Page 1 of 35

MISSISSIPPI 

2022 ANNUAL REPORT 

Disclaimer: This report is the property of the State Department of Transportation (State DOT). The State DOT 

completes the report by entering applicable information into the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Highway 

Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) online reporting tool. Once the State DOT completes the report pertaining to its 

State, it coordinates with its respective FHWA Division Office to ensure the report meets all legislative and regulatory 

requirements. FHWA’s Headquarters Office of Safety then downloads the State’s finalized report and posts it to the 

website (https://highways.dot.gov/safety/hsip/reporting) as required by law (23 U.S.C. 148(h)(3)(A)). 
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 35

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 .......................................................................................................................8

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................11

Funds Programmed .........................................................................................................................11

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................13

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

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

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

Applicability of Special Rules ...........................................................................................................25

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................26

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................26

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

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................30

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................31

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................34

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................35
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 35

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. 407 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.” 
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 35

Executive Summary

The State of Mississippi's Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), operating out of the Highway Safety 

Division (HSD) within the Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT), has completed another year of 

prioritizing and programming projects that support the state's most recent Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

(SHSP). Over the last 12 months, the Mississippi HSIP has made great strides in supporting the goal of 

reducing fatal and serious injury crashes by programming safety projects that are both aggressive in reducing 

targeted crash types and innovative in their approach. These advancements of the last year include, but are 

not limited to, the following highlights: 

Continued Focus on FHWA's Proven Safety Countermeasures

Mississippi continues to put an emphasis on countermeasures listed in the Federal Highway Administration's 

list of Proven Safety Countermeasures, including several new roundabouts, additional restricted crossing uturn (RCUT) locations, rumble strips, Local Road Safety Plans, etc. 

Systemic Safety

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

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

obligate more of its own funding towards supporting the installation of systemic measures such as cable 

barrier, edge line delineation enhancements (rumble stripe/strip, audible thermoplastic stripe, etc.), shoulder 

widening, and systemic access management. Over the past year, Mississippi has also increased its focus on 

prioritizing improvements on the shoulder and beyond into the clear zone. With lane departure crashes 

presenting an ongoing concern in the state, Mississippi is moving more of its project focus towards those 

routes with higher percentages of lane departure crashes. For those locations, MDOT conducts reviews for the 

presence of edge line delineation (rumble strip/stripe, audible thermoplastic stripe), shoulder width and slope, 

and obstructions in the clear zone. The focus has been to make improvements along the entire route where 

narrow shoulders or clear zone hazards exist and where crash history shows patterns of vehicles leaving their 

lane at a higher than normal rate. 

A Culture of Safety

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

continued its work over the past year to further institute a culture of safety across the entire department. The 

last year has seen MDOT Districts and its supporting Division personnel progress in how they give 

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

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

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

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

safety across the state, as well as how the completed projects have been performing to support those efforts. 
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 35

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

improvements and compliance assessment. 

Program Structure

Program Administration 

Describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State. 

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

analysts and administrative support staff located in MDOT's Highway Safety Division (formerly Highway and 

Rail Safety Division). On a day-to-day basis, the HSIP staff works hand-in-hand with other MDOT Divisions in 

aiding the MDOT Districts towards advancing safety on Mississippi Highways. These regular efforts include 

data analysis, countermeasure discussion and coordination, as well as the administration of regularly 

scheduled safety meetings to keep in contact with the Districts regarding safety matters and concerns. 

One of the primary initiatives that the Mississippi HSIP staff takes on routinely throughout the year is holding 

regularly scheduled safety meetings with its Districts. These meetings are an informal time for HSIP staff to go 

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

locations that the Districts are fielding calls about from the public, local law enforcement, emergency 

responders, community leaders, and elected officials. These meetings have proven to be invaluable in 

establishing a rapport between District staff and the HSIP staff, which has aided in the identification of 

locations of need that might not have been found as quickly by data analysis alone. The HSIP has also seen 

these relationships promote a level of trust in the selection of alternative intersection countermeasures, as well 

as more progressive and non-typical countermeasures that are being implemented across the United States. 

