Page 1 of 40

CONNECTICUT 

2020 ANNUAL REPORT 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 40

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................14

Funds Programmed .........................................................................................................................14

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................16

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................21

General Highway Safety Trends ......................................................................................................21

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................27

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................30

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................31

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................31

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................31

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................35

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................36

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................39

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................40
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 40

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence 

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

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

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action 

for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, 

schedules, lists, or other data. 

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

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

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action 

for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, 

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

surveys, schedules, lists, or data compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning 

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

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

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

not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for 

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

such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 40

Executive Summary

The reporting period for 2020 is from October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2019. Connecticut's (5 year rolling 

average) fatalities and fatal crash rates have increased in calendar years 2018 and 2019. Both (5 year rolling 

average) serious injuries and the serious injury crash rate have seen little change in recent years. Connecticut 

uses HSIP resources to incorporate safety improvements across a broad range of maintenance, safety and 

non-infrastructure projects. Innovative methodologies developed and used by CTDOT will continue to identify 

more locations, on a statewide scale, with the greatest potential for crash reduction. Applications of new 

Highway Safety Manual concepts and systemic approaches are also being integrated into the HSIP program. 

The SHSP will target goals and devise strategies in each emphasis area to see where improvements can be 

made in order to support the vision of moving towards zero deaths. 

Since CT did not meets its 2018 safety performance targets, an HSIP Implementation Plan was prepared and 

submitted to the Division Office on June 30, 2020. CTDOT took this opportunity to re-evaluate its HSIP 

investments and identify gaps and deficiencies to ensure that projects identified, prioritized, and programmed 

have the best potential for reducing fatalities and serious injuries. Consideration is also being made to help CT 

meet safety performance targets in subsequent years. 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 40

Introduction

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose of achieving 

a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 

924.15, States are required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP implementation 

and evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent with the HSIP Reporting Guidance dated 

December 29, 2016 and consists of five sections: program structure, progress in implementing highway safety 

improvement projects, progress in achieving safety outcomes and performance targets, effectiveness of the 

improvements and compliance assessment. 

Program Structure

Program Administration 

Describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State. 

CTDOT's Safety Engineering Section, which is located within the Division of Traffic Engineering, Bureau of 

Engineering and Construction utilizes the spot improvement approach and systemic approach to identify, 

select, and implement HSIP projects. The spot improvement approach, known as High Frequency Crash 

Locations (HFCL), results in safety investments at specific locations. The systemic approach leads to 

widespread implementation of treatments to reduce the potential for fatalities and/or serious injuries, 

regardless of if crashes occurred at a given site. Since many of CT's fatal and serious injury crashes are 

spread out across all public roads, the systemic approach provides an alternate method to identify and 

implement low-cost safety countermeasures addressing specific risk factors across the entire roadway 

network. As data becomes available, spot and systemic improvement projects will be evaluated to determine 

their effectiveness. 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Engineering

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

 SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

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

Local Roads are addressed by the Local Road Safety Program (LRSP). The LRSP provides federal funding for 

safety-related improvements on the non-State-maintained roadways, to address hazardous elements identified 

at locations and along roadway sections. To address all public roads requirement, Regional Transportation 

Safety Plans (RTSP) are being prepared for each of the nine regional councils of government (COG). The 

RTSPs identify key safety issues for all public roads. The plans utilized are similar to Connecticut’s Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) but focused instead on the local and regional level needs of the individual 

communities and region. Since RTSPs include all public roads, communities will be made aware of potential or 

emerging safety issues on locally owned and maintained roadways and recommendations on how to address 

them. Once all nine RTSPs have been finalized, there will be a new application process for HSIP projects not 

on the State system. Project sponsors will be encouraged to examine a full range of options starting with lowcost spot and systemic treatments such as signs and pavement markings, to mid-range solutions such as 

traffic signals, turning lanes or roadway realignment. The applications will be reviewed and evaluated based on 

factors such as crash analysis, regional or local priority, and benefit/cost analysis. Additional program details 

will made available at a later date. 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 40

Tribal roads open to public travel are located in Southeastern CT and are not included in the RTSPs. The 

Tribal Nations have been invited to participate in the transportation safety planning process under the SHSP on 

numerous occasions but have not yet been involved. In the past, the Bureau of Indian Affairs has contacted the 

Department to contact RSAs on Tribal roads and CTDOT has willing participated. It is acknowledged that tribal 

roads qualify for HSIP funding. Contact information for CT's State and Federal transportation officials are 

available under the Transportation Safety for Tribal Governments website. 

