Page 1 of 60

OREGON 

2020 ANNUAL REPORT 

Photo Source: 

Photo image courtesy of ODOT 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 60

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

Program Methodology .....................................................................................................................10

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................26

Funds Programmed .........................................................................................................................26

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................29

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................39

General Highway Safety Trends ......................................................................................................39

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................44

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................46

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................47

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................47

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................48

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................51

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................55

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................59

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................60
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 60

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 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 60

Executive Summary

The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) is responsible for administering Oregon’s Highway Safety 

Improvement (HSIP) Program. All roads within the state of Oregon are eligible to receive HSIP funding under 

the All Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) Program. The mission of the Highway Safety Program at the 

Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) is to carry out highway safety improvement projects to achieve 

a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries. For purposes of programming Highway Safety 

funds in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), all highway safety infrastructure 

improvement projects shall follow these guidelines. The majority of the funding for the ODOT Highway Safety 

Program comes from the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), which is a core federal-aid program 

under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act that went into effect in December, 2015. The 

primary goal of the HSIP is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public 

roads, including non-state owned roads and tribal roads. The HSIP also requires a data-driven and strategic 

approach to improving highway safety on all public roads that focuses on performance. The FAST Act, which 

replaced the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), largely maintained the program 

structure of the HSIP with slight increases in funding and a change that disallows HSIP funds to be transferred 

to and used for educational and enforcement type activities. The HSIP funds are primarily intended for 

infrastructure improvement projects. Non-infrastructure highway safety improvements such as education and 

enforcement programs are administered by the ODOT Transportation Safety Division (TSD), and are typically 

funded with separate funding from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the Federal 

Highway Administration (FHWA), or state funds.

Following the HSIP requirements, ODOT has developed a relatively new safety program, known as the All 

Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) Program, which addresses safety on all public roads including non-state 

roadways. ODOT worked with the representatives from the League of Oregon Cities (LOC) and the 

Association of Oregon Counties (AOC) to document principles for a jurisdictionally blind safety program for 

Oregon to address safety on all public roads of the state, which eventually led to the development of the ARTS 

Program. The ARTS Program is intended to address safety needs on all public roads in Oregon. About half of 

the fatal and serious injury crashes in the state occur on non-state roadways. By working collaboratively with 

local road jurisdictions (cities, counties, MPOs, and tribes) ODOT can expect to increase awareness of safety 

on all roads, promote best practices for infrastructure safety, complement behavioral safety efforts, and focus 

limited resources to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes in the State of Oregon. The program is a datadriven program to achieve the greatest benefits in crash reduction and is blind to jurisdiction. Under the 

inaugural round of the ARTS Program, safety projects have been selected that will be delivered between 2017 

and 2021. The Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) has allocated approximately $31 to $37 million 

dollars per year to the ODOT Highway Safety Program for these five years (for a total of $166 million dollars) 

for infrastructure improvements. The majority of this funding will come from the federal HSIP. We have updated 

our Roadway Departure plan on Oregon roadways. Currently in the process of updating our intersection plan 

and bike/pedestrian plan in the near future. ODOT is starting the third round of the All Roads Transportation 

Safety (ARTS) program starting in the fall of 2020. Recently completed an ODOT research project conducted 

by OSU and PSU entitled, "Addressing Oregon's Rise in Deaths and Serious Injuries for Senior Drivers and 

Pedestrians". ODOT intends to incorporate several of the recommendations for practice into ODOT policies 

and guidance documents.
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 60

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 objective of the ARTS Program is to select the best safety projects using a jurisdictionally 

blind and data-driven approach to significantly reduce the occurrence of fatalities and serious 

injuries on all roads in the state. A data-driven approach uses crash data, risk factors, or other 

data supported methods to identify the best possible locations to achieve the greatest 

benefits. Oregon DOT primarily uses a flagging tool called Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) 

to assist Region Traffic Investigators in identifying high crash locations to investigate and 

determine if there are appropriate safety countermeasures to be developed into a safety 

project to eliminate or reduce fatal or serious injury crashes. Many highway projects 

incorporate design features or elements that relate to highway safety, such as updating 

guardrail or improving intersection channelization, signing, and pavement markings. But 

appropriate use of HSIP funds is only for locations or corridors where a known problem exists 

as indicated by location-specific data on fatalities and serious injuries, and/or where it is 

determined that the specific project can with confidence produce a measurable and significant 

reduction in such fatalities or serious injuries. To achieve the maximum benefit, the focus of 

the ARTS Program is on cost-effective use of the funds allocated for safety improvements 

addressing fatal and serious injury crashes.

The general program guidelines are as follows:

• All projects shall address specific safety problems that contribute to fatal and serious injury 

crashes.

• All projects shall use only countermeasures from the ODOT-approved countermeasure list.

• Only the most recent available five years of ODOT-reported crashes shall be used for crash 

analysis.

• Projects shall be prioritized based on ODOT-approved prioritization method such as BenefitCost Ratio.

• ODOT Regions will be responsible for developing and delivering projects.

The ARTS Program has two components – a hotspot component and a systemic component. 

The hotspot approach is the traditional approach used in safety analysis (ODOT users a 

program called SPIS), in which ‘hotspot’ locations are identified based on crash history and 

appropriate countermeasures are implemented to reduce crashes. Hotspot projects typically 

focus on a particular location (for example, an intersection or a short segment of a roadway) 

that may have multiple causes to address. For the ARTS Program, a hotspot location is 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 60

defined as a location that has at least one fatal or serious injury crash within the last five 

years.

The systemic approach identifies a few proven low-cost countermeasures that can be widely implemented and 

then applies the countermeasures where there is evidence that they would be most useful. The HSIP places a 

significant emphasis on the systemic approach, which has been proven to successfully reduce the occurrences 

of fatal and serious injury crashes. The systemic component of the ARTS Program has been further divided 

into three emphasis areas – roadway departure, intersection, and pedestrian/bicycle. Based on Oregon data, 

these three emphasis areas accounted for approximately 85% of the fatal and serious injury crashes in the 

state. 

The systemic approach originally used Section 164 penalty funds allocated to the Safety Program, but under 

the ARTS Program the systemic approach has been moved into the mainstream safety program equal with the 

hotspot approach. 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-Traffic-Roadway Engineering Section

The Oregon DOT Highway Safety Engineer and Traffic Safety Coordinator are both located in our 

headquarters office in Salem. There are 5 Region Traffic offices across Oregon. Each Region Traffic office has 

several employees that work with Region staff to help develop appropriate safety projects using one of our 

safety plans (Roadway Departure, Intersection, Bike/ped plans) or using our Safety Priority Index System 

(SPIS) to help identify high crash locations. 

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

 SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

The available money is separated into two categories — systemic and hot spots. Systemic project are proven, 

low-cost measures that have successfully reduced the occurrence of fatal and serious injury crashes and that 

can be widely implemented, like rumble strips on the shoulder of the road. Hot spots are identified by a higher 

than normal crash occurrence. These are often higher cost projects and are targeted to a specific segment of 

roadway or intersection. 

ODOT collected input from the local governments in each region of the state. 

Funding is divided to each region based on the number of fatalities and serious injury crashes. Potential 

projects within each region are prioritized by their benefit cost or cost effectiveness index (CEI) for bike/ped 

projects. 

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

Local and tribal roads are addressed through the All Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) Program, a safety 

program that addresses safety needs on all public roads in Oregon. By working collaboratively with local road 

jurisdictions (cities, counties, MPO’s and tribes), ODOT hopes to increase awareness of safety on all roads, 

promote best practices for infrastructure safety, compliment behavioral safety efforts and focus limited 

resources to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes in the state of Oregon. This program uses a data-driven 

approach that is blind to jurisdiction to achieve the greatest benefits in crash reduction and emphasize 

elements of the SHSP. 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 60

The objective of the ARTS Program is to select the best safety projects using a jurisdictionally blind and datadriven approach to significantly reduce the occurrence of fatalities and serious injuries on all roads in the state. 

A data-driven approach uses crash data, risk factors, or other data supported methods to identify the best 

possible locations to achieve the greatest benefits. Many highway projects incorporate design features or 

elements that relate to highway safety, such as updating guardrail or improving intersection channelization, 

signing, and pavement markings. But appropriate use of HSIP funds is only for locations or corridors where a 

known problem exists as indicated by location-specific data on fatalities and serious injuries, and/or where it is 

determined that the specific project can with confidence produce a measurable and significant reduction in 

such fatalities or serious injuries. To achieve the maximum benefit, the focus of the ARTS Program is on costeffective use of the funds allocated for safety improvements addressing fatal and serious injury crashes. 

The general program guidelines are as follows: 

• All projects shall address specific safety problems that contribute to fatal and serious injury crashes. 

• All projects shall use only countermeasures from the ODOT-approved countermeasure list. 

• Only the most recent available five years of ODOT-reported crashes shall be used for crash analysis. 

• Projects shall be prioritized based on ODOT-approved prioritization method such as Benefit-Cost Ratio. 

• ODOT Regions will be responsible for developing and delivering projects.

The ARTS Program has two components – a hotspot component and a systemic component. The hotspot 

approach is the traditional approach used in safety analysis, in which ‘hotspot’ locations are identified based on 

crash history and appropriate countermeasures are implemented to reduce crashes. Hotspot projects typically 

focus on a particular location (for example, an intersection or a short segment of a roadway) that may have 

multiple causes to address. For the ARTS Program, a hotspot location is defined as a location that has at least 

one fatal or serious injury crash within the last five years. 