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

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

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

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

involved in the countermeasure selection process for HSIP projects. Before any potential location or set of 

locations are pursued for HSIP funding, any and all possible countermeasures are discussed with this group in 

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

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

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

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

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

manner possible. 

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

performance is tracked and reported as a part of the HSIP Reporting process. The Mississippi HSIP typically 

conducts a five year before and after data analysis of each project in order to provide a healthy set of data to 

determine the performance of the project's countermeasure(s). In many cases, the state also continues to track 
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 35

projects beyond the five year window to ensure the countermeasure still works and/or other changes are not 

needed beyond the initial project.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Operations

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Other-Central Office

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

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

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

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

the Mississippi Department of Transportation are administered through the Local Public Agency (LPA) 

Program. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

can be treated using one of the following:

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

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

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

may be asked to provide an in-kind service as part of the agreement, such as tree trimming within the Right-ofWay; otherwise, the signs, sign supports and appropriate hardware are provided free of charge to the county or 

municipality. During the 2022 State Fiscal Year (July '21 - June '22), MDOT spent $17,995 of state funds on 

this program providing over 390 signs and reflective sign post delineators to locals.

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

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

statewide HSIP program. If selected for funding, projects are designed and constructed through the state's 

Local Public Agency (LPA) Program. To date, Circuit Rider projects have mostly involved low cost mitigation 

strategies including re-signing and re-striping of routes, the installation of reflective sign post delineators, 

raised pavement marker installation, etc.; however, more robust treatments will be given consideration for 

funding through the program as crash data dictates. There is no application deadline currently for local 

projects; projects are considered throughout the entire fiscal year. All local road safety projects are considered 

alongside state highway safety projects. MDOT continues to work with local roadway officials towards 

developing quality local road safety projects.

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

• Design

• Districts/Regions

• Local Aid Programs Office/Division
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 35

• Maintenance

• Operations

• Planning

• Traffic Engineering/Safety

• Other-Environmental

Describe coordination with internal partners.

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

Traffic Engineering Division, Environmental Division, Right of Way Division, Planning Division, etc.) are 

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

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

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

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

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

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

manner possible.

MDOT's HSIP staff also maintains a three year plan of active and future HSIP projects and the spending 

anticipated to occur with each. This plan, which is reviewed and approved by FHWA - Mississippi Division at 

the beginning of each federal fiscal year, outlines where MDOT intends to spend all of its HSIP dollars across 

the state. The plan lists project locations, project details, applicable approvals achieved or in process, 

anticipated funding - amounts and types (Preliminary Engineering (PE), Rights-of-Way, Construction, etc.) -

and other details. As new projects arise or ongoing projects have unforeseen changes during the fiscal year, 

MDOT and FHWA work to review and revise the plan as necessary. This list is another effort between the state 

and federal partners in Mississippi that help us accurately and effectively track and spend safety dollars in the 

state.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

• FHWA

• Law Enforcement Agency

• Local Government Agency 

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

Describe coordination with external partners.

Federal Highway Administration - Mississippi Division (MS Division) is an active and helpful partner in program 

planning for the HSIP here in the state. MDOT coordinates with the MS Division for development, review and 

approval of the three-year HSIP project planning and programming list on an annual basis. The MS Division's 

Area Transportation Engineers and Safety Engineer are involved with project planning and development 

meetings.

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

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

local roadways within the State of Mississippi. MDOT coordinates with these partners when the HSIP is 

developing a potential Safety Circuit Rider project within the local agency's jurisdiction.
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 35

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes?

Yes

HSIP projects in Mississippi are identified, planned, and implemented utilizing Safety Countermeasure 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

analysis - is recorded and summarized in report format. These reports are known as Safety Countermeasure 

Alternative Reports (the attached is a screenshot of the program where all of these are kept within MDOT). 

This formal report is then submitted for review and approval by meeting attendees as well as senior MDOT 

Officials including District Engineers, Assistant Chief Engineers, as well as the Chief Engineer. This ensures 

that HSIP projects in the state of Mississippi are fully vetted by MDOT staff, and that MDOT utilizes its HSIP 

funds in the most prudent manner possible.

