Page 1 of 41

MISSISSIPPI

2019 ANNUAL REPORT
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 41

Table of Contents

Table of Contents.................................................................................................................................. 2

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

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

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

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

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

Program Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 9

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................12

Funds Programmed.........................................................................................................................12

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................14

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................18

General Highway Safety Trends......................................................................................................18

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................23

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................26

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................27

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................27

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................27

Project Effectiveness.......................................................................................................................31

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................37
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 41

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 41

Executive Summary

Introduction

The State of Mississippi's HSIP, now operating out of the Highway and Rail Safety Division within the 

Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT), has completed another year of programming and prioritizing 

projects that support the state's Strategic Highway Safety Plan. Over the last 12 months, the Mississippi HSIP 

has made great strides in supporting the goal of reducing ( and hopefully one day eliminating ) fatal and 

serious injury crashes by programming safety projects that are both aggressive in reducing targeted crash 

types and innovative in their approach. These advancements of the last year include, but are not limited to, the 

following highlights: 

A Division Solely for Safety

Thanks to the efforts and vision of MDOT's Executive Leadership, the MDOT now has a Division solely 

dedicated to the efforts of improving highway and railroad crossing safety in the state of Mississippi. The 

Highway and Rail Safety Division was formed in August 2019 and now gives MDOT and its HSIP staff the 

opportunity to work with fellow Divisions and District personnel to further spread safety throughout MDOT.

Data Enhancements

The MDOT continued its efforts this past year in working towards making significant updates to its crash data 

analysis system. Once in place, this new system will provide the Mississippi HSIP and its project managers 

with the ability to conduct better network screening statewide, the ability to better analyze and assess potential 

project locations with the use of state-calibrated SPFs, and conduct up-to-date crash data analyses using 

advanced mapping and GPS-located crashes. Currently, MDOT anticipates this new system to be in place in 

2020.

Systemic Safety

MDOT has for years prioritized the use of systemic safety improvements such as Safety Edge and Rumble 

Stripe/Strips as a part of larger construction and mobility projects. More recently, the HSIP has worked to 

obligate more of its own funding towards supporting the installment of systemic measures, such as FYA 

installment along corridors, systemic resigning and striping of selected routes, and even systemic access 

management. Over the next year, MDOT intends to continue implementing safety more from a systemic 

approach in the hopes of preventing more crashes statewide, and treating more affected routes and 

intersections. 

Innovative Countermeasures

The HSIP, with the support of MDOT's Administration and Districts, has continued its pursuit of implementing 

innovative countermeasures to address serious crash concerns. Over the past year, MDOT has programmed 

more funding towards countermeasures such as roundabouts and RCUTs where crash data and volumes have 

warranted, and it intends to continue this trend into next year. 

SHSP Update

In January 2019, Mississippi officially put into effect its new Strategic Highway Safety Plan . This document, 

which incorporated statewide participation with numerous agencies and safety advocates, spells out a 

roadmap by which MDOT and its safety partners intend to target and treat crash concerns over the next five 

years. Through extensive data analysis, stakeholder involvement and discussion, the following five emphasis 

areas were selected for the plan:

• Unlicensed Drivers 

• Impaired Driving 

• Unbelted Vehicle Occupants 

• Road Departure Crashes 

• Intersection Crashes 
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 41

A Culture of Safety

While MDOT has worked to address safety through quantifiable efforts such as safety projects, it has also 

worked over the past year to further institute a culture of safety across the entire department. The last year has 

seen MDOT Districts and its supporting Division personnel progress in how they give consideration to 

innovative countermeasures, as well as the mindset for safety in everyday maintenance and construction 

activities. More and more, the state is seeing MDOT employees looking to incorporate needed safety 

improvements as a part of all MDOT projects, whether they are safety funded or not. The following report for 

the state of Mississippi will show how MDOT has programmed its HSIP funds to continue improving safety 

across the state, as well as how the completed projects have been performing to support those efforts. We feel 

strongly that not all safety successes in the state will necessarily be captured in the report as the information 

was requested, but we know that in the last year, the MDOT has worked tirelessly department-wide to ensure 

that Mississippi's roadways become safer for our fellow drivers than they were the year before.
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 41

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 Highway Safety Improvement Program staff includes full-time engineers, as well as supporting data 

analysts and clerical staff, now located in MDOT's new Highway and Rail Safety Division ( the HSIP Program 

was formerly a part of Traffic Engineering Division; this change took place in August 2019 ). On a day-to-day 

basis, the HSIP staff works hand-in-hand with other MDOT Divisions in aiding the MDOT Districts towards 

advancing safety on Mississippi Highways. These regular efforts include data analysis, countermeasure 

discussion and coordination, as well as the administration of regular safety meetings to keep in contact with the 

Districts regarding safety matters and concerns.

