Roadway Safety Data Program 

WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM LOCAL ROADS 

STATE AND LOCAL DATA INTEGRATION

CASE STUDY

FHWA-SA-14-037

Prepared for

Federal Highway Administration

Office of Safety

Roadway Safety Data Program

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsdp/

June 6, 2014
(Page intentionally left blank.)
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

i 

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.
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Roadway Safety Data Program team would like to thank the following individuals who 

graciously provided information needed to develop this case study.

Name Title Department Email/Phone#

Susie Forde Data Management 

Section Chief WisDOT

Susie.forde@dot.wi.gov

608.266.7140 

Kelly Schieldt Statewide Local Road 

Coordinator WisDOT

Kelly.schieldt@dot.wi.gov

608.257.9748 

WisDOT Division of Transportation Investment General 

Contact Number

608.266.0189 
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1

ACKGROUND .......................................................................................... 1

YSTEM DESCRIPTION AND USE.......................................................... 2

ATA INTEGRATION............................................................................... 5

ATA MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ....................................................... 5

ESOURCES................................................................................................ 6

EY OUTCOMES AND LESSONS LEARNED ........................................ 7

UMMARY ................................................................................................... 8

OURCES..................................................................................................... 8

B

S

D

D

R

K

S

S

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Street Name Parsing in the WISLR Crash Mapping Automation Tool......4
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

iv

ACRONYMS

AADT Annual average daily traffic

AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

CMAT Crash-Mapping Automation Tool

DOT Department of Transportation

FDE Fundamental Data Elements

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

GIS Geographic information system

GPS Global positioning system

GTA General Transportation Aid

HPMS Highway Performance Monitoring System

HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program

HSIS Highway Safety Information System

HSM Highway Safety Manual

LIDAR Light detection and ranging

MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century

MIRE Model Inventory of Roadway Elements

MIS Management Information System

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program

NHS National Highway System

OIT Office of Information Technology

PASER Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating

RPC Regional Planning Commission

RSDP Roadway Safety Data Program

STN State Trunk Network

TMS Traffic Monitoring System

WisDOT Wisconsin Department of Transportation

WISLR Wisconsin Information System for Local Roads

XML Extensible Markup Language
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

v 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Quality data are the foundation for making important decisions regarding the design, operation, 

and safety of roadways. While crash data have been a consistent element of highway safety 

analysis, in recent years there has been an increased focus on the combination of crash, 

roadway and traffic data to make more precise and prioritized safety decisions. The application 

of advanced highway safety analysis processes and tools requires a comprehensive inventory of 

roadway safety data combined with crash data to better identify and understand problems, 

prioritize locations for treatment, apply appropriate countermeasures, and evaluate the 

effectiveness of the those countermeasures. Comprehensive roadway safety data include 

information on roadway and roadside features, traffic operations, traffic volumes, and crashes.
(Page intentionally left blank.)
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

 

1

INTRODUCTION

This case study presents the Wisconsin Information System for Local Roads (WISLR) project 

for safety and asset management. WISLR is an example of integrating State and local road data 

in a spatial framework that differs from the one already in place for State-maintained roads. The 

integration of spatial information uses an “on/at/towards” location referencing system for local 

road and crash information along with a translation from the linear reference system (LRS) that 

applies to State-maintained routes (route and milepoint). The result is an all-public-roads 

database using a single LRS and basemap. Local agencies collect and own the data, but the 

centralized system is available to all authorized users. The case study also examines how 

Wisconsin plans to use WISLR to meet Federal requirements and how the system has 

improved Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s (WisDOT) ability to locate crashes 

accurately.