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

 Districts/Regions 

 Maintenance 

 Operations 

 Planning 

Describe coordination with internal partners. 

The Safety Engineering Section within the Department's Division of Traffic Engineering conducts network 

screening on the state system to determine those intersection and segments that have the greatest potential 

for injury reduction. The lists are forwarded to the Operations Section within Traffic Engineering which reviews 

locations for possible highway safety improvements. Both of the sections coordinate and collaborate with each 

other as necessary. The study locations typically originate from internal databases, such as High Frequency 

Crash Location (HFCL) lists or via appointed and elected officials, town officials, or the public. Depending on 

the cost and scope of the countermeasure, CTDOT’s Office of Maintenance may be requested to implement 

low-cost improvements such as traffic signal timing changes, as well as installation of signs and pavement 

markings. In those situations where the scope of work is beyond the resources of the DOT’s Division of 

Maintenance, the Operations Section recommends a project for inclusion in the CTDOT’s Capital Improvement 

Plan. These safety projects are further developed, and plans, specifications, and estimates are taken on by the 

Department's Division of Highway Design. 

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning. 

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

 Other-Safety Circuit Rider Program 

Describe coordination with external partners.

Regional Transportation Safety Plans (RTSP) are being prepared for all nine Councils of Government (COG) in 

CT. Once the plans are complete, the COGs will solicit member towns for candidate HSIP projects. CTDOT 

plans to evaluate all the projects received and will notify the COG if the project is selected for funding. The 

COGs then inform the member towns accordingly. 

The Department's Safety Section works in partnership with CT's Safety Circuit Rider Program (CT SCR) which 

provides safety-related information, training, and technical assistance to local agencies. Some of the initiatives 

include coordination of Road Safety Assessments (RSA), collection and analysis of traffic volume data, 

identification of low cost safety improvements, assistance in the development of Local Road Safety Plans, 

development of a Connecticut Toolbox of Safety Resources, development of a series of Roadway Safety 

Briefs, and delivery of Local Road Safety Training. The CT SCR program also provides assistance to local 

agencies in understanding the capabilities of the new CT Crash Data Repository at the University of 

Connecticut (UCONN) and provides accurate information to local practitioners to make informed roadway 

safety decisions. 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 40

Describe HSIP program administration practices that have changed since the last 

reporting period.

An internal HSIP eligibility form was created to help planners and engineers determine if the proposed strategy 

or treatment meets the requirements 23 USC 148 and 23 CFR Part 924. 

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

elaborate. 

Projects can qualify for the Department's HSIP funds and placement on the HSIP Safety Project Plan when 

they are initiated from the following sources: 

- High Frequency Crash Locations (HFCL) 

- Local Road Safety Program (LRSP) 

- Railway-Highway Grade Crossing Program (RHGCP) 

- Projects supporting SHSP Emphasis Areas 

- High Risk Rural Roads 

-Regional Transportation Safety Plans (RTSPs) 

Program Methodology 

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

implementation and evaluation processes? 

Yes 

CT's Highway Safety Improvement Program Guide is pending FHWA concurrence. 

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

 Horizontal Curve 

 Local Safety 

 Pedestrian Safety 

 Roadway Departure 

 Wrong Way Driving 

 Other-spot improvements (HFCL) 

Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2015

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic  Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 40

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Probability of specific crash types

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

program?

Yes

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

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

Horizontal curves projects on local roads are based on risk factors.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 selection committee

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

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:100

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2008

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 Other-As supplied by the 

applicant  Functional classification
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 40

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

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

program?

Yes

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

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

Submittals by the regional planning organizations. The submittals that meet the program's criteria are 

funded.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Other-Submittals are checked for accuracy and if the improvement yields a b/c ratio greater 

than 1.0, the submittals are forwarded to financial to obtain funding

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

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:50

Available funding:50

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology:9/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 40

 Crash frequency

 Probability of specific crash types

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 selection committee

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

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:100

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2015

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic  Horizontal curvature

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Probability of specific crash types

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

program?