One of the initiatives that the Mississippi HSIP staff has taken on in the last few years is holding regular safety 

meetings with its Districts. These meetings are an informal time for HSIP staff to go out into the Districts and 

discuss locations of concern that are revealed through data analysis, as well as locations that the Districts are 

fielding calls about from the public, local law enforcement and emergency responders, community leaders, and 

elected officials. These meetings have proven invaluable in establishing a rapport between District staff and 

the HSIP, which has aided in the identification of locations of need that might not have been found as quickly 

by data analysis alone. The HSIP has also seen these relationships promote a level of trust in the selection of 

alternative intersection countermeasures, as well as more progressive and non-typical countermeasures that 

are being implemented across the United States.

The second initiative that directly impacts HSIP projects in Mississippi are the Safety Countermeasure 

Selection Team meetings. These meetings were established by internal policy in the last several years to 

ensure that applicable MDOT Divisions ( Roadway Design Division, Right of Way Division, Traffic Engineering 

Division, Construction Division, Environmental Division, Planning Division, etc.) and District personnel are 

extensively involved in the countermeasure selection process for HSIP projects. Before any potential location 

or set of locations are pursued for HSIP funding, any and all possible countermeasures are discussed with this 

group in a formalized meeting format. Site visits are conducted as a part of the meeting, and the entire process 

- including supporting data, location information, countermeasure recommendations, and a benefit to cost 

analysis - is recorded and summarized in report format. This formal report is then submitted for review and 

approval by meeting attendees as well as senior MDOT Officials. This ensures that HSIP projects in the state 

of Mississippi are fully vetted by MDOT staff, and that MDOT utilizes its HSIP funds in the most prudent 

manner possible.

Once projects are selected, programmed, and constructed using HSIP funds, the MDOT ensures that their 

performance - in terms of realized crash reductions - is tracked and reported as a part of the HSIP Reporting 
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 41

process. The Mississippi HSIP typically conducts a five year before and after data analysis of each project in 

order to provide a healthy set of data to determine the performance of the project's countermeasure(s). In 

many cases, the state also continues to track projects beyond the five year window to ensure the 

countermeasure still works and/or other changes are not needed beyond the initial project.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Design

In August 2019, the HSIP program and its staff moved under the new Highway and Rail Safety Division 

(HRSD) within MDOT. The group was formerly a part of the Traffic Engineering Division, which falls under the 

MDOT Assistant Chief Engineer for Field Operations. MDOT's new Highway and Rail Safety Division will be 

located under the Assistant Chief Engineer for Pre-Construction, who is responsible for all design and planning 

operations within the agency.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Other-Central Office

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

As a part of Mississippi's statewide safety efforts, local roads are given consideration for Highway Safety 

Improvement Program funding during each federal fiscal year. Potential projects are scrutinized under the 

same set of criteria set forth for state highway safety projects. All HSIP local road safety projects conducted by 

the Mississippi Department of Transportation are administered through the Circuit Rider Program. 

The Circuit Rider program, established in 2012, provides training as well as technical assistance to local road 

administrators and staff. As a part of the technical assistance portion of the program, Circuit Riders ( along with 

MDOT Safety personnel ) review crash data for local roads and conduct site visits with local government 

authorities to offer countermeasure identification assistance. Solutions offered by Circuit Riders on these site 

visits can either be resolved by the local road authority, or can be treated under several available Circuit Rider 

initiatives. Projects identified in need of additional assistance through the Circuit Rider program can be treated 

using one of the following:

1. Sign Project : At no cost to the local authority, MDOT provides warning and advisory signage to a local 

government agency where crash trends - systemic or "hot spot" in nature - have been identified, and where 

signs and/or low cost countermeasures are deemed an appropriate corrective measure. The local authority 

may be asked to provide an in-kind service as part of the agreement, such as tree trimming within the Right-ofWay; otherwise, the signs are free of charge to the county or municipality. During the 2019 State Fiscal Year 

(July '18 - June '19), MDOT spent $48,432 of state funds on this program, providing over 1,000 signs (1,099 

total) and sign post delineators to local governments to help advance roadway safety.

2. Design Project : Should a location or set of locations within a county, municipality or other local governing 

body's jurisdiction be deemed eligible by MDOT for HSIP funding, those projects are pursued as a part of the 

statewide HSIP program. Currently, MDOT chooses to focus its local road safety efforts on low cost measures, 

including resigning and restriping of routes, the installation of reflective sign post delineators, raised pavement 

marker reinstallation, etc. There is no application deadline currently for local projects; projects are considered 

throughout the entire fiscal year. All local road safety projects are considered alongside state highway safety 

projects. MDOT continues to work with local roadway officials towards developing quality local road safety 

projects.
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 41

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning. 

• Design

• Districts/Regions

• Maintenance

• Operations

• Planning

• Traffic Engineering/Safety

• Other-Environmental

• Other-Right of Way Division

Describe coordination with internal partners. 