The systemic approach identifies a few proven low-cost countermeasures that can be widely implemented and 

then applies the countermeasures where there is evidence that they would be most useful. The HSIP places a 

significant emphasis on the systemic approach, which has been proven to successfully reduce the occurrences 

of fatal and serious injury crashes. The systemic component of the ARTS Program has been further divided 

into three emphasis areas – roadway departure, intersection, and pedestrian/bicycle. Based on Oregon data, 

these three emphasis areas accounted for approximately 85% of the fatal and serious injury crashes in the 

state. 

The systemic approach originally used Section 164 penalty funds allocated to the Safety Program, but under 

the ARTS Program the systemic approach has been moved into the mainstream safety program equal with the 

hotspot approach. 

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning. 

 Design 

 Districts/Regions 

 Governors Highway Safety Office 

 Local Aid Programs Office/Division 

 Maintenance 

 Operations 

 Planning 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 60

 Traffic Engineering/Safety 

 Other-Highway Safety Engineering Committee (HSEC) 

ODOT established a Highway Safety Engineering Committee (HSEC) on February 18, 2005 which meet 

quarterly. This committee provides a leadership forum to strategize, coordinate and direct the engineeringrelated highway safety activities and is comprised of individuals with a mix of expertise within the Department. 

Members of the committee represent the Transportation Safety Division, Region and Headquarters Traffic, 

Region Technical Centers, Region Planner, District Maintenance and Roadway Section. The Traffic Operations 

and Leadership Team (TOLT) recently change their name to Traffic Operations Group (TOG) which provides 

statewide policy and procedure leadership for traffic engineering related issues. The All Roads Transportation 

Safety (ARTS) subcommittee was established to provide guidance and direction during the ARTS process for 

continued improvements to the HSIP/ARTS safety program. 

Describe coordination with internal partners. 

ODOT established a Highway Safety Engineering Committee (HSEC) on February 18, 2005 which meet 

quarterly. 

The Highway Safety Engineering Committee (HSEC) provides operational decisions for the Safety 

Management System within ODOT and provides advice and recommendations to Highway Leadership Team 

as well as other leadership teams within ODOT regarding funding issues or major safety policy matters. 

The HSEC will be comprised of individuals with a mix of expertise within the Department. Members of the 

committee represent the Transportation Safety Division, Region and Headquarters Traffic, Region Technical 

Centers, Transportation Development (Planning), Maintenance, Federal Highway, Transportation Safety, 

Association of Oregon Counties and Roadway Section. 

The Highway Safety Engineering Committee provides a leadership forum to enhance, strategize, coordinate, 

and direct the engineering/infrastructure related highway safety activities for the Department including the 

ARTS/HSIP program. 

The Traffic Operations Group (TOG) was established to provides statewide policy and procedure 

leadership for traffic engineering related issues. 

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 

Our 5 Region Traffic offices work closely with all external partners in determining appropriate ARTS safety 

projects to fund in Oregon to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes. 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 60

Describe coordination with external partners.

Our 5 Region Traffic offices work closely with external partners in determining appropriate safety projects to 

fund in Oregon to reduce fatal and serious injuries crashes. We are in the process of starting our round 3, All 

Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) program where the 5 Region Traffic offices conducted outreach meetings 

with local agencies interested in submitting proposed ARTS safety projects for funding consideration. They are 

currently hiring a consultant to assist Region Traffic offices during the ARTS application process.

Some External Partners are involved in HSEC, but all are involved in the planning through the SHSP process 

as stakeholders in the strategic planning document that defines Oregon’s traffic safety trends and challenges. 

The SHSP also identifies Oregon’s policies and strategies to eliminate fatalities and serious injuries.

Describe HSIP program administration practices that have changed since the last 

reporting period.

The major change in the round 2 ARTS (All Roads Transportation Safety) program is that both the proposed 

hot spot projects and the proposed systemic project now require an application to be submitted for funding 

consideration. The second round of the ARTS program began in the fall of 2017 and extended through the fall 

of 2019. During this period, projects were selected for the STIP and to be delivered in the years 2022 through 

2024. Approximately $30 million per year will be available for the ARTS program as determined by the Oregon 

Transportation Commission (OTC).

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

elaborate. 

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/TRAFFICROADWAY/docs/pdf/odot_safety_program_guide.pdf

Oregon DOT updated their Roadway Departure plan in September 2017 for the 

statehttp://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Engineering/Docs_TrafficEng/Departure-ImplementationPlan.pdf. Portland State University recently develop a plan regarding wrong way driving and 

recommendation on our interstate 

rampshttp://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Engineering/Docs_TrafficEng/Wrong-Way-DriverReport.pdf. ODOT is in the process of implementing several of the recommendations in 

Region 3 using the ARTS funding. 

Currently finalizing an ODOT research project titled, "Addressing Oregon's Rise in Deaths and 

Serious Injuries for Senior Drivers and Pedestrians". Our plan is to incorporate some of the 

recommendations for practice into our policy and guidance documents to reduce fatal and 

serious injuries for senior drivers and pedestrians.

Although not as commonly used as benefit-cost analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis is 

another tool that is used by ODOT for project prioritization. Rather than comparing the 

economic value of the crash reductions to the project cost, cost-effectiveness analysis 

compares the change in crash frequency due to the implementation of a countermeasure to 

the project cost. For Oregon’s pedestrian/bicycle projects under the ARTS Program, CostEffectiveness Index (CEI) is used to prioritize projects. 

CEI estimates the cost to reduce one crash. The lower the CEI value of a project, the higher it will rank in the prioritized list.
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 60

Here is a link to the ARTS program for more information http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/TRAFFIC-ROADWAY/Pages/ARTS.aspx .

Program Methodology 

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

implementation and evaluation processes? 

Yes 

Here is a link to our All Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) program 

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Engineering/Pages/ARTS.aspx . 

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

 Bicycle Safety 

 HRRR

 Intersection 

 Pedestrian Safety 

 Roadway Departure 

ODOT's common highway safety goal on Oregon roadways is to select appropriate safety projects that will 

reduce fatal and serious injury crashes. In our HSIP ARTS program, most all of these program topic areas can 

receive HSIP safety funding depending on the applicant justifying an acceptable benefit/cost analysis to reduce 

fatal and serious injury crashes. Bicycle and pedestrian projects are ranked using a cost effectiveness index. 

ODO has a small fund called Quick Fix funding to address low cost safety spot improvements for our highway 

system only. 

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology:2/1/2014

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 and serious injury crashes 

only  Volume  Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Other-Cost Effectiveness for Bike/Peds
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 60

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

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

Cost Effectiveness:100

The traditional approach to safety is to identify "hotspot" locations and then identify measures to implement by 

diagnosing the "hotspot". ODOT uses the Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) which is a flagging tool to 

identify high crash locations for our Region Traffic Investigators to investigate to develop potential hotspot 

safety projects (prioritized based on benefit cost ratios) for all roads in each Region identifying locations and 

the appropriate countermeasures. 

The systemic approach identifies a few proven low-cost measures to be widely implemented, then implements 

the measures where there is evidence that they would be most useful. The systemic measures have been 

proven to successfully reduce the occurrence of fatal and serious injury crashes. The process for Systemic 

projects was an application-based process. Local Agencies and ODOT Regions submitted applications for 

systemic projects in three focus areas- roadway departure, intersections, and pedestrian/bicycle. Projects were 

prioritized based on benefit cost ratio (for roadway departure and intersections projects) and cost-effectiveness 

index (pedestrian/bicycle projects). Here is a link to the bicycle/pedestrian plan. 

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/TRAFFIC-ROADWAY/Pages/Bicycle_Pedestrian_Safety.aspx 

Program: HRRR

Date of Program Methodology:9/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 60

 Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

 Volume

 Population

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

 Other-Crash Severity

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

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:100

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology:6/1/2012

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 and serious injury crashes 

only  Volume  Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 60

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

 Other-Crash Severity

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

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:100

The traditional approach to safety is to identify "hotspot" locations and then identify measures to implement by 

diagnosing the "hotspot". ODOT uses the Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) which is a flagging tool to 

identify high crash locations for our Region Traffic Investigators to investigate to develop potential hotspot 

safety projects (prioritized based on benefit cost ratios) for all roads in each Region identifying locations and 

the appropriate countermeasures. 

The systemic approach identifies a few proven low-cost measures to be widely implemented, then implements 

the measures where there is evidence that they would be most useful. The systemic measures have been 

proven to successfully reduce the occurrence of fatal and serious injury crashes. The process for Systemic 

projects was an application-based process. Local Agencies and ODOT Regions submitted applications for 

systemic projects in three focus areas- roadway departure, intersections, and pedestrian/bicycle. Projects were 

prioritized based on benefit cost ratio (for roadway departure and intersections projects) and cost-effectiveness 

index (pedestrian/bicycle projects). Here is a link to our intersection plan 

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/TRAFFIC-ROADWAY/Pages/intersections.aspx . 

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology:2/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 60

 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 and serious injury crashes 

only  Volume  Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Other-Cost Effectiveness for Bike/Peds

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

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

Cost Effectiveness:100

The traditional approach to safety is to identify "hotspot" locations and then identify measures to implement by 

diagnosing the "hotspot". ODOT uses the Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) which is a flagging tool to 

identify high crash locations for our Region Traffic Investigators to investigate to develop potential hotspot 

safety projects (prioritized based on benefit cost ratios) for all roads in each Region identifying locations and 

the appropriate countermeasures. 

The systemic approach identifies a few proven low-cost measures to be widely implemented, then implements 

the measures where there is evidence that they would be most useful. The systemic measures have been 

proven to successfully reduce the occurrence of fatal and serious injury crashes. The process for Systemic 

projects was an application-based process. Local Agencies and ODOT Regions submitted applications for 

systemic projects in three focus areas- roadway departure, intersections, and pedestrian/bicycle. Projects were 

prioritized based on benefit cost ratio (for roadway departure and intersections projects) and cost-effectiveness 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 60

index (pedestrian/bicycle projects). Here is a link to the bicycle/pedestrian plan. 