Yes
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 40

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 selection committee

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

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:100

Program: Wrong Way Driving

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2015

What is the justification for this program? 

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Traffic

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Probability of specific crash types

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 40

 selection committee

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

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:100

Program: Other-spot improvements (HFCL)

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2018

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only  Traffic

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Probability of specific crash types

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 selection committee

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

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 40

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Cost Effectiveness:1.0

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements? 

 4

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

 Horizontal curve signs 

 Install/Improve Signing 

 Other-Traffic Signal Timings 

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

 Crash data analysis 

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

 Engineering Study 

 Road Safety Assessment 

 SHSP/Local road safety plan 

 Stakeholder input 

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

No

Does the State use the Highway Safety Manual to support HSIP efforts? 

Yes 

Please describe how the State uses the HSM to support HSIP efforts. 

CTDOT, in partnership with UCONN, is currently updating the agency's safety analysis tools and methods to 

match the six-step safety management process as described in the HSM. CT's Roadway Safety Management 

System (CRSMS) has a network screening module which is used to identify and rank sites with a higher than 

predicted crash frequency for specific roadway types, crash types, or the presence of a specific traffic control 

device. In the diagnosis module, users can create collision diagrams and crash trees as well as conduct a test 

of proportions. Condition diagrams are also available to provide a visual site overview and can be used in 

coordination with the collision diagram. CTDOT is also using IHSDM in the safety planning process to evaluate 

and compare design alternatives.
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 40

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed 

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Federal Fiscal Year

The reporting period is October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2019. 

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $25,610,464 $28,803,779 112.47%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$252,926 $252,926 100%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$5,645,904 $5,845,904 103.54%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$1,065,664 $1,193,131 111.96%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $32,574,958 $36,095,740 110.81%

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

safety projects? 

$9,330,001

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

$9,743,853

27% of the total HSIP funding was for local road safety projects 

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

$15,066,590

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

$15,849,590

44% of the total HSIP funding was for non-infrastructure projects 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 40

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

during the reporting period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

$4,083,300

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

the reporting period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

$0

Project 170-3455 (CHAMP Safety Service Patrol)

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

the future.

None.
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 40

General Listing of Projects 

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

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

0015-

0335RW+

Roadway Roadway widening - travel 

lanes

1 Locations $40500 $45000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 11,000 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0063-

0678CN

Roadway Roadway widening - travel 

lanes

1 Locations $503694 $559660 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 11,000 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0063-

0714CN

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $1022670 $1136300 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 16,000 30 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0076-

0221CN

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $900000 $1000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 25,000 30 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0087-

0146CN

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $720000 $800000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 8,000 25 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0088-

0191CN+

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - 

other

1 Intersections $972000 $1080000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 5,800 25 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0088-

0194CN

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $610362 $678180 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 10,700 25 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0093-

0213PL

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety 

planning

1 Plan $1540000 $1540000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 not applicable not 

applicable

Data Records

0093-

0214PL

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety 

planning

1 Plan $781000 $781000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 not applicable not 

applicable

Data Records

0102-

0285RW+

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add twoway left-turn lane2 Intersections $472500 $525000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther23,000 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0102-

0346CN+

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane1 Intersections $584690 $649656 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 19,750 30 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 40

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

0106-

0126CN+

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $1830384 $2035460 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther35,500 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0126-

0173CN

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $378000 $420000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 16,000 30 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0135-

0340CN

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

4 Intersections $1478336 $1642595 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 17,000 30 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0138-

0211CN+

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $251577 $251577 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther15,000 30 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0138-

0211CN+

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $97467 $97467 Other 

Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. 

STBG, 

NHPP)

Urban Principal ArterialOther15,000 30 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0138-

0212CN+

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $24089 $24089 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther15,000 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0138-

0212CN+

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $607415 $607415 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther15,000 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0139-

0103PE+

Railroad grade 

crossings

Railroad grade crossings - 

other

1 Plan $30000 $30000 Other 

Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. 