Under current internal policy, applicable MDOT Divisions ( District personnel, Roadway Design Division, 

Construction Division, Environmental Division, Right of Way Division, Planning Division, etc .) are extensively 

involved in the countermeasure selection process. Before any potential location or set of locations are pursued 

for HSIP Program funding, any and all possible countermeasures are discussed with this group in a meeting 

format. Site visits are conducted with this group as a part of the meeting, and the entire process - including 

supporting data, location information, countermeasure recommendations, etc. - is recorded in report format 

and approved by meeting attendees as well as MDOT leadership. This ensures that all HSIP projects in the 

state of Mississippi that adhere to this process are fully vetted by the MDOT staff, and that MDOT utilizes its 

HSIP funds in the most prudent manner possible.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning. 

• FHWA

• Law Enforcement Agency

• Local Government Agency 

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

The Mississippi HSIP staff works with its FHWA partners within the state on all safety matters ranging from 

more broad program planning and management down to specific projects and their potential countermeasures. 

On local road projects, and in some cases where state highway projects require coordination with local 

officials, MPOs and officers from local agencies are brought in to be a part of project discussions.

Describe coordination with external partners. 

The Federal Highway Administration - Mississippi Division is an active participant in program planning for the 

HSIP. MDOT coordinates with the Division Office for review and approval of the three year funding program 

and its approval on an annual basis.

Other external partners involved in the HSIP project planning process are local government agencies, MPOs, 

and MDOT's Local Public Agency (LPA) Division, who is responsible for managing many federally funded 

projects on local roadways within the State of Mississippi. MDOT coordinates with these partners when the 

HSIP is developing a potential Safety Circuit Rider project within the local agency's jurisdiction.
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 41

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

• HSIP (no subprograms)

Mississippi chooses to operate its program with a more broad based approach, where all of the listed 

subprograms are addressed as crashes and circumstances dictate, but without the formalized structure of 

having multiple subprograms with dedicated funding pots, etc.

Program: HSIP (no subprograms)

Date of Program Methodology:8/3/2015

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• FHWA focused approach to safety

• Other-Addresses state's priority of advancing safety 

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

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

program? 

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation? 

• selection committee

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

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 41

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:3

Available funding:2

Cost Effectiveness:1

As MDOT continues to build its list of priority safety projects in the future, it will transition to the use of a ranked 

list based on benefit to cost.

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 17

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? 

• Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

• Cable Median Barriers

• Clear Zone Improvements

• Horizontal curve signs

• Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

• Install/Improve Signing

• Pavement/Shoulder Widening

• Rumble Strips

• Safety Edge

- Mississippi's largest systemic effort in 2019 was the beginning of two District-wide systemic intersection 

improvement projects that mimic the South Carolina project model listed as a proven countermeasure by 

FHWA. These projects will help to spread low cost, systemic improvements to 200+ intersections across two of 

MDOT's Districts.

- MDOT policy maintains that Safety Edge be installed on all MDOT mill and overlay projects, regardless o

funding. 

f 

- MDOT's striping policy specifically requires the use of rumble strip/stripe where adequate shoulder is 

available. 

- Over 1,500 miles of OGFC have been installed on MDOT highways to date

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-Input from internal partners
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 41

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

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

Mississippi HSIP projects primarily consider ITS elements when they are a complimentary component of a 

larger project, such as traffic cameras at a new or improved signal, fiber interconnectivity between signals, or 

other measures to provide advanced warning to motorists.

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. 

Currently, the Mississippi HSIP uses various principles that are cited in the Highway Safety Manual, though the 

manual is not used extensively in day to day analysis and decision-making. We are currently developing a 

crash data analysis system that will wholly incorporate the principles and practices outlined in the HSM, and 

will fully integrate them into how Mississippi evaluates locations across the state, and potential projects. 

The state is also currently working through the process of calibrating multiple SPFs for Mississippi crash data 

in hopes that those can be used once the new crash data analysis system is online.
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 41

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding. 

Federal Fiscal Year

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $29,234,202 $29,234,202 100%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$165,174 $165,174 100%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$5,732,238 $5,732,238 100%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$3,680,744 $3,680,744 100%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $3,970,041 $3,970,041 100%

Totals $42,782,399 $42,782,399 100%

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) Funding figures - Programmed and Obligated - include the 2018 HSIP funding 

apportionment for the state of Mississippi, as well as a portion of HSIP funds returned* from previous fiscal 

years. 

HRRR (23 U.S.C. 148(g)(1)) Funding figures shown for this category are made up of HRRR funding returned* 

from previous fiscal years totaling $165,174. 

State and Local Fund totals includes $51,567 of state funds spent to provide free warning and advisory 

signage to local governments through the Safety Circuit Rider Program.

*Returned funds are from previous years when HSIP projects came in under the programmed construction 

budget.

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

safety projects?

$300,000

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

$300,000
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 41

Mississippi is beginning design on two local road safety projects that will let to construction next federal fiscal 

year. The projects target lane departure crashes on multiple high priority routes across Lauderdale and Warren 

Counties. The state is also beginning work on a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) that will cover Mississippi's 

three coastal counties: Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson.

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

$200,000

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

$200,000

The state is beginning work on a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) that will cover Mississippi's three coastal 

counties: Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson.

