A 01/15/06 SUN 0330 DSS

CRASH REPORT ID#####

D 02/25/06 MON 0705 DSS

CRASH REPORT ID#####

Road Safety Audit Toolkit 

for Federal Land 

Management Agencies and 

Tribal Governments

FHW

July 

Tribal School Zones

Safety Video Toolkit

FHWA-FLH-07-002

March 2007

FHWA Road Safety Audits Guidelines 1

FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines

Publication No. FHWA-SA-06-06
Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in 

the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the 

information contained in this document.

The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ 

names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document.

Quality Assurance Statement 

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, 

industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are 

used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA 

periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality 

improvement.
i

Technical Documentation Page

1. Report No.

FHWA-FLH-10-0011

2. Government 

Accession No.

3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

 

4. Title and Subtitle.

Road Safety Audit Toolkit for Federal Land Management Agencies and Tribal Governments

5. Report Date.

September 2010

6. Performing Organization Code.

7. Author(s). 

 Dan Nabors, Kevin Moriarty, and Frank Gross

8. Performing Organization Report 

No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address. 

Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc (VHB) 

8300 Boone Blvd., Ste. 700 

Vienna, VA 22182-2626 

10. Work Unit No.

11. Contract or Grant No.

 DTF61-05-D-00024

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address.

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

Office of Safety 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

13. Type of Report and Period 

Covered. 

Final Report

September 2009 – December 

2010 

14. Sponsoring Agency Code.

15. Supplementary Notes. 

This report was produced under the FHWA contract DTF61-05-D-00024. The Contracting Officer’s Technical Manager (COTM) 

was Chimai Ngo, FHWA Office of Federal Lands Highway. The project team gratefully acknowledges the input provided by the 

following individuals over the course of this project: Jeff Bagdade, Mike Blankenship, Victoria Brinkly, Rebecca Crowe, Edward 

Demming, Peter Field, Thomas Fronk, Christoph Jaeschke, Salisa Norstog, Norah Ocel, Jennifer Proctor, Gerald Fayuant, Steve 

Suder, Dennis Trusty, and Scott Whittemore.

16. Abstract.

Road Safety Audits/Assessments (RSAs) have proven to be an effective tool for improving safety on and along roadways. As such, 

the use of RSAs continues to grow throughout the United States. The success has led to the Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA) including the RSA as one of its nine “proven safety countermeasures”. Federal Land Management Agencies (FLMAs) 

and Tribes are beginning to witness the benefits of conducting RSAs. However, FLMAs and Tribes often face unique conditions, 

staffing, and funding constraints that do not allow resources to be devoted to improving roadway safety. The “Road Safety Audit 

Toolkit for Federal Land Management Agencies and Tribal Governments” is intended to be used by FLMAs and Tribes to overcome 

these obstacles. Information, ideas, and resources are provided in key topic areas including how to conduct an RSA, common 

safety issues and potential improvements, establishing an RSA program, and incorporating RSAs into the planning process. The 

Toolkit serves as a starting point, providing information to FLMAs and Tribes about partnerships needed to build support, available 

funding sources for the program and improvements, tools to conduct RSAs, and resources to identify safety issues and select 

countermeasures. Worksheets and other sample materials have been provided to aid in the RSA process including requesting 

assistance, scheduling, analyzing data, conducting field reviews, and documenting issues and suggestions. Examples of programs 

and experiences of other agencies have also been included throughout to provide examples of successes and struggles in 

implementing RSAs and improving safety for all road users.

17. Key Words. 

Safety, Road Safety Audit, Toolkit, Federal Land Management 

Agencies (FLMAs), Tribes

18. Distribution Statement.

No restrictions. This document is available to the public 

through the National Technical Information Service, 

Springfield, Virginia 22161.

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of 

this page).

Unclassified

21. No. of 

Pages.

 66

22. Price.

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed pages authorized
ii

This page intentionally left bla
Introductio

Road Safety Audits/Assessments (RSAs) are a valuable tool used to evaluate road safety 

issues and to identify opportunities for improvement. The Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA) defines an RSA as a “formal safety performance evaluation of an existing or future 

road or intersection by an independent, multidisciplinary team.” RSAs can be used on any 

type of facility during any stage of the project development process.

Some element of safety is considered on every project. 

However, sometimes conditions on or adjacent to 

Federal and Tribal lands merit a more detailed safety 

review. For example, traffic volumes on a roadway 

may be higher than intended or 

may carry a higher percentage of 

trucks and other heavy vehicles 

due to unanticipated growth. 

These conditions can divide a Tribal 

community or interject a set of 

complexities to an unfamiliar 

visitor. RSAs examine these conditions in detail by pulling together a 

multidisciplinary team that looks at the issues from different perspectives 

– perspectives which are often not a part of a traditional safety review. RSAs 

also consider safety from a human factors point of view which aims to 

answer the following questions: How and why are people reacting to the 

roadway conditions? What do people sense and how do they react to those 

senses? What are the associated risks with those elements? The 

multidisciplinary team approach helps to answer these questions. 

Interactions between all road users (e.g., pedestrians and motor vehicles, 

commuter traffic and recreational vehicle traffic, bicycles and motor 

vehicles, etc.) are investigated to determine potential risk and to identify 

programs and measures to help reduce those risks and create safer 

environments for all road users.

RSAs have proven to be an effective tool for improving safety on and along 

roadways. As such, the use of RSAs continues to grow throughout the U.S. A decade ago, 

few states had experience conducting RSAs; now each state has had some experience with 

the RSA process. The success has led to FHWA including the RSA process as one of its nine 

RSAs examine roadw

roadside features that

potential safety i

Partner Agencies

FHWA

Tribal Governments

Bureau of Indian Affairs

U.S. Forest Service

National Park Service

U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service

Bureau of Land 

Management

Department of Defense

Tennessee Valley 

Authority

Bureau of Land 

Reclamation

Tribal Technical 

Assistance Program
 Page iv RSA Toolkit

“proven safety countermeasures.” Federal Land 

Management Agencies (FLMAs) and Tribes are 

beginning to witness the benefits of conducting 

RSAs. FHWA Federal Lands Highway (FLH) 

division offices have helped plan or conduct 

RSAs on facilities owned by the National Park 

Service (NPS), Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM), U.S. Forest Service (FS), U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (FWS), and several Tribes. The 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has included 

RSA findings in planning and programming 

documents. Western Federal Lands Highway 

Division (WFLHD) has used RSAs in their 

project selection process. Tribes such as the Tohono O’odham Nation have worked with 

State and local agencies to conduct RSAs and implement RSA findings. However, while 

RSAs have secured a foothold with FLMAs and Tribes, more opportunities exist to promote 

RSAs as a tool to address safety on and adjacent to Federal and Tribal lands. Some examples 

include introducing FLMAs and Tribes to the RSA process, initiating full-fledged programs 

within agencies, and incorporating RSAs into the planning process, thus promoting a more 

comprehensive approach to addressing safety.

Conducting an RSA does not require a large investment of time or money. RSAs require only 

a small percentage of the time and money needed for a typical roadway project. Furthermore, 

by gaining a better understanding of the safety implications of roadway and roadside features, 

RSAs can be used to prioritize locations with safety issues which help identify the best use 

for funding. Other benefits include encouraging 

multidisciplinary collaboration beyond the RSA, 

which promotes a better understanding of road 

user needs and safety.

Perhaps the best way to describe the effectiveness 

of RSAs is through a benefit/cost (B/C) ratio. A 

benefit/cost ratio is a measure to compare the 

benefits derived from the reduction of crashes to 

the cost of conducting an RSA and implementing 

crash reduction strategies. Benefit/cost ratios may 

be used as the ultimate measure of the project’s 

success. The following case studies show the 

potential benefits of conducting RSAs.

RSAs will help save lives and 

reduce injuries. The success 

of RSAs has led to FHWA 

adopting the process as one 

of its nine “proven safety 

countermeasures.” The success 

has been realized by many 

FLMAs and Tribes, which are 

planning and/or conducting a 

number of RSAs with various 

partners.

RSAs on Federal or Tribal 

may encounter unique geometric

roadside conditions with signi

historical, cultural, and envir

constrai
Introduction Page v

RSA Success Sto

Roadway

An RSA was conducted along a 

3.84-mile section of a two-lane road 

in Cumberland County, Tennessee. 

Safety issues observed by the RSA 

team along the corridor included 

severe roadway curvature and limited 

sight distance. The team suggested 

the following measures: install curve 

warning and chevron signs, paint 

thicker (8”) edgelines, and remove 

trees along the roadway.

 RSA Cost = $12,000

 Crash Reduction = 3.5%

 Implementation Cost = $23,000

 B/C Ratio = 20:1 (entire segment)

Intersection

An RSA was conducted at a signalized 

and an unsignalized intersection in 

Collier County, Florida. The potential 

safety issues included limited sight 

distance, faded and insufficient 

signing and markings, and lack of safe 

pedestrian facilities. Team suggestions 

included trimming vegetation, installing 

advance warning signs, constructing 

left-turn lanes, and providing pedestrian 

signal and sidewalk improvements.

 RSA Cost = $15,000

 Crash Reduction = 9.5%

 Implementation Cost = $250,000

 B/C Ratio = 8:1 (both 

intersections)
 Page vi RSA Toolkit

This Toolkit is intended to be used by Federal land agencies and Tribal governments as 

guidance and to provide information, ideas, and resources in key topic areas to lead the effort 

to improve safety through the use of the RSA:

• How do I conduct an RSA?

• What are common safety issues and potential countermeasures?

• How do I establish an RSA program?

• How do I incorporate RSAs in the planning process?

• What’s next?

The Toolkit serves as a starting point, providing information to FLMAs and Tribes about 

identifying an RSA champion, partnerships needed to build support, available funding 

sources (for both the program and improvements), tools to conduct RSAs, and resources to 

identify safety issues and select countermeasures. Worksheets and other sample materials 

have been provided to aid in the RSA process, including requesting assistance, scheduling, 

analyzing data, conducting field reviews, and documenting issues and suggestions. Examples 

of programs and experiences of other agencies have also been included throughout to provide 

examples of successes and struggles in implementing RSAs and improving safety for all road 

users.
vii

List of Terms

“4 E’s” Engineering, Education, Enforcement, and Emergency Medical Services

ADOT Arizona Department of Transportation

B/C Benefit/Cost

BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs

BLM Bureau of Land Management

CCP Comprehensive Conservation Plan

CFLHD Central Federal Lands Highway Division

COG Council of Governments

DOI United States Department of the Interior

DOT Department of Transportation

EFLHD Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

EMS Emergency Medical Services

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FLH Federal Lands Highway

FLMA Federal Land Management Agency

FS United States Forest Service

FTA Federal Transit Administration

FWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service

GMP General Management Plan

HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program

IHS Indian Health Service

IRR Indian Reservation Roads Program

ITCA Inter Tribal Council of Arizona

LTAP Local Technical Assistance Program

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program

NEPA National Environmental Protection Agency

NPS National Park Service

NRDOT Navajo Region Division of Transportation

PLHD Public Land Highway Discretionary Program

RFP Request for Proposal

RPC Regional Planning Commission

RSA Road Safety Audit/Assessment

SRTS Safe Routes to School Program

STIP Statewide Transportation Improvement Program

STP Surface Transportation Program

TE Transportation Enhancement

THSIP Tribal Highway Safety Improvement Project

TIP Transportation Improvement Program

TTAP Tribal Technical Assistance Program

TTIP Tribal Transportation Improvement Program

UDOT Utah Department of Transportation

WFLHD Western Federal Lands Highway Division

WisDOT Wisconsin Department of Transportation
viii

This page intentionally left bla
ix

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: How Do I Conduct an RSA?...............................................................................