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/TRAFFIC-ROADWAY/Pages/Bicycle_Pedestrian_Safety.aspx 

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology:9/1/2017

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 

 Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only  Population

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

 Other-Crash Severity

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

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:100
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 60

The traditional approach to safety is to identify "hotspot" locations and then identify measures to implement by 

diagnosing the "hotspot". ODOT uses the Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) which is a flagging tool to 

identify high crash locations for our Region Traffic Investigators to investigate to develop potential hotspot 

safety projects (prioritized based on benefit cost ratios) for all roads in each Region identifying locations and 

the appropriate countermeasures. 

The systemic approach identifies a few proven low-cost measures to be widely implemented, then implements 

the measures where there is evidence that they would be most useful. The systemic measures have been 

proven to successfully reduce the occurrence of fatal and serious injury crashes. The process for Systemic 

projects was an application-based process. Local Agencies and ODOT Regions submitted applications for 

systemic projects in three focus areas- roadway departure, intersections, and pedestrian/bicycle. Projects were 

prioritized based on benefit cost ratio (for roadway departure and intersections projects) and cost-effectiveness 

index (pedestrian/bicycle projects). Here is a link to the roadway departure plan 

https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Engineering/Pages/Roadway-Departures.aspx 

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements? 

 50

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

 Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal 

 Cable Median Barriers 

 High friction surface treatment 

 Horizontal curve signs 

 Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation 

 Install/Improve Signing 

 Rumble Strips 

 Wrong way driving treatments 

The ARTS Program has two components – a hotspot component and a systemic component. The hotspot 

approach is the traditional approach used in safety analysis, in which ‘hotspot’ locations are identified based on 

crash history and appropriate countermeasures are implemented to reduce crashes. Hotspot projects typically 

focus on a particular location (for example, an intersection or a short segment of a roadway) that may have 

multiple causes to address. For the ARTS Program, a hotspot location is defined as a location that has at least 

one fatal or serious injury crash within the last five years. 

The systemic approach identifies a few proven low-cost countermeasures that can be widely implemented and 

then applies the countermeasures where there is evidence that they would be most useful. The HSIP places a 

significant emphasis on the systemic approach, which has been proven to successfully reduce the occurrences 

of fatal and serious injury crashes. The systemic component of the ARTS Program has been further divided 

into three emphasis areas – roadway departure, intersection, and pedestrian/bicycle. Based on 2009 through 

2013 data, these three emphasis areas accounted for approximately 85% of the fatal and serious injury 

crashes in the state. 

The ARTS Program funds will be allocated to the five ODOT Regions based on the proportion of the fatal and 

serious injury crashes occurred within the last five years in each Region. For a given Region, total funding 

should be divided equally between the hotspot and systemic components. Again, for the systemic component, 

it is recommended that Regions split the available funding between the emphasis areas identified in the TSAP 

(currently those are roadway departure, intersection, and pedestrian/bicycle) based on the proportion of the 

fatal and serious injury crashes occurred between these three areas within the last five years. For the first 

round of the ARTS Program, based on the crash data from 2009 to 2013, the statewide proportions of fatal and 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 60

serious injury crashes between roadway departure, intersection, and pedestrian/bicycle crashes were 50%, 

36%, and 14%, respectively. 

ODOT has approximately $166 million of funding for the five years between 2017 and 2021. Here is a link to 

ODOT's CRF list http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/TRAFFICROADWAY/Pages/ARTS.aspx#Crash_Reduction_Factors 

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

 Crash data analysis 

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

 Engineering Study 

 Road Safety Assessment 

 SHSP/Local road safety plan 

 Stakeholder input 

 Other-Region Traffic Investigator's investigate the top 5% Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) each 

year and identify potential cost effective countermeasures. 

Once locations have been identified for potential safety improvements through networking screening and 

diagnoses, the next step is to identify potential countermeasures that can be implemented to improve safety. A 

countermeasure can be defined as a roadway strategy intended to decrease crash frequency and/or severity at 

a given site. 

ODOT has compiled a list of countermeasures, known as the ODOT Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) List, which 

have been proven to reduce crashes. A Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) is the percentage crash reduction that 

might be expected after implementing a given countermeasure(s) at a specific site. These countermeasures 

were primarily chosen from the Highway Safety Manual, the Crash Modification Factors (CMF) Clearinghouse, 

and the FHWA Desktop Reference for Crash Reduction Factors. All the countermeasures were listed as either 

‘hotspot’ or ‘systemic’ countermeasures. Any countermeasures listed in the ODOT CRF List can be used for 

hotspot projects. However, for systemic projects only countermeasures that are listed as ‘systemic’ shall be 

used. 

The ODOT CRF List is updated periodically as new countermeasures or better studies on existing 

countermeasures become available. Suggestions for including new countermeasure(s) to the ODOT CRF List 

can be submitted to ODOT TRS Staff using the CRF Request Form provided on the ARTS website. 

Some CRFs may be applicable to all crash types and/or all severities. Some CRFs may be applicable to a 

particular crash type and/or severity. Correct crash types and severities should be used in the benefit-cost 

analysis. Refer to the ODOT Highway Safety Investigation Manual for more information on the CRF 

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/TRAFFIC-ROADWAY/Pages/ARTS.aspx#Crash_Reduction_Factors . 

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes 

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

ODOT's All Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) program includes several ITS technologies as potential 

countermeasures, especially curve and intersection warning systems and variable speeds Oregon is in the 

formative stages of developing connected vehicle technologies . 

Here is a link to our Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) connected vehicles website 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 60

https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Programs/Pages/Connected-Vehicles.aspx 

Automated Vehicles website https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Programs/Pages/CAV.aspx

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.

We are in the early stages of using the HSM to support HSIP efforts. Our ODOT Planning unit has 

incorporated several methodologies into their latest manual. We are using the cost-effectiveness analysis tool 

outlined in the HSM for project prioritization. Rather than comparing the economic value of the crash 

reductions to the project cost, cost-effectiveness analysis compares the change in crash frequency due to the 

implementation of a countermeasure to the project cost. For the pedestrian/bicycle projects under the ARTS 

Program, Cost-Effectiveness Index (CEI) is used to prioritize projects. CEI estimates the cost to reduce one 

crash. The lower the CEI value of a project, the higher it will rank in the prioritized list. ODOT uses some 

analysis methods from the HSM, including expected numbers of crashes for bikes and pedestrians, proportions 

of crashes in investigations and critical crash rates in planning and project level analysis.

Describe program methodology practices that have changed since the last reporting 

period.

Yes, we are in the process of starting round three of the ARTS program.

The ARTS program primarily uses federal funds from the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). The 

principles and purpose of ARTS and HSIP are:

The program goal is to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes.

The program must include all public roads.

The program is data driven and blind to jurisdiction.

The process is be overseen by Oregon DOT Regions.

Both traditional "hot spot" methodology and systemic methodology is used based on an application process.

The objective of ARTS and HSIP is to significantly reduce the occurrence of fatalities and serious injuries. A 

data-driven approach uses crash data, risk factors, or other data supported methods to identify the best 

possible locations to achieve the greatest benefits. Many highway projects incorporate design features or 

elements that relate to highway safety, such as updating guardrail or improvements to intersection 

channelization, signing and pavement markings. But appropriate use of HSIP funds is only for locations or 

corridors where a known problem exists as indicated by location-specific data on fatalities and serious injuries, 

and/or where it is determined that the specific project can, with confidence, produce a measurable and 

significant reduction in such fatalities or serious injuries. To achieve the maximum benefit, the focus of the 

ARTS program is on cost effective use of the funds allocated for safety improvements addressing fatal and 

serious injury crashes.

Address a specific Safety problem contributing to fatalities and serious injuries

Use proven countermeasures that correct or substantially improve the fatal and serious injury problem
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 60

Use ODOT crash data to establish the Benefit/Cost ratio (so projects can be compared fairly)

Use ODOT Benefit Cost method (or Cost effectiveness for Bicycle/Pedestrian)

Be prioritized or categorized based on the Benefit/Cost Ratio for developing the 150% list

Use only proven countermeasures from the approved ODOT Crash Reduction Factor list (a written process is 

developed for considering new measures)

Projects must include written support from the Road Jurisdiction if the project is proposed by another agency

Benefit Costs will be based on the most recent available three to five years of crash data

The traditional approach to safety is to identify "hot spot" locations, and then identify measures to implement by 

diagnosing the "hot spot".

Hot Spot Projects shall:

Address a location with a crash history of at least one fatal or serious injury crash within the last five years

The systemic approach identifies a few proven low-cost measures to be widely implemented, then implements 

the measures where there is evidence that they would be most useful. The systemic measures have been 

proven to successfully reduce the occurrence of fatal and serious injury crashes. The sites may be selected 

from ODOT’s list of priority corridors for Roadway Departure, Intersections or Pedestrian/Bicycle crashes. Our 

Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) is another flagging tool used to select appropriate safety projects.

Systemic Projects shall:

Use only approved "Systemic" countermeasures as listed in the Crash Reduction factors list

Not require the acquisition of significant amounts of right of way (more than 10% of project costs), preferably 

no right of way

For the Pedestrian and Bicycle Analysis, use Highway Safety Manual methods to estimate predicted crashes 

for pedestrians and bicycles and Cost Effectiveness to prioritize projects selection.

Systemic Projects should:

Have a history of fatal or serious injury crashes or a risk of high severity crashes and preferably are selected 

from priority corridors within Systemic plans.

The Safety funds are split to each region based on the amount of fatalities and serious injuries occurring in the 

region on all public roads. Regions will be required to spend a minimum of 50% of their funding on Systemic 

projects.

