43

only)

2013100

13

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometry -

other

1 

Numb

ers

15300

00

17000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

2070

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Left-turn 

and rightturn lane

2013100

14

Roadway Rumble strips -

center

2.28 

Miles

90000

0

10000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

4950 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Rumble 

strips -

centerline 

and 

shoulder

2013100

17

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

0.32 

Miles

33300

00

37000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

4559

0

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2013100

18

Roadside Barrier - other 1 Miles 19097

18

21219

09

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Guardrail

2013100

21

Roadside Removal of 

roadside objects (trees, 

poles, etc.)

2.1 

Miles

33750

00

37500

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Major 

Collector

2725 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Fixed 

object 

removal

2013100

22

Roadside Barrier - other 0.3 

Miles

36000 40000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

250 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Guardrail
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

44

2013100

23

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal - add 

additional signal heads

1 

Numb

ers

45000

0

50000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

4330

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Left turn 

offset, 

Signal head 

per lane

2013100

27

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

1 

Numb

ers

31600

0

31600

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 50 County 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Exclusive 

left-turn

2013100

29

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal - add 

additional signal heads

12.88 

Miles

20700

00

23000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

3700

0

45 County 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Speed 

signing

2013100

31

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometry -

other

1 

Numb

ers

14000

00

19000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

9900 55 County 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Roundabou

t

2013100

34

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

1 

Numb

ers

91800 10200

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

8900 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2013100

36

Roadside Barrier -

concrete

1 

Numb

ers

33000

0

33000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

1670

0

0 City of 

Municip

al 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Median 

barrier

2013100

37

Access management 1 

Numb

90000 10000 HSIP 

(Sectio

Urban 

Minor 

1080 30 City of 

Municip

Intersecti Pedestrian 

Signing; 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

45

Raised island - install new ers 0 n 148) Arterial 0 al 

Highway 

Agency

ons Pavement 

marking

2013110

03

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

2.11 

Miles

60000

0

60000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

3950 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Exclusive 

left turn 

lanes

2013110

04

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add lane(s) 

along segment

4.3 

Miles

96800

0

96800

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

2900 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Widen 

Paved 

Shoulder

2013110

05

Roadside Barrier - other 6.9 

Miles

77500

0

77500

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expresswa

ys

1630

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Guardrail

2013110

07

Intersection traffic control 

Pavement markings - add 

advance stop ahead

0.01 

Miles

22500 25000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

1200 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Pavement 

markings

2013110

08

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

1 

Numb

ers

44100

0

44100

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Left turn 

phase
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

46

2013120

01

Miscellaneous 0.25 

Miles

62600

0

18960

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Collector

1950 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Realignmen

t

2013120

02

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

2.1 

Miles

94606

0

94606

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

4000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Guardrail, 

Paved 

Shoulder

2013120

03

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

8.58 

Miles

25515

00

28350

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

8400 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Paved 

shoulder, 

Rumble 

strips

2013120

04

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

1.59 

Miles

16200

00

18000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

8300 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Exclusive 

left turn

2013120

05

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal - add 

additional signal heads

1 

Numb

ers

27900

00

31000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Intersection 

phasing

2013120

06

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add rightturn lane

1 

Numb

ers

26100

00

29000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Intersection 

phasing

2013120

07

Pedestrians and bicyclists 

Pedestrian signal

1.8 

Miles

12150

00

13500

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

8200 35 City of 

Municip

al 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Signal head 

per lane
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

47

2013120

08

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

1 

Numb

ers

54000

00

60000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2013120

09

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

1 

Numb

ers

16200

00

18000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2014020

01

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

1 

Numb

ers

39200

0

39200

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

1300

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Rumble 

strips 

2014020

03

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add lane(s) 

along segment

1 

Numb

ers

10000

00

10000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane add

2014030

01

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

26.02 

Miles

19910

00

19910

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

1250 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Paved 

shoulder

2014030

02

Roadside Barrier -

concrete

1 

Numb

ers

0 52500

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Guardrail
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