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

performance is tracked and reported as a part of the HSIP Reporting process. The Mississippi HSIP typically 

conducts a five year before and after data analysis of each project in order to provide a healthy set of data to 

determine the performance of the project's countermeasure(s). In many cases, the state also continues to track 

projects beyond the five year window to ensure the countermeasure still works and/or other changes are not 

needed beyond the initial project.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• HSIP (no subprograms)

Program: HSIP (no subprograms)

Date of Program Methodology:8/3/2015

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• FHWA focused approach to safety

• Other-Addresses state's priority of advancing safety 

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Traffic • Median width

• Horizontal curvature
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 35

• Volume • Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

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

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

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:1

Available funding:2

Cost Effectiveness:3

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 21

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Cable Median Barriers

• Clear Zone Improvements

• Horizontal curve signs

• Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

• Install/Improve Signing

• Other-Audible Thermoplastic Striping

• Other-Rumble Stripe

• Pavement/Shoulder Widening

• Rumble Strips

• Safety Edge
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 35

For "install/improve pavement marking and/or delineation" - the state has begun to target groups of roadways 

with no existing edge line rumble strip/stripe to install audible edge/centerline thermoplastic striping. There has 

also been a concerted effort to install wider edge line stripes on local roads, as well as the audible stripe.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

• Crash data analysis

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

• Engineering Study

• Road Safety Assessment

• SHSP/Local road safety plan

• Stakeholder input

• Other-Input from internal partners

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

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

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

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

other measures to provide advanced warning to motorists.

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

Yes

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

Currently, the Mississippi HSIP uses various principles that are cited in the Highway Safety Manual (HSM), 

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

developing a crash data analysis system that will wholly incorporate the principles and practices outlined in the 

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

projects.

The state has also completed the process of calibrating multiple Safety Performance Functions (SPFs) for 

Mississippi crash data for inclusion in the new crash analysis system.
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 35

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed 

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Federal Fiscal Year

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $34,092,003 $34,092,003 100%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$6,690,969 $6,690,969 100%

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)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $5,339,417 $5,339,417 100%

HSIP (23 U.S.C 148) - 

Extension (prior to IIJA)

$2,243,700 $2,243,700 100%

Totals $48,366,089 $48,366,089 100%

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

safety projects? 

1%

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

1%

- In FFY 22, MDOT let to construction another local road safety project, implementing low cost 

countermeasures on a large number of miles within the county. The state is getting underway with PE for 

another project of a similar type, and just completed four Local Road Safety Plans (covering Copiah, Hancock, 

Harrison, Jackson, Pearl River, and Warren Counties) with the hopes that all four will produce more local road 

safety projects 

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

1%
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 35

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

1%

- In FFY 22, MDOT has begun the process of updating its Strategic Highway Safety Plan ahead of the January 

2024 deadline.

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

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

0%

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

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

0%

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

the future.

There are no impediments.

Describe any other aspects of the State’s progress in implementing HSIP projects on 

which the State would like to elaborate. 

Over the past several years, MDOT has used the Force Account program to install low cost, quicklyimplementable safety countermeasures at multiple locations throughout the state. This process has allowed 

MDOT to implement certain safety solutions using HSIP funds to pay for state force installations and materials. 

So far, the state has installed countermeasures including Intersection Conflict Warning Systems (ICWS), 

Flashing Yellow Arrow (FYA), super-elevation correction with repaving, Prepare to Stop When Flashing at 

signals, and more. This has proven to be an invaluable tool for the state's safety program, and in certain 

instances (installing quick-curb delineators to directionalize an existing intersection while an RCUT is being 

designed and constructed), has provided a more immediate way to solve a safety issue while design and 

construction is ongoing for a more permanent solution. 
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 35

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

102186 - MS 

43 between 

Picayune and 

Henleyfield

Alignment Horizontal curve 

realignment

3 Curves $-178218 $-198020 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 3,570 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.4

106858 - MS 

9 at MS 341

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify auxiliary lanes 1 Intersections $38474 $42749 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 8,100 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.3

106953 - MS 

145 Corridor 

Upgrades

Intersection 

traffic control

Systemic improvements –

signal-controlled

3.7 Miles $-460919 $-512132 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 20,320 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.2