Systemic funding is intended to be used for Roadway Departure, Intersections and Pedestrian/Bicycle type 

projects. At the statewide level the split in F&A between Roadway Departure, Intersections and Ped/Bike is 

about 40%/40%/20% respectively. Regions will be given the flexibility to determine the appropriate splits 

between systemic types of projects for their regions. It is suggested:

That at least one project per year be developed for each type, if possible.
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 60

Region splits of systemic funds for each systemic type be roughly equivalent to the proportion of F&A occurring 

in the region 

Funding is eligible to be used for approved countermeasures as long as those countermeasures provide an 

improvement to reducing fatal and serious injury and are prioritized through the ARTS data driven process. 

Safety funds may be used to include or replace elements that are necessary to satisfactorily complete the 

project, such as replacing non-compliant ADA ramps, replacing pavement striping that is removed or right of 

way, but those elements must be included in the cost of the project and part of the prioritization process. Other 

elements (not applicable to the safety project) may be combined with the project (i.e., culvert), but must be 

funded by other sources, not safety funds. 

Both Hot Spot and Systemic processes will be an application based process. Oregon jurisdictions will be 

invited to submit projects for Hot Spot and Systemic funding, using a large list of proven countermeasures. 

ODOT will distribute data on Hot Spots and Systemic Plans to help determine potential locations for 

improvement. 

For Hot Spots projects agencies will be given the opportunity to submit projects with justification that it meets 

the program purpose. The number of submittals should be limited because of limited funds, but ODOT will ask 

for submittals amounting to 300 to 500% of the funding available to ensure sufficient worthwhile projects. 

Regions will categorize projects based on the project’s ability to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes and the 

benefit cost of the project, and finalize a draft 150% list for field scoping. 

For Systemic projects the submittals will be for three systemic categories of funding, roadway departure, 

intersections and pedestrian/bicycle, attempting to solicit submittals amounting to about 300 - 500% of 

available funding. ODOT Regions will check all applications for program purpose and correctness, working with 

the submitting agencies when necessary in order to develop a potential list of projects. The intent is that the 

ODOT Regions will analyze and refine the list of submitted projects in order to prioritize the project list based 

on program purpose of reducing fatal and serious injuries and benefit cost, in order to finalize a draft 150% list 

for field scoping. 

Once the refined 150% lists are ready, all projects (both hot spot and systemic) will go through a multidiscipline assessment to verify the solution. A multi-disciplinary team, including the owner of the facility, will 

ensure the best countermeasure is chosen to mitigate fatal and serious injury crashes. The project will also be 

scoped to verify the costs and any possible barrier to implementation. A finalized list of prioritized projects can 

then be produced with the best solution and the best cost. 

Once the list is prioritized and a final 100% list is produced ODOT Region’s will work with Jurisdictions to 

determine the delivery methods, delivering agency and timelines (applicable funding year). For projects 

involving local agencies, the ODOT Regions will work with Jurisdictions to develop an Intergovernmental 

Agreement. The delivering agency will be accountable for timely and fiscally responsible delivery. 

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

elaborate.

HSIP All Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) Program 

Key Facts 

 ODOT and representatives of the League of Oregon Cities (LOC) and the Association of 

Oregon Counties (AOC) have examined road safety statistics throughout the state. The 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 60

results reveal a great need to improve local road safety. 

 In February 2013, ODOT entered into a memorandum of understanding with AOC and LOC. 

The MOU establishes that all Oregonians share the roads and that safety is everyone’s

concern. The common purpose is to reduce fatal and serious injuries on all public roads 

through a data driven process. 

 MAP 21 increased safety funding and emphasizes a focus on all public roads. Because of 

this, ODOT decided to offer a portion of its safety funds to improve safety on local roads, 

leading to the creation of the All Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) program. 

 The state road system makes up about 10 percent of the total mileage in the total road 

system. Ten percent of the system carries 50 percent of all traffic and has 50 percent of all 

crashes in the state. The other 50 percent of crashes occur off the state system. Under the 

ARTS program, available funds go toward the best and highest use. 

 The available money is separated into two categories — systemic and hot spots. 

o Systemic project are proven, low-cost measures that have successfully reduced

the occurrence of fatal and serious injury crashes and that can be widely 

implemented, like rumble strips on the shoulder of the road. 

o Hot spots are identified by a higher than normal crash occurrence. These are 

often higher cost projects and are targeted to a specific segment of roadway or 

intersection. 

 ODOT collected input from the local governments in each region of the state. By 

cooperating with local agencies we hope to raise the awareness of safety on all roads and 

promote best practices. 

Funding is divided to each region based on the number of fatalities and serious injury 

crashes. 

 Potential projects within each region are prioritized by their benefit cost which factors in the 

number of crashes, the crash reduction potential of the enhancement and the project cost. 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 60

 The program is data driven, using safety data to perform problem identification and analysis, 

to achieve the greatest benefits in terms of fatal and serious injury crash reduction. 

Here is a link to the 2018 ODOT ARTS Program Summary Report prepared for ODOT and prepared by 

DKS Associates:

https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Engineering/Docs_TrafficEng/ARTS_SUmmary-Report-2018.pdf 

All Roads Transportation Program: Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the ARTS Program? 

The All Roads Transportation Safety Program (ARTS) is a safety program that addresses safety forall public 

roads in the state of Oregon. This program uses federal funds from theHighway Safety Improvement Program. 

HSIP adopts a data-driven approach that uses crash data, risk factors, and other supported methods to identify 

the best possible locations to achieve the greatest benefits. The first round of ARTS began in 2014 with 

projects scheduled for delivery in years 2017-2021. The second round of project selection is scheduled to 

begin this fall for projects delivered in years 2022-2024.

2. What is the purpose of the ARTS Program? 

The primary objective of the ARTS Program is to select the best projects to reduce fatalities and serious 

injuries on all public roads in the state. 

3. What is the timeline for ARTS Program? 

The second round of the ARTS project selection will begin in the fall of 2017 and extend through the spring of 

2018. During this period, projects will be selected for the STIP and delivered in years 2022 through 2024. The 

Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) is currently working on developing the project criteria and plans 

on outreach to the local agencies sometime in late 2017. 

4. What methods are used for project selection?

ODOT will use two different methods for selecting projects – traditional ‘Hotspot’ method and ‘Systemic’ 

method. ODOT regions are required to spend at least half of the funding for Systemic projects. These two 

methods are designed to select the most cost-effective projects among all public roads in Oregon to reduce the 

most fatal and serious injury crashes with available funds. 

5. How much funding is available and how is it allocated? 

During the period of 2022 through 2024, approximately $30 million per year will likely be available for the ARTS 

program. This funding will be determined by theOregon Transportation Commission (OTC). 

Funds will be allocated to each ODOT region based on the proportion of fatalities and serious injuries that 

occurred within the region during the last five years. The region allocations during the last round of ARTS 

funding was approximately: 

Region 1 - 33%

Region 2 - 34%

Region 3 - 15%
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 60

Region 4 - 11%

Region 5 - 7%

6. What is the Hotspot method and how are the Hotspot projects selected?

The hotspot method identifies locations with documented crash problems, selects and then applies appropriate 

countermeasure(s) to mitigate the crash problems. Hotspot countermeasures are typically more expensive 

than systemic countermeasures. Examples of hotspot projects include installation of left turn lane(s), 

installation of a new traffic signal or roundabout at an intersection, or conversion of a signalized intersection to 

a roundabout. 

ODOT will develop a list of locations for potential projects using its Safety Priority Index System (SPIS), and 

Safety Implementation Plans for three emphasis areas including potential remedies and countermeasures: 

Roadway Departure, Intersections and the Pedestrian and Bicycle. Local agencies can use the SPIS list or 

whatever method they choose to pick the best potential projects. These projects must address locations with a 

crash history of at least one fatal or serious injury crash within the last five years. 

Local agencies and ODOT will both prepare applications for the projects that they believe will be the most 

effective at reducing fatal and serious injury crashes and yet have a good benefit cost ratio. All the proposed 

hotspot countermeasures must be from theODOT CRF List. 

Projects are prioritized based on benefit cost ratio. The projects selected for funding and addition to the 

Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) are those with the highestbenefit cost. 

To access data and tools, visit the ARTS Program website. 

7. What is the Systemic method and how will the Systemic projects be selected?

The Systemic method takes a broader view by looking at the crash history and risks associated with an entire 

roadway/corridor and then applying proven low-cost countermeasures to reduce the risk along the entire 

roadway, corridor or jurisdiction. Examples of systemic projects include installation of curve warning signs, 

reflectorized backplates on signals, rumble strips, countdown pedestrian timers and conversion to flashing 

yellow left turn arrow (FYLTA) signal heads for protected-permitted left turn (PPLT) signal operation. 

The ARTS Program consists of three emphasis areas for systemic improvements: Roadway Departure, 

Intersection, and Pedestrian and Bicycle. Systemic project locations may be selected from ODOT’s list of 

priority corridors for these three areas or from other sources. The systemic funds are roughly proportional to 

the number of fatalities and serious injuries that occur within the region. 

Like the hotspot approach, the systemic approach is an application-based process. ODOT and all local 

jurisdictions within a region can submit an application for available Systemic funding. All the proposed systemic 

countermeasures must be from theODOT CRF List. Projects are prioritized based on benefit cost ratio (for 

Roadway Departure and Intersection projects) and cost effectiveness index (Pedestrian and Bicycle projects). 

8. Can the same countermeasures be used for Hotspot as Systemic projects? Can a single location use 

a Systemic approach?