Wh is an RSA? ........................................................................................................................

WhatShld be Considered for an RSA? .......................................................

Hois an RSA Conducted?............................................................................................

Wh are he Te Requirements and Costs Asso

Who ShouldI Patner With to Set-Up an RSA? ..............................................

Chapter 2: What are Common Safety Issues and Potential Counterme

What ypes of Safety Issues Might I Encounter?...................................

Wht are Common Countermeasures?.........................................................

How Can I Incoporate Educ

How Do I Prioritize Issues? ........................................................................................

Chapter 3: How Do I Establish an RSA Program? ......................................................

Ho are RSA Programs Structured?................................................................

How Do I Prioritize Potential RSA Locations?..........................................

Who ShouldI artner With to Establish an RSA Program? .........

What Fding Mechanisms are in Place?..................................................

What Challenges Will I Face?..................................................................................

How Do I Overcome These Challenges?..........................................................

How Do I Etablh Goals and Per

Chapter 4: How Do I Incorporate RSAs in the Planning Process? ....................

Who ShouldI artneri

Process?.....................................................................................................................................

How Do I Incorrate RSA Findings in the Planning Process?

What Challnges Will I Face and How Do I

Chapter 5: What’s Next? .......................................................................................................

HOW Do I Start? ........................................................................................................................

Where Can I Find Support?.........................................................................................

RESOURCE MATERIALS .........................................................................................................
x

This page intentionally left bla
Chapter 1: How Do I Conduct 

This chapter provides critical information needed to conduct an RSA. Special considerations 

for FLMAs and Tribal transportation agencies in each step of the 8-step RSA process are 

described to help improve safety on and adjacent to Federal and Tribal lands.

Wha is a

A Road Safety Audit/Assessment (RSA) is a formal safety performance examination of 

a future roadway project or an in-service facility that is conducted by an independent, 

experienced, multidisciplinary RSA team.

The primary focus of an RSA is safety while working within the context of the facility’s 

existing mobility, access, surrounding land use, and/or aesthetics. RSAs enhance safety by 

considering potential safety issues presented to all road users under all conditions (e.g., day/

night and dry/wet conditions). By focusing on safety, RSAs ensure that potentially hazardous 

roadway and roadside elements do not “fall through the cracks.”

RSAs are commonly confused with other review processes, particularly traditional safety 

reviews. Traditional safety reviews are missing one or more of the key elements of an RSA. 

Table 1 compares the key elements of an RSA with the elements that are typically part of a 

traditional safety review or other safety study.

Table 1: What ar

RSAs are: RSAs are not:

	Focused on road safety.

	A formal examination.

	Proactive in nature.

	Conducted by a multidisciplinary 

team.

	Conducted by a team that is 

independent of the operations, 

design, or ownership of the facility.

	Conducted by a qualified team.

	Broad enough to consider the safety 

of all road users of the facility.

	Qualitative in nature.

2 A means to evaluate the design of a 

facility.

2 A check of compliance with standards.

2 A means of ranking or justifying one 

project over another.

2 A means of rating one design option 

over another.

2 A redesign of a project.

2 A crash investigation (although the 

crash history of an existing facility is 

reviewed by an RSA team).

2 A safety review.
 Page 2 RSA Toolkit

What Should be Considered f

The RSA process may be employed on any type of facility and during any stage of the project 

development process, including existing facilities that are open to traffic. RSAs conducted 

during the pre-construction phase can be particularly effective because there is an opportunity 

to address a number of safety issues. RSAs conducted in later stages have less ability to 

address these issues.

In addition to vehicular traffic safety issues, RSAs can also be oriented to specific user groups 

such as pedestrians and bicyclists. The RSA would still consider all potential users but may 

have a particular consideration for the needs of a specific group.

Common factors leading to requests for RSAs during the existing road stage include high 

crash frequencies, high profile crash types or political influence, and significant changes in 

traffic characteristics (current or expected). A potential factor leading to the request for an 

RSA in the planning or construction phase includes novel designs for the area, such as the 

introduction of a roundabout. Another factor may be a major change in the surrounding land 

use that accompanies the project.

The selected project should be scoped in size so that the RSA can be accomplished in a 

reasonable amount of time, usually two to three days or one week at most. For a corridor, this 

is generally a corridor of one to two miles in length or a longer corridor that is concentrated 

on issues at four or five spots within the corridor. For intersection projects, the scope should 

be limited to a series of four or five intersections.

Howis an RSA C

The FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines document (Publication FHWA-SA-06-06) describes 

the 8-step process for conducting RSAs. These steps are shown in Figure 1 illustrating the 

primary responsibilities of the project owner/design team and the RSA team. This section 

describes how these steps apply to an RSA conducted on or near Federal or Tribal lands.

Figure 1: RSA P
Chapter 1: How Do I Conduct an RSA? Page 3

Identify Project or Existing Road fo

Typically, the facility or project owner identifies the location(s) to be reviewed during the 

RSA. Jurisdictional authority of facilities involving Federal or Tribal lands can be unique. It 

is common that RSAs conducted at the request of FLMAs or Tribal transportation agencies 

are on facilities with different ownership, such as a State or local agency. In this case, a facility 

or project identified by a FLMA or tribe would need to contact the owning agency to request 

an RSA. For instance, a request may be initiated because of safety concerns about a road 

running adjacent to or through a Federal or Tribal land.

If, however, the FLMA or Tribal government is the owner, the approach can be decided 

internally within the agency. Depending on factors such as available staffing and funding, 

one of the following approaches may be taken:

• Issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to obtain an experienced RSA team leader;

• Obtain technical assistance from FHWA, State or local Department of Transportation 

(DOT); or,

• Attend training to conduct your own RSAs.

Once the facility or project is identified, the RSA scope, schedule, team requirements, tasks to 

be completed, report format and content, and response procedures should be defined.

The appropriate season for the RSA review should also be established. For example, special 

events, or seasonal conditions are important to consider for the timing of the RSA.

Select Independent and Multidisciplinary RSA T

Selecting a knowledgeable RSA team is vital to the success 

of an RSA. The facility or project owner is responsible 

for selecting the RSA team or the RSA team leader. 

Regardless of ownership the assistance of other local 

agencies may be sought due to their familiarity with the 

area. It is important that the RSA team is independent 

of the operations of the road or the design of the project 

being assessed to assure two things: that there is no bias 

in the assessment and the project is reviewed with “fresh 

eyes.”

See the Resource 

Materials section for items 

to assist with identifying 

an approach to conduct an 

RSA:

•	 Example RFP

•	 Example application
 Page 4 RSA Toolkit

The RSA team should include (but are not 

limited to) individuals with the following 

expertise:

• Road Safety

• Traffic Operations

• Road Design

• Transportation Planning

• Enforcement/Emergency Medical 

Service (EMS)

• Public Health

• Human Factors

• Maintenance

• Tribal Culture/Natural Preservation

• Community Organizations

• User Groups (pedestrians, bikers, ATV 

users)

Depending on different needs, the RSA team 

could include other specialists to ensure that 

all aspects of safety performance of the given 

facility can be adequately assessed.

The size of the RSA team may vary. The best 

practice is to have the smallest team that brings 

all the necessary knowledge and experience to 

the process for the specific location(s) being 

reviewed. As a general rule, the RSA team 

should be able to travel in one vehicle (except 

for police and EMS) so the team can review 

and discuss conditions in the field collectively.

Case St

An RSA for the Navajo Nation in 

San Juan County, Utah included 

team members from the Navajo 

DOT, Navajo police, Utah DOT 

(UDOT), Bureau of Indian Affairs 

(BIA), Indian Health Services 

(IHS), FHWA, and the County. All 

members provided useful insights 

during the RSA process and several 

team members commented on the 

benefit of listening to and learning 

from their teammates who provided 

a different perspective on the safety 

issues and potential improvements. 

In particular, the public health 

representative contributed 

valuable information regarding 

road-user demographics as well 

as opportunities for educational 

improvements, such as road safety 

campaigns.

\
Chapter 1: How Do I Conduct an RSA? Page 5

Conduct Start-up Meeting to Exchange Informati

The purpose of the start-up meeting is to ensure the project owner/design team and all 

RSA team members understand the purpose, schedule, and roles and responsibilities of all 

participants in the RSA. This meeting helps establish lines of communication between the 

RSA team leader and the project owner/design team. At the end of the meeting, all parties 

should have a clear understanding of the scope of the RSA to be undertaken and each of their 

roles and responsibilities. Specific topics of discussion 

may include:

• Review the scope and objectives of the RSA.

• Review all relevant data, information, drawings, 

aerials, photos, etc.

• Discuss design constraints, standards used, 

findings of previous RSAs/safety studies, local 

traffic laws, statutes, and customary usage 

affecting road users.

• Communicate any other matters of importance 

to the RSA team.

If possible, the owner and/or design team should provide data describing the existing and 

planned conditions (if applicable) as well as the existing safety performance (e.g., crash 

records/data, traffic volumes, etc.). Ideally data will be provided prior to the start-up meeting 

for review/analysis by the RSA team. This will enable the team to ask detailed questions at 

the start-up meeting. Naturally the desired data may not be readily available; however, any 

information that can be provided to the RSA team is beneficial to the understanding of the 

location(s) to be reviewed and the potential safety issues.

Perform Field Reviews und

Various Conditions

The RSA team should review the entire site (as well as 

plans if conducting an RSA of a design), documenting 

potential safety issues and project constraints (e.g. 

available right-of-way, impact on adjacent land). Issues 

identified in the review of project data (e.g., safety 

See the Resource Materials 

section for items to assist 

with the start-up meeting:

•	 Example agenda

•	 Typical data requested

•	 Example collision 

diagram & worksheet

See the Resource Materials 

section for items to assist 

with the field review:

•	 Example field notes 

sheet

•	 List of materials needed 

for field review
 Page 6 RSA Toolkit

concerns related to crash clusters) should be verified in the field. Key elements to observe 

include:

• Site characteristics (road geometry, sight distances, clear zones, drainage, surface 

condition, signing, lighting, and barriers).

• Traffic characteristics (traffic volume, movements, typical speeds, and traffic mix).

• Surrounding land uses (including traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle generators).

• Human factors issues (such as road user “expectancy,” reactions, and other behaviors).

The FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Pedestrian Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Prompt 

Lists provide prompts to help the RSA team identify potential safety issues and ensure that 

roadway elements are not overlooked.

A thorough site visit will include field reviews under various conditions. At a minimum, the 

RSA team should review the site during the following conditions:

•	 Day and night to experience conditions from the perspective of all roadway users 

during different lighting scenarios.

•	 Peak and non-peak to experience the influence of traffic conditions on safety, mobility, 

and access.