STBG, 

NHPP)

Urban Local Road or 

Street

0 25 Other State 

Agency

Spot Railroad Reduce 

Conflicts

0144-

0196CN

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $149500 $166000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 19,750 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0144-

0196PE+

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $75500 $83889 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 19,750 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0170-

3360PL

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety 

planning

1 Plan $1496018 $1662242 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 not applicable not 

applicable

Data Records

0170-

3360PL

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety 

planning

1 Plan $305782 $339758 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 not applicable not 

applicable

Other Records

0170-

3455OTH

Noninfrastructure Non-infrastructure - other 1 Safety Patrol $4083300 $4537000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Safety Patrol Other
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 40

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

0170-

3480PL+

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety 

planning

1 Report $27000 $30000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Reduce 

Conflicts

0170-

3501PL+

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety 

planning

1 Plan $1400000 $1400000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 not applicable not 

applicable

Data Records

0170-

3515PL

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety 

planning

1 Plan $450000 $500000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 not applicable not 

applicable

Planning Records

0170-

3516PL

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety 

planning

1 Plan $1350000 $1500000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 not applicable not 

applicable

Data Records

0170-

3517PL

Noninfrastructure Training and workforce 

development

1 training $1215000 $1350000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 not applicable not 

applicable

Other Other

0170-

3517PL+

Noninfrastructure Training and workforce 

development

1 training $74700 $83000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 not applicable not 

applicable

Other Other

0170-

3547PL

Noninfrastructure Non-infrastructure - other 1 Plan $1500000 $1500000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 not applicable not 

applicable

Data Other

0170-

5002PL

Noninfrastructure Training and workforce 

development

1 training $123857 $123857 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

not 

applicable

Work Zones Other

0170-

5002PL

Noninfrastructure Training and workforce 

development

1 training $123857 $123857 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

not 

applicable

Work Zones Other

0171-

0393CN+

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $15000 $15000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Collector 36,400 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0171-

0401CN+

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $584640 $584640 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 18,600 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0171-

0434PE

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

5 Intersections $118000 $118000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0171-

0434RW

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

5 Intersections $115000 $115000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0171-

0437CN+

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

467 Locations $1431620 $1431620 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Reduce 

Conflicts
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 40

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

0171-

0450PE

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

15 Locations $250000 $250000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Wrong Way Reduce 

Conflicts

0172-

0438CN+

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian warning signs - 

add/modify flashers

54 Signs $81026 $81026 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Reduce 

Conflicts

0172-

0440PE+

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

436 Intersections $45000 $50000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0172-

0450CN

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

17 Intersections $270000 $270000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0172-

0450CN

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

17 Intersections $270000 $270000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0172-

0450PE+

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

17 Intersections $270000 $270000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0172-

0474CN+

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

208 Locations $834220 $834220 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Reduce 

Conflicts

0172-

0474CN+

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

208 Locations $834220 $834220 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Reduce 

Conflicts

0172-

0484PE

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

47 Intersections $1000000 $1000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0172-

0485PE

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

50 Intersections $875000 $875000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0172-

0488PE

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

15 Locations $250000 $250000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Wrong Way Reduce 

Conflicts

0173-

0455CN+

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

1 Intersections $754840 $754840 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther16,000 30 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0173-

0468PE+

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

17 Intersections $270000 $270000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 40

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

0173-

0485CN

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning 

signs and flashers

630 Curves $100000 $100000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Conflicts

0173-

0485CN

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning 

signs and flashers

630 Curves $84564 $84564 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Conflicts

0173-

0485CN

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning 

signs and flashers

630 Curves $1065664 $1065664 Other 

Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. 

STBG, 

NHPP)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Conflicts

0173-

0485PE

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning 

signs and flashers

630 Curves $116000 $116000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Conflicts

0173-

0487PE+

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

2 Intersections $78600 $78600 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0173-

0502PE

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

15 Locations $250000 $250000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Wrong Way Reduce 

Conflicts

0174-

0377CN+

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

2 Intersections $54207 $54207 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0174-

0405CN

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

17 Intersections $270000 $270000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0174-

0405PE+

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

17 Intersections $270000 $270000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce 

Conflicts

0174-

0417PE

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning 

signs and flashers

1080 Curves $225000 $225000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Reduce 

Conflicts

0174-

0432PE

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

15 Locations $250000 $250000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Wrong Way Reduce 

Conflicts
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 40

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends 

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

years. 