While systemic and Hotspot countermeasures may be applicable at the same location, ODOT asks applicants 

to submit separate applications for hotspot and for systemic measures during this round. Once approved for 

funding, the measures can be combined under one project if desired. Separate applications allow similar 

comparisons of benefits for both methods. 

9. If a local jurisdiction has supplemental crash data, can that data be used during the project selection 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 60

process?

ODOT recognizes that some jurisdictions may have supplemental crash data (e.g. police reports) that might be 

different from ODOT crash data. This data is exempt from project prioritization and benefit cost analysis. For 

fairness and consistency, crash data from 2012-2016 obtained from ODOT Crash Reports must be used for 

analysis purposes. However, the supplemental data may be informative for selecting appropriate 

countermeasures at a given location. 

10. How is the final project list prepared?

All projects in the refined lists (for both hotspot and systemic) go through multi-disciplinary assessment to verify 

the applicability of the proposed solution. A final list (100 percent list) is prepared and prioritized based on the 

best benefit cost ratios (Pedestrian and Bicycle projects are ranked based on cost effectiveness). 

11. Can a Hotspot or Systemic safety project from the final list be combined with another Statewide 

Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) project at the same location?

Yes, if a hotspot or systemic safety project from the final list is at a location where another STIP project is 

planned, these two projects may be combined for efficiency. Similarly, if a Hotspot project is selected in a 

location that is in the corridor where there will be a systemic project, both projects may be combined to a single 

project for efficient design and delivery of the project. This typically occurs after project lists are completed and 

before the STIP is adopted. 

12. Who designs and delivers the projects?

After the final 100 percent list is complete, ODOT regions work with the local jurisdictions to determine the 

delivery methods, timelines, and delivery agencies. Local agencies are encouraged to consider fund exchange 

(State Funded Local Projects) and deliver the projects themselves. The delivering agency is responsible for 

timely and fiscally responsible delivery. 

13. Will a local match be required for selected projects?

The federal HSIP requires a 7.78 percent match for projects. This requires local agencies to contribute 7.78 

percent of the total project cost. Local agencies are encouraged to fund exchange for state funds. More 

information can be found on theLocal Agency Guidelines website. 

14. Do HSIP projects follow Statewide Transportation Improvement Program process?

All the projects selected under the ARTS Program follow the STIP process. Refer to theSTIP website for more 

information on the STIP process and stakeholder involvement. 

15. Do the engineering countermeasures impact driver behaviors such as drinking and driving and 

speeding?

A direct relationship between countermeasures and driver behaviors has not been determined. Some 

countermeasures may directly improve driver behaviors, others may not, however the improvement may 

prevent similar crashes in the future. For example, a roadway with a countermeasure installed — such as a 

median barrier or centerline rumble strips — may prevent an intoxicated driver from crossing into oncoming 

lanes. 

Countermeasures that effectively reduce crashes are developed using data from all types and causes of 

crashes. The Crash Reduction Factor represents the relative change in crash frequency for a particular 

countermeasure regardless of cause of a crash. Engineering judgment may be needed to determine the 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 60

appropriate countermeasure to mitigate poor driver behaviors. 

16. So what can my local agency do to start preparing for ARTS?

ODOT will reach out to local agencies in each region this fall. In the meantime, local agencies and ODOT can 

begin thinking about and looking for good safety project candidates that meet funding eligibility. ODOT will 

update theARTS webpage as more information becomes available. The following are available now: 

The most recent 2016 SPIS reports for State Highways andLocal Roads and

 The new Roadway Departure Plan. 

17. Who should I contact if I have questions? 

For questions regarding the ARTS Program, please contact your local ODOT Region Traffic Office. While the 

FAQs are informative, some items like schedule and timelines could change. 

.
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 60

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

During the period of 2022 through 2024, approximately $30 million per year will be available for the ARTS 

program. This funding will be determined by the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC).

Funds will be allocated to each ODOT region based on the proportion of fatalities and serious injuries that 

occurred within the region during the last five years. The region allocations during the last round of ARTS 

funding was approximately: Region 1 - 33% Region 2 - 34% Region 3 - 15% Region 4 - 11% Region 5 - 7%

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $30,000,000 $30,000,000 100%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$9,500,000 $9,500,000 100%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $39,500,000 $39,500,000 100%

ODOT has approximately $166 million of funding for five years between 2017 and 2021 for the first round of 

the ARTS Program. ODOT has approximately $87,396,000 of funding for the next three years between 2022 

and 2024 for the second round of the ARTS program. Safety Leverage HB 2017 - The Safety Leverage Funds 

are meant to help improve the safety of the state highway system where the Agency is planning to make a 

separate Fix-It program investment. The intent is to improve the most important safety issues that are in the 

general area of a planned Fix-It project. Investment decisions from this leverage fund will follow the general 

priorities outlined in the 2016 Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP). 

The funds should be used for engineering countermeasures that can demonstrate a measurable cost-effective 

benefit and should generally follow the prioritization guidelines below: 

• Tier 1 - Infrastructure improvements that will reduce serious / fatal crashes within the Emphasis Areas of the 

2016 TSAP, such as Intersection, Roadway Departure, Pedestrian, and Bicycle crashes.
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 60

• Tier 2 - Regional safety priority areas, such as top 10% Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) sites, regionwide systemic safety features, or other documented crash locations. Safety leverage opportunities are 

identified by the following process: 

• Regions review the Fix-It programs 150% lists for Tier 1 and 2 Safety Leverage qualification. 

• Scoping teams review the Fix-It programs 150% lists for project details, including: status of each project, 

location, noting whether it qualifies as Safety Leverage (identifying safety mitigation as appropriate), or 

explaining why the project does not qualify in the "Leverage Opportunities" section of the Business Case. 

• The Safety Leverage portion of all projects is prioritized by Regions and ACTS within Tier 1 and 2. 

• Funding limitations are applied: Tier 1 in priority order first, then Tier 2 if funding allows. The outcome of 

Safety Leverage prioritization will be documented for each eligible project in the "Leverage Opportunities" 

section of the Business Case. Region Funding Allocation: Region 1 $10,680,000 Region 2 $9,273,000 Region 

3 $4,431,000 Region 4 $3,108,000 Region 5 $2,508,000 Total $10,066,953 

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

safety projects? 

40%

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

40%

The objective of the ARTS Program is to select the best safety projects using a jurisdictionally blind and datadriven approach to significantly reduce the occurrence of fatalities and serious injuries on all roads in the state. 

A data-driven approach uses crash data, risk factors, or other data supported methods to identify the best 

possible locations to achieve the greatest benefits. 

Benefit-cost analysis, which compares the economic benefits of the crash reductions to the project cost, is the 

traditional analysis tool that is used to determine financial viability of a project and to prioritize projects. The 

ODOT Benefit-Cost Workbook shall be used to calculate benefit-cost ratio for the ARTS Program. ODOT 

requires that five years of the most recent crash data available be used for the analysis and that the project 

has a benefit-cost ratio of 1.0 or greater. Projects with higher benefit-cost ratios will rank higher in the 

prioritized list. 

ODOT's first round of ARTS has approximately $166 million of funding for the five years between 2017 and 

2021. Approximate funding splits between the ODOT Regions for the first round of the ARTS Program are as 

shown, Region 1 = 33%, Region 2 = 34%, Region 3 = 15%, Region 4 = 11%, Region 5 = 7%. ODOT's second 

round of ARTS has approximately $29,132,000 of funding for three years between 2022 and 2024. 

Approximate funding splits between the ODOT Regions for the second round of the ARTS Program are shown, 

Region 1 = 31.4%, Region 2 = 35.7%, Region 3 = 15.7%, Region 4 = 10.2%, Region 5 = 7%. 

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

$218,000

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

$218,000

These funds are used for roadway departure enforcement thru the Transportation Safety Division (TSD). 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 60

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%

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

the future.

Oregon DOT does a great job obligating the HSIP funds to appropriate safety project but the challenge is 

getting the safety projects programmed and built in an appropriate time frame. We are working on writing IGA's 

with local agencies to ensure the HSIP funds get spent in a timely fashion. The Region Traffic offices monitor 

their safety funds. More progress needs to be gained in constructing safety projects earlier in the STIP instead 

of later.

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

which the State would like to elaborate. 

One of the biggest challenges in HSIP implementation is programming and constructing these projects in a 

timely fashion, especially local safety projects. On State highway HSIP safety projects, the challenge is letting 

a lot of small dollar projects where the administration costs overrides the project costs. Some Regions have 

bundled safety projects where practical to reduce administration costs.
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 60

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

OR99: Young 

Street Safety 

and ADA 

Ramps 

(Woodburn) 

16008

Roadway Roadway - other Numbers HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Safety 

Improvements 

for 

Pedestrians 

by rebuilding 

ADA ramps

OR99E: Creel 

Rogue Valley 

Reduce to 3-

Lanes (17478)

Roadway Roadway narrowing (road diet, 

roadway reconfiguration)

Miles HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Bicyclists Added bike 

lanes

Workzone 

Enforcement 

FFY2018 

(17670)

Speed 

management

Speed management - other Locations Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Workzone 

enforcement

FFO - US30: 

Old Portland 

Road to Millard 

Lower 

Columbia 

River 

Intersection 

Improvements 

(17702)

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other Intersections 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Improvements 

to 

Intersections

OR8: SW 

185TH Ave. 

Sec. Tualatin 

Valley Hwy., 

Washington, 

County 

(17704)

Roadway Roadway - other Miles $48,311 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

NW Cornelius 

Pass Rd US30 

- NW Kaiser 

Rd. (18147)

Lighting Lighting - other Numbers $3,055,315 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Safety and 

Lighting 

Improvements

OR551 @ 

Ehlen Road 

(18664)

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other 1 Intersections $583,860 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection 

Safety 

Improvement

OR140: Brett 

Way Extension 

(K-Falls) 

18731

Roadway Roadway - other Miles 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 60

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

OR 213 @ S 

Union Mills Rd 

Cascade S 

Intersection 

(18789)

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other Intersections $145,938 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection 

improvements

OR8 @ OR219 

and SE 44TH 

Ave. 