106699 - US 

84 at Auburn 

Rd

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – new traffic 

signal

2 Intersections $-585089 $-650099 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther9,840 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.1

107181 - US 

49 (3 

Intersections)

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry -

other

3 Intersections $11083 $12314 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther20,691 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.3

107253 - US 

49W Railroad 

Crossing S of 

2nd St

Access 

management

Raised island - install new 2 Approaches $36000 $40000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther11,000 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.4

107253 - MS 

397 at County 

Line Road 

(ICWS)

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Intersection Conflict 

Warning System (ICWS)

1 Intersections $27000 $30000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 870 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.4

107253 - US 

84 at MS 28 

Traffic Signal 

Upgrades

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal –

modernization/replacement

1 Intersections $61200 $68000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther19,750 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.2

107464 - US 

49 fr the 

Stone CL to 

South Gate 

Rd

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – paved or 

other (includes add 

shoulder)

19.9 Miles $9406999 $10452221 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther12,300 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.5

107684 - MS 

1 at Friars 

Point Rd

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Intersection Conflict 

Warning System (ICWS)

1 Intersections $181617 $201797 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 955 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.4

107793 -

District 3 

Districtwide 

Intersection 

Intersection 

traffic control

Systemic improvements –

stop-controlled

73 Intersections $2958060 $3286733 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.4
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 35

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

Improvement 

Project

108069 - MS 

7 at Eddie L 

Smith Dr

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – Modern 

Roundabout

1 Intersections $352565 $391739 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther8,790 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.1

108370 - US 

49 fr 

Goodwater to 

1st Ave

Access 

management

Change in access - close or 

restrict existing access

9 Crossovers $3513362 $3903736 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther22,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.6

108426 - MS 

13 from 

Lumberton to 

Marion 

County

Roadway Roadway widening - curve 14.5 Miles $250693 $278548 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 1,550 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.3

108488 - I110 SB at US 

90 WB

Roadway Pavement surface – high 

friction surface

1 Curves $503655 $559617 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate4,800 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.8

108599 - I-59 

Slope 

Corrections in 

Pearl River 

County

Roadway Superelevation / cross 

slope

3 Locations $-67825 $-75361 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate23,125 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.4

108638 - MS 

301 at Star 

Landing Rd

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – Modern 

Roundabout

1 Intersections $135000 $150000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 8,894 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.1

108641 - MS 

302 at 

Braybourne 

Main

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – new traffic 

signal

3 Intersections $2250000 $2500000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

32,950 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.1

108642 - MS 

3 at MS 315

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Intersection Conflict 

Warning System (ICWS)

1 Intersections $244083 $271203 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 2,290 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.4

108646 - US 

82 fr US 45 to 

Military Rd

Roadway Pavement surface – high 

friction surface

5.8 Miles $225000 $250000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

25,250 60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.8

108667 - MS 

583 fr 

Topisaw Dr to 

US 84

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – paved or 

other (includes add 

shoulder)

5.6 Miles $172676 $191862 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 2,600 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.1

108776 - US 

72 at MS 7

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – Modern 

Roundabout

1 Intersections $391655 $435172 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther19,621 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.1
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 35

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

108806 - 

District 5 

Districtwide 

Intersection 

Improvement 

Project

Intersection 

traffic control

Systemic improvements – 

stop-controlled

84 Intersections $2070000 $2300000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.4

108839 - US 

49W fr 

Belzoni to 

Isola - WB 

lanes

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – paved or 

other (includes add 

shoulder)

7.6 Miles $359181 $399090 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther5,800 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

4.2.1

108860 - SR 

145 fr 

Industrial Park 

Rd to 

Bauhaus Dr

Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

0.3 Miles $126000 $140000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 11,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.4

108122LPA - 

Lauderdale 

County Safety 

Circuit Rider 

Project

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning 

signs and flashers

8 Locations $570427 $633808 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 County 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.3

108882 - MS 

39 fr Dale Dr 

to N Hills St

Access 

management

Median crossover - 

directional crossover

1 Miles $4590000 $5100000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther23,000 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.6

108883 - I-20 

fr the Natchez 

Trace to 

Robinson Rd; 