BACKGROUND

Wisconsin has certified 102,000 centerline miles of roadway open to the public. The State 

manages 10,000 of those miles—more than 1,900 local entities (72 counties, 1,851 

cities/towns/villages, plus other organizations including MPOs, RPCs, etc.) manage the remaining 

roads. For more than 40 years, Wisconsin State Law (SS86: 302) requires local agencies to 

report public roadway mileage to WisDOT for the purposes of allocating State General 

Transportation Aid (GTA) funds—currently about $440 million annually. Before WISLR, 

WisDOT maintained more than 1,900 separate maps representing the jurisdictions of local 

units of government (counties, cities, villages, towns). These maps covered more than 90,000 

centerline miles of public roads in the State—roughly 90 percent of the total miles. WisDOT 

entered the roadway attribute information into a mainframe database accessible only to select 

WisDOT staff. Local agencies received paper copies of local road certification data, e.g., maps 

and certification mileage listing by route names. WisDOT was also required to inventory every 

county on a 10-year cycle.

WisDOT partnered with local governments to determine the frequency with which they 

inventoried local roadways. The results identified a duplication of data being inventoried 

between WisDOT and local governments. Additionally, local agencies inventoried roads within 

their jurisdiction more frequently than WisDOT. This finding was one of the reasons the

Department asked the Legislature to move inventorying responsibility to local governments.

In the 1990s, the WisDOT Secretary established the Local Roads and Streets Council (LRSC) 

charged with providing advice on issues related to local roads and streets. The Council 
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

 

2

recommended updates to the existing local road inventory system to address shared data 

responsibilities and roadway attribute data tied to location. The LRSC recommendations aimed 

to promote data sharing, improve access, and reduce duplication of effort. The new system was 

the WISLR.

The first, original objective of the WISLR project was to give local roadway government officials 

the tools and responsibility to update their own inventory of public roadway mileage. This 

fulfills WisDOT’s responsibility for local roadway certification and GTA funding allocation with 

a more efficient process relying on local agencies to supply the basic physical roadway attribute 

data. The Stage 1 implementation of WISLR provided that functionality.

Beginning in 2003, the objectives for WISLR have expanded to include pavement management 

and, most recently, safety management. The tools and data sources in WISLR now support 

these additional functions.

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND USE

As of the date of this case study, WISLR supports the following functions and uses:

Mileage certification and allocation of General Transportation Aid (GTA) funds: 

This is the core functionality of WISLR and the only portion required to meet a State legislative 

mandate. WisDOT uses a formula set in law to determine the amount of GTA funding each 

local agency will receive. The State Legislature has changed the formula over time as emphasis 

moves along a continuum from cost-based to mileage-based funding criteria. WISLR provides 

the sole basis for determining centerline miles under the jurisdiction of each agency. Local 

agencies with access to the WISLR website can view physical and administrative local road 

attribute data statewide in tabular form or represented in a GIS layer across all jurisdictions. 

These agencies can update physical roadway attribute information for roads in their jurisdiction. 

To obtain update authority, local officials must complete a computer-based training about the 

on/at/towards linear referencing method used by WISLR. Administrative roadway attributes 

and mileage data can be updated by WisDOT staff only. Mileage changes are updated by 

WisDOT based on legal documentation provided by locals. Mileage data is used in the GTA` 

formula to determine a local agency’s aid payment.

Pavement analysis: 

The pavement analysis (PA) module of WISLR supports local agencies using the Pavement 

Surface Evaluation and Rating (PASER) windshield survey methodology developed at the 
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

 

3

University of Wisconsin-Madison Transportation Information Center (TIC). This subsystem 

includes a pavement rating entry screen and a pavement needs analysis budgeting tool 

programmed to optimize overall pavement condition in a jurisdiction. Users can alter the 

optimization method and model as well as the costs and expected effectiveness of each 

treatment, the calculations in the budgeting tool require ratings in the PASER methodology (a 

ten-point scale applies to asphalt roads; a four-point scale applies to gravel and dirt roads). 

Users may use the rating data entry function with any other numeric point-based rating scheme.