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fatalities 221 264 286 248 270 304 281 294 255

Serious Injuries 1,673 1,779 1,523 1,356 1,526 1,689 1,641 1,361 1,335

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

0.710 0.840 0.924 0.795 0.855 0.961 0.892 0.930 0.807

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

5.360 5.690 4.920 4.348 4.830 5.338 5.210 4.308 4.225

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

34 47 40 51 49 65 52 61 59

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

166 247 226 210 251 307 302 255 244
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 40

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Serious Injuries

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

Page 23 of 40

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

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

Page 24 of 40

In some cases, the values from previous years were updated to reflect the most recent data. 

Describe fatality data source. 

FARS

Annual data for the number of fatalities, fatality rate, and number of non-motorized fatalities between 2010 and 

2018 was updated from the latest available FARS data. Annual data for the number of serious injuries, serious 

injury rate and number of non-motorized serious injuries between 2010 and 2018 was updated from the 

UCONN crash data repository. Also, the 2019 performance measures data for fatalities and serious injuries is 

from the UCONN crash data repository and is preliminary. 

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

ownership. 

Year 2018

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

3.2 0.68

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

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

Page 25 of 40

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Minor Arterial

Rural Minor Collector

Rural Major Collector

Rural Local Road or 

Street

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

43.6 0.44

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

25.2 0.6

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

61.4 1.6

Urban Minor Arterial 77.4 1.5

Urban Minor Collector

Urban Major Collector 32 1.22

Urban Local Road or 

Street

33.8 1.33

Other 2.8
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 40

Year 2018

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway 

Agency

196.4 479.4

County Highway 

Agency

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

83 747.2

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

Indian Tribe Nation

FARS is the source for the number of fatalities based on functional class. The source of data for HMVMT is 

FHWA Table VM-2 for 2018. 

The state's crash file does not have serious injury crash data broken down by functional class so those 

columns are blank. 

2019 values are not available. 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 40

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2021 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:270.0

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

"Annual” Fatalities. - The annual number of fatalities did fluctuate as expected from year to year, but the annual 

data also suggest a downward trend since a high point of 304 fatalities in 2016. - A time series regression 

analysis was conducted to project the likely number of fatalities in 2020 and 2021 (our target year). Based on 

the regression analysis, we should expect the fatalities to drop to 260-270, but there is a significant amount of 

statistical variance around the projection.5-Year Moving Average. - In contrast to the annual numbers, the 5-

year moving average is exhibiting a continuing upward trend. The trendline suggests the 5-year moving 

average could be as much as 20-25 fatalities higher than the likely annual trend. (The annual trend reflects the 

influence of decreasing fatalities since 2016.)TARGET: - CTDOT is choosing to set a 2021 fatality target of 

270.0. The selection is based on careful consideration of the following:1. The 2 trendlines in the graph suggest 

the actual value should lie fall between 260-290.2. CTDOT wants to set an aggressive target that will move the 

State back toward fatality levels experienced in 2015 and earlier. 3. CTDOT recognizes that 2019 had an 

exceptionally low number of fatalities. The unusually large reduction of 39 fatalities between 2018 and 2019 

could be a statistical anomaly.The goal in CT's 2017-2021 SHSP for number of fatalities is combined with 

number of serious injuries. By 2021, the goal is to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads by 

15%. It is hopeful that CT can reach this goal by implementing the strategies in each of the emphasis areas.

Number of Serious Injuries:1360.0

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

“Annual” Serious Injuries.- The annual number of serious injuries fluctuated as expected from year to year, but 

the annual data also suggest a major downward trend since a high point of 1689 serious injuries in 2016. - A 

time series regression analysis was conducted to project the likely number of serious injuries in 2020 and 2021 

(our target year). Based on the regression analysis, we should expect a large drop in serious injuries. The drop 

is expected to bring the annual number down to the 1260-1300 range, but there is a significant amount of 

statistical variance around the projection.5-Year Moving Average. - Unlike the case for fatalities, the 5-year 

moving average for serious injuries is exhibiting a steady downward trend. Nonetheless, there is still a large 

difference between the 5-year average trendline and the annual regression analysis forecast. The 5-year 

average is expected to drop to around 1410, while the regression forecast is 1260-1300. TARGET: - CTDOT is 

choosing to set a 2021 fatality target of 1360.0 serious injuries. The selection is based on careful consideration 

of the following:1. The 2 trendlines in the graph suggest the actual value should lie fall between 1260-1410.2. 

