Texas

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2013 Annual Report

Prepared by: TX
ii

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery & Admission into Evidence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Contents

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

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

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................2

Program Structure ........................................................................................................................................2

Program Administration ...........................................................................................................................2

Program Methodology..............................................................................................................................5

Progress in Implementing Projects.............................................................................................................17

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................. 17

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

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Overview of General Safety Trends....................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Application of Special Rules................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................56

SHSP Emphasis Areas............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Groups of similar project types.............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Systemic Treatments ............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Glossary.......................................................................................................................................................81
iv
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

Executive Summary

The Texas State Fiscal Year is September 1 - August 31.

Texas uses incapacitating and non-incapacitating injuries to determine the number of serious 

injuries.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

Introduction

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program 

with the purpose of achieving a significant reduction in fatalities and serious 

injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 924.15, States are 

required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP 

implementation and evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent 

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

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

progress in achieving safety performance targets, and assessment of the 

effectiveness of the improvements. 

Program Structure

Program Administration

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

Central

District

Other

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

Local roads receive the same consideration as roads on the state highway system. They are 

subjected to the same cost/benefit analysis.

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

Design

Planning
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

Maintenance

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Other: 

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

Step - Responsible Party - Action 

1. TRF (Central) - Using the most current Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), the program 

safety emphasis areas are identified. 

2. TRF (Central)- analyzes the three most current years of crash data to identify potential 

project locations that qualify for improvements in the identified program emphasis areas. 

3. TRF (Central)- Provides a spreadsheet listing potential project locations by emphasis area that 

qualified for the program to each district. 

4. District (Design/Operations) - Evaluates each identified location to determine if the project is 

feasible and to verify that appropriate countermeasures addressing the location’s safety needs 

have not already been implemented or scheduled for construction. 

5. District (Design/Operations) - Works with area offices and local governments to gather 

additional location information and to identify any potential locations that may have been 

excluded due to incomplete or inaccurate crash and roadway data. 

6. District (Design/Operations) - For projects determined to be feasible, conducts a field 

evaluation to determine the appropriate countermeasure and develop a detailed estimate. 

7. District (Design/Operations) - Completes and submits spreadsheets containing requested 

data to the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Traffic Operations Division (TRF) along 

with the necessary backup data (typical sec-tions, layouts, etc.) in response to the program call. 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

8. TRF (Central) - analyzes the proposed highway safety projects for HSIP eligibility, data 

accuracy, and conformance with design standards. 

9. TRF (Central)- Subjects each eligible project to a benefit/cost analysis using the Safety 

Improvement Index (SII), then puts the projects into priority order based on the results. 

10. TRF (Central)- Places projects in the HSIP according to priority and appropriated federal 

funding; then sends listing of highway safety projects selected for funding in the HSIP to the 

districts.

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

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Other: 

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

the last reporting period.

Multi-disciplinary HSIP steering committee

Other: Other-No change

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

would like to elaborate.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

None at this time.

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

Median Barrier Intersection Safe Corridor

Horizontal Curve Bicycle Safety Rural State Highways

Skid Hazard Crash Data Red Light Running Prevention

Roadway Departure Low-Cost Spot Improvements Sign Replacement And 

Improvement

Local Safety Pedestrian Safety Right Angle Crash

Left Turn Crash Shoulder Improvement Segments

Other: 

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology: 9/1/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

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

Yes

No
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology: 9/1/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

Program: Rural State Highways

Date of Program Methodology: 9/1/2012

 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

Yes

No

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

Program: Crash Data

Date of Program Methodology: 9/1/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology: 9/1/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding 2

Incremental B/C
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

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

0

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

improvments?

Cable Median Barriers Rumble Strips

Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation Pavement/Shoulder Widening

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

Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails Clear Zone Improvements

Safety Edge Install/Improve Lighting

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal Other 

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

Other: 

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

last reporting period.

Highway Safety Manual

Road Safety audits

Systemic Approach

Other: Other-No change

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

would like to elaborate. 

None at this time.