Conduct RSA Analysis and Prepare Report Fi

The RSA team conducts an analysis to identify safety issues based on data from the field visit 

and preliminary documents. The safety issues may be prioritized by the RSA team based on 

the perceived risk. For each identified safety issue, the RSA team generates a list of possible 

measures to mitigate the crash potential and/or severity of a potential crash. Chapter 2 

provides more detailed information on this step of the process.

The RSA team then prepares a summary of the safety 

issues and related suggestions for improvement. 

Prior to preparing a report, the team may meet with 

the owner and/or design team to discuss preliminary 

findings (Step 6).

The RSA report should include a brief description of 

the project, a listing of the RSA team members and their 

qualifications, a listing of the data and information used 

in conducting the RSA, and a summary of findings and 

proposed safety measures. It should include pictures and diagrams that may be useful to 

further illustrate issues and countermeasures.

See the Resource Materials 

section for additional 

guidance on report content 

and format:

•	 Example report outline

•	 Example presentation of 

issues & suggestions
Chapter 1: How Do I Conduct an RSA? Page 7

Present RSA Findings to Owner/Design

The results of the RSA are presented to the owner/design team. The purpose of this meeting 

is to establish a basis for writing the RSA report and to ensure that the report will adequately 

address issues that are within the scope of the RSA process. This is another opportunity 

for discussion and clarification. The project owner/design team may ask questions to seek 

clarification on the RSA findings or suggest additional/alternative mitigation measures.

Prepare Formal Respo

Once the owner and/or design team have reviewed the RSA report, they should prepare a 

written response to its findings. The response should outline what actions the owner and/

or design team will take with respect to each safety concern listed in the RSA report. A 

letter, signed by the project owner, is a valid method of responding to the RSA report. The 

RSA findings may be presented in a public meeting or the report could be made available 

to the public to help garner support for the findings and the overall RSA process. This can 

be particularly beneficial on projects with a high degree of public involvement, such as 

pedestrian facilities.

Incorporate Findings into the Project when Appropri

After the response to the RSA report is prepared, the project owner and/or design team should 

work to implement the agreed-upon safety measures or create an implementation plan. RSA 

findings can be incorporated into an agency’s planning process, as discussed in Chapter 4. 

An important consideration is to evaluate the RSA program and share lessons learned. An 

RSA “after action review” can be scheduled for the RSA team to evaluate the effectiveness of 

the suggested measures implemented and to evaluate if other measures are needed.

What are the Time Requirements a

with an 

The time and cost to complete an RSA vary based upon conditions such as project extents, 

level of detail, logistics, and team size. Figure 2 presents a generalized timeline of the RSA 

process. Please note that the writing of the report does not necessarily have to occur in Step 

5; it can be completed following the presentation of preliminary findings in Step 6.
 Page 8 RSA Toolkit

Figure 2: RSA Time Requirements by

In total, the entire RSA process (Steps 1 through 8) could range from a month to a couple 

years. The cost to conduct an RSA depends largely upon the approach (discussed in Step 1) 

and the level of effort required by the RSA team.

Who Should I Partner With to S

Several Federal, Tribal, State, and local agencies have used RSAs as a tool for improving 

safety. Initially, it is important to identify a local champion, either internally or externally, to 

support the RSA and its outcome (see Chapter 3 for more details). If the RSA is on or adjacent 

to Federal or Tribal lands, the local champion should be able to communicate effectively with 

all parties involved. It is particularly important to communicate the need for and desired 

outcome of an RSA. The next challenge is to assemble an independent RSA team. Since 

independence is a requirement of an RSA, the agencies may contact the State and/or local DOT, 

Local and/or Tribal Technical Assistance Program 

(LTAP/TTAP) center, FHWA Division Office, 

FHWA’s RSA Peer-to-Peer Program, FHWA’s 

Federal Lands Division Office, or FHWA’s 

Offices of Safety and Federal Lands Highway for 

assistance in finding team members. Federal and 

Tribal transportation agencies may also find it 

helpful to contact staff from other nearby Federal 

agencies or Tribes with whom they may establish 

a reciprocal relationship.

Step 1234 5* 678

Description Identify 

Project

Select RSA 

Team

Conduct 

Start-Up 

Meeting 

Perform Field 

Reviews

Conduct 

Analysis & 

Prepare 

Report

Present 

Findings 

to Project 

Owner

Prepare 

Formal

Response

Incorporate 

Findings

Conduct RSA Workshop: Write RSA Report Develop Plan 

to Address 

RSA Findings

Implement 

Suggestions

Duration

Depends 

upon project 

selection 

process; est.

1 day - 1 

year+

Depends 

upon team 

composition & 

availability; 

est. 1 day - 1 

month

RSA Workshop: Typically 1/2 - 3 days

RSA Report: Typically 1/2 day - 3 weeks

Several days 

- 1 month

short-term: up 

to 1 year

intermediate:

1-5 years

long-term: 5+ 

years

*Report may occur following Step 6

RSAs conducted on or near 

or Tribal lands may n

involvement from multiple agenci
Chapter 2: What are Common Safety

and Potential Counter

This chapter describes potential safety issues identified on Federal and Tribal lands as well as 

a list of potential low-cost countermeasures for addressing these issues. A basic prioritization 

methodology is also discussed. 

What Types of Safety Issues Might

Most issues on or adjacent to Federal and Tribal lands have both an engineering and 

behavioral element. For example, traffic types and volumes may be inconsistent with the 

intended roadway design due to changes in the functionality of the roadway and land use 

in surrounding areas. This may result in a roadway serving mostly commuter traffic, an 

increase in heavy vehicular traffic, or seasonal traffic peaks and variations. As such, shoulder 

widths and roadsides may not adequately address the increased risk to drivers. From a 

behavioral standpoint, lack of awareness of the intended purpose of the roadway may result 

in motorists not applying the appropriate driving techniques for the conditions. Furthermore, 

driver expectancy of other road users such as pedestrians and bicyclists may not reflect the 

intended usage.

The RSA team should determine the safety issues while considering the infrastructure and the 

behavior elements. Table 2 illustrates common safety issues and behavioral aspects relating 

to these issues on or near Federal and Tribal lands listed by roadway element. The RSA team 

is charged with determining specific roadway and behavioral issues for the specific project 

they are assessing. The documents in the Resource Materials section provide further detail 

with regard to the issues presented here and to other potential safety hazards that an RSA 

team should be aware of when conducting a field review.

What are Common Countermeas

Table 2 also presents common countermeasures that may be used to address road safety issues 

on or near Federal and Tribal lands. This list is not comprehensive; it is intended to provide 

general guidance to typical countermeasures. Note that the countermeasures identified in this 

list are primarily low-cost engineering measures, although a few relatively high-cost options 

are included because they are considered to be “proven” countermeasures. A few specific 

education and enforcement measures are identified as well, but a more general discussion 

of how to incorporate education, enforcement, and EMS countermeasures is provided in the 

following section. The documents in the Resource Materials section provide a much wider 

and detailed range of potential countermeasures and their effectiveness and should be used 

as guidance when considering safety measures during the RSA process.
 Page 10 RSA Toolkit Table 2: Common Safety Issues and Countermeasures Topic Area General Issues Example Observations Example Countermeasures Cross-section Limited pavement width Narrow or no paved shoulders Improve/stabilize unpaved shoulders Install safety edge Install new paved shoulders or widen existing paved shoulders Install centerline or edgeline rumble strips or rumble stripes Pavement edge drops Vertical pavement edge drops greater than two inches Horizontal curves Sharp curves Limited sight distance Install advance curve warning (with/without advisory speed) Install centerline and edgeline pavement markings Improve delineation (e.g., chevrons, post-mounted delineators) Upgrade existing signs (size, retroreflectivity, location) Improve skid resistance with high-friction treatment (e.g., NovaChip, microsurfacing, etc.) Inadequate superelevation Various levels of delineation Inconsistent and old signing Faded pavement markings; no edgelines Roadside hazards Common roadside hazards located in close proximity to the roadway Trees, rocks, utility poles, guide wires The order of preference for treating roadside hazards (from most preferred to least preferred) 1 is to: 1. Remove the obstacle. 2. Redesign the obstacle so it can be safely traversed. 3. Relocate the obstacle to a point where it is less likely to be struck. 4. Reduce impact severity by using an appropriate breakaway device. 5. Shield the obstacle with a longitudinal traffic barrier designed for redirection or use a crash cushion. 6. Delineate the obstacle if the above alternatives are not appropriate. Steep embankments Drainage features (inlets, headwalls, culverts) Large bodies of water Wal

1 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Roadside Design Guide. 2002 3rd Edition with 2006 Chapter 6 Update.
Chapter 2: What are Common Safety Issues and Potential Countermeasures? Page 11 Topic Area General Issues Example Observations Example Countermeasures Intersections Lack of driver expectancy Sight distance to the intersection Inconsistent and old signing Enhance driver expectation of intersections (e.g., advance pavement markings and/or signs, lateral rumble strips) Provide adequate sight distance to intersection Enhance conspicuity of signs and pavement markings (size, retroreflectivity, location, number) Improve line of sight at the intersection/provide clear sight triangles Reduce conflict points by installing turn lanes and consolidating driveways (access management) Provide lighting Consider roundabouts Obstructions in the sight triangle Sight distance at the intersection Driver behavior Poor gap acceptance at stop-controlled intersections Lighting Roadway and intersection lighting Inadequate or lack of lighting Limited visibility of pedestrian/bicycle traffic; also, animals/wildlife Install/improve lighting along roadway or at intersections Pedestrians and bicyclists Lack of designated facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists No sidewalks or shared use paths and limited shoulders Lack of designated crossings Provide designated pedestrian and bicycle facilities Install or widen paved shoulder to a minimum of four feet for use by pedestrians and bicyclists Construct a shared use path Enhance driver awareness of pedestrians, bicyclists, and crossings (e.g., warning signs, pavement markings, standard and/or hybrid signals) Provide median refuge areas Provide educational information to road users with regard to safe use Enforce pedestrian and bicycle laws Driver behavior Lack of driver awareness of pedestrians and bicyclists Pedestrian and bicyclist behavior Lack of familiarity with road network and safety issues (tourists)
Topic Area General Issues Example Observations Example Countermeasures

Animals

Open range livestock

Roadside grazing Enhance driver awareness of animals and animal crossings (e.g., 

signs)Install animal/wildlife fencing to reduce the number of potential conflict pointsConstruct wildlife crossings (i.e., overpasses and underpasses) along primary migratory/feeding routesEnact and enforce laws to prohibit grazing within the right-of-wayEducate owners about animal control laws and liability

Wildlife Annual migration routes

Speed management

High vehicle speeds

Limited enforcement due to large jurisdictions

Coordinate with local enforcement to conduct targeted speed enforcementConsider alternative measures (e.g., speed trailers)Install gateway treatments at the entrances to towns

Vehicle mix

All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs)/SnowmobilesTrucks and buses

ATVs or snowmobiles on and along the roadwayATVs or snowmobiles crossing the roadwayTrucks and buses interacting with other road users, especially non-motorized

Provide educational information to road users with regard to safe operating/useInstall warning signs and markings to indicate ATV/snowmobile crossings Inform ATV/snowmobile riders of appropriate/designated trailsCoordinate with local enforcementSupport educational campaigns by enforcing ATV/snowmobile operationsProvide sidewalks or shared-use paths to separate non-motorized road users

 Page 12 RSA Toolkit
Topic Area General Issues Example Observations Example Countermeasures

Access to facilities and communities

Location Limited sight distance/

awareness of facilitiesAccess along highspeed roadsInadequate pedestrian / bicycle accommodations

Enhance driver awareness of facilities/communities (e.g., advance warning signs and/or guide signs, gateway treatments)Clear sight triangles at entrances/exitsSeparate turning vehicles by installing left- and/or right-turn lanesInstall shared use path or provide an adequate shoulder to separate pedestrians and bicyclists from motor vehicle trafficConduct a parking studyIdentify current occupancy and determine needed capacityIdentify opportunities to provide better connectivity between parking facilities and pedestrian/bicycle generators

Parking Limited capacity 

(spillover)Lack of connectivity to destinations

Chapter 2: What are Common Safety Issues and Potential Countermeasures? Page 13
How Can I Incorporate Education, Enforce

Countermeasur

Safety issues cannot be completely addressed through engineering alone. The other “E’s” 

include education, enforcement, and emergency medical services (EMS). The RSA team 

should encourage and suggest measures that consider all “4 E’s” to address specific safety 

issues. Communication and coordination among the “E’s” is essential to ensuring safety is 

addressed at a comprehensive level. The agencies conducting RSAs may need to regularly 

assemble representatives from each of the “4 E’s” to ensure that countermeasures and 

strategies are complementing one another. Some examples of education, enforcement, and 

EMS countermeasures are presented below; NCHRP Report 622 provides a more complete 

description of countermeasures that may aid education, enforcement, and EMS safety 

strategies (see Resource Materials section for complete reference). Although the report is 

based on countermeasures targeting a State Highway Safety Office audience, the information 

provided may be applicable to safety issues observed by Federal and Tribal agencies.