The pavement module’s budgeting calculations require calibration to make the tool applicable 

to other rating schemes other than PASER. In Wisconsin, most of the local agencies are using 

PASER and the number of users of the PA module continues to grow each year—currently 

there are more than 2,400 active users. The tool defaults to a model that ensures the best 

average roadway condition at the least cost. The goal is to maintain all pavement at a level that 

can be treated and maintained with lower cost solutions and put off major reconstruction for as 

long as possible. This does result in some roadways that are already in poor condition not being 

fixed at their earliest possible date, but rather when the local agency can afford the major 

expense of reconstruction. This strategy differs from a “worst first” approach that would spend 

most of the maintenance and reconstruction budget on the roads that are in the poorest 

condition—letting those in moderately good condition deteriorate before receiving any 

treatment. The PA budget module also supports “what if” analysis by allowing users to change 

the number of dollars spent each year and the assumptions about which treatments match 

which levels of severity. Users can also manually change the treatment applied to individual 

locations. The budgeting module provides predicted pavement condition ratings for the next 

five years based on the user-selected parameters and the starting pavement conditions entered 

by users. The analysis also produces confidence level ratings—based in part on the age of the 

pavement ratings supplied to the module and the percentage of the system with pavement 

ratings.

Safety: 

The University of Wisconsin-Madison, Traffic Operations and Safety (TOPS) lab supports safety 

analysis in the WisTransPortal with GIS mapping capabilities and shared use of geolocated 

roadway inventory traffic volume, and crash data. Two efforts bring crash data into the system: 

(1) WisDOT’s manual efforts to code locations for all crashes on the State Trunk Network 

(STN), and (2) the Crash-Mapping Automation Tool (CMAT), which locates crashes on local 

roads. The South Dakota State University (SDSU) developed CMAT under contract to 

WisDOT. The CMAT project developed a link-network “cross-walk” capability that enabled 

the transfer of mapped highway crashes from the State Trunk Network to WISLR. The GIS 

“cross-walk” mechanism that was developed for highway crash locations was designed and 
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

 

4

serves as a generalized tool to move business data between the State Trunk and WISLR linear 

referencing systems. WISLR serves as the GIS platform for CMAT. The CMAT algorithms 

convert local roadway crash location information (on street, nearest cross street, distance, and 

offset) to identify the WISLR location based on the on/at/towards LRS in WISLR. Street names 

from the crash report data parse automatically into four components (directional prefix, road 

name, road type, and directional suffix). Figure 1 shows an example of how the name parsing 

works in WISLR.

Figure 1: Street Name Parsing in the WISLR Crash Mapping Automation Tool

The system handles alias street names with a look-up table. For local roads, this results in a high 

degree of location coding success (90 percent successful pinning to a location), with somewhat 

lower successful matching for STN locations. Accuracy of the mapped locations is also high—a 

random sample and manual review found that 85 percent of mappable local crashes were 

mapped correctly, 12 percent were not mapped at all, and the remaining crashes were mapped 

incorrectly (3 percent). WISLR displays traffic count data for State, county, and collector 

roadway sites collected by the DOT. This information is made available in tabular form and GIS. 

The traffic count AADT layer is refreshed annually.

The WISLR GIS layer is selected by the CMAT project to display State and Non-State crashes 

on a single network. With the majority of crashes occurring on local roads, providing a map 

with both State and Non-State crashes enables more comprehensive safety analysis.
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

 

5

DATA INTEGRATION

WisDOT has identified WISLR as their answer to the FHWA requirement to develop an allpublic-roads linear reference system and base map. The intent is that WISLR will be the 

database used to support statewide network screening analysis. Because there are two LRSs 

maintained in Wisconsin (one for the STN and one that was intended for local roads but 

includes the STN), WisDOT needed a method of crosswalking between the more robust STN 

database and the minimal inventory and linear representation of the STN in WISLR. Having 

accomplished this for the CMAT crash mapping project, WisDOT is now able to consider use 

of the crosswalk for other purposes, including carrying over roadway inventory details on the 

STN into WISLR. It is clear, however, that WisDOT will continue to conduct analyses 

(including safety analyses) using its own internal systems. WISLR will support statewide 

network screening analyses, but WisDOT has additional data and analytic resources that will be 

used for the STN.