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Calendar Year

State Fiscal Year

Federal Fiscal Year
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

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

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) 0 0 % 86773554 100 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) 0 0 % 0 0 %

HRRR Special Rule

Penalty Transfer -

Section 154

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

Incentive Grants - 

Section 163

Incentive Grants (Section 

406)

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STP, NHPP)

State and Local Funds

Totals 0 100% 86773554 100%

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

$0.00

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

$0.00
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

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

$0.00

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

$0.00

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

period?

$0.00

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

period? 

$0.00

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

overcome this in the future.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

We do not have any impediments to obligating our HSIP funds at this time. Our Administration 

is supportive of the program and provides us with appropriate obligation authority

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

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

We do not have anything on which to elaborate.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

General Listing of Projects

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

Project Improvement Category Outpu

t 

HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Fundin

g 

Catego

ry

Functiona

l 

Classificat

ion

AAD

T

Spe

ed

Roadwa

y 

Owners

hip

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strategy

STP 

2013(822)

HES

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

1 

Numb

ers

40000

0

16459

01

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

750

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Improving 

the design 

and 

operation 

of 

highway 

intersectio

ns

Add more 

turn bays 

and 

accelerationl

anes on highspeed rural 

roads.

STP 

2013(121)

HES

Roadside Roadside -

other

7 

Miles

44017

2

44017

2

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

740 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Minimizin

g the 

consequen

ces of 

leaving 

the road

Continue to 

remove 

trees, 

relocate 

utility poles, 

and protect 

culverts or 

remediate 

risks by other 

means.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

22

STP 

2013(527)

HES

Miscellaneous 1 

Miles

63660

0

12404

99

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

265

55

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Reducing 

head-on 

and 

acrossmedian 

crashes

Install more 

concrete and 

cable median 

barriers

STP 

2013(059)

HRR

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

13 

Miles

31054

23

31054

23

HRRRP 

(SAFET

EA-LU)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

390

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(119)

HES

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics -

realignment to increase 

cross street offset

1 

Numb

ers

97600

8

97600

8

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

400

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Improving 

the design 

and 

operation 

of 

highway 

intersectio

ns

Eliminate 

limited sight 

distance on 

all roads. 

This includes 

high speed 

rural and 

urban 

intersections 

where sight 

distance 

limitations 

exist due to 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

vegetation, 

signing and 

other 

obstructions.

STP 

2012(085)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

4 

Miles

21550

16

21550

16

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

190

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2012(068)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

4 

Miles

14851

79

14851

79

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

590 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(330)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

10 

Miles

48036

37

48036

37

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

400

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

STP 

2013(595)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

8 

Miles

31209

93

31209

93

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

140

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2012(736)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

13 

Miles

49389

99

49389

99

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Collector

135

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(016)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

13 

Miles

37300

00

47438

93

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Collector

420 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

25

STP 

2013(463)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

8 

Miles

19372

98

19372

98

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

170

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines

STP 

2013(394)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

13 

Miles

30020

00

36184

15

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

540 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(677)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

18 

Miles

32445

21

32445

21

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Collector

620 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(546)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

11 

Miles

37720

00

42783

80

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Collector

890 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

26

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(025)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

7 

Miles

43489

46

43489

46

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

195

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(028)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

9 

Miles

51068

64

51068

64

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

120

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines

STP 

2013(851)

HES

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

1 

Numb

ers

79119

0

79119

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

105

00

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Improving 

the design 

and 

operation 

of 

highway 

intersectio

ns

Add more 

turn bays 

and 

accelerationl

anes on highspeed rural 

roads.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

27

STP 

2013(022)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

5 

Miles

21919

92

21919

92

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

120

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(029)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

6 

Miles

28995

81

28995

81

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

440 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines

STP 

2013(054)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

8 

Miles

19980

13

19980

13

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

920 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(133)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

8 

Miles

26387

86

26387

86

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

320

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

28

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(314)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

5 

Miles

21960

76

21960

76

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

150

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(006)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

9 

Miles

26831

60

26831

60

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

910 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(005)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

15 

Miles

25548

18

25548

18

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

170 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(444)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

5 

Miles

17577

70

17577

70

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

110

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines

STP 

2013(060)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

13 

Miles

43948

43

43948

43

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

200

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(315)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