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. 

There are no impediments.
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 41

General Listing of Projects

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

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEG

Y

Circuit Rider 

Sign 

Donation/Brigh

t Stick Program

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

1 Statewide $0 $51567 State and 

Local Funds

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 County and 

Municipality

Systemic Roadway 

Departure, 

Intersection

s

Safety Circuit 

Rider Project - 

Lauderdale 

County

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

8 Locations $-53545 $-53545 Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US 49 SB Fr 

Main St in Mt. 

Olive to Walter 

Lott Rd. in 

Seminary

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or other 24.2 Miles $4847287 $5385874.4

4

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther11,05

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

MS 25, 

Tishomingo

County

Intersection 

traffic control

Systemic improvements - stopcontrolled38.9 Miles $0 $0 Rural Principal ArterialOther1,564 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 61 at Delta 

View Rd

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 1 Intersections $-81104 $-81104 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther16,04

6

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 82 fr MS 

River Bridge to 

MS 454

Lighting Intersection lighting 1 Intersections $-20620 $-22911.11 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther7,600 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

I-20 West 

Brandon 

Interchange

Interchange 

design

Extend existing lane on ramp 1 Interchange

s

$-56523 $-62803.33 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate24,30

0

70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 45A at 

Tarlton Rd

Access 

management

Median crossover - directional 

crossover

1 Intersections $-40752 $-45280 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther6,930 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 45 at Ripley 

Rd

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 1 Intersections $-20333 $-22592 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther12,50

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 11 

Intersection 

Safety Study

Noninfrastructure Road safety audits 3 Intersections $-46572 $-51746.67 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 0 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

MS 25 at US 

278 Amory

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecifie

d

1 Intersections $-48275 $-53638.89 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 0 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 41

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEG

Y

US 49 fr Old 

Hwy 49/Wilson 

Homes Rd to 

Witherspoon 

Rd

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or other 11 Miles $-638681 $-709645.56 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther11,97

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

US 49 fr Peps 

Point Rd to US 

98

Intersection 

traffic control

Systemic improvements - 

signal-controlled

13 Intersections $5473529 $6081698.8

9

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther24,16

0

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 90 Signal 

and Access 

Improvements 

in Pascagoula

Intersection 

traffic control

Systemic improvements - 

signal-controlled

4.5 Miles $6454194.

3

$7171327 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther28,96

0

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 84 at 

Auburn Rd

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 2 Intersections $1429481 $1588312.2

2

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther8,338 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

MS 25 at River 

Bend Rd

Access 

management

Median crossover - directional 

crossover

1 Intersections $145973 $162192.22 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther7,250 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

MS 12 from 

Hollandale (US 

61) to the 

Sunflower 

River

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or other 9.5 Miles $-53120 $-59022.22 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 1,800 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US 278 at MS 

345 and Rocky 

Ford Rd/CR 

833

Access 

management

Median crossover - directional 

crossover

2 Intersections $1800000 $2000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther22,47

2

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 49 fr the 

Stone CL to 

South Gate Rd

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or other 19.9 Miles $0 $0 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther11,95

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

US 49 

Covington 

County 

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other 3 Intersections $877985 $975538.89 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

MS 613 

Systemic 

Curves Project

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

32.2 Miles $-23896 $-26551.11 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 3,840 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

District 6 

Districtwide 

Intersection 

Improvement 

Project

Intersection 

traffic control

Systemic improvements - stopcontrolled164 Intersections $135000 $150000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersection

s
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 41

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEG

Y

US 84 at MS 

184 (west of 

Waynesboro)

Access 

management

Change in access - close or 

restrict existing access

1 Intersections $405000 $450000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther9,850 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

US 84 at 

Reservoir 

Rd/Magnolia 

Hill

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 1 Intersections $405000 $450000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther7,311 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

MS 7 at MS 9W Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $0 $0 Rural Principal ArterialOther11,58

5

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

MS 363 fr MS 

178 to the Lee 

CL

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

11.8 Miles $74583 $82870 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 1,500 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Safety Circuit 

Rider - Warren 

County Lane 

Departure 

Improvements

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

10 Locations $45000 $50000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Safety Circuit 

Rider - 

Lauderdale 

County Lane 

Departure 

Improvements

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

8 Locations $45000 $50000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

I-55 fr 1 mi S of 

MS 14 to the 

Carroll CL

Roadside Barrier - cable 21 Miles $1800000 $2000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate14,79

0

70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

I-55 fr 1 mi S of 

Martinsville to 1 

mi N of MS 27

Roadside Barrier - cable 8.1 Miles $1800000 $2000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate25,51

0

70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

I-55 fr Holmes 

CL to 1.5 mi N 

of MS 35

Roadside Barrier - cable 19.6 Miles $1800000 $2000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate14,00

0

70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

MS 53 fr South 

of Cuevas 

Gravel Pit Rd 

to I-59

Roadway Rumble strips - center 7.4 Miles $0 $0 Rural Minor Arterial 3,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