(Hillsboro( 

18791

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections State and 

Local Funds

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

OR8: SW 

192nd Ave. 

(Aloha) - SW 

160th Ave. 

(Beaverton) 

18839

Roadway Roadway - other Miles HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

OR217: OR10 

- OR99W 

(18841)

Roadway Roadway - other Miles HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 Systemic Roadway 

Departure

OR 38: US 101 

- Dean Creek 

Paving and 

PED 

Improvements 

(18869)

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Medians and pedestrian refuge 

areas

Locations HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Pedestrian 

Improvements

Region 5 curve 

warning signs 

2016 (18984)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including post) - 

new or updated

Signs HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Update curve 

warning signs

I-84: NE OR 

snow zone 

safety 

improvements 

(18994)

Parking Parking - other snow zone 

chain up 

areas

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Snow zone 

safety 

improvements 

for drivers

US 95: Idaho - 

Burns Junction 

durable 

striping 

(19007)

Roadway 

delineation

Improve retroreflectivity Miles $403,731 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Installation of 

durable 

pavement 

striping

Region 4 

Curve Warning 

Signs (19124)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning signs and 

flashers

Signs HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Installation of 

curve warning 

signs

OR39: Crest 

Street - 

Madison Street 

(19261)

Roadway Roadway - other $615,858 $976,956 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 60 

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

City of Salem 

Signalized 

Intersection 

Improvement 

(19447)

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic

US97: S 

Century Drive 

to USFS 

Boundary 

(19451)

Roadside Roadside - other 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic

A Street Rail 

Safety 

Improvements 

(Rainer) 19462

Roadway Roadway - other 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot

Safety 

Features for 

Local Roads 

and Streets 

2018 (19666)

Roadway Roadway - other 0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic

I-84 and I-205 

Barrier 

Installation 

(19691)

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Region 2 

Centerline 

Rumble Strips 

(Unit 3) 19692

Roadway Rumble strips - center Miles $2,929,398 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

HSIP 2016 

Siganlized 

Improvements 

(Portland) 

19722

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

HSIP City of 

Portland 

Bike/Ped 

(19723)

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians and 

bicyclists

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians

All Roads 

Transportation 

Safety (City of 

Bend) 19806

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians and 

bicyclists

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians

Grants Pass 

Signal and 

Pedestrian 

Upgrades 

(19960)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other $3,097,946 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 60

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

OR 140 Lake 

of the Woods 

(20025)

Roadway Roadway - other Miles HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

OR 99E: 

Enhance 

Pedestrian 

Crosswalks 

(Woodburn) 

20093

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Modify existing crosswalk Crosswalks $323,010 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians

US395 UkiahNye Junction 

sign upgrades 

(20108)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including post) - 

new or updated

$2448,199 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Sign 

Upgrades

Region 2 

(Central and 

South) Rural 

Signal 

Improvements 

(20137)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $4,186 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

US 20 @ Knox 

Butte/OR226 

(20140)

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other $195,986 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

OR22 @ 

Smithfield 

Rd/Kings 

Valley (20141)

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

OR211 @ 

Canby 

Marquam Hwy. 

(20142)

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other Intersections $162,393 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

13th Ave: 

Lincoln St. to 

Alder St. 

(Eugene) 

20165

Roadway Roadway - other Miles $2,398,411 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US30 @ 8th 

St. (Astoria) 

20177

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

OR99E @ 

Airport Rd 

(Albany) 

20183

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $390,169 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 60

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

US20: Geary 

St. to Waverly 

St. (Albany) 

20184

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miles $578,199 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Bicyclists

OR99: 

Ashland 

Pedestrian 

Upgrades 

(20186)

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians and 

bicyclists

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians

City of Salem 

Signal 

Enhancements 

(Unit 3) 20187

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

Region 2 

(North) Curve 

Warning 

Upgrades 

(20189)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning signs and 

flashers

Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Region 2 

(Central and 

South) Curve 

Warning 

Upgrades 

(20190)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including post) - 

new or updated

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US199: MP 25 

to Kerby 

Shoulder 

Widening 

(20191)

Roadway Roadway widening - travel lanes HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Region 2 

(South) Curve 

Warning 

Upgrades 

(20193)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including post) - 

new or updated

$191,149 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Josephine 

County Safety 

Improvements 

(20194)

Roadway Roadway - other HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

OR234: Gold 

Hill - Sams 

Valley 

Intersection 

(20196)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Mission St. 

Adaptive 

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal timing - 

signal coordination

Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 60

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

Signal Timing 

(Salem) 20214

City of Eugene 

Signal 

Enhancements 

(20216)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $37,303 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

OR540: 

Broadway @ 

Newmark 

Realign (North 

Bend) 20219

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

City of Salem 

Local Road 

Signal 

Enhancements 

Unit 2 (20220)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $124,681 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

Albany and 

Corvallis 

Signal 

Improvements 

(20221)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $552,489 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

West Lane 

County Curve 

Warning 

Upgrades 

(20223)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including post) - 

new or updated

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

OR99: Urban 

Upgrade 

(Cottage 

Grove) 20242

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other $441,588 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

OR99: Eugene 

- Junction Cit 

Safety Barrier 

(20244)

Roadside Barrier - other Miles $1,283,560 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US101: 

Johnsn Ave. 

Intersections 

(Cooc Bay)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Southern 

Oregon 

Warning Sign 

Upgrades 

(20247)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 60

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

OR66@ Delap 

Pit Road 

(Klamath Falls) 

20256

Roadway Roadway - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Region 4 Sign 

Upgrades 

(20271)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

$3,969 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

City of 

Portland 

Safety Project 

(20304)

Roadway Roadway - other Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians

Central 

Systemic 

Signals and 

Illumination 

(Portland) 

20334

Lighting Lighting - other $904,396 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

Central 

Systemic 

Signals and 

Illumination 

(ODOT) 20335

Lighting Lighting - other HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

Systemic 

Signals and 

Illumination 

(Clackamas) 

20336

Lighting Lighting - other $160,831 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

Rumble Strips 

and Bike/Ped 

Conflict 

Markings 

(Portland) 

20340

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miles $402,870 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians

Systemic 

Signals and 

Illumination 

(Beaverton) 

20374

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $626,864 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

West Systemic 

Signals and 

Illumination 

(ODOT) 20376

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

I-5 MP 303.27 

to MP 308.63 

(20430)

Roadway Roadway - other Miles Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 60

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

OR99W 

(Barbur Blvd) 

at SW Capital 

Hwy (20438)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $88,800 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

OR99W 

(Barbur Blvd): 

MP 8.01 to MP 

11.50 (20439)

Roadway Roadway - other Miles HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

OR213 at MP 

15.71 (Toliver 

Rd) 20478

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $501,001 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Region 1 Bike 

Ped Crossings 

(20479)

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Intersections $230,386 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians

I-205 Exit 

Ramps at SE 

Division St. 

(20480)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $112,437 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

OR207: 11th 

@ Elm & 

Orchard 

Signals 

(Hermiston) 

20671

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Region 1 High 

Friction 

Surface 

Treatment 

(20719)

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

OR99W: SW 

Naito Parkway 

- SW Huber St 

Phase 2 

(21071)

Roadway Roadway - other Miles HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

OR82: Minam 

Curve and 

Bank 

Stabilization 

(21169)

Roadway Roadway widening - curve Curves $455,126 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Bank 

Stabilization 

Project

OR214: 

Jefferson St. 

(Silverton) 

21190

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $30,709 Other 

Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. 

STBG, 

NHPP)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 60

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

US20: Safety 

Upgrades 

(Albany to 

Corvallis) 

21191

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway delineation - other Miles Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

2019 Roadway 

Departure 

Enforcement 

(21286)

Speed 

management

Speed management - other Locations HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

US26: 

Timberline 

Hwy - OR35 

Sherwood 

Campground 

(21289)

Roadway Roadway - other Miles $65,874 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Wickiup 

Junction Area 

Refinement 

Plan (21295)

Roadway Roadway - other Intersections Other 

Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. 

STBG, 

NHPP)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Southern 

Oregon Signal 

Upgrades 

(21308)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

OR99W: Orrs 

Corner Rd. - 

Clow Corner 

Road (21374)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

OR99: Rogue 

Valley 

Intersection 

Improvements 

(21408)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

OR99: Rogue 

Valley 

Intersection 

Improvements 

(21408)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

US30: Millard 

and Bennett 

Roads (St. 

Helens) 21459

Roadway Roadway - other Miles HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Region 4 Sign 

Upgrades 

Phase 2 

(21482)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 60

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

US395: Cape 

Horn to Dale 

Freight 

Improvements 

(21523)

Roadway Roadway - other Miles $511,821 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

OR281, 

OR282 and 

OR35 Signs, 

Signals and 

Lighting 

(21637)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

$162,981 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Eastern 

Oregon 

Variable 

Message 

Signs (21651)

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning signs and 

flashers

Locations $444,000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

US20: Ward / 

Hamby Rd. 