Education – All road users must be aware of the safe and proper way to use roads. Due to the 

unique characteristics of Federal and Tribal land roadways, users need to be made aware of 

safe travel practices and potential hazards. Example methods of transferring this information 

include postings on the internet, brochures provided at visitor’s centers, and video messages. 

Additional information on effective education strategies may be acquired through outreach 

groups such as Tribal Technical Assistance Programs (TTAPs).

Enforcement – Laws are intended to control the operation 

of road users. Enforcing speed limit and compliance with 

signal/sign indications, as well as correcting wrong-way 

riding and impaired driving create a safer travel environment 

for all road users. Staffing and funding constraints may 

limit the ability of a Federal or Tribal land agency to provide 

comprehensive enforcement; however, efforts should be 

made to target specific issues or frequent or high-risk 

behaviors. This can be done by identifying prevalent factors 

that contribute to crashes along the roadway of interest and 

targeting behaviors that relate to those issues. For example, 

if alcohol was determined to be a primary contributing factor 

in 50 percent of fatal and injury crashes along a specific 

route, it may be appropriate to deploy a checkpoint to 

combat drinking and driving; this could be further targeted 

by identifying the time of day and day of week when this 

behavior is most likely to occur.

 Page 14 RSA Toolkit

Law enforcement on 

is helpful to identify saf

issus as ell as t

targeted enforcem

countermeas
Emergency Medical Services – The rural nature of many roadways on or near Federal or 

Tribal lands may play a major role in limiting the ability to provide timely medical treatment 

to people injured in a crash. Factors contributing to response time include the ability of other 

motorists to identify a crash and to notify emergency personnel, the ability of emergency 

personnel to quickly respond to the scene, and the ability to quickly transport the victim(s) to 

a trauma center. Adequate cell phone service coverage and routine patrols are a few methods 

that can help save a life in the event of a serious injury.

How Do I Prioritiz

A prioritization process is useful for identifying the most pressing safety needs based on the 

findings of the RSA team. Table 3 is a matrix that can be used in the prioritization process. 

In general, issues associated with more frequent crashes and higher severity levels tend to 

be given higher priority. The prioritization can be based on historical crash data, expert 

judgment (provided by the RSA team), or a combination of the two.

Table 3: Issue Prioritiz

Frequency of 

Crashes

Severity of Crashes

Possible/Minor 

Injury Moderate Injury Serious Injury Fatal

Frequent Middle-High High Highest Highest

Occasional Middle Middle-High High Highest

Infrequent Low Moderate Middle-High High

Rare Lowest Low Middle Middle-High

For many RSAs conducted in rural areas, reliable crash data are not available. Anecdotal 

information (e.g., from maintenance, enforcement call logs, land owners) and evidence of 

conflicts and crashes (e.g., skid marks and fence strikes) help to create a more complete 

picture of potential hazards, but cannot be quantified with any certainty. In these cases, 

the likely frequency and severity of crashes associated with each safety issue are qualitatively 

estimated, based on the experience and expectations of RSA team members. Expected crash 

frequency can be qualitatively estimated on the basis of exposure (how many road users would 

likely be exposed to the identified safety issue?) and probability (how likely was it that a 

collision would result from the identified issue?). Expected crash severity can be qualitatively 

estimated on the basis of factors such as anticipated speeds, expected collision types, and the 

likelihood that vulnerable road users would be exposed. These two risk elements (frequency 

and severity) are then combined to obtain a qualitative risk assessment.

Chapter 2: What are Common Safety Issues and Potential Countermeasures? Page 15
Chapter 3: How Do I Establ

Program

This section describes the process to initiate an RSA program, including potential program 

structures, partners, and funding sources. Discussion on how to prioritize locations to 

conduct RSAs is also included. It presents potential challenges and provides suggestions for 

overcoming these challenges. Finally, it suggests performance measures that may be used to 

evaluate the progress and success of the program.

How are RSA Programs St

The successful integration of RSAs into any agency requires several important elements: 

management commitment, an agreed-upon policy/process, informed project managers, an 

ongoing training program, and skilled RSA team members. Program structures vary by 

agency depending on the goals and objectives as well as available resources and level of 

training. The FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines recommends an approach for introducing 

RSAs that typically includes:

1. Piloting RSA projects – conduct one or more projects with in-house personnel that are 

guided by individuals experienced in the process.

2. Developing a formal RSA policy/process – use the experience from the pilot projects 

to develop an RSA policy/process suited to the local conditions; establish criteria 

for site selection, procedures for conducting and documenting field reviews, and 

opportunities for additional training.

3. Monitoring, refinement, and promotion of the RSA policy/process – periodically 

review the current policy/process to ensure the desired level of success is being 

achieved and modify as necessary to increase efficiency and effectiveness.

How Do I Prioritize Potenti

There are numerous methods for prioritizing RSA locations. The method of choice will 

depend on the availability of staff and data resources, as well as the number of requests for 

RSAs. If RSA efforts are request-based, it is not necessary to waste valuable resources on a 

complex prioritization process when the number of requests is relatively low; it may suffice 

to simply prioritize locations on a first-come-first-served basis. As the number of requests 

increases, it will become necessary to prioritize and perhaps even screen locations, which 

requires a formal (and likely data-driven) process. This does not mean that the process has 

to be completely quantitative and objective. However, good transportation safety planning 

should focus RSA efforts on areas with the highest concentration of crashes, particularly deaths 

and injuries. Other factors to be considered can include timeframe, cost, relation to overall 

program goals, and stakeholder support. Chapter 2 of the FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines
Chapter 3: How Do I Establish an RSA Program? Page 17

suggests an application of nominal (compliance to design standards) and substantive (crash 

performance) safety concepts to prioritize locations; please refer to that publication for more 

information.

Who Should I Partner With to Establi

An RSA program may be established by and housed at any one of a number of agencies. 

Regardless of where the program is housed, it is critical to identify a champion to lead and 

promote the RSA program (or at least the establishment of the RSA program) at the highest 

level of the organization. Depending on factors such as available staff, experience, and 

funding, FLMAs or Tribes may decide to identify a champion internally within their own 

agency or seek an external champion. A champion may be an individual or may be an entire 

agency or department of an agency. In any event, the champion should be knowledgeable of 

the RSA process and potential benefits so that RSAs can be introduced to others to promote 

awareness and foster support.

While the champion is responsible for introducing and promoting RSAs, there is a need 

to identify a support network to provide staff, funding, expertise, and public and political 

support. Table 4 identifies potential partners that could help establish, house, staff, fund, or 

support an RSA program.

Table 4: RSA Program Par

Potential Partners for RSA Program House Staff Fund Support

Tribal/State/Local DOT X X X X

Forest Service X X X

National Park Service X X X

Fish and Wildlife Service X X X

Tribal Technical Assistance Program X X X X

FHWA (including Federal Lands and Federal 

Aid Division offices) X X X

BIA Division of Transportation X X X

Public health agencies/officials X X X

Public officials X X

Other groups (e.g., community safety teams) X X

Tribal Cultural Officials X X
 Page 18 RSA Toolkit

What Funding Mechanisms

An important consideration when establishing an RSA program is funding, not only for the 

functionality of the program but also for the implementation of proposed safety improvements. 

A number of funding resources are provided in this section for initial guidance. In addition 

to these resources, it is recommended that Federal and Tribal agencies consult their local 

FHWA division, State DOT, and local Metropolitan Planning Organization/Council of 

Governments/Regional Planning Commission (MPO/COG/RPC) offices to learn more about 

available funding mechanisms. Up-to-date information on funding opportunities can also be 

obtained by visiting the following websites:

• Tribal Highway Safety Improvement Implementation Guide

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/tribaltrans/saf_guide.htm

• Tribal Transportation Funding Resources

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/tribaltrans/ttfundresource.pdf

• FHWA Discretionary Programs website

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/discretionary/proginfo.cfm

The Federal government provides funding assistance for eligible activities through legislative 

formulas and discretionary authority, including some 100 percent Federal-aid programs 

and programs based on 90/10 or 80/20 Federal/local matches. The Tribal Highway Safety 

Improvement Implementation Guide advises that the implementation plan for a Tribal Highway 

Safety Improvement Project (THSIP) or highway safety project will depend greatly on 

which funding sources the Tribes pursue, since each source has different program eligibility 

requirements. Some of the important safety-funding sources are presented in Table 5.
Table 5: Potential Funding 

Source Website Purpose / Use

Highway Safety 

Improvement Program 

(HSIP)

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip Projects that improve safety.

Surface Transportation 

Program (STP)

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/

factsheets/stp.htm

Projects on Federal-aid 

highways, including the NHS, 

bridge projects on any public 

road, transit capital projects, and 

intracity/intercity bus facilities. 

Now limited to urban areas.

Transportation 

Enhancement (TE) http://www.enhancements.org Projects involving pedestrian facilities and scenic highways.

Safe Routes to School 

(SRTS) Program http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/saferoutes Enable and encourage children to walk and bike to school.

National Scenic Byway 

Program

http://www.byways.org/learn/program.

html

Nationally or locally designated 

roads with outstanding scenic, 

historic, cultural, natural, 

recreational, and archaeological 

qualities.

Indian Reservation Roads 

(IRR) Program http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/irr

Planning, design, construction, 

and maintenance activities 

addressing Tribal transportation 

needs.

Park Roads and Parkways 

Program http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/prp

Design, construction, 

reconstruction, maintenance, 

or improvement of roads and 

bridges providing access to or 

within a unit of the National Park 

Service.

Refuge Roads Program http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/rr

Design, construction, 

reconstruction, maintenance, 

or improvement of roads and 

bridges providing access to 

or within a unit of the National 

Wildlife Refuge System.