MS 12, from 

Old Highway 

12 to Sta 

17+47

Access 

management

Raised island - install new 2.6 Miles $45000 $50000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther23,65

0

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

MS 12, from 

Sta 17+47 to 

Russell Street

Access 

management

Raised island - install new 1.2 Miles $135000 $150000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther23,65

0

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 41

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEG

Y

Coastal County 

Local Road 

Safety Plan

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety planning 1 Three 

Counties

$180000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure, 

Intersection

s

Rail Signage 

Project

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

1 Statewide $-28289 $-31432.22 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 County and 

Municipality

Systemic Intersection

s

- Funding values as shown above include both obligated expenditures so far this year for HSIP projects, as well as anticipated obligations for the remainder of this federal fiscal year (FFY). This information represents the best available 

data at this time for how Mississippi's HSIP funds are to be obligated this FFY.

- Some projects listed above as being HSIP (23 U.S.C 148) funded may also be partially funded with Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154).
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 41

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Fatalities 641 630 582 613 607 677 687 690 663

Serious Injuries 738 732 689 642 589 596 722 627 546

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.610 1.620 1.510 1.580 1.540 1.700 1.700 1.687 1.630

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.850 1.880 1.790 1.660 1.490 1.490 1.780 1.530 1.340

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

54 54 55 59 60 68 71 77 94

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

47 39 49 47 47 42 61 60 49
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 41

520

540

560

580

600

620

640

660

680

700

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 41

1.4

1.45

1.5

1.55

1.6

1.65

1.7

1.75

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 41

- The 2018 reported traffic fatalities for the state of Mississippi is an accurate representation of what we in the 

Mississippi HSIP anticipate the number to be, based upon our own analyses, as well as conversations with the 

state's FARS Analyst, the Department of Public Safety, and other applicable officials within the state. That 

number is not yet certified, though, and therefore may be subject to change before final admission into the 

FARS Public Database. This same note applies to the reported number of non-motorized fatalities for 2018.

- Serious Injuries are reported using Mississippi's Safety Analysis Management System (SAMS).

- All reported Serious Injuries in the chart for 2010-2017 have been modified from previous reports. This was 

due to an error discovered during the development of this year's report where Mississippi previously reported 

too few serious injuries. The state had not been counting serious injuries that happened in fatal crashes. Once 

the issue was identified, the counts were updated for this year and previous years, and the new totals as 

shown above more accurately represent the realized values. As will be discussed later in the report, this 

previously-unknown error has also caused issues with performance target setting, and the state's ability to 

meet targets set for this year. 

Describe fatality data source. 

FARS

- Mississippi relies wholly on FARS data for fatal crashes when available; however, we do use data from our 

Safety Analysis Management System (SAMS) as an interim measure when FARS data is not available and/or 

finalized when needed for analysis.

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

ownership. 

Year 2018

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 41

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

51.4 28.6 1.23 0.68

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0 0 0 0

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

155 83 2.89 1.59

Rural Minor Arterial 89 78.6 2.53 2.26

Rural Minor Collector 10.8 20.4 2.6 4.83

Rural Major Collector 104 120.2 2.58 2.99

Rural Local Road or 

Street

68.4 54.2 1.23 0.97

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

29.8 27.6 0.72 0.67

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

4 4.2 0.84 0.86

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

62 74.4 1.2 1.44

Urban Minor Arterial 26 32.4 1 1.25

Urban Minor Collector 19.4 23 0.98 1.16

Urban Major Collector 0

Urban Local Road or 

Street

24.2 17.4 0.76 0.56
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 41

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

447.6 382.2 1.83 1.56

County Highway

Agency

137.6 168.4 1.55 1.89

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

55.8 68.4 0.83 1.02

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

8.4

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 2020 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:682.0

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

MDOT's performance target for number of fatalities is based on a five year rolling average developed 

using 10 years' (2009-2018) worth of historical crash data. Prediction models are based on Excel's 
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 41

FORECAST.ETS exponential triple smoothing formula. While we always maintain a target of zero 

fatalities, historical trends in the state are more in line with what is presented.

Number of Serious Injuries:661.0

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

MDOT's performance target for number of serious injuries is based on a five year rolling average 

developed using 9 years' (2009-2017) worth of historical crash data. Prediction models are based on 

Excel's FORECAST.ETS exponential triple smoothing formula. 2018 values have been estimated at 

this time as the current value in our system is unreliable and does not fit with current historical trends.

Fatality Rate:1.690

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

MDOT's performance target for number of fatalities is based on a five year rolling average developed 

using 10 years' (2009-2018) worth of historical crash data. The volumes used to calculate the rates 

are provided by MDOT's Planning Division.

Serious Injury Rate:1.570

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

MDOT's performance target for number of serious injuries is based on a five year rolling average 

developed using 9 years' (2009-2017) worth of historical crash data. The volumes used to calculate 

the rates are provided by MDOT's Planning Division.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:145.5

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

MDOT's performance target for number of non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries is based on a 

five year rolling average developed using 10 years' (2009-2018) worth of historical crash data. 