Data integration relies on a mix of contractor support including university-based researchers 

from the UW TOPS Lab, University of Alabama, and SDSU, and WisDOT data entry and 

management plus local data input. 

There are local entities that are not using WISLR for their local data management. These 

include some large municipal agencies that have their own systems. WisDOT and its universitybased research partners are looking at ways to integrate extracts from these other data 

systems. This is the source of some of the WisDOT manual data entry in the WISLR 

management operation and is limited to the focus on certified centerline mileage.

DATA MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

The Transportation Research Board’s NCHRP Report 666: Target-Setting Methods and Data 

Management to Support Performance-Based Resource Allocation by Transportation Agencies 

defined the concepts of data management, data governance, and data stewardship. Briefly, Data 

Management is the set of practices related to collecting, storing, and preparing data for use 

(e.g., in safety decisionmaking). Data Governance is the set of standards and practices applied to 

any data resource to control the quality of the data. Data Stewardship refers to ownership 

responsibility and control over data including authority for its collection, storage, integration, 

and use. Regarding data management, the design philosophy behind WISLR is that the local 

agencies own their own data—they collect it, manage it, and use it. WISDOT sets the quality 

standards and enters administrative roadway inventory updates for the majority of local 

agencies. WISDOT also uploads crash data into WISLR based on records in the statewide 
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

 

6

database. All other WISLR data are collected, entered, and managed by the local agencies or 

their designated partners (e.g., the MPO).

RESOURCES

WISLR development is in its third stage. In the first stage (late 1990s - 2002) WisDOT allocated 

funding for WISLR (source of original funding is not known). Stage 1 deployment included the 

critical functions required in order for WisDOT and the local agencies to comply with mileage 

reporting requirements under State law. WisDOT does not have a figure for the original 

funding amount. The WISLR’s go-live date was 2002.

Stage 2 (completed in 2005) resulted in the development of the Pavement Management Analysis 

system—a tool that incorporates pavement condition ratings and budget analysis used by local 

agencies to plan maintenance and reconstruction operations. WisDOT used State Planning 

Research (SPR) funds to pay for the efforts in Stage 2.

Stage 3 (started in 2004 and ongoing) is the enhancement of WISLR to add a safety analysis 

capability and is intended to meet FHWA requirements for an all-public-roads basemap and 

linear referencing system. WisDOT continues to use SPR funds to pay for ongoing 

enhancements. 

The data management and analysis efforts supported by WISLR are staffed as follows:

• One statewide Local Road Coordinator with primary responsibility for the statewide 

roadway data attributes and network.

• Three GeoEditors responsible for location control changes and data quality of the 

statewide local road network.

• Equivalent of two to three Field Data Collector positions responsible to collect and 

verify mileage and roadway attributes for new roads; also perform a one percent “smart 

and random” validation.

• Three Limited Term Employees (part-time seasonal workers).

• University-based contractor support for system enhancements.

In addition, the efforts are supported by local staffing (local/county/MPO/RPC) that collect, 

report, and enter data.
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

 

7

KEY OUTCOMES AND LESSONS LEARNED

WISLR deliveries the following key outcomes and products for local agencies and WisDOT:

• Consistent statewide local roadway data.

• Cost savings through reduced redundancy.

• Expanded local use of WISLR as WisDOT added new modules and capabilities.

• Improved efficiency of safety analysis including all public roads.

The lessons learned from the WISLR effort are that the success of the program is due to (A) 

the local agencies having a sense of ownership over the data and the system, and (B) WisDOT’s 

continued investment in the expansion of the system. The philosophy behind WISLR’s 

development has always been to ensure that the local agencies controlled the contents and 

features of the system. The original purpose of WISLR was to serve as an aid to mandatory 

recertification of centerline mileage by the local agencies. While State law requires the 

recertification of centerline mileage, agencies can use any method or software product to 

accomplish the recertification. Today, compliance is above 90 percent. The vast majority of 

local agencies use WISLR for data mining and decision-making. The online WISLR user numbers 

continue to increase each year.