CTDOT wants to set an aggressive target that will move the State back toward fatality rate levels experienced 

in 2014 and earlier. The goal in CT's 2017-2021 SHSP for number of fatalities is combined with number of 

serious injuries. By 2021, the goal is to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads by 15%. It is 

hopeful that CT can reach this goal by implementing the strategies in each of the emphasis areas.

Fatality Rate:0.850

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

- The annual fatality rate fluctuates as expected from year to year, but the annual data also suggest a 

downward trend since a high point of 0.961 fatalities/100M VMT in 2016. - A time series regression analysis 

was conducted to project the likely number of fatalities in 2020 and 2021 (our target year). Based on the 

regression analysis we should expect the fatality rates to drop to 0.835, but there is a significant amount of 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 40

statistical variance around the projection.5-Year Moving Average. - In contrast to the annual numbers, the 5-

year moving average is exhibiting a continuing upward trend. The trendline for the 5-year moving average 

suggests the fatality rate could be up to 8% higher (or a rate of 0.910 versus 0.835) than rates suggested by 

the “annual” projection. (The annual trend reflects the influence of a decreasing fatality rate since 

2016.)TARGET: - CTDOT is choosing to set a 2021 fatality rate target of 0.850. The selection is based on 

careful consideration of the following:1. The 2 trendlines in the graph suggest the actual value should fall 

between 0.835 and 0.910.2. CTDOT wants to set an aggressive target that will move the State back toward 

fatality rate levels experienced in 2015 and earlier. 3. CTDOT recognizes that 2019 had an exceptionally low 

fatality rate 0.807 fatalities/100M VMT. The unusually large rate reduction between 2018 and 2019 could be a 

statistical anomaly.CT does not have goals for fatality rate per HMVMT in its 2017-2021 SHSP.

Serious Injury Rate:4.300

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

“Annual” Serious Injury Rates.- The annual serious injury rates fluctuated as expected from year to year, but 

the annual data also suggest a major downward trend since a high point of 5.34 serious injuries/100 million 

VMT in 2016. - A time series regression analysis was conducted to project the likely serious injury rates in 

2020 and 2021 (our target year). Based on the regression analysis, we should expect large a drop in the 

serious injury rates. The drop is expected to bring the annual rate down to 3.90-4.10, but there is a significant 

amount of statistical variance around the projection.5-Year Moving Average. - Unlike the case for fatality rates, 

the 5-year moving average for serious injury rates is exhibiting a steady downward trend. Nonetheless, there is 

still a large difference between the 5-year average trendline and the annual regression analysis forecast. The 

5-year average is expected to drop to around 4.50, while the regression forecast is 3.90-4.10. TARGET: -

CTDOT is choosing to set a 2021 fatality target of 4.30 serious injuries/100M VMT. The selection is based on 

careful consideration of the following:1. The 2 trendlines in the graph suggest the actual value should lie fall 

between 3.90-4.50.2. CTDOT wants to set an aggressive target that will move the State back toward fatality 

rate levels experienced in 2014 and earlier.CT does not have goals for serious injury rate per HMVMT in its 

2017-2021 SHSP.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:300.0

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

“Annual” Non-Motorist Fatalities & Serious Injuries.- The annual number of non-motorist fatalities and serious 

injuries fluctuated as expected from year to year, but the annual data also suggest a major downward trend 

since a high point of 372 non-motorist fatalities and serious injuries in 2016. - A time series regression analysis 

was conducted to project the likely number of non-motorist fatalities and serious injuries in 2020 and 2021 (our 

target year). Based on the regression analysis, we should expect a drop in fatalities and serious injuries. The 

drop is expected to bring the annual number down to 300-320, but there is a significant amount of statistical 

variance around the projection.5-Year Moving Average. Non-Motorized Road Users are an emphasis area in 