Prediction models are based on Excel's FORECAST.ETS exponential triple smoothing formula. While 

we always maintain a target of zero fatalities, historical trends in the state are more in line with what is 

presented.

While developing performance targets, MDOT's HSIP personnel met numerous times with the Mississippi 

Office of Highway Safety (MOHS), who is responsible for the state's NHTSA Highway Safety Plan (HSP). Our 

offices worked hand in hand to determine the appropriate performance targets regarding fatalities, fatality rate, 

and serious injuries that are included both in the HSP as well as the HSIP Report. Our offices agreed to the 

three targets, and MOHS reported the joint targets as a part of their June 2019 reporting processes for the 

HSP.

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

safety performance targets. 

- The Mississippi DOT worked hand-in-hand alongside the Mississippi Office of Highway Safety (OHS) in 
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 41

reviewing the data necessary to develop the three shared safety performance targets: Fatalities, Fatality Rate, 

and Serious Injuries. Personnel responsible for the development of the Highway Safety Plan (HSP) 

participated in all meetings to establish final targets.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2018 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. 

Fatalities: 677.8

The five year rolling average for fatalities in Mississippi, including a tentative 663 fatalities in 2018, was 664.8. 

This value is 13 fatalities below the performance target of 677.8. While Mississippi is pleased to have met the 

target, the state is not satisfied. Those who work day in and day out with the HSIP efforts in the state will 

continue to work until the true target of zero is met.

Serious Injuries: 574.4

The five year rolling average for serious injuries in Mississippi, including a tentative 546 serious injuries in 

2018, was 616. This value is nearly 42 serious injuries above the performance target of 574.4. As was 

discussed on Question 30, a major contributing factor to missing this performance target was the previous 

issues with reported serious injuries. Mississippi was not properly counting serious injuries that occurred in 

fatal crashes, and thus the realized values reported statewide were too low. Using these erroneous values, 

Mississippi ultimately set targets that were likely never attainable given the data error. The issue has since 

been corrected, and targets set going forward will be measured more accurately against historical trends and 

what we expect in the years to come. 

Fatality Rate: 1.668

The five year rolling average for fatality rate in Mississippi, including a tentative rate of 1.630 in 2018, was 

1.651. This value would put the state below the performance target of 1.668. While Mississippi is pleased to 

have met the target, the state is not satisfied. Those who work day in and day out with the HSIP efforts in the 

state will continue to work until the true target of zero is met.

Serious Injury Rate: 1.425

The five year rolling average for serious injury rate in Mississippi, including a tentative rate of 1.340 in 2018, 

was 1.526. This value would mean that Mississippi did not meet its performance target of 1.425 for this 

particular category. As was discussed on above for serious injuries, this is primarily due to the serious injury 

reporting error. The issue has since been corrected, and targets set going forward will be measured more 

accurately against historical trends and what we expect in the years to come.

Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries: 119.8

The five year rolling average for non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries in Mississippi, including a 

tentative value of 143 in 2018, was 125.8. This value would mean that the state did not meet its performance 

target of 119.8 for 2018. As was the case with serious injuries and serious injury rate, incorrectly counting 

serious injury values too low contributed to setting a target that was too low. Additionally, Mississippi has 

experienced a dramatic rise in pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries, and is working to identify what is 
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 41

contributing to these troubling trends, and hopefully begin to correct them. Those who work day in and day out 

with the HSIP efforts in the state will continue to work until the true target of zero is met.

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 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

62 84 60 66 68 98 90

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

27 44 41 22 31 48 58
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 41

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

• Other-Before and After Crash Analysis

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

the State's program level evaluations. 

As a part of the HSIP reporting process, the state of Mississippi has kept track of the performance of its HSIP 

projects. Since this first began, the preferred method of evaluating projects has been to measure the crashes 

occurring after the project was constructed and in place against crashes at the location before improvements 

were installed. Using this measuring tool, the state of Mississippi's HSIP has realized an appreciable success 

in terms of its project effectiveness. Through the Federal Fiscal Year 2019, Mississippi HSIP projects with a 

minimum of three years of before and after crash data have achieved a 36% reduction of the severity of 

crashes at its project locations, as well as a 17.6% reduction in the number of overall crashes at these same 

locations. While recognizing that these reductions are a positive litmus test for the projects that Mississippi has 

selected for the HSIP to date, it is the intention of our program to aggressively pursue projects to make 

Mississippi's roads safer for our fellow road users.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

• # miles improved by HSIP

• # RSAs completed

• HSIP Obligations

• Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

• Increased focus on local road safety

• More systemic programs

• Organizational change

• Policy change

Describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting 

period. 