1 

Miles

10664

5

10664

5

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Collector

125

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines

STP 

2013(315)

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

7 

Miles

23461

43

23461

43

HSIP 

(Sectio

Rural 

Major 

520 0 State 

Highway 

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

30

HES or other n 148) Collector Agency roadway FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(152)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

5 

Miles

24979

72

24979

72

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

110

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(768)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

7 

Miles

25300

00

38694

42

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

230

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(828)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

21 

Miles

47875

87

47875

87

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

820 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

31

roadway FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(480)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

28 

Miles

31493

02

31493

02

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

180 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(395)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

7 

Miles

35000

00

49382

97

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

100

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines

STP 

2013(797)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

14 

Miles

35767

96

35767

96

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

520 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

32

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(798)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

16 

Miles

56471

70

56471

70

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

400 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(173)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

2 

Miles

79251

6

79251

6

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

130

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines

STP 

2013(245)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

9 

Miles

18127

80

18127

80

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

600 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(486)

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

20 22578 22578 HSIP 

(Sectio

Rural 

Major 

820 0 State 

Highway 

Keeping 

vehicles in 

Increase the 

use of paved 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

33

HES or other Miles 94 94 n 148) Collector Agency the 

roadway

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(684)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

1 

Miles

38198

4

38198

4

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

115

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Increase the 

use of paved 

shoulders on 

FM roads to 

increase the 

"forgiveness" 

of the road 

during road 

departures

STP 

2013(684)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

2 

Miles

44208

4

44208

4

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

760

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines

STP 

2013(241)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

8 

Miles

24861

46

24861

46

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

850 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

34

STP 

2013(241)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

13 

Miles

35511

86

35511

86

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

165

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines

STP 

2013(397)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

8 

Miles

32394

83

32394

83

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

220

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Install more 

pavement 

width to 

allow edge 

lines

STP 

2013(380)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Shoulder treatments -

other

7 

Miles

67389 67389 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

730

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Continue to 

install 

shoulder and 

centerline 

rumble strips

STP 

2013(380)

HES

Shoulder treatments 

Shoulder treatments -

other

6 

Miles

65307 65307 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

760

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

Continue to 

install 

shoulder and 

centerline 

rumble strips

STP 

2013(677)

HES

Roadside Roadside -

other

8 

Miles

26590

1

26590

1

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Collector

510 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Minimizin

g the 

consequen

ces of 

leaving 

the road

Continue to 

remove 

trees, 

relocate 

utility poles, 

and protect 

culverts or 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

35

remediate 

risks by other 

means.

STP 

2013(394)

HES

Roadside Roadside -

other

13 

Miles

76866

2

76866

2

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

540 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Minimizin

g the 

consequen

ces of 

leaving 

the road

Continue to 

remove 

trees, 

relocate 

utility poles, 

and protect 

culverts or 

remediate 

risks by other 

means.

STP 

2013(677)

HES

Roadside Roadside -

other

20 

Miles

99482

1

99482

1

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Collector

620 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Minimizin

g the 

consequen

ces of 

leaving 

the road

Continue to 

remove 

trees, 

relocate 

utility poles, 

and protect 

culverts or 

remediate 

risks by other 

means.

STP 

2013(330)

HES

Roadside Roadside -

other

11 

Miles

53309

8

53309

8

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

400

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Minimizin

g the 

consequen

ces of 

Continue to 

remove 

trees, 

relocate 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

36

leaving 

the road

utility poles, 

and protect 

culverts or 

remediate 

risks by other 

means.

STP 

2013(847)

HES

Access management 

Median crossover - close 

crossover

0 

Miles

30236

0

39437

4

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressw

ays

680

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Improving 

the design 

and 

operation 

of 

highway 

intersectio

ns

Promote 

better access 

management 

policies

STP 

2013(847)

HES

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

miscellaneous/other/uns

pecified

1 

Numb

ers

20348

9

20348

9

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressw

ays

220

0

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Improving 

the design 

and 

operation 

of 

highway 

intersectio

ns

Implement 

engineering 

solutions to 

reduce redlight running, 

such as 

changes in 

signal timing 

(i.e., longer 

yellow, allred phase, 

etc.)