I-55 fr MS 463 

to the Big 

Black River

Roadside Barrier – cable 12.7 Miles $2315000 $2572222 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate43,100 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

4.2.6

108900 - 

District 2 

Districtwide 

Intersection 

Improvement 

Project

Intersection 

traffic control

Systemic improvements – 

stop-controlled

83 Intersections $2925000 $3250000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.4

108902 - I-55 

SB at I-20 WB 

HFST

Roadway Pavement surface – high 

friction surface

1 Curves $520511 $578346 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate32,000 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.8

109026 - MS 

30 fr MS 15 to 

US 45

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway delineation - 

other

24.4 Miles $1309003 $1454448 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 2,700 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.1

109062 - I-22 

fr the Benton 

CL to the 

Roadside Barrier – cable 33 Miles $225000 $250000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate28,000 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

4.2.6
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 35

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

Coldwater 

River

109063 - I-55 

fr Tillatoba 

Creek to Pope 

Water Valley 

Rd

Roadside Barrier – cable 23.5 Miles $226800 $252000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate16,600 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

4.2.6

109061 - 

District 2 

Audible Stripe

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway delineation - 

other

120.7 Miles $2712758 $3014176 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 99,999 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

4.2.1,4.2.2

109120 - I-55 

at Brookway 

Blvd

Interchange 

design

Interchange improvements 1 Interchanges $180000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate15,260 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.1

109122 - US 

49 at RT 

Braddy Rd 

and Muse Rd

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - 

other

2 Intersections $180000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther21,802 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.1

109125 - I-59 

Clarke, 

Jasper, Pearl 

River Cable 

Median 

Barrier and 

Pier 

Protection

Roadside Barrier – cable 41.5 Miles $270000 $300000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate18,000 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

4.2.6

109129 - US 

49 fr WSF 

Tatum Blvd to 

Sims Rd

Access 

management

Median crossover - 

directional crossover

8 Intersections $180000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther23,300 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.6

109131 - US 

80 fr ClintonRaymond Rd 

to Shaw Rd

Access 

management

Raised island - install new 2.8 Miles $360000 $400000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther17,000 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.6

109138 - US 

49 fr SR 13 to 

SR 149

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - 

other

3 Intersections $180000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther21,500 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.1

109142 - 2024 

Strategic 

Highway 

Safety Plan 

Update

Miscellaneous SHSP Development 1 Numbers $270000 $300000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A N/A 99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Statewide 

Plan

SHSP 

Development

All

109143 - MS 

15 fr N of CR 

561 to the 

Winston CL

Roadway Rumble strips – center 8.8 Miles $4590000 $5100000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 5,300 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

4.2.1,4.2.2
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 35

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

109145 - US 

45 at SR 184 

and 

Landfill/Patton 

Creek Rd

Intersection 

geometry

Innovative Intersection 

(e.g. MUT, RCUT, QR)

2 Intersections $180000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther6,950 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.1

109154 - US 

49 fr St 

Charles St to 

Orange Grove 

Rd

Access 

management

Median crossover - 

directional crossover

2 Intersections $108000 $120000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther45,000 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.6

109157 - SR 

25/Lakeland 

Dr fr I-55 to 

Grants Ferry 

(Unsignalized 

Crossover 

Safety 

Review)

Miscellaneous Transportation safety 

planning

21 Intersections $180000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther43,800 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections 4.1.6

109199 - 

District 5 

Audible Stripe

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway delineation - 

other

67 Miles $1980000 $2200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 99,999 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

4.2.1,4.2.2

109216 - 

District 6 

Audible Stripe

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway delineation - 

other

61.6 Miles $1980000 $2200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 99,999 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

4.2.1,4.2.2

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

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

- Any negative values provided for funding represent the return of funds to the program for one of the following reasons: 

> A decreased project cost based on received bids 

> Funds released at the project's close 

> Funds released due to the project not moving forward within the HSIP 

- Any "AADT" or "Speed" fields either with a 99999 or that appear blank above are to be considered N/A - Not Applicable due to multiple routes or locations, or being non-infrastructure projects. 