2014030

03

Alignment Horizontal 

curve realignment

0.06 

Miles

13500

00

15000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Frontage

5600 45 City of 

Municip

al 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Horizontal 

alignment

2014040

01

Roadway Superelevation / 

cross slope

5.66 

Miles

48600

0

17000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

1150 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Superelevat

ion

2014040

02

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

2.2 

Miles

77500

0

77500

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

1740

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Resurfacing

2014040

03

Shoulder treatments 

Shoulder treatments -

other

5.9 

Miles

24513

10

24513

10

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

1900

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Other

2014040

04

Roadway Superelevation / 

cross slope

6.28 

Miles

24000

00

24000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

4650 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Superelevat

ion

2014040

05

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

3.66 

Miles

90000

0

90000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

2600 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Pavement 

treatment

2014050

01

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

1 

Numb

90000 10000 HSIP 

(Sectio

Urban 

Minor 

0 35 State 

Highway 

Intersecti Protected 

left-turn 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

49

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

ers 0 00 n 148) Arterial Agency ons lane 

phasing

2014050

02

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

1 

Numb

ers

90000

0

10000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Resurfacing

2014050

03

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

1 Miles 21000

00

21000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

5700 30 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Resurfacing 

2014050

04

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/uns

pecified

1.81 

Miles

87500

0

87500

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

5950 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Improveme

nt roadway

2014050

05

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal 

timing - left-turn phasing 

(permissive to protectedonly)

1 

Numb

ers

16200

00

18000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Protected 

left-turn 

lane 

phasing

2014050

06

Alignment Horizontal 

curve realignment

1 

Numb

ers

71200

0

71200

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 55 County 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Delineators

2014060

01

Alignment Horizontal 5.61 11700 13000 HSIP 

(Sectio

Urban 

Principal 

5040 65 State 

Highway 

Guardrails
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

50

curve realignment Miles 0 0 n 148) Arterial -

Interstate

0 Agency

2014060

02

Roadway Rumble strips -

transverse

17.22 

Miles

25650

0

28500

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

1003

00

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Rumble 

strips

2014060

03

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add lane(s) 

along segment

10.72 

Miles

32572

80

36192

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

4250 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Paved 

shoulder

2014060

04

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add lane(s) 

along segment

2.7 

Miles

87480

0

97200

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

2180

0

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Paved 

shoulder

2014060

05

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal - add 

additional signal heads

1 

Numb

ers

13500

00

15000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Realignmen

t

2014060

06

Intersection traffic control 

Intersection traffic control 

- other

1 

Numb

ers

31500

0

35000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 30 City of 

Municip

al 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Traffic 

signal

2014060

07

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

5.66 

Miles

10000

00

10000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

3050 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Paved 

shoulder

2014070 Shoulder treatments 7.98 21000 21000 HSIP Rural 5160 55 State Roadway Widen 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

51

01 Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

Miles 00 00 (Sectio

n 148)

Minor 

Arterial

Highway 

Agency

Departure Paved 

Shoulder

2014070

02

Pedestrians and bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and bicyclists

1 

Numb

ers

52000

0

52000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Behaviora

l 

Awarenes

s, 

Vulnerabl

e Users, 

Intersecti

ons

Pedestrian 

Signaling; 

Pavement 

marking

2014070

03

Speed management 

Speed management -

other

1 

Numb

ers

16000

0

16000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

5430

0

0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Behaviora

l 

Awarenes

s, Road 

Departure

Horizontal 

alignment; 