STP Roadside Barrier - 5 10185 10185 HSIP Rural 185 0 State Reducing Install more 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

37

2013(882)

HES

concrete Miles 81 81 (Sectio

n 148)

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

00 Highway 

Agency

head-on 

and 

acrossmedian 

crashes

concrete and 

cable median 

barriers

STP 

2013(990)

HES

Lighting Continuous 

roadway lighting

6 

Miles

11908

07

11908

07

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressw

ays

180

00

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Enhancing 

safety on 

the 

roadway.

Other

STP 

2013(080)

HES

Roadside Barrier - cable 17 

Miles

13849

87

13849

87

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

188

00

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Reducing 

head-on 

and 

acrossmedian 

crashes

Install more 

concrete and 

cable median 

barriers
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

38

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

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

Performance Measures* 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Number of fatalities 3479 3122 3060 3067 3399

Number of serious injuries 84827 80205 83512 80188 87087

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.48 1.35 1.31 1.29 1.41

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 36.16 34.57 35.73 33.77 36.19

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

39
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

40
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

41

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

Year - 2012

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

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

184 1869 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

0 0 0 0

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

302 3556 0 0

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

67 814 0 0

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

440 4553 0 0

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

0 0 0 0

URBAN PRINCIPAL 328 8429 0 0
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

42

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

256 6640 0 0

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

406 12735 0 0

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

122 3655 0 0

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

0 0 0 0

URBAN COLLECTOR 36 870 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL

404 4192 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL

404 4192 0 0
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

43
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

44
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

45
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

46
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

47

Year - 2012

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

STATE HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

2368 44967 0 0

COUNTY HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

303 3426 0 0

TOWN OR TOWNSHIP 

HIGHWAY AGENCY

0 0 0 0

CITY OF MUNICIPAL 

HIGHWAY AGENCY

706 38003 0 0

STATE PARK, FOREST, 

OR RESERVATION 

AGENCY

0 0 0 0

LOCAL PARK, FOREST 

OR RESERVATION 

AGENCY

0 0 0 0

OTHER STATE AGENCY 0 0 0 0

OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 0 0 0 0

PRIVATE (OTHER 

THAN RAILROAD)

3 43 0 0
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

RAILROAD 0 0 0 0

STATE TOLL 

AUTHORITY

0 0 0 0

LOCAL TOLL 

AUTHORITY

0 0 0 0

OTHER PUBLIC 

INSTRUMENTALITY 

(E.G. AIRPORT, 

SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY)

0 0 0 0

INDIAN TRIBE NATION 0 0 0 0

OTHER 0 0 0 0

TOLL ROAD 30 817 0 0

TOLL ROAD 30 817 0 0
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

49
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

50
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

51
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

52
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

53

Functional Classification is only collected for on-system crashes.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

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

With the exception of two years, there has been a decrease in the number fatalities each year 

for the last 10 years.

Application of Special Rules

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

age of 65. 

Older Driver

Performance Measures

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Fatality rate (per capita) 2.76 2.54 2.64 2.83 0

Serious injury rate (per 

capita)

7.4 6.77 7.54 7.29 0

Fatality and serious injury 

rate (per capita)

10.16 9.31 10.18 10.11 0

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

Fatality and Serious Injury Rate = (Fatalities (FARS)+Incapacitating Injutries)/65+ Population (per 

1,000)

For the purpose of this analysis, serious injuries are defined as incapacitating injuries only.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

55

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

56

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)

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

Safety Improvement Program?

None

Benefit/cost

Policy change

Other: Other-% decease in number of fatal and serious injury crashes and injuries in SHSP emphasis 

areas.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

57

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

Shift Focus to Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Include Local Roads in Highway Safety Improvement Program

Organizational Changes

None

Other: 
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

58

Briefly describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period. 