- Some projects listed above as being HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) funded may also be partially funded with Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154)
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 35

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends 

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Fatalities 613 607 677 687 685 663 642 752 766

Serious Injuries 688 633 637 781 686 587 1,579 3,630 3,562

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.580 1.540 1.700 1.690 1.680 1.630 1.560 1.910 1.880

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.780 1.600 1.600 1.920 1.680 1.440 3.840 9.180 8.630

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

60 68 75 72 80 96 78 117 107

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

46 44 41 58 59 50 109 208 180
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 35

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 35

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 35

- The 2021 reported fatalities for the state of Mississippi are an accurate representation of what we in the 

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

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

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

FARS Public Database. This same note applies to the reported number of non-motorized fatalities for 2021. 

- 2019 and 2020's listed fatality figures were revised due to an amendment made in the certified FARS data for 

Mississippi. 

- Serious Injuries are reported using a combination of Mississippi's Safety Analysis Management System 

(SAMS) and direct queries against the Mississippi Department of Public Safety's (DPS) eCrash database. 

- Serious Injuries recorded in 2021 have, as anticipated, experienced a significant increase from annual 

recorded Serious Injuries as shown in the previous years from 2018 prior. This is due to the state uniform 

crash reporting form being changed in September of 2019, which included the state adopting a MMUCC 4th 

edition-compliant definition of suspected serious injury. The previous Injury A was defined as: 

"Life Threatening - Injuries where there is a high probability of the loss of life". Compare that with the new 

definition, which is: 

"Suspected serious injury: A suspected serious injury is any injury other than fatal which results in one or more 

of the following: • Severe laceration resulting in exposure of underlying tissues/muscle/organs or resulting in 

significant loss of blood • Broken or distorted extremity (arm or leg) • Crush injuries • Suspected skull, chest or 

abdominal injury other than bruises or minor lacerations • Significant burns (second and third degree burns 

over 10% or more of the body) • Unconsciousness when taken from the crash scene • Paralysis" 

These definitions are vastly different, with the updated definition substantially increasing the type and total 

number of injuries that were not captured in previous Injury A crashes. Because specific information on injury 

types is not collected on the crash form, the state is also unable to extrapolate the data to do a true 

comparison of serious injury crashes: old definition versus new. 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 35

Describe fatality data source. 

FARS

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

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

finalized when needed for analysis. 

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

ownership. 

Year 2021

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

53.6 98.6 1.14 2.08

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0 0

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

106.6 241.4 2.03 4.6

Rural Minor Arterial 113 263.4 3.16 7.35

Rural Minor Collector 11.2 38.8 2.76 9.53

Rural Major Collector 117.4 331.6 2.95 8.38

Rural Local Road or 

Street

58.4 192.8 0.99 3.29

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

40.8 94.4 0.97 2.25

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

11.8 28.8 2.26 5.5

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

83.4 302 1.64 6.02

Urban Minor Arterial 34 151 1.32 5.92

Urban Minor Collector 25.4 112 1.47 6.56

Urban Major Collector 0 0

Urban Local Road or 

Street

22.8 114 0.87 4.42
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 35

Year 2021

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

147.6 494.6 1.34 3.12

County Highway 

Agency

138 497 0.32 1.51

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

106 310.6 2.77 7.08

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

9.2 28

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

Safety Performance Targets 

Safety Performance Targets 

Calendar Year 2023 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:760.8

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals.
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 35

A requirement of the HSIP's Safety Performance Targets is to match DPS's Safety Performance Measures in 

the annual Highway Safety Plan. In a joint effort, MDOT and DPS utilize realized data trends within the state to 

project future numbers for fatalities, fatality rate and serious injuries. As such, our safety targets are developed 

in compliance with NHTSA's requirement for the DPS' Highway Safety Plan performance measures. For 

congruity, the remaining safety targets are developed in the same manner (serious injury rate and nonmotorized fatal and serious injuries.) Those values are then used to identify where the most significant 

problems are with respect to fatal and serious injury crashes, and a plan is developed to treat and hopefully 

reduce those numbers in the future.

Number of Serious Injuries:3098.0

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

See above.

Fatality Rate:1.870

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

See above.

Serious Injury Rate:7.640

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

See above.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:258.0

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

See above.