Forest Highway Program http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/plh/fh

Resurface, restore, rehabilitate, 

or reconstruct roads providing 

access to or within a unit of the 

National Forest or Grassland.

Public Lands Highway 

Discretionary (PLHD) 

Program

http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/plh/

discretionary

Planning, research, engineering, 

and construction of highways, 

roads, parkways, and transit 

facilities within, adjacent to, or 

providing access to reservations 

and Federal public lands.

Indian Health Service 

Injury Prevention Program

http://www.ihs.gov/MedicalPrograms/

InjuryPrevention/index.cfm

Basic and advanced injury 

prevention projects.

Chapter 3: How Do I Establish an RSA Program? Page 19
What Challeges W

Wilson and Lipinski2 noted in their synthesis of RSA practices in the United States that the introduction 

of RSAs or an RSA program can face opposition based on liability concerns, the anticipated costs of 

the RSA or of implementing suggested changes, and commitment of staff resources. Other challenges 

include cultural and institutional barriers (e.g., lack of support from within), lack of RSA training, and 

lack of long-term support.

How Do I Overcome These Cha

The following were identified as potential challenges to establishing an RSA program; 

methods to overcome each potential challenge are also presented. Note that education and 

awareness are a common theme.

•	 Risk Management: There is sometimes a concern that agencies conducting RSAs will 

be held responsible in the event of a crash after a review has been completed. RSAs 

are just one of several proactive risk management techniques that demonstrate an 

agency’s responsiveness to the safety needs of the public. Following the 8-step RSA 

process and using the information garnered from the RSA should be included in the 

framework of the agency’s safety management system. It is important that agencies 

thoroughly document the RSA and resulting actions.

•	 Funding: A common issue with establishing and sustaining any program or activity 

is funding. In many areas, funding is available from various sources to conduct RSAs. 

Guidance with regard to funding sources has been provided in this chapter.

•	 Staffing: Limited staff is a common issue for many agencies. While in-house staff 

may not be available, there are other options to create an RSA team (see Chapter 

1). An additional resource is the FHWA Peer-to-Peer program which will assist in 

identifying the appropriate personnel from a nearby State or local agency.

•	 Skills: It may be difficult to sustain an in-house RSA program without proper training. 

While outside options are available for an RSA lead or technical support, it may be 

more cost effective to complete the appropriate training and lead RSAs with in-house 

staff. Even if an outside source is used, it still may prove beneficial to support the 

RSA team with trained in-house staff that is knowledgeable of the RSA process and 

specific safety issues. Check with FHWA and State and local agencies for training 

opportunities.

•	 Cultural and Institutional History: Many Federal and Tribal lands are steeped in 

tradition. As such, it may be difficult to introduce new programs or processes. A 

local champion can help to overcome this challenge by explaining the purpose and 

benefits of the RSA process. Agencies that have proactively involved their cultural 

heritage representatives within the RSA process have been successful in making 

roadway improvements. Conducting an RSA provides an opportunity for senior 

leaders to realize the benefits of RSAs and help promote their wider acceptance.

 Page 20 RSA Toolkit

2 Eugene Wilson and Martin Lipinski. NCHRP Synthesis 336: Road Safety Audits, A Synthesis of Highway 

Practice (National Cooperative Highway Research Program, TRB, 2004)
•	 Long-Term Support: It is relatively easy to schedule a single RSA; however, it is more 

difficult to sustain an RSA program due to funding and staffing commitments. In 

addition to the funding and staffing support discussed in this chapter, another option 

for long-term support is to involve the public or specific community groups. The 

RSA process provides a way for the public to voice their concerns and take action.

How Do I Establish Goals and Performan

an RSA Progr

As support is gained to establish an RSA program, it will be useful to begin to define 

goals and performance measures. Goals help to guide the direction of the program while 

performance measures help to identify the success of the program. Performance measures 

are also important because they can be used (or may be required) to obtain or renew funding. 

Example goals and performance measures are presented in Table 6.

•	 Goals: Goals are generally established by a group of representatives from the agency 

or agencies responsible for administering the program. Goals will vary by program; 

however, they should be specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and timely. Goals 

should be reevaluated over time or as they are met. Early in an RSA program, the 

goals may be related to the sustainability of the program. As the program becomes 

more established, goals may be related to gains in safety.

•	 Performance Measures: Performance measures can be established to indicate the 

relative success of the program. They will depend on the specific goals of the program 

and should be established to directly measure the progress in attaining a specific goal.

Table 6: Example Goals and Per

Goal Performance Measure

Provide RSA training to X percent of 

agency personnel with Y years.

Percentage of personnel trained to conduct 

RSAs.

Conduct X RSAs per year at high-crash/risk 

and/or high-profile locations. Number of RSAs conducted per year.

Reduce injuries and fatalities by X 

percent per year with low-cost, quickly 

implemented improvements.

Number of total crashes or specific crash 

types/severities at locations where RSAs are 

conducted.

Chapter 3: How Do I Establish an RSA Program? Page 21
Chapter 4: How Do I Incorporate RSAs

Planning P

This section describes the process for integrating RSAs in the planning process, including 

potential partners, implementing RSA findings, and potential challenges.

Who Should I Partner With to Integrate a

in the Planning

Many of the same partners identified to assemble an RSA team are the same partners that 

can assist in integrating an RSA program into the planning process. For example, the Office 

of Federal Lands Highway provides “program stewardship and transportation engineering 

services for planning, design, construction, and rehabilitation of the highways and bridges 

that provide access to and through Federally-owned lands.” FLH consists of the following: 

Eastern (http://www.efl.fhwa.dot.gov/), Central (http://www.cflhd.gov/), and Western (http://

www.wfl.fhwa.dot.gov/) Federal Lands Highway Divisions as well as the Headquarters 

(http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/) office. These units of the FLH work with Tribes, FLMAs, and States 

to address and improve safety. FHWA’s Division Office in each state is also a resourceful 

partnering agency.

State DOTs, MPOs, and COGs are 

also open to forming partnerships 

with Federal and Tribal land agencies. 

Several DOTs have internal departments 

devoted specifically to setting up 

partnerships between agencies. 

Federal and Tribal land agencies also 

have formed committees and councils 

to communicate their needs to DOTs, 

MPOs, and COGs. By working together, 

agencies have realized the benefits 

of cooperative participation where 

the needs and concerns of all parties 

involved can be voiced and addressed 

in a timely and efficient manner.

RSAs on Federal and Tribal 

require unique partnershi

safety  These partnerships can

in incorporating long-term sugges

establishig a long-term RSA 
Chapter 4: How Do I Incorporate RSAs in the Planning Process? Page 23

CASE

In Arizona, coordination and information sharing between the Arizona Department 

of Transportation (ADOT) and the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. (ITCA) 

have advanced consultation activities between ADOT and tribal governments in 

transportation planning efforts. The partnering between ADOT and the ITCA has (1) 

provided insight to ADOT staff of the challenges facing tribes throughout the state, 

and (2) increased awareness amongst tribal transportation staff of the opportunities 

for input into state-level transportation planning efforts. Besides the ITCA, ADOT 

has formed partnerships with other agencies: Arizona State Land Department, Arizona 

Tribal Strategic Partnering Team, Bureau of Land Management, the United States 

Forest Service, and FHWA. These partnerships have helped effectively streamline 

tribal transportation consultation in Arizona. In an effort to assist tribal governments 

and tribal planning departments in understanding the ADOT transportation planning 

and programming processes, ADOT has developed Transportation Planning and 

Programming – Guidebook for Tribal Governments.

The Arizona Tribal Transportation website (http://www.aztribaltransportation.org/) 

provides a wealth of information with regard to state-tribal transportation related 

partnerships, projects, activities, and funding resources. Other helpful information can 

be found on ADOT’s partnering office website (http://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/

Partnering/Index.asp) and on the ITCA website (http://www.itcaonline.com/).
 Page 24 RSA Toolkit

How Do I Incorporate RSA Findings i

Proc

Step 8 of the RSA process introduced in Chapter 1 involves the implementation of safety 

improvement measures identified by the RSA team. Incorporating RSA findings into the 

planning process is largely dependent on the desired timeframe for implementation (i.e., 

short-, intermediate-, or long-term). Short-term improvements (e.g., signing, pavement 

markings, and vegetation control) can often be handled through maintenance activities. 

Intermediate- and long-term improvements (e.g., updating/installing guardrail, installing a 

shared use path, realigning/widening, etc.) can be integrated into local, regional, and State 

transportation improvement programs and plans. It is important for all parties involved in 

the RSA process to understand the intent and extent of these programs as they pertain to the 

area being studied so that safety issues may be addressed in an appropriate timeframe.

Transportation agencies are charged with developing long-range plans for the transportation 

systems on State, Tribal, and Federal lands. Examples include the Transportation 

Improvement Program (TIP), Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), Tribal 

CASE

The Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) has formed a formal 

partnership with the State’s Federally-recognized Tribes. The Wisconsin State Tribal 

Relations Initiative recognizes the government-to-government relationship between 

the State and Tribal governments. As such, the State-Tribal Consultation Initiative is 

poised at improving communication between State and Tribal representatives to ensure 

that concerns and issues are addressed in a timely and efficient manner. This partnership 

is applied through the WisDOT Tribal Task Force. Since 2008, the task force has 

provided funding for the Tribes to conduct RSAs. Many of the RSAs were targeted at 

Reservations where WisDOT was planning roadway improvements.
Transportation Improvement Program (TTIP), Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP), and 

General Management Plan (GMP). A major component of these plans is a comprehensive 

transportation study which identifies short- and long-term needs. The findings on an RSA 

are important to fully addressing these needs.

A brief description of the identified programs and plans is provided. For specific information 

regarding the long-range plans in your area, contact your State DOT, Tribal DOT, or FLH. 

Figure 3 illustrates how RSAs contribute to the overall planning process.

•	 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP): The TIP is a regional prioritized, fiscallyconstrained, and multi-year list of Federally-funded, multimodal transportation 

projects. Specifically, the TIP covers at least a four-year program of projects and is 

updated every few years. Projects in the TIP are prioritized at the regional level and 

have clearly identified funding sources. The TIP represents an agency’s intent to 

construct or implement a specific project and the anticipated flow of Federal funds 

and matching State or local contributions. The TIP is incorporated in the Statewide 

Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).

•	 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP): The STIP is a financiallyconstrained list of transportation projects consistent with the State long-range 

transportation plan and other regional plans. The STIP includes all capital and 

noncapital projects that are targeted to use Federal Highway Administration or 

Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds. The STIP also includes all regional TIPs 

and the portion of the Indian Reservation Roads, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, or National Park Service TIP applicable to that State.

•	 Tribal Transportation Improvement Program (TTIP): The TTIP is similar to the TIP, 

but is the list of Tribal transportation projects to be funded in the next few years. 

The TTIP is a list of proposed transportation projects developed by a Tribe based on 

the Tribal priority list or the long-range transportation plan. The TTIP contains all 

projects funded by the IRR program and scheduled for construction in the next three to 

five years. It also includes other Federal, State, county, and municipal transportation 

projects initiated by or developed in cooperation with the Tribal government. For 

more information on developing a TTIP, refer to Developing the Tribal Transportation 

Improvement Program (FHWA-HEP-08-003) available online at: http://www.tribalplanning.

fhwa.dot.gov/training_ttip_module.aspx.