No changes were made since the last reporting period.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

59

SHSP Emphasis Areas
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

60

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

Year - 2012

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target Crash Type Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious 

injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury 

rate (per 

HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Instituting graduated 

licensing for younger 

drivers

Teen drivers -

related

339 14417 0.14 5.99 0 0 0

Sustaining 

proficiency in older 

drivers

Drivers 65 years of 

age and older

419 10792 419 4.49 0 0 0

Curbing aggressive 

driving

Speed-related 28 313 0.01 0.13 0 0 0

Reducing impaired 

driving

DUI-related 1317 10531 0.55 4.38 0 0 0

Keeping drivers alert distracted driving -

related

470 18583 0.2 7.72 0 0 0

Increasing seat belt 

use and improving 

airbag effectiveness

Lack of restraint 

usage - related

978 5477 0.41 2.28 0 0 0

Making walking and 

street crossing easier

Vehicle/pedestrian 485 2966 0.2 1.23 0 0 0
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

61

Ensuring safer bicycle 

travel

Vehicle/bicycle 56 1452 0.02 0.6 0 0 0

Improving 

motorcycle safety 

and increasing 

motorcycle 

awareness

Vehicle/motorcycle 470 6130 0.2 2.55 0 0 0

Making truck travel 

safer

Truck-related 395 3378 0.16 1.4 0 0 0

Reducing vehicletrain crashes

Vehicle/train 30 309 0.01 0.13 0 0 0

Minimizing the 

consequences of 

leaving the road

Run-off-road 1314 21576 0.55 8.97 0 0 0

Improving the design 

and operation of 

highway 

intersections

Angle 841 36087 0.35 15 0 0 0

Reducing head-on 

and across-median 

crashes

Head on 535 3364 0.22 1.4 0 0 0

Designing safer work 

zones

crashes that occur 

in wz

131 3500 0.05 1.45 0 0 0
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

62
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

63
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

64
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

65
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

66

Groups of similar project types
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

67

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

Year - 2012

HSIP Sub-program 

Types

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Rural State 

Highways

Run-offroad

1894 26463 2.62 36.66 0 0 0

Intersection Angle 841 36087 0.35 15 0 0 0

Roadway 

Departure

Run-offroad

1314 21576 0.55 8.97 0 0 0
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

68
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

69
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

70
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

71
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

72

Systemic Treatments
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

73

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.. 

Year - 2012

Systemic 

improvement

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

74
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

75
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

76
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

77

This information is not available by these categories.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

78

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

which you would like to elaborate. 

Texas has invested billions of state funds over the last 8 years to improve safety on our 

highways. The ability to supplement our federally 

funded safety programs with state funded safety programs has had a major impact on the 

number of safety projects being implemented in 

Texas and we are beginning to reap the benefits of these investments in the form of lower 

fatalities and serious injuries on Texas roadways.
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

79

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

BefOther 

Injury

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

AftOther 

Injury

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ 

Cost Ratio)

None Miscellaneous
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

80

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached
2013 Texas Highway Safety Improvement Program

81

Glossary

5 year rolling average means the average of five individual, consecutive annual points of data (e.g. 

annual fatality rate).

Emphasis area means a highway safety priority in a State’s SHSP, identified through a data-driven, 

collaborative process. 

Highway safety improvement project means strategies, activities and projects on a public road that are 

consistent with a State strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous road location 

or feature or addresses a highway safety problem. 

HMVMT means hundred million vehicle miles traveled.

Non-infrastructure projects are projects that do not result in construction. Examples of noninfrastructure projects include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities, 

improvements in the collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement 

activities.

Older driver special rule applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and 

pedestrians over the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2-year period for which data 

are available, as defined in the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Interim Guidance dated 

February 13, 2013. 

Performance measure means indicators that enable decision-makers and other stakeholders to monitor 

changes in system condition and performance against established visions, goals, and objectives.

Programmed funds mean those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP) to be expended on highway safety improvement projects.

Roadway Functional Classification means the process by which streets and highways are grouped into 

classes, or systems, according to the character of service they are intended to provide.

Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) means a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary plan, based on safety 

data developed by a State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148. 

Systemic safety improvement means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high risk 

roadway features that are correlated with specific severe crash types. 

Transfer means, in accordance with provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, a State may transfer from an 

apportionment under section 104(b) not to exceed 50 percent of the amount apportioned for the fiscal 

year to any other apportionment of the State under that section.