Advanced 

warning

2014070

04

Roadway Roadway - other 44.61 

Miles

20000 20000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

2000

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Pavement 

markings

2014070

18

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

5 Miles 15330

00

15330

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

4150 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Paved 

shoulder

2014090

01

Advanced technology and 

ITS Advanced technology 

and ITS - other

0 Miles 27500

0

27500

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Advanced 

Signal 

Warning
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

52

2014090

05

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

2.5 

Miles

66000

0

66000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

2250 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Paved 

shoulder

2014090

06

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

1.3 

Miles

76000

0

76000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

2000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Paved 

shoulder

2014090

07

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

2.16 

Miles

12000

00

12000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

1800 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

High 

friction 

surface

2014090

08

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

0.85 

Miles

60000

0

60000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

2650 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

High 

friction 

surface

2014100

60

Intersection traffic control 

Systemic improvements -

signal-controlled

1 

Numb

ers

10000

0

10000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

1220

0

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Traffic 

signal

2014103

71

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

1 

Numb

ers

13820

00

13820

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

5450 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Exclusive 

left turn 

lanes

2014110

01

Advanced technology and 

ITS Advanced technology 

and ITS - other

1 

Numb

ers

10730

00

26481

47

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

3000

0

70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Data ITS use

2014110 Miscellaneous 1 16000 16000 HSIP Rural 1190 0 State Intersecti Realignmen
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

53

05 Numb

ers

00 00 (Sectio

n 148)

Minor 

Arterial

0 Highway 

Agency

ons t
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

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

Performance Measures* 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Number of fatalities 1076.6 1009.4 951 940.6 758.4

Number of serious injuries 14530.6 13368.2 12675 12454.8 9853.6

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.01 0.96 0.91 0.9 0.72

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

13.66 12.65 12.07 11.87 9.41

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

55
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

56
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

57

To the maximum extent possible, present performance measure* data by functional classification and ownership. 

Year - 2014

Function 

Classification

Number of fatalities Number of serious injuries Fatality rate (per HMVMT) Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

101.4 1004.8 0.32 3.2

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

0 0 0 0

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

69.6 524.6 1.53 11.52

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

7 69.4 1.69 16.72

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

86.8 716.2 1.77 14.61

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

61 522.8 1.61 13.8

URBAN PRINCIPAL 202 2976.8 0.82 12.15
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

58

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

3 48 0.26 4.17

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

0 0 0 0

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

113 1998.8 0.73 12.9

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

61.6 955 0.76 11.85

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

49 770.4 0.47 7.4

OTHER 4.2 120 4.81 136.9

INTERSTATE 0 0 0 0

URBAN COLLECTOR 0 0 0 0
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

59
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

60
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

61
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

62
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

63

Year - 2010

Roadway Ownership Number of 

fatalities

Number of serious 

injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

COUNTY HIGHWAY AGENCY 0 0 0 0

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 0 0 0 0

COUNTY HIGHWAY AGENCY 0 0 0 0

TOWN OR TOWNSHIP HIGHWAY AGENCY 0 0 0 0

CITY OF MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY AGENCY 0 0 0 0

STATE PARK, FOREST, OR RESERVATION AGENCY 0 0 0 0

LOCAL PARK, FOREST OR RESERVATION AGENCY 0 0 0 0

OTHER STATE AGENCY 0 0 0 0

OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 0 0 0 0

PRIVATE (OTHER THAN RAILROAD) 0 0 0 0

RAILROAD 0 0 0 0

STATE TOLL AUTHORITY 0 0 0 0

LOCAL TOLL AUTHORITY 0 0 0 0

OTHER PUBLIC INSTRUMENTALITY (E.G. AIRPORT, 

SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY)

0 0 0 0
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

64

INDIAN TRIBE NATION 0 0 0 0
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

65
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

66
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

67
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

68
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

69

Describe any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which you would like to elaborate.

From 2009 to 2013, there is a 13% reduction of fatalities on state routes (552 in 2009 to 483 in 2013) but 

42% increase on local routes (359 in 2009 to 508 in 2013). Similarly, there is a 25% reduction of serious 

injuries on state routes (7151 in 2009 to 5382 in 2013) but 18% increase on local routes (5855 in 2009 to 

6918 in 2013) from 2009 to 2013. 