•	 Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP): A CCP is required by law for all lands 

within the National Wildlife Refuge System. A CCP is a document that provides a 

comprehensive framework for guiding refuge management decisions. The National 

Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) requires CCPs to examine a full range of 

alternative approaches to refuge management. CCPs are also intended to encourage 

public involvement in selecting alternatives that are best suited to a refuge’s purposes. 

Refuge transportation studies have been used to develop the transportation component 

of CCPs. These studies have examined the core transportation network within a 

refuge, identifying short- and long-term transportation, capital, and maintenance 

plans for future programming.

Chapter 4: How Do I Incorporate RSAs in the Planning Process? Page 25
•	 General Management Plan (GMP): A GMP is the National Park Service’s version of 

the CCP (see description above).

•	 USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan: The plan provides strategic direction to 

the Forest Service’s commitment to its mission. The programs and budget are 

aligned to meet the goals and objectives contained within the plan. Through this 

programming, the Forest Service is capable of providing financial and technical 

assistance in collaborative efforts with States, Tribes, local communities, and other 

partner agencies. One component of the plan is the condition of the transportation 

infrastructure, including off-highway vehicle access.

Figure 3: RSAs in the Plannin

 Page 26 RSA Toolkit
What Challeges Will I Face and Ho

These Challen

Much like the challenges faced when establishing an RSA program, similar challenges may 

be realized when incorporating an RSA program into the planning process. Identifying 

appropriate partners and obtaining funding is described in Chapter 3. Other challenges 

include the availability of data and jurisdictional boundaries.

Data Quantity and Quality – For many RSAs conducted on Federal and Tribal lands, the lack 

of data and/or the poor quality of available data are issues when identifying and prioritizing 

locations. In many instances, crashes are not formally documented. When documents have 

been prepared, the data may be incomplete or inaccurate. These data constraints do not help 

pinpoint locations in need of attention or provide a good understanding of the safety hazards, 

thus making it difficult to program appropriate measures into transportation improvement 

plans.

The lack of data and/or the poor quality of available data can be overcome by using alternative 

methods for identifying and prioritizing locations for RSAs. Consulting with local law 

enforcement, emergency medical services, health services, and/or the public can help with 

the identification of common issues and problematic locations that could be considered as 

potential candidates for an RSA. Law enforcement and public input provides anecdotal 

information that often helps create a more complete picture of potential hazards even without 

Chapter 4: How Do I Incorporate RSAs in the Planning Process? Page 27

CASE

An RSA conducted on the Savannah National Wildlife Refuge study area revealed that 

many run-off-the- road crashes were not reported as a result of the location of the crash. 

Vehicles involved in run-off-the-road crashes along a State roadway going through the 

refuge were not represented in the crash reports; once the vehicle leaves the roadway it 

enters Federal refuge property. The motorist is responsible for removing the vehicle and 

it is not reported by the police.
quantifiable data. The inputs to the process can be a combination of objective and subject 

measures depending on the availability, quality, and detail of the data (see Chapter 2).

Jurisdictional Boundaries – Ownership of facilities or projects involving Federal or Tribal 

lands can be unique. For example, an RSA may be conducted on a state-owned roadway that 

travels through or adjacent to a Federal land. In other cases, local agencies such as counties, 

townships, and villages may also have roadway jurisdiction. When a facility or project is 

under multiple jurisdictions, there are multiple interests that are involved. One challenge 

is to ensure that all parties affected by programs or initiatives are well informed and that 

concerns are received and addressed appropriately. Another challenge is to determine 

which jurisdiction is responsible for planning and implementing changes, performing 

maintenance activities, providing enforcement, and keeping up-to-date records. This can 

become particularly difficult when multiple agencies are involved, especially when staffing 

and financial responsibility must be assigned. It is important to realize, though, that while 

the ownership of a facility or project can be very complex and present difficult challenges, 

there are also benefits of multi-agency involvement. For example, funding for reconstruction 

and maintenance may be limited for an individual agency, but options can be identified for 

pooling resources to implement suggested RSA improvements.

 Page 28 RSA Toolkit

CASE

An RSA for the Navajo Nation was conducted along N-35. The portion of the N-35 

corridor studied is a Federal Aid Highway. A portion of the roadway (milepost 0 to 18) 

is owned by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Phillips Oil Company paved a section 

of N-35 (milepost 18 to 23), but road ownership remains with the Navajo Nation. 

Funding for reconstruction and maintenance of N-35 comes from several sources, 

including the Indian Reservation Roads Program, Congressional earmarks, and the 

BIA road maintenance program. The funding for road improvements is administered 

by the Navajo Region Division of Transportation (NRDOT) through the IRR Program 

within the Federal Lands Highway Program. 

Funding for road maintenance comes from 

the Department of the Interior (DOI) and is 

also administered by the NRDOT. They have 

contracted San Juan County to maintain much 

of the roads in the county, including N-35. San 

Juan County is responsible for signing, pavement 

markings, and roadside mowing.
Effective communication between all parties in the RSA process is important to overcome 

jurisdictional boundaries. It is also important to understand how the RSA process and the 

resulting suggestions for improvement fit into the planning process for each agency, region, 

and/or State. Through partnerships, many DOTs have created formal initiatives with FLMAs 

and Tribes to ensure that each agency’s interests are addressed through the planning process 

while minimizing negative impacts or feelings by any party involved (see “Who should I 

partner with to integrate an RSA program in the planning process?”). It is also important 

that other local and regional stakeholders (e.g., MPOs and COGs) buy into the RSA process 

and realize the benefits of the suggested improvements so that the program gains support, 

relationships form and grow, and measures continue to be programmed. 

Chapter 4: How Do I Incorporate RSAs in the Planning Process? Page 29
Chapter 5: What’s

This chapter summarizes the key points presented in the Toolkit, providing guidance 

regarding what can be done to move forward in establishing an RSA program and conducting 

RSAs. Further information related to the available references to aid in this process can be 

found in the Resource Materials section.

HOW Do I S

The following are key elements of starting an RSA program.

	Coordinate with other Partner Agencies – Partnering with other agencies will prove 

beneficial for Federal and Tribal land agencies, as resources can be combined to 

target a central goal: improving roadway safety. Partnering opportunities should be 

considered not only when establishing an RSA program, but also when incorporating 

RSAs into the planning process. Partnering between State DOTs and FLMAs or Tribes 

can greatly improve communication and increase inter-agency participation and 

cooperation.

	Identify Problematic/High-Crash Locations – One of the key components of 

conducting a successful RSA is to select locations with safety issues where a benefit 

can be realized. For facilities on Federal and Tribal lands, it may prove difficult to 

adequately understand crash problems as data may be insufficient to identify trends. 

The best effort must be made to use available data and anecdotal information to select 

the most problematic and hazardous locations so that resources are used effectively 

and efficiently.

	Decide on an RSA Approach – Depending on experience, personnel, and funding, 

FLMAs or Tribes can consider several options to conduct RSAs. For those agencies 

with little or no experience, issuing a Request for Proposal would solicit an experienced 

outside lead for the RSA team (typically a consulting firm). Agencies with some 

experience and available resources may request assistance from the local or State 

transportation agency. Finally, for those agencies wishing to conduct RSAs on their 

own, training courses should be scheduled prior to actual field reviews. The National 

Highway Institute provides a training course (FHWA-NHI-380069) for performing 

effective RSAs (http://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/training/training_products.aspx).

	Obtain RSA Materials – Prior to conducting RSAs, agencies should become familiar 

with the overall process as well as specific details and issues to be looking for in the 
Chapter 5: What’s Next? Page 31

field. The Resource Materials section provides various resources with regard to 

demonstrating the usefulness of RSAs, assessing roadway safety, identifying potential 

improvements, and evaluating their effectiveness. Additional information and 

resources can also be obtained from attending one or more training courses and/or by 

visiting FHWA’s website (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa).

	Schedule and Conduct an RSA – Once partnerships have been formed, locations have 

been identified, options have been addressed, and materials have been reviewed, it 

is time to get the RSA process underway. Example materials to aid in scheduling, 

conducting, and documenting an RSA are provided in the Resource Materials section. 

When introducing RSAs, consideration should be given to the “top down” approach: 

start with pilot RSA projects under an experienced lead and work towards developing 

a formal RSA policy. It is important to evaluate the overall experience of the RSA after 

its completion, noting the pros and cons and making adjustments as necessary when 

scheduling and conducting the next RSA.

Where Can I Find Sup

There are a number of supporting and participatory resources available to assist Federal 

and Tribal transportation agencies in improving safety by conducting RSAs. Resources are 

also available to provide updates on the “state of practice” for RSAs as well as information 

about safety issues and treatments being used by others. Several examples are provided as 

a starting point:

• Visit the RSA Website for more information (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa).

• Utilize the RSA Peer-to-Peer Program (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/resources/p2p/).

• Contact a FHWA office, LTAP or TTAP, or State/local DOT.

o FHWA Office of Safety (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/)

o FHWA Office of Federal Lands Highway (http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/)

o FHWA Division Office

	Eastern Federal Lands (http://www.efl.fhwa.dot.gov/)

	Central Federal Lands (http://www.cflhd.gov/)

	Western Federal Lands (http://www.wfl.fhwa.dot.gov/)

• Subscribe to safety-related newsletters, such as the Road Safety Audit (RSA) Newsletter 

(http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/newsletter/).

• Subscribe to relevant listservs, such as the Center for Transportation and Environment 

“Wildlife, Fisheries, and Transportation (WFT)” Listserv (http://itre.ncsu.edu/cte/

gateway/WFTlistserv.asp).

• Attend a safety conference, such as a Tribal safety summit, when it is held in your 

State.
 Page 32 RSA Toolkit

Keep in mind that implementing changes may take time. Even seemingly minor changes 

may require coordination with multiple agencies and may result in a change in policies or 

practices. However, by working together, positive relationships can be established that will 

provide longer-term benefits in all efforts to improve safety...all it takes is commitment.
Chapter X: Xxx RESOURCES Page

RESOURC

This section includes resources that will be helpful in establishing an RSA program, conducting 

RSAs, and identifying potential improvements. Sample materials that can be used to conduct 

and document RSAs are also provided.

Resource Materials Table of Conten

What Materials are Available for Conducting and Documenting 

Sample Request for Proposal........................................................................................................

Sample RSA Application...............................................................................................................

Sample RSA Agenda.....................................................................................................................

Typical Data for Conducting RSAs..................................................................................................

Sample Collision Diagram Worksheet ...........................................................................................4

Sample Field Notes Worksheet....................................................................................................

What Materials Do I Need for the Field Review?........................................................................

Sample RSA Report Outline ........................................................................................................

Sample Presentation of Issues and Suggestions............................................................................4

RSA Software................................................................................................................................

What Resources are Available for Demonstrat

Effectiveness of RSAs?...................................................................................................

What Resources are Available for Assessing Safety on Our Roadw

What Resources are Available for Identifying Po

Evaluating Their Effectiveness?..............................................................................

What Resources are Available for Incorporatin

Transportation Planning Process?.........................................................................