Intersection 

(21667)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other Intersections $64,489 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

OR42: Slater 

Creek - Hard 

Cash Lane and 

Slide Repair 

(21678)

Roadside Roadside grading Miles $57,323 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US 199: Clear 

Zone 

Improvements 

(21714)

Roadside Roadside - other Miles $133,200 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 60

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 331 337 313 357 446 498 439 502 489

Serious Injuries 1,541 1,618 1,416 1,495 1,777 1,973 1,764 1,686 1,727

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

0.990 1.020 0.930 1.030 1.240 1.360 1.190 1.360 1.360

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

4.620 4.880 4.200 4.320 4.940 5.370 4.800 4.580 4.800

Number nonmotorized fatalities62 70 55 64 82 84 83 88 95

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

184 185 165 177 186 196 168 161 115

PDO Crashes 24,853 25,036 26,228 26,716 26,025 29,321 28,926 21,936 0
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 60

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Serious Injuries

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

Page 41 of 60

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

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

Page 42 of 60

Describe fatality data source. 

Other

If Other Please describe

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

PDO Crashes

PDO Crashes 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 60

Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Crash Data Base System in comparison with FARS 

data 

Primarily, we use the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) crash data base system because the data 

is available sooner than the FARS data. We compare our ODOT fatality crash data with FARS when possible.

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

ownership.

Year 2019

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Interstate

20 46 0.5 1.16

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

99.4 235.8 2.35 5.58

Rural Minor Arterial 55.6 157.4 3.01 8.54

Rural Minor Collector 19.4 47.2 3.07 7.58

Rural Major Collector 63 163 3.43 8.88

Rural Local Road or 

Street

20.8 53 1.3 3.1

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

20.2 88.2 0.35 1.54

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

4.8 27.8 0.33 1.92

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

85.6 416.8 1.52 7.4

Urban Minor Arterial 48 310.2 1.09 7.08

Urban Minor Collector 1.8 10.6 0.66 3.92

Urban Major Collector 28.2 164.2 1.04 6.08

Urban Local Road or 

Street

8 65.2 0.39 3.18
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 60

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

263.6 845.6 1.25 4.04

County Highway 

Agency

116.2 362.4

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

66.8 530.4

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

1.4 0.6

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

Indian Tribe Nation

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2021 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:306.0

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

Page 45 of 60

The annual HSIP performance targets were developed during the last Strategic Highway Safety Plan update 

and were agreed upon by a multidisciplinary working group. Decrease traffic fatalities to 306 by December 31, 

2021.

Number of Serious Injuries:1274.0

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

The annual HSIP performance targets were developed during the last Strategic Highway Safety Plan update 

and were agreed upon by a multidisciplinary working group. Decrease serious traffic injuries to 1,274 by 

December 31, 2021.

Fatality Rate:0.730

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

The annual HSIP performance targets were developed during the last Strategic Highway Safety Plan update 

and were agreed upon by a multidisciplinary working group. Reduce the fatality rate to 0.73 by December 31, 

2021.

Serious Injury Rate:3.780

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

The annual HSIP performance targets were developed during the last Strategic Highway Safety Plan update 

and were agreed upon by a multidisciplinary working group. The serious injury rate for our 2021 target is 3.78 

people per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT).

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:200.0

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

The annual HSIP performance targets were developed during the last Strategic Highway Safety Plan update 

and were agreed upon by a multidisciplinary working group. The non-motorized fatalities plus serious injuries 

for our 2021 target is 200 people.

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

safety performance targets. 

The annual HSIP performance targets were developed during the last Strategic Highway Safety Plan update 

and were agreed upon by a multidisciplinary working group including the SHSO (and including a representative 

of an MPO). Afterwards ODOT held meetings with the MPOs from around the state and explained the process 

and the outcome. The Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan 2016 

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TS/docs/TSAP/TSAP_2016_web.pdf . There is some discussion around 

revisiting the annual HSIP performance targets in the near future. ODOT is in the process of updating the 

Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) where the safety performance targets will be re-evaluated 

by stakeholders.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 60

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 343.0 474.8

Number of Serious Injuries 1432.0 1785.4

Fatality Rate 0.830 1.302

Serious Injury Rate 4.240 4.898

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

225.0 251.6

There are probably several reasons why the State's 2018 Safety Performance Targets are not being met. The 

primary reasons is assumed to be distracted driving issues, a limited presence of law enforcement officers due 

to budget cuts and an increase in people moving to Oregon. Our 2018 safety performance targets were more 

aspirational goals than obtainable goals. ODOT is in the process of updating the Oregon Transportation Safety 

Action Plan where these goals will be re-evaluated by stakeholders. We are also in the process of developing 

an HSIP implementation plan this summer.

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

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

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

56 58 68 86 67 102 99

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

134 167 197 232 219 206 238

ODOT just completed the following research project, "Addressing Oregon's Rise in Deaths and Serious Injuries 

for Senior Drivers and Pedestrians". https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Programs/Pages/ResearchPublications.aspx . ODOT plans to incorporate several of the recommendations for practice into several of 

ODOT policy and procedure manuals https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Engineering/Pages/Highway-Safety.aspx 

.
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 60

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness 

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

 Benefit/Cost Ratio 

 Change in fatalities and serious injuries 

 Other-Fatal free days 

In Oregon, the HSIP program funds the All Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) program, an applicationbased program funding to address safety concerns on public roadways within the State. 

The ARTS Program is designed to address safety needs on all public roads in Oregon by collaborating with 

local road jurisdictions. The Oregon Department of Transportation can expect to: 

 Increase awareness of safety on all roads. 

 Promote best practices for infrastructure safety. 

 Compliment behavioral safety efforts. 

 Focus limited resources to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes in the state of Oregon by selecting 

projects with the highest benefit/cost ratio. 

The program is data driven to achieve the greatest benefits in crash reduction and should be blind to 

jurisdiction. 

Here is a link to the 2018 ODOT ARTS Program Summary Report 

https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Engineering/Docs_TrafficEng/ARTS_SUmmary-Report-2018.pdf 

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

the State's program level evaluations. 

Historically Oregon’s fatalities and serious injuries have trended downwards, Since 2013 however there have 

been annual increases, this increase has been common across the country. Project level evaluations has 

shown that the projects implemented under HSIP funding have improved the locations where invested. A 

recent comparison of Roadway Departure has also shown that the last few years of investments in this key 

area has lessened the percentage of total roadway departure crashes, indicating Oregon’s investments in 

systemic roadway departure has been moving the numbers. 

Here is a link to the 2018 ODOT ARTS Program Summary Report 

https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Engineering/Docs_TrafficEng/ARTS_SUmmary-Report-2018.pdf 

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

 HSIP Obligations 

 Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process 

 Increased focus on local road safety 

 More systemic programs 

 Policy change 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 60

With the implementation of the ARTS program, there is an increased awareness of safety and a data-driven 

process for developing safety projects across all jurisdictions in Oregon. Policy level changes that are a direct 

result of HSIP implementation efforts like the use of safety edge now incorporated into our Highway Design 

Manual. Improved guidance in our signing and striping manuals to reduce wrong way driving at interchange 

ramps taken from a recent research project that was completed in September 2017. Improved guidance in our 

signal policy and guidelines to eliminate conflicts between left turn traffic and pedestrians. ODOT recently 

completed research SPR 828, "Addressing Oregon's Rise in Deaths and Serious Injuries for Senior Drivers 

and Pedestrians" and we anticipate that several of the recommendations for practice will be incorporated into 

ODOT policy guidance and procedure manuals. 

Here is a link to the 2018 ODOT ARTS Program Summary Report 

https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Engineering/Docs_TrafficEng/ARTS_SUmmary-Report-2018.pdf 

Describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting 

period.

ODOT has revised their Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) flagging tool that assists Region Traffic 

Investigators in identifying high crash locations for the potential development of safety projects to reduce fatal 

and serious injury crashes in Oregon. 

Here are some of the major changes to this year’s SPIS program:

 No Property Damage Only (PDO) crashes in SPIS (only fatal and injury crashes) 

 All SPIS reports will now include connectors (ramps) and frontage roads 

 All SPIS reports now display the top 15% SPIS sites 

 Changed the SPIS qualifying criteria from “one fatal or 3 crashes” to “one fatal or one serious injury A 

or three injury crashes“ to generate a SPIS value 

Here is a link to SPIS information and reports, https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Engineering/Pages/HighwaySafety.aspx 

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements 

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures. 

Year 2019

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury 

Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Roadway Departure Run-off-road 277.6 693 0.76 1.9

Intersections Intersections 89.2 661.8 0.25 1.82

Pedestrians Vehicle/pedestrian 76.6 114 0.21 0.31

Bicyclists Vehicle/bicycle 9.6 51.2 0.06 0.14

Motorcyclists Motorcyclists 62.2 229.2 0.17 0.63

Work Zones Work Zone 5.2 24 0.01 0.07
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 60

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Motorcyclists Work Zones

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

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

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Motorcyclists Work Zones

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

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

Page 50 of 60

** ODOT revised its Roadway Departure query criteria in February 2020 to align more closely with FHWA's 

2009 criteria and state TSAP category 

definitions. Roadway Departure figures for years 2015 to 2019 in this table were updated to reflect this change. 

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Motorcyclists Work Zones

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Motorcyclists Work Zones

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

Page 51 of 60

Project Effectiveness

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

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDOBEFORE

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)

FFO-US26: 

MP49.2 - MP 

57.45 (13717)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Roadway Pavement surface -

miscellaneous

47.00 17.00 1.00 5.00 3.00 34.00 21.00 87.00 41.00

Greenhill 

Road Rail Xing 

Safety Project 

(Eugene) 

16075

Urban Local 

Road or Street

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other

OR213: 

Intersection 

Improvements 

(16150)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 107.00 50.00 1.00 6.00 3.00 155.00 82.00 269.00 135.00

Region 5 ROR 

Safety 

Improvements 

(17447)

Various 

Locations

Roadway Rumble strips - unspecified or 

other

325.00 243.00 12.00 12.00 31.00 33.00 248.00 273.00 616.00 561.00

St. Louis Road 

Rail-xing 

Safety Project 

(17472)

Various 

Locations

Railroad grade 

crossings

Protective devices

OR213: (82nd 

Ave): SE Duke 

Street (17708)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 14.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 8.00 6.00 23.00 12.00

OR224 

(Clackamas 

Hwy): SE 

232nd Dr. 