CT's 2017-2021 SHSP. The strategies in the SHSP for this EA will help CT re- Unlike the “annual” projections 

of fatalities and injuries, the 5-year moving average for non-motorist fatalities and serious injuries is exhibiting a 

steady upward trend. The diverging trends yield a significant difference between the 5-year average trendline 

and the annual regression analysis forecast. The 5-year average is expected to increase to around 350, while 

the regression forecast is 300-320. TARGET: - CTDOT is choosing to set a 2021 target of 300 non-motorist 

fatalities and serious injuries. The selection is based on careful consideration of the following:1. High Priority 

for Pedestrian Safety. The safety of pedestrians and bicyclists became a major issue in CT when pedestrian 

and bicyclist fatalities unexpectedly jumped in 2014. While it was part of a larger national trend, it raised great 

concern in a State that is heavily urbanized, and walking and bicycling are essential modes of transport for 

many residents. These forms of active transportation are also increasingly popular forms of physical exercise. 

CTDOT adopted pedestrian safety as a high priority, and there are major programs to improve safety and 

expand opportunities for walking and bicycling. We remain committed to those goals.2. 5-year Moving Average 

Trendline is Problematic. Given CTDOT’s commitment to pedestrian safety, we are unwilling to accept a higher 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 40

performance target of 350 fatalities and serious injuries that is projected using the 5-year moving average 

trendline. 3. “Annual” Trendline is more acceptable. The projection using regression analysis suggests a value 

between 300-320 that we believe to be more likely than the 5-year average, and it is more acceptable given 

CTDOT’s goal of improving non-motorist safety. 4. Aggressive Target. The CTDOT wants to set an aggressive 

target that will move the State back toward fatality rate levels experienced in 2014 and earlier.Non-Motorized 

Road Users is an emphasis area in CT's 2017-2021 SHSP. A 15% reduction in the number of fatalities and 

serious injuries is the stated goal in the SHSP which should be reached by implementing the strategies under 

this EA. 

The performance targets and match those reported by CT's Highway Safety Office. 

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

safety performance targets. 

Internal coordination between the HSO and Traffic Engineering began in the Spring of 2020. The HSO's 

contractor prepared initial targets for each of the safety performance targets for discussion. Once the draft 

targets were approved at the staff level, they were forwarded to CTDOT management for discussion and 

approval. After the targets were approved, CTDOT hosted a meeting with the MPOs to discuss safety 

performance targets. During the June 2, 2020 meeting, there was a presentation and discussion on Federal 

reporting requirements, deadlines, and an assessment on past and current trends. After the HSIP annual 

report is submitted to FHWA, CTDOT will send a letter to all the MPOs requesting a resolution from their policy 

board no later than February 28, 2021, stating that they either support CTDOT's targets or that they plan to set 

their own. 

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2019 Safety Performance Targets (based 

on data available at the time of reporting). For each target, include a discussion of any 

reasons for differences in the actual outcomes and targets. 

PERFORMANCE MEASURES TARGETS ACTUALS

Number of Fatalities 274.0 280.8

Number of Serious Injuries 1574.0 1510.4

Fatality Rate 0.873 0.889

Serious Injury Rate 5.024 4.782

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

290.0 329.0

Number of Fatalities: 

Preliminary data suggests that target will not be achieved and is slightly worse than baseline 

Number of Serious Injuries: 

Preliminary data suggests that target will be achieved and is better than baseline 

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT): 

Preliminary data suggests that target will not be achieved and is slightly worse than baseline 

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT): 
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 40

Preliminary data suggests that target will be achieved and is better than baseline 

Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries: 

Preliminary data suggests that target will not be achieved and is worse than baseline

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

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

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

30 35 38 50 53 40 53

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

113 112 124 120 132 117 137

Data source for the number of older drivers and pedestrian fatalities is FARS with the exception of 2019 data 

which is from the UCONN crash data repository. Data source for the number of older drivers and pedestrian 

serious injuries in the UCONN crash data repository.
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 40

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness 

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

 Change in fatalities and serious injuries 

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

the State's program level evaluations. 

- Since the number of fatalities and serious injuries trends have not changed much since last year, it is difficult 

to evaluate the State's HSIP program. CT finalized its SHSP in July 2017 and it is anticipated that many of the 

infrastructure related strategies will be implemented resulting in fewer fatalities and serious injuries. 