Wildlife Safety Measures.............................................................................................
Chapter X: Xxx Page    RESOUR

What Materials are Available for Conducting 

Sample Request for Propos

The following is a general outline of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for an RSA. For each 

section, a brief explanation of the information to be included in the RFP is provided. The 

RFP generally follows the 8-step RSA process, however, the requesting agency may wish to 

include additional tasks or eliminate tasks based on specific needs. Federal Land Management 

Agencies and Tribes may draft and issue a request for engineering consultant services to 

lead one or a series of RSAs on their lands. Typically, RFPs generate responses from several 

consultants and requires the issuing agency to award a contract based on the consultant’s 

ability to adequately perform the work and the cost at which the work can be completed.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Provide a brief overview of the Consultant’s responsibilities, a 

brief description of the RSA, and how the RSA will be conducted.

ANTICIPATED SERVICE START AND END DATES: Identify start and end date of services.

PREQUALIFICATION CLASSIFICATION: Identify any stipulations to establish the type(s) 

of work the Consultant must be qualified to perform.

DBE REQUIREMENT: Identify any Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) requirement(s) 

the Consultant must satisfy to be eligible for consideration for award of contract.

PROJECT MANAGER: Provide the name and contact information of the person(s) overseeing 

the execution of the scope of services. This person is typically from the requesting agency.

GENERAL BACKGROUND: Provide a brief description of the purpose and objective of the 

services being requested.

OBJECTIVES AND TASKS OF THE PROPSED PROJECT: Provide a detailed task-by-task 

description of the work to be completed to meet the purpose and objective of the services 

being requested.

Identify Multidisciplinary RSA Team (Optional: can be completed by owning agency as described 

in Chapter 1).

•	 Identify team leader to conduct RSA.

•	 Determine required disciplines and individuals to serve on RSA team.

•	 DELIVERABLES: Provide a list of names and contact information for each RSA 

team member; submit a schedule of RSA activities.
Chapter X: Xxx RESOURCES Page

Prepare Relevant Data and Documents

•	 Obtain available relevant data and documents needed for RSA, including but 

not limited to project scope, location, crash history, traffic volumes, aerial 

photographs, design drawings, and planned improvements at the site and in 

the vicinity of the site.

•	 Create collision diagram and summary of crash data (e.g., crashes by year, 

type, severity, light condition, weather condition, day of week, and month of 

year).

•	 Provide all pertinent data and documents to RSA team members.

•	 DELIVERABLES: Provide a copy of all information to each RSA team member.

Conduct RSA Briefing Meeting

•	 Schedule and lead meeting to introduce RSA team members and establish 

roles; explain RSA scope, objectives, and goals; discuss project data (crash 

documents, traffic volumes, aerial photographs, design drawings, etc.); 

establish completion schedule.

•	 DELIVERABLES: Provide a copy of the meeting minutes to the Project 

Manager(s).

Perform Field Reviews

•	 Establish time of day to conduct field reviews.

•	 Provide equipment to perform reviews: safety vests and hats, camera, 

measuring instruments.

•	 Identify travel arrangements to the site.

•	 Designate specific field assignments for each RSA team member.

•	 Observe road user behavior, geometric and operational characteristics, 

surrounding land uses.

•	 DELIVERABLES: Documentation of field observations through photos, field 

review notes, and sketches (optional: video recording).

Conduct Debriefing Meeting

•	 Discuss and consolidate RSA team findings.

•	 Prioritize identified safety issues.

•	 Formulate potential recommendations.

•	 Conduct a preliminary review of findings and recommendations with Project 

Manager(s).

•	 DELIVERABLES: Summary of RSA team findings and prioritized safety 

improvements.

Prepare Draft RSA Findings Report

•	 Prioritize and categorize safety issues with recommended improvements (see 

the Resource Materials section for a report template).

•	 Conduct preliminary cost estimates and B/C analyses (optional).

•	 DELIVERABLES: Provide draft report to RSA team members for review and 

comment prior to submitting to the Project Manager.
Chapter X: Xxx Page    RESOUR

Conduct Cost Analysis

•	 Provide cost analysis (quantity estimating and B/C analyses) to support 

safety improvement recommendations (may be planning-level or detailed 

construction estimates).

•	 Categorize recommendations as low-, medium-, and high-cost improvements.

•	 DELIVERABLES: Summary of cost analysis and list of recommendations by 

priority and category.

Present Draft RSA Findings Report

•	 Present findings to Project Manager(s).

•	 DELIVERABLES: Provide a copy of the draft RSA report, including all pertinent 

supporting documentation.

Submit Final RSA Findings Report

•	 Address and incorporate all comments from presentation of draft report.

•	 Submit final report to Project Manager(s) in accordance with schedule.

•	 DELIVERABLES: Provide copy of final RSA report, including all pertinent 

supporting documents.

CONSULTANT RESPONSIBILITIES: Provide details of the Consultant’s contractual 

responsibilities to fulfill the scope of services being requested. This may include principal 

contacts, materials and equipment, funding compliance, personnel, and progress reporting.

HOST AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES: Provide details of the hosting agency’s responsibilities 

to the Consultant to fulfill the scope of services being requested. This may include provision of 

documentation, transportation, and any relevant information needed for the RSA.

PAYMENT SCHEDULE: Provide information with regard to how the Consultant will be 

compensated for completing the scope of the services being requested. Also establish a 

billing schedule and other terms and conditions of compensation.
Chapter X: Xxx RESOURCES Page

Sample RSA Applicat

The following is an example of an application to request assistance to conduct an RSA. This 

may be used when requesting an RSA on a roadway adjacent to Federal or Tribal lands 

that is owned by a State or local DOT. Applications such as this are used by agencies that 

have a formal RSA request process in place; however, the information in the application may 

be included in any type of correspondence to an owning agency (State or local agency) to 

request an RSA. 
Chapter X: Xxx Page    RESOUR

Sample RSA Age

The agenda helps set the course of events for the RSA process. In addition to setting a time 

schedule, it also provides direction to all parties involved as to who should partake in the 

various activities. The agenda is created by the RSA team and provided to all participating 

parties prior to the RSA.
Chapter X: Xxx RESOURCES Page

Typical Data for Conducting RS

The following data elements are typically requested for conducting RSAs. Those data 

elements that are most important are notated with an asterisk (*). The data is requested prior 

to conducting the RSA so that the team has an opportunity to review and become familiar 

with the characteristics of the study area. Depending on the extent of the data provided, 

summary tables and graphics may be created to make the information more manageable for 

field review activities and presentation purposes. It is recognized that this data may not be 

available, but lack of data does not prevent an RSA from being conducted.

Requested Information

Traffic Volume Data (one year period)

Average vehicular daily traffic (ADT)*

Pedestrian and bicycle volumes

Vehicle classification data (percent trucks)

Turning movement counts at intersections

Crash Data (preceding three years pedestrian crashes (minimum))

Individual police crash reports*

Reference/summary crash statistics*

Crash pin maps*

Collision diagrams (usually developed by RSA team)

Other Pertinent Information

Aerial photographs of study area*

Location of pedestrian generators*

Previous safety study reports (if any)*

Inventory of existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities (e.g., sidewalks, curb 

ramps, trails, greenways)

Locations of schools

Future/existing roadway, signing and marking, and signalization plans 

Transit route information (ridership if available)

Vehicle speed data (measured speeds and speed limits) 

School bus/walking route (safe routes to school) information

Agency and citizen correspondence pertinent to study area

Future development plans

*High-priority data
Chapter X: Xxx Page    RESOUR

Sample Collision Diagram Workshee

Collision diagrams use symbols to illustrate the location of crashes by crash type. The 

diagrams help the RSA team to identify patterns in crashes. Information provided on 

the collision diagram may include time of day, day of the week, light conditions, weather 

conditions, surface conditions, and severity level. Corresponding document numbers may 

also be included as a reference to a detailed crash report. Collision diagrams may be obtained 

from the owning agency (if available) or may be produced by the RSA team if crash reports 

are provided. Ideally, the diagrams should be obtained or produced prior to the start-up 

meeting (Step 3 of the RSA process).

The example collision diagram demonstrates how crashes can be illustrated:

• Crash #1: Two vehicles are traveling westbound on Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 3:30 

AM. Vehicle #1 stops for a red signal. Vehicle #2 is following too closely and does not 

stop in time, rear ending Vehicle #1. Weather conditions are snowy with snow on the 

roadway. The crash results in property damage only to both vehicles.

• Crash #2: Vehicle #1 is traveling westbound and Vehicle #2 is traveling southbound 

on July 21, 2008 at 7:00 PM. Vehicle #1 has a green signal. Vehicle #2 runs the red 

signal, crashing into the passenger’s side of Vehicle #1. Weather conditions are clear 

and the pavement condition is dry. The crash results in a B severity injury for Vehicle 

#1.

• Crash #3: A single vehicle is traveling eastbound on Friday, April 6, 2007 at 2:00 PM. 

The driver has a medical emergency and runs off the roadway to the right. The 

vehicle strikes a utility pole, killing the driver. Weather conditions are rainy and the 

pavement condition is wet.
Chapter X: Xxx RESOURCES Page
Chapter X: Xxx Page    RESOUR

Sample Field Notes Worksh

Documenting potential safety issues is an important part of the RSA field review process. The 

notes taken by the RSA team in the field are used to conduct the RSA analysis and prepare the 

findings report. In addition to field notes, an aerial photo can be useful to annotate issues and 

comments, rather than sketching the location by hand. Photographs (and video recordings, if 

desired) of identified safety issues should also be taken as a further means of documentation. 

This worksheet is intended to be used during Step 4 of the RSA process.
Chapter X: Xxx RESOURCES Page
Chapter X: Xxx Page    RESOUR

What Materials Do I Need for the Field Re

The following list provides a number of possible materials that could be taken by an RSA 

team member into the field when conducting reviews. Not all of the materials on this list 

are absolutely necessary, but should be strongly considered. Any other materials that do not 

appear on this list but are thought to be essential to the field review should be included.

	Reflective Safety Vests (and helmets, if required)

	Vehicle to collectively transport all RSA team members

	Magnetic rotating beacon/emergency vehicle flashers

	Temporary traffic control sign (e.g., “Road Work Ahead”, “Survey Crew”), if desired

	RSA Agenda

	Field Notes Worksheet

	Writing Implements and Paper/Notebook

	Crash Data (if available)

	Collision Diagrams

	Pin or GIS Maps

	Summary Charts and Graphs

	Aerial Photographs or Schematic of RSA Study area 

	Google Maps: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl

	RSA Prompt Lists (from RSA Guidelines and Pedestrian RSA Guidelines and Prompt Lists)

	GPS/Directions

	RSA Team Member Phone List

	Digital Camera and Extra Batteries

	Video Recording Device (if desired)

	Measuring Wheel

	Grade Level (or carpenter’s level and tape measure)

	Personal Items (Bottled Water, Light Snack; Hat/Sunglasses, Sunblock)
Chapter X: Xxx RESOURCES Page

Sample RSA Report Out

The following provides a general framework of the components and structure of a RSA report.

1. Cover – include project name, location, and date.

2. Introduction – include objectives, background, and study team.

Objectives of Study

Background

Study Team 

3. Existing Conditions – identify existing geometric conditions, discuss traffic conditions, 

and present crash history.

Geometric Conditions

Traffic Data

Crash Analysis

4. Assessment Findings – describe the safety benefits of existing features, present the RSA 

framework, and summarize the identified issues and suggestions for improvement.