(17716)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway Roadway widening - add lane(s) 

along segment

4.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 3.00 9.00 4.00

Rail Crossing 

Improvements 

(UPRR) Linn 

County 17752

Various 

Locations

Railroad grade 

crossings

Upgrade railroad crossing signal 1.00 1.00

US97: 

Romaine 

Village Way -

Lava Butte 

(7807)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Roadside Barrier - concrete 35.00 10.00 4.00 21.00 15.00 60.00 25.00
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 52 of 60

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDOBEFORE

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)

US 101 @ NE 

Devils Lake 

Rd. (17611)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Roadway Roadway widening - add lane(s) 

along segment

7.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 7.00 5.00 15.00 8.00

OR551 @ Keil 

Road (17812)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway Roadway widening - add lane(s) 

along segment

5.00 1.00 2.00 7.00 3.00 13.00 5.00

US30: Traffic 

Signals at 

McAlister RD. 

(RX1659) 

18228

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 2.00 2.00

I-5 SB: 

BroadwayWeidler Exit 

Ramp 

(Portland) 

18262

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Interstate

Interchange 

design

Interchange design - other 10.00 11.00 6.00 15.00 16.00 26.00

George 

Millican Rd: 

OR126-

Reservoir Rd. 

(18446)

Urban Local 

Road or Street

Roadway Roadway - other

OR126: 

Torrence Rd. - 

Cornerstone 

Dr. (18613)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Roadway Pavement surface - 

miscellaneous

14.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 17.00 19.00 32.00 26.00

US395: AlkaliAbert (18694)Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Roadway Pavement surface - 

miscellaneous

3.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 6.00 6.00

US26: SE 

Cesar E. 

Chavez BlvdWolf Dr. 

(18785)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway delineation - other 637.00 290.00 7.00 5.00 26.00 26.00 809.00 513.00 1479.00 834.00

US30BY 

(Sandy Blvd): 

NE 105th Ave. 

(Portland) 

18796

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

12.00 5.00 1.00 14.00 6.00 27.00 11.00

Region 2 

Dynamic 

Warning Signs 

(19094)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Dynamic message signs 11.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 14.00 7.00 30.00 9.00
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 53 of 60

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDOBEFORE

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)

Region 4 HSIP 

Transition 

Rural (19165)

Varioous 

Location

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway delineation - other

Region 4 HSIP 

Transition 

Urban (19166)

Various 

locations

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other

City of Eugene 

Signalized 

Intersection 

Improvements 

(2015) 19406

Various 

locations

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other

Coos & 

Douglas 

County Signs 

and 

Delineation 

Upgrades 

(19491)

Various 

locations

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway delineation - other

Garden Valley 

Signal 

Upgrades 

(19494)

Various 

Locations

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other

Region 5 Local 

Jurisdiction 

Sign Grades 

2016 (19509)

Various 

locations

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including post) - 

new or updated

2016 Region 1 

Local Roads 

Signal 

Upgrades 

(HSIP) 19528

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other

US97: UPRR 

O'xing-Millitary 

Xing and 

OR58: Hwy 

429 - Hwy4 

(19585)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Roadway Pavement surface - 

miscellaneous

75.00 11.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 32.00 27.00 112.00 42.00

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

Effective Safety Countermeasures 

ODOT has developed an extensive list of countermeasures with Crash Reduction factors proven to be effective. There are many examples of effective safety countermeasures 

 Installing hundreds of miles of rumble strips on rural highways, Oregon has reduced these severe crashes by 20-30%. 

 Cable guard rail has been used on many of the portions of interstates and other major routes, almost entirely eliminating the median crossover crashes, which are often fatal. 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 54 of 60

 Roundabouts have been installed on state highways intersections and in many cities where intersections were experiencing fatal and serious injury crashes every year, those severe crashes are almost entirely eliminated. 

 Wrong way safety countermeasures included installing enhanced “DO NOT ENTER” and “WRONG WAY” low mounted signage at interchange ramp terminals along I-84 and I-5 is an example of the installation of safety 

countermeasures that reduce wrong way driving and result in reductions of fatal and serious injury wrong-way crashes. 

 Installing lighting at signalized intersections and designing every new signalized intersection to include lighting reduces night time crashes by 38% and pedestrian and bicycle crash by over 40%. 

 Upgrading signal hardware like installing reflectorized backplates which reduces intersection crashes by 20%. 

 Installing Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons with medians that reduce pedestrian crash by more than 50%. 

 Installing upgraded curve signing and chevrons that reduce run off the road crashes by 16%. 

 Installing bike lanes and separated bike facilities reducing bicycle crashes by 40-60%. 

ODOT countermeasures have been developed from multiple sources. From the Crash Modification Factors Clearinghouse, the Highway Safety Manual, NCHRP Report Series 500 and other guidance documents such as the Pedestrian 

Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System and the Handbook for designing Roadways for the Aging Population. The countermeasures were also gathered from other states and various research efforts and are documented as 

to the source of the measure. 

Here is a link to ODOT's Crash Reduction Factor list: https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Engineering/Pages/ARTS.aspx 

Project selection requires a comprehensive process to select and implement cost effective and beneficial countermeasures. ODOT has a data driven process and using traditional and systemic network screening processes to guide 

professionals to sites with promise. It requires expertise and training to diagnose safety problems and select appropriate countermeasures. This process results in selecting projects and measures that assure the elimination of at least 

some fatal and serious injuries in Oregon. 

These efforts demonstrate how Oregon will continue to program effective projects despite a continued national increase or at least lack of progress in meeting performance measures. 

One example of effective programs is the following excerpt from the Oregon Roadway Departure Implementation plan showing the results of the implementation of countermeasures to reduce fatal and serious injury roadway departure 

crashes. Roadway departure fatalities decreased 19.3 percent during the study period (2009-2014), far more dramatically than overall fatal crashes which only decreased 5.6 percent. 

Improved data and analysis techniques, continued research into proven countermeasures and better project cost estimating are just a few improvements that will continue to move the needle. In addition the Oregon legislature approved 

more funds for safety in HB 2017, the bill dedicates $10 million more towards safety measures on Oregon roads.
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 55 of 60

Compliance Assessment

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

 10/01/2016

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2016 To: 2021

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

 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]

100 100 100 100

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]

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100 100

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100

Median Type (54) 

[55]

100
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 56 of 60

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

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

AADT Year (80) [82]

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 57 of 60

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

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201) [191]

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 100.00 50.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 88.89 33.33 20.00 0.00

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

Three years ago we had plans to do more collecting MIRE fundamental data elements but priorities like the ADA litigation requirements temporarily delayed our efforts. 

We are currently working on establishing an intersection ID, planning for a non-state road ID in Trans Info and plan to conduct an operations evaluation for MIRE element to start in 2021. 

All three of these effort will help us in collecting the MIRE fundamental data elements for all roads by September 30, 2026. 

Please note the table in question 49 was difficult to provide exact percentages at this time. 

MIRE Fundamental Data Elements: Non Local Paved Roads – Segment , State 70%, Non-State 15%; Non Local Paved Roads – Intersection , State 70%, Non-State 5%; Non Local Paved Roads – Ramps , State 60%, Non-State 20%; 

Local Paved Roads , State 90%, Non-State 5%; Unpaved Roads , State 90%, Non-State 5%. 

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. 

We are currently working on establishing an intersection ID, planning for a non-state road ID in Trans Info and plan to conduct an operations evaluation for MIRE element to start in 2021.All three of these effort will help us in collecting the 

MIRE fundamental data elements for all roads by September 30, 2026. 
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 58 of 60

Oregon DOT performed a phase 1 pilot to estimate the work necessary to collect intersection data on state highways, the finding of the pilot are being used to plan a phase pilot to collect signalized intersection data in the most populous 

region of the state. While there are about 500 signalized intersections on state highways in this region, the quantity and density will be very useful to hone the attributes collected and the methods used for optimum efficiency. In addition, 

Region 1 was identified for collection of signalized intersection data so HSM methods could be used to identify signalized intersections which, are often over capacity and already identified as crash hot spots, for potential safety 

improvements.

The objectives of this pilot is to collect the FDE for signalized intersection only, utilize HSM methods of network screening for potential safety improvements and finalize the methodology before implementation in other regions of the state. 

Tentatively we have a planned schedule of collection of the data elements.

Winter 2017 Prepare to implement Phases 3-7 

Spring 2018 Begin Phase 3, FDE data collection for signalized intersections in Regions 2, 3, 4 and 5

Fall 2020 Estimated completion of Phase 3 collection of FDE

Spring 2021 Begin Phase 4, FDE data collection for signalized interchange-only intersections state-wide

Winter 2021 Estimated completion of Phase 4 collection of FDE

Spring 2022 Begin Phase 5, FDE data collection for signalized intersections on local roads

Winter 2023 Estimated completion of Phase 5 collection of FDE

Spring 2024 Begin Phase 6, FDE data collection for state-owned highway segments between signalized intersections state-wide

Winter 2024 Estimated completion of Phase 6 collection of FDE

Spring 2025 Begin Phase 7, FDE data collection for local road segments between signalized intersections state-wide

Winter 2026 Estimated completion of Phase 7 collection of FDE

Spring 2027 Data maintenance cycle begins
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 59 of 60

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

odot_safety_program_guide[1].pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2020 Oregon Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 60 of 60

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.