A State's commitment to safety can be measured in many different ways, and in the past federal fiscal year, 

MDOT has undertaken a major change that the state is quite proud of. Thanks to the determination of the 

MDOT's Executive Leadership, MDOT now has a division solely dedicated to HSIP efforts in the state: the 

Highway and Rail Safety Division (HRSD). MDOT's decision to form a Division solely dedicated to safety will 

help in the pursuit of the ultimate goal: zero deaths on our roadways.

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures. 

Year 2018
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 41

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury 

Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Lane Departure 377 343.2 0.93 0.85

Intersections 126.8 155
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 41

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Lane Departure Intersections

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

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

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Lane Departure Intersections

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 41

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the 

reporting period? 

No

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Lane Departure Intersections

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Lane Departure Intersections

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 41

Project Effectiveness

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

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL 

OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL 

OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

Kiln-Delisle at Vidalia Curb 

and Gutter

Rural Major 

Collector

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add left-turn 

lane

3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 2.00

US 49 Fr Campbell Loop to N 

31st

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Access 

management

Raised island - install new 94.00 141.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 51.00 50.00 150.00 192.00

US 90 at Franklin Creek Rd Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - modify 

skew angle

15.00 18.00 3.00 1.00 18.00 14.00 36.00 33.00

US 84 at Ferguson Mill Rd. Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Access 

management

Median crossover - directional 

crossover

6.00 2.00 7.00 1.00 15.00 1.00

US 61 at Delta View Rd. Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 5.00 9.00 1.00 7.00 9.00 13.00 18.00

I-59 @ 16th Ave Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Interstate

Interchange 

design

Ramp closure 57.00 55.00 10.00 15.00 67.00 70.00

MS 35 at I-20 EB Ramps Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 13.00 17.00 1.00 12.00 3.00 26.00 20.00

US 84 at Magnolia Rd. Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Access 

management

Median crossover - directional 

crossover

9.00 28.00 1.00 10.00 8.00 20.00 36.00

US 45 at CR 212 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Access 

management

Median crossover - directional 

crossover

5.00 1.00 1.00 6.00 1.00 13.00 1.00

RWIS Installations, I-69 over 

Hurricane Creek

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Interstate

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Advanced technology and ITS - 

other

9.00 9.00

RWIS Installations, I-55 over 

Coldwater River

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Interstate

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Advanced technology and ITS - 

other

5.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 7.00 2.00

US 72 at MS 7 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

17.00 30.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 23.00 20.00 46.00 52.00

MS 463 at Sunny Orchard Urban 

Principal 

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

26.00 39.00 9.00 13.00 35.00 52.00
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 41

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL 

OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL 

OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

MS 463 at Welch Farms Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

13.00 29.00 5.00 7.00 18.00 36.00

MS 463 (Old)/Main at Post 

Oak

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

14.00 4.00 1.00 15.00 4.00

MS 463 at Colony 

Crossing/Key

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

44.00 46.00 11.00 6.00 55.00 52.00

MS 463 at Woodgreen Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

24.00 28.00 4.00 11.00 28.00 39.00

MS 463 at 

Annandale/Reunion

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

11.00 15.00 1.00 12.00 15.00

MS 463 at Mannsdale Park Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

22.00 44.00 4.00 8.00 26.00 52.00

MS 463 at St. Joe Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

6.00 8.00 6.00 1.00 12.00 9.00

MS 463 at Madison Middle 

School

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

10.00 24.00 3.00 1.00 13.00 25.00

MS 463 at Highland Colony 

Parkway

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

93.00 139.00 14.00 16.00 107.00 155.00

US 51 at Hoy Rd. Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

63.00 78.00 1.00 1.00 13.00 15.00 77.00 94.00

US 51 at Main/Old MS 463 Urban 

Principal 

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

76.00 46.00 16.00 6.00 92.00 52.00
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 41

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL 

OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL 

OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

US 51 at Lake Harbor Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

41.00 64.00 9.00 14.00 50.00 78.00

US 51 at Ridgewood Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

27.00 33.00 8.00 6.00 35.00 39.00

US 51 at McLellan Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

11.00 11.00 1.00 9.00 4.00 20.00 16.00

US 51 at 

Ridgeland/Sunnycrest

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

32.00 50.00 8.00 8.00 40.00 58.00

US 51 at Jackson St/MS 886 Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

126.00 122.00 24.00 26.00 150.00 148.00

US 51 at Rice Rd Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

130.00 138.00 1.00 24.00 19.00 155.00 157.00

US 51 at School St. Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

54.00 50.00 9.00 10.00 63.00 60.00

US 51 at Olympic Way Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

8.00 12.00 5.00 4.00 13.00 16.00

US 51 at Madison Ave Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

50.00 49.00 9.00 12.00 59.00 61.00

US 51 at St. Augustine Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

12.00 21.00 6.00 3.00 18.00 24.00

US 51 at Cobblestone Urban 

Principal 

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

12.00 11.00 3.00 4.00 15.00 15.00
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 41

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL 

OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL 

OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

MS 2 Fr Tippah/Alcorn Co Ln 

to Kossuth

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or shoulder 47.00 28.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 26.00 13.00 75.00 44.00