WISLR saves the local agencies money in that they avoid the cost of developing and maintaining 

software and mapping systems to manage roadways in their jurisdiction. These savings are likely 

to be more important for the smaller, less well funded local agencies; however, it is clear that 

WISLR has reduced duplication of efforts by local agencies as well as having a standardized and 

simplified job of recertification by WisDOT.

WISLR also succeeds because of the continuous expansion of the system’s capabilities. The 

Pavement Management module—consisting of both a pavement rating system and a condition 

projection and budgeting tool—implements the widely used PASER windshield pavement 

condition rating method. Most of the local agencies use these ratings and WISLR gives them a 

convenient way to store and access the data. The budgeting tool helps local agencies by 

providing a way to optimize their pavement improvement spending to achieve the highest 5-

year projected pavement conditions. The addition of the safety module in WISLR helps local 

agencies incorporate safety into their roadway decision-making process.
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

 

8

SUMMARY

This case study indicates that developing a statewide local road system is a long-term effort. It 

began with a targeted area, which was to facilitate local agencies’ annual reporting of centerline 

miles of roadway to WisDOT for the purpose of funding allocation. The legal requirement, 

funding implications, and that the software is freely available, all combined to encourage local 

agencies to adopt WISLR. As the local user base grew and new needs were identified, 

WISDOT added analytic tools to better support the work of local agencies. By showing the 

commitment of the State to local agencies and the capability of the system, more and more 

local agencies are using WISLR. 

SOURCES

To complete this case study, the project team conducted on site interviews and follow-up 

conversations via email and telephone with WisDOT; university-based contractors from South 

Dakota State University (SDSU), University of Alabama, and University of Wisconsin (UW); and 

local representatives from the City of Franklin, the Wisconsin Towns Association, and the East 

Central Regional Planning Commission.

The project team consulted the following resources, individuals, and agencies in developing this 

Case Study:

• Wisconsin’s submissions to the FHWA Office of Safety project, State Safety Data 

Capabilities Assessment—used with permission from the State and FHWA.

• NCHRP Synthesis 458: Roadway Safety Data Interoperability between Local and State 

Agencies, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_458.pdf. 

• NCHRP Report 666: Target-Setting Methods and Data Management to Support 

Performance-Based Resource Allocation by Transportation Agencies (Section I: Chapter 

4, page I-58), http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs.nchrp/nchrp_rpt_666.pdf. 

• Federal, State and local personnel and university-based contractors interviewed:

WisDOT: Susie Forde, Kelly Schieldt, Joseph Nestler, Mary Forlenza, Rebecca 

Szymkowski, Scott Janowiak

• City of Franklin: Ron Romies, Paul Rotzenberg, Wisconsin Towns Association: Richard 

Stadelman

• East Central RPC: Nick Musson

• South Dakota State University: Xiao Qin
WISCONSIN INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL ROADS

 

9

• University of Alabama: Andrew Graettinger

• University of Wisconsin, Traffic Operations and Safety (TOPS) Lab: Steven Parker

• FHWA Division Office: David Jolicoeur

• 2013 Traffic Records Forum Presentation: The Evolution of Wisconsin Local Roads 

System to Support Safety Data Driven Decision-Making. Susie Forde. Available 

at: http://www.atsip.org/forum2013/program/sessions/s15.html. 

• 2013 Presentation to WisDOT Executives: Wisconsin Statewide Crash Mapping and 

Analysis. Susie Forde, Xiao Qin, Andrew Graettinger, Steven Parker.

This project was performed by Robert Scopatz, Yuying Zhou, and Angela Wojtowicz from 

Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.; and Daniel Carter, Sarah Smith, and Patricia Harrison of the 

University of North Carolina, Highway Safety Research Center.

FHWA, Office of Safety

Stuart Thompson. P.E.

Federal Highway Administration

202-366-8090 

Stuart.Thompson@dot.gov 
FHWA-SA-14-037