Application of Special Rules

Present the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over the 

age of 65. 

Older Driver

Performance Measures

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Fatality rate (per 

capita)

1.14 1 0.99 0.94 0.96

Serious injury rate 

(per capita)

8.25 7.76 7.25 6.97 6.95

Fatality and serious 

injury rate (per capita)

9.38 8.76 8.24 7.92 7.91

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.

Fatality and serious injury rate for 2013: 

((2009 older driver fatalities & serious injuries + 2009 older pedestrian fatalities & serious injuries 

)/2009 older person population + (2010 older driver fatalities & serious injuries + 2010 older pedestrian 

fatalities & serious injuries)/2010 older person population + (2011 older driver fatalities & serious 

injuries + 2011 older pedestrian fatalities & serious injuries)/2011 older person population + (2012 older 

driver fatalities & serious injuries + 2012 older pedestrian fatalities & serious injuries)/2012 older 

person population + (2013 older driver fatalities & serious injuries + 2013 older pedestrian fatalities & 

serious injuries)/2013 older person population))/5 years 

=(((119 + 907)/124) + ((109 + 905)/126) + ((125 + 854)/128) + ((126 + 892)/132) + ((140 + 932)/135))/5 = 

7.93
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

70

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

71

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)

What indicators of success can you use to demonstrate effectiveness and success in the Highway 

Safety Improvement Program?

None

Benefit/cost

Policy change

Other: Other-Statewide fatal and serious injuries, local route fatal and serious injuries and 

performance measures by emphasis area and District

What significant programmatic changes have occurred since the last reporting period? 

Shift Focus to Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Include Local Roads in Highway Safety Improvement Program

Organizational Changes

None

Other: 

Briefly describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period. 
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

72

Illinois has been developing and maintaining databases that will be used for project and program 

evaluation. This will supplement the statewide performance metrics that are being used to manage and 

track program successes and make changes as needed.
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

73

SHSP Emphasis Areas

For each SHSP emphasis area that relates to the HSIP, present trends in emphasis area performance measures. 

Year - 2013

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Roadway Departure 494.6 3994.4 0.47 3.14 0 0 0

Intersections 237.2 5437.6 0.23 5.18 0 0 0

Pedestrians 126.6 976.4 0.12 0.93 0 0 0

Bicyclists 26 418.4 0.02 0.4 0 0 0

Older Drivers 163.8 1910.8 0.16 1.82 0 0 0

Motorcyclists 143 1127.4 0.14 1.07 0 0 0

Work Zones 26.8 206.8 0.03 0.2 0 0 0
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

74
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

75
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

76
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

77
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

78

Groups of similar project types

Present the overall effectiveness of groups of similar types of projects.

Year - 2014

HSIP Subprogram TypesTarget Crash Type Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious 

injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury 

rate (per 

HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Horizontal Curve Run-off-road 145.2 1106.4 0.14 1.06 0 0 0

Pedestrian 

Safety

Pedestrians 103.8 763.6 0.1 0.73 0 0 0

Roadway 

Departure

Overturned, Fixed Object, 

Sideswipe-opposite 

direction, Head on

399.8 3137.8 0.38 2.33 0 0 0

Local Safety Segments, Intersections 383 5221.4 0.37 4.99 0 0 0

Intersection Intersections 190.8 4306.8 0.18 4.11 0 0 0
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

79
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

80
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

81
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

82
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

83

Systemic Treatments

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Systemic 

improvement

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

84
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

85
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

86
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

87
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

88

Describe any other aspects of the overall Highway Safety Improvement Program effectiveness on 

which you would like to elaborate. 

The statewide safety program is evaluated, monitored and tracked at the statewide, local routes.
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

89

Project Evaluation

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

Bef-All 

Injuries

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

Aft-All 

Injuries

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ 

Cost Ratio)
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

90

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached
2015 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

91

Glossary

5 year rolling average means the average of five individual, 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. 

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.