Safety Benefits of Existing Roadway Features

RSA Framework

Summary of Identified Safety Issues and Suggestions for Improvement

5. Conclusions – provide a brief summary of the major safety issues and discuss any 

potential to incorporate multidisciplinary improvements, including enforcement and 

education.

6. References – provide a list of references used to complete the RSA or identify potential 

countermeasures.

7. Appendix: Detailed Discussion of Issues and Suggestions – provide a more detailed 

discussion of each issue identified and summarized in Section 4 “Assessment Findings.”
Chapter X: Xxx Page    RESOUR

Sample Presentation of Issues and Suggestion

The following examples illustrate different methods of presenting the safety issues and 

proposed suggestions discovered and developed during the RSA. This information would 

appear in Section 4 “Assessment Findings” of the sample report outline.

Example 1: Portrait Layout (Two-C

Issue 2: Roadside Hazards

2.1 Fixed objects near roadway: There are several 

fixed objects along the corridor in close proximity

to the roadway, particularly within curves. Fixed

objects along the corridor include trees, utility poles, 

embankments, and culverts. 

Based on crash data from 2006 to 2008, 30 of the 

47 crashes along the corridor were run-off-road, 

18 of which involved a fixed object. Of the 18 

fixed object crashes, seven involved a tree, six 

involved a utility pole, and five involved an 

embankment.

Suggestions:

Short-term - Delineate fixed objects that are close 

to the roadway using post-mounted delineators 

or retro-reflective tape as appropriate. 

Intermediate – Consider removing trees and 

other fixed objects that are within the clear zone, 

particularly along the outside of curves. 

Long-term – Consider relocating utility poles to 

the inside of horizontal curves, where they are 

less likely to be struck. Consider increasing the 

pavement width to create a consistent crosssection and provide more room for recovery.

Photo shows the lackof a

shoulder and close proximity of 

objects to the road
Chapter X: Xxx RESOURCES Page 47 Primary Issue: Animals on the Roadway Specific Safety Concern Suggested Improvements Example of Issue Animals—the roadside throughout the study area is open range. Horses, cows, and sheep were observed crossing and grazing along the roadway during daytime and nighttime conditions. Animal-related crashes represented approximately 25% of all crashes along the corridor. Short-Term – Utilize reflective ear tags, branding, or other strategies to increase the conspicuity of animals at night. Intermediate – Consider installing an animal fence along the corridor. This may be a challenge as the County does not provide any right of way fencing on county roads. This may require coordinating with the grazing official to support the effort. Long-Term •	 Engage animal owners regarding economic loss and better control of animals. •	 Consider working with elected officials toward efforts to prohibit open range grazing and couple this with local enforcement. The enforcement component is critical because legislation alone will have limited effectiveness without actual consequenc

View of the corr

r within th

stud

area. P

sho

a hors

ossing t

o

d, which

w

a common o

servat

du

ring the RSA

Example 2: Landscape Layout (Three-
Chapter X: Xxx Page    RESOUR

RSA Softwa

The Road Safety Audit (RSA) software is a tool for assisting with the completion of RSAs. The 

software facilitates team members in the collection of information as they proceed through the 

RSA process. It gives users access to comprehensive prompt lists and reduces the potential 

for users to simply “check” issues off a list. The prompt lists are presented at different levels 

of detail, helping users to identify issues that may be overlooked in the RSA process. With 

the software, users can link identified issues to user-defined locations in the study area and 

provide accompanying comments with each issue. It also allows users to record suggestions 

for improvements that may be identified. Finally, output from the RSA software groups 

findings by issue and exports the results to a Word-compatible file that allows for quick 

completion of a formal RSA report. The software is available for download on FHWA’s Office 

of Safety website (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/software/).
Chapter X: Xxx RESOURCES Page

What Resources are Available for Demonstrating the Usefuln

and Effectiveness of RS

Road Safety Audits: Case Studies (FHWA-SA-06-17), March 2007

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/case_studies/fhwasa06017/fhwasa06017.pdf

Tribal Road Safety Audits: Case Studies (FHWA-SA-08-005), September 2008

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/tribal_rsa_studies/tribal_rsa_studies.pdf

Federal and Tribal Lands Road Safety Audits: Case Studies (FHWA-FLH-10-05), December 

2009

http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/irr/safety/documents/trsa-case-studies-2.pdf

Recent Uses of Road Safety Audits (RSAs) in Highway Safety Improvement Programs and 

Strategic Highway Safety Plans (TRB Paper 09-2492)

TRB 88th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers DVD

Selected Examples of Tribal Road Safety Audits (RSAs) in the United States (TRB Paper 

10-1284)

TRB 89th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers DVD

What Resources are Available for Assessing Safety on

Roadways

FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines (FHWA-SA-06-06), 2006

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/guidelines/documents/FHWA_SA_06_06.pdf

Pedestrian Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Prompt Lists (FHWA-SA-07-007), July 2007

http://drusilla.hsrc.unc.edu/cms/downloads/PedRSA.reduced.pdf

Road Safety Audits/Assessments Training Course (FHWA-NHI-380069)

http://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/training/nhistoresearchresults.aspx?topicnum=380

usRAP

http://www.usrap.us/home/

Roadway Safety Tools for Local Agencies (NCHRP Synthesis 321)

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_321.pdf

SAFER Manual, Transportation Information Center, University of Madison-Wisconsin, 

1996

http://www.t2.unh.edu/nltapa/Pubs/SAFER_96.pdf

RSA Toolkit DVD

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/resources/toolkitcd/
Chapter X: Xxx Page    RESOUR

What Resources are Available for Identifying Potent

Improvements and Evaluating Their Effectivenes

NCHRP Report 500: Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway 

Safety Plan Transportation Research

http://www.trb.org/Main/Public/Blurbs/152868.aspx

NCHRP Report 622: Effectiveness of Behavioral Highway Safety Countermeasures

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_622.pdf

Sign Retroreflectivity Manual: How to Meet the New National Standard for Small 

Agencies, Federal Land Management Agencies, and Tribal Governments (FHWA-CFL/TD09-005), July 2009

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/night_visib/retrotoolkit/

Roadway Safety Guide, Roadway Safety Foundation

http://www.roadwaysafety.org/wp-content/uploads/guide3.pdf

Vegetation Control for Safety (FHWA-SA-07-018), May 2007 [Revised August 2008]

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_rural/training/fhwasa07018/fhwasa07018.pdf

Maintenance of Signs and Sign Supports (FHWA-SA-09-025), January 2010

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_rural/training/fhwasa09025/fhwasa09025.pdf

W-Beam Guardrail Repair (FHWA-SA-08-002), November 2008

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_rural/training/fhwasa08002/fhwasa08002.pdf

Maintenance of Drainage Features for Safety (FHWA-SA-09-024), July 2009

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_rural/training/fhwasa09024/fhwasa09024.pdf

Roadway Delineation Practices Handbook (FHWA-SA-93-001), August 1994

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/pubs/93001/93001.pdf

Good Practices: Incorporating Safety into Resurfacing and Restoration Projects (FHWASA-07-001), December 2006

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/strat_approach/fhwasa07001/fhwasa07001.pdf

Mitigation Strategies for Design Exceptions (FHWA-SA-07-011), July 2007

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/publications/fulltext/ProjectDev/Manuals/MitigationManual.pdf

Low-Cost Treatments for Horizontal Curve Safety (FHWA-SA-07-002), December 2006

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/horicurves/fhwasa07002/fhwasa07002.pdf

National Scan of Best Practices for Chemical Treatments on Unpaved Roads

http://www.roaddustinstitute.org/scantour/default.aspx

FHWA CMF Clearinghouse

http://www.cmfclearinghouse.org

Crash Cost Estimates by Maximum Police-Reported Injury Severity Within Selected Crash 

Geometries

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/05051/05051.pdf
Chapter X: Xxx RESOURCES Page

What Resources are Available for Incorporating Safety into t

Transportation Planning Proces

A Primer on Safety Performance Measures for the Transportation Planning Process 

(FHWA-HEP-09-043), September 2009

safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/tsp/fhwahep09043/fhwahep09043.pdf

Tribal Highway Safety Plans

http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/irr/safety/sms.htm

Tribal Transportation Programs (NCHRP Synthesis 366)

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_366.pdf

Considering Safety in the Transportation Planning Process

http://tmip.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/clearinghouse/docs/safety/safety.pdf

Incorporating Safety into Long-Range Transportation Planning (NCHRP Report 546), 2006

http://tmip.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/clearinghouse/docs/safety/safety.pdf

Transit Planning Guidebook for FLMAs

flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/planning.htm

Tribal Transportation Planning Guide for Washington State

www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/D9668173-F25F-448B-B571-57EB32122036/0/

TribalTransportationPlanningGuideforWashingtonState.pdf

Wildlife Safety Measur

Page, M. A. “A Toolkit for Reducing Wildlife & Domestic Animal-Vehicle Collisions in 

Utah”. TRB 2006 Annual Meeting CD-ROM.

www.wildlifeandroads.org/media/docs/m_page_trb_2006_toolkit_paper.pdf

West, P. W. “UDOT Wildlife and Domestic Animal Accident Toolkit”. Report UT-08.07. 

Prepared for the Utah Department of Transportation Environmental Services & Wildlife & 

Domestic Animal Accident Quality Improvement Team. April 2008.

www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=1728703519720286945

Deer Vehicle Crash Information Clearinghouse

http://deercrash.com/Toolbox/index.htm

Knapp, K. K., et al. “Deer-Vehicle Crash Countermeasure Toolkit: A Decision and Choice 

Resource”. Report Number DVCIC-02. Submitted to the Wisconsin Department of 

Transportation as part of the Deer-Vehicle Crash Information Clearinghouse initiation. 

June 2004.

http://deercrash.com/Toolbox/finalreport.pdf

U.S. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Critter Crossings: 

Linking Habitats and Reducing Roadkill.

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/wildlifecrossings/
Chapter X: Xxx Page    RESOUR

U.S. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Keeping It Simple: 

Easy Ways to Help Wildlife Along Roads.

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/wildlifeprotection/index.cfm

“Best Practices Manual: Wildlife Vehicle Collision Reduction Study”

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/hconnect/wvc/index.htm

Ontario Ministry of Transportation - “Watch for Wildlife”

www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/safety/wildlife.shtml

“Wildlife-Vehicle Collision and Crossing Mitigation Measures: A Toolbox for the Montana 

Department of Transportation”

www.mdt.mt.gov/research/docs/research_proj/wildlife_crossing_mitigation/final_report.

pdf

SGI Road Safety Driving Tips – Wildlife

www.sgi.sk.ca/sgi_pub/road_safety/drive_right/highway02.html

“Highway 82 safety measures for wildlife nearing completion between Carbondale and 

Glenwood Springs”

www.postindependent.com/article/20091110/VALLEYNEWS/911099986/1083&ParentProfi

le=1074

“Evaluation of Measures to Minimize Wildlife-Vehicle Collisions and Maintain Wildlife 

Permeability Across Highways”

www.azdot.gov/TPD/ATRC/publications/research_notes/PDF/540RN.pdf

A 01/15/06 SUN 0330 DSS

CRASH REPORT ID#####

D 02/25/06 MON 0705 DSS

CRASH REPORT ID#####