- A safety effectiveness evaluation module is planned for the CT Roadway Safety Management System 

(CRSMS) which will allow users to evaluate individual projects. Features such as lives saved and injuries 

prevented are being considered to help inform decision makers of the return on past investments and help 

make a case for future funding. 

- A Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Implementation Plan for Connecticut (CT) was created to 

document the HSIP funding and actions the state will take for the 2021 Federal Fiscal Year (FFY). This plan is 

required because the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) notified the State that we did not meet or make 

significant progress toward meeting our 2018 safety performance targets, based on the 5-year moving 

averages for 2014-2018. Connecticut was not alone on this assessment because FHWA determined that 24 

other State DOTs also did not meet targets or make significant progress. Connecticut met the safety 

performance target for two out of the five categories, specifically the number of serious injuries and the serious 

injury rate. Although Connecticut failed to meet its projected safety performance target for the fatality rate, its 

fatality rate was one of the lowest rates in the country. In 2018, the rate was 0.930 per 100 million vehicles 

miles traveled (VMT) which was the 11th lowest rate nationwide. The national average was 1.13 VMT, which 

was 20% higher than CT’s rate.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

 HSIP Obligations 

 Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process 

 Increased focus on local road safety 

 More systemic programs 

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements 

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures. 

Year 2019

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury 

Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Roadway Departure 162.8 435.6 0.51 1.38
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 40

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury 

Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Intersections 61 514.2 0.19 2.03

Pedestrians 53.6 206 0.17 0.65

Bicyclists 3.2 35 0.01 0.11

Older Drivers 32 100.2 0.1 0.32

Motorcyclists 50.2 222.8 0.16 0.7

Work Zones 4.2 7.4 0.01 0.02
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 40

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older DriversMotorcyclists Work Zones

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

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

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older DriversMotorcyclists Work Zones

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

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

Page 34 of 40

For 2015-2018, FARS was used for the number of fatalities for all SHSP emphasis areas. All other crash data 

is from the UCONN crash data repository. 

The HMVMT data source is FHWA Table VM-2 for 2018. 

In some cases, data was updated from previous years in order to reflect the most up-to-date information. 

Lane departure cannot be accurately separated from roadway departure data so all the crash data is combined 

on a single line.

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcyclists Work Zones

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcyclists Work Zones

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

Page 35 of 40

Project Effectiveness 

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

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

IMPROVEMENT 

TYPE

PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

US Rte 44 

from US Rte 5 

to Mary Street

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

230.00 190.00 1.00 10.00 4.00 99.00 89.00 340.00 283.00 3.85

There were "0" fatalities in the after period. The tool will not allow a zero to be entered.
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 40

Compliance Assessment

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

 05/18/2017

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2017 To: 2021

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

 2021

Update is currently underway via State Project 170-3516.

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

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

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12) [12]

100 100 90 99 65 99

Route Number (8) 

[8]

100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9) [9]

100 100

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21) [21]

100 100

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20) [20]

100 100 99 99

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100 100 90 99

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 90 99 65 99

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 90 99 65 99

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 99 99 100 90
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 40

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

Median Type (54) 

[55]

95 50

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100 99 99

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 99 99

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100 99 99 99 90

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

100 100

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

100 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

100 100
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 40

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201) [191]

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

100 100

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

100 100

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

100 100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 99.72 97.22 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 95.00 99.00 78.80 95.40

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

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

go to https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/Programs/Traffic-Records 

Select TRCC Traffic Records Strategic Plan 

MIRE FDE section begins on page 36
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 40

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

Highway Safety Improvement Program Guide.docx

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2020 Connecticut Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 40

Glossary

5 year rolling average: means the average of five individuals, consecutive annual points of data 

(e.g. annual fatality rate).

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

collaborative process.

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

that are consistent with a State strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous 

road location or feature or addresses a highway safety problem.

HMVMT: means hundred million vehicle miles traveled.

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

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

activities.

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

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

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

dated February 13, 2013.

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

monitor changes in system condition and performance against established visions, goals, and 

objectives.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Systematic: refers to an approach where an agency deploys countermeasures at all locations across 

a system.

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

risk roadway features that are correlated with specific severe crash types.

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

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

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