I-20 WB On Ramp at Lost 

Gap

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Interstate

Interchange 

design

Extend existing lane on ramp 3.00 2.00 5.00

US 61 at Oak Ridge/Bowie Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

17.00 13.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 9.00 3.00 29.00 18.00

US 49 at Hall St. Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Access 

management

Median crossover - close 

crossover

15.00 1.00 4.00 12.00 2.00 31.00 3.00

US 49 at S. Magnolia Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

20.00 34.00 1.00 9.00 5.00 30.00 39.00

US 49 at Walmart Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

additional signal heads

18.00 14.00 8.00 6.00 26.00 20.00

US 49 at 4th St. Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Access 

management

Median crossover - directional 

crossover

8.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 22.00 1.00 32.00 2.00

US 49 at Ora Swamp/Sunset Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

12.00 6.00 1.00 8.00 8.00 21.00 14.00

US 49 at 

Pinecrest/Westview/Frontage

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

1.00 7.00 1.00 1.00 11.00 2.00 19.00

US 49 at Selma/Rebecca Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

8.00 9.00 1.00 9.00 6.00 17.00 16.00

US 98 at Beaver Dam Rd Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

11.00 9.00 3.00 9.00 5.00 23.00 14.00

US 98 at MS 198/Rocky 

Creek Rd

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

11.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 20.00 4.00 33.00 9.00

MS 25 at Cool Papa Bell Rd Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

80.00 40.00 18.00 13.00 98.00 53.00
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 41

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL 

OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL 

OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

MS 25 at Ridgewood Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

158.00 114.00 39.00 28.00 197.00 142.00

MS 25 at Tree Tops Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

91.00 73.00 20.00 15.00 111.00 88.00

MS 25 at River Oaks/Jackson 

Prep

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

111.00 55.00 25.00 10.00 136.00 65.00

MS 25 at MS 475/Airport Rd Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

249.00 138.00 1.00 56.00 28.00 306.00 166.00

US 49 at Muse Rd. Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Dynamic message signs 11.00 9.00 1.00 12.00 5.00 24.00 14.00

US 49 at RT Braddy Rd Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Other

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Dynamic message signs 9.00 13.00 4.00 9.00 13.00 22.00

US 51 at N. Pat Harrison Rural Major 

Collector

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Dynamic message signs 1.00 1.00

MS 43 FM Crossroads to I-20 Rural Major 

Collector

Alignment Horizontal curve realignment 50.00 8.00 1.00 2.00 31.00 5.00 84.00 13.00

I-55SB to I-20EB Flyover, 

Ice/Snow/Slush

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Interstate

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Dynamic message signs 5.00 1.00 6.00

I-59/US 49 Loop Ramps Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) 

- Interstate

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

62.00 19.00 22.00 1.00 84.00 20.00

US 78 Fr Craft Rd to Hacks 

Cross Rd

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Roadway Pavement surface - 

miscellaneous

250.00 151.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 60.00 46.00 316.00 199.00
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 41

- Mississippi's project listing includes all projects that involved HSIP funding that have at least three years of "before" construction and "after" construction crash data available.

- It should be noted that the duration of the “before” and “after” evaluations are not equal. The “after” totals will include as much post construction crash data as possible, therefore a straight “before and after” comparison could be skewed. 

Crashes per year would be a better comparison for all crash data categories included in the tables and would illustrate better performance.

- Multiple projects include "before" crash data analysis periods that predate January 1, 2010. This is important to note as this precedes MDOT's ongoing crash data cleansing and review efforts; therefore, this older data has not been 

verified for accuracy and completeness. 

- Multiple query methods (spatial vs. attribute) were required for analyses included in the report. This has likely resulted in variances in crash totals reported for multiple projects, again providing an unbalanced before and after comparison 

for many projects that included crash data prior to 2010 in the above list.

- All crash data provided was analyzed using Mississippi's Safety Analysis Management System (SAMS).
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 41

Compliance Assessment

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

 01/03/2019

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2019 To: 2023

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

 2024

Mississippi completed its most recent SHSP in January of this year. A copy of the SHSP can be found online at the following web link: http://mdot.ms.gov/documents/traffic%20engineering/plan/shsp.pdf

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

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

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

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9)

100 100

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21)

100 100

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20)

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 100 100 100 100

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10)

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13)

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18)

100 100

Functional Class 

(19)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Median Type (54) 100 100

Access Control (22) 100 100
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 41

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

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

One/Two Way 

Operations (91)

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31)

100 100 100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79)

100 100 100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120)

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122)

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123)

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

100 100

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79)

100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

100 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197)

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 100 100
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 41

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

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

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

100 100

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199)

100 100

Interchange Type 

(182)

100 100

Ramp AADT (191) 100 100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192)

100 100

Functional Class 

(19)

100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

*Based on Functional Classification

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

The state has completed all MIRE data element collection that it is able to collect.

Did the State conduct an HSIP program assessment during the reporting period? 

No

When does the State plan to complete its next HSIP program assessment.

2022
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 41

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2019 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 41

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.