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

safety performance targets. 

MDOT worked hand-in-hand alongside the Mississippi Office of Highway Safety (MOHS) in reviewing the data 

necessary to develop the three shared safety performance targets: Fatalities, Fatality Rate, and Suspected 

Serious Injuries. MDOT - more specifically the staff responsible for management of the state's HSIP - worked 

from there to review data available and develop the two remaining performance targets: Suspected Serious 

Injury Rate and Non-Motorized Fatalities and Suspected Serious Injuries.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 35

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2022 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 685.4 701.6

Number of Serious Injuries 2178.4 2008.8

Fatality Rate 1.690 1.732

Serious Injury Rate 5.410 4.954

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

181.7 216.8

For the second year in a row, the state appears poised to miss all three targets related to fatalities. This is 

likely due to a a large increase in fatalities in 2020 through the midst of the pandemic, followed by another 

slight increase in fatalities in 2021.

As for serious injuries, with another year of data on hand under the new definition for A-injury (Suspected 

Serious Injury), the state was able to meet the targets related to those measures.

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

The HRRR special rule did not apply to the state for this reporting period, but we were notified in April of 2022 

that it would apply for FFY 23

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 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

68 97 90 92 107 77 100

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

33 47 57 41 130 257 318

- Mississippi was notified in April 2022 that it met for the Older Driver and Pedestrians Special Rule for FFY 

2023. As such, the state will incorporate the necessary items to address this special rule during SHSP 

development that is upcoming in FFY 2023.
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 35

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness 

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

• Other-Before and After Crash Analysis 

- The state measures the true effectiveness of the projects it programs and constructs by the reduction of 

targeted crashes. 

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

the State's program level evaluations. 

Mississippi tracks crash data - before construction begins as well as after construction is completed - for all 

projects in the state which utilize HSIP funds in any way (excludes planning projects as well as PE-only 

expenditures). The state tracks project area crash data for a five year time period for before and after 

construction is completed. While it does begin post-construction tracking immediately, Mississippi does not 

begin reporting project performance in the report until at least three years of post-construction data is available. 

A significant program update is that the state is more closely tracking the effectiveness of these projects at 

reducing targeted crash types as well as the more severe (fatal and serious injury) crashes present at the 

location. This moves away from an older practice of tracking project effectiveness by comparing all crashes in 

the project area in the before and after periods. Mississippi believes that this will give a better sense of the true 

effectiveness of our projects, as well as aid in the state's long-term goal of developing state-specific Crash 

Reduction Factors based on Mississippi projects. 

In reviewing the project tracking matrix provided as an attachment to the report and the data included therein, 

Mississippi noted several points of interest as they relate to the overall data trends. Of the 216 project locations 

that Mississippi is reporting on, there has been a 36% overall reduction in targeted crash types, or 929 overall 

targeted crashes.This is a good indicator that overall, the projects selected are producing the kind of crash 

reductions that the state hopes to achieve. On the other side of things, some projects have seen an increase in 

the targeted crash type. A large portion of the projects producing an increase in targeted crash type involve 

installation of a new traffic signal or modification of an existing traffic signal. Though disappointing, this 

information is incredibly useful as it can help Mississippi better assess a countermeasure's effectiveness at 

certain locations involving certain road characteristics and potentially remove or de-prioritize the use of 

countermeasures that aren't as well-performing as a part of its overall program. 

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

• # miles improved by HSIP 

• HSIP Obligations 

• Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process 

• Increased focus on local road safety 

• More systemic programs 

• Organizational change 

• Policy change 
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 35

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements 

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures. 

Year 2021

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 127.4 621.8

Lane Departure 415.8 1,026.8 1.03 2.54
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 35

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Intersections Lane Departure

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Intersections Lane Departure

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 35

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Intersections Lane Departure

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Intersections Lane Departure

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 35

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 35

Compliance Assessment

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

 01/03/2019

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2019 To: 2024

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

 2024

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]

100 100 100 100 100 100

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]

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100 100 100 100

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100 100 100
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 35

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]

100 100

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100 100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100 100 100 100 100

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]

98 98

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
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 35

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): 100.00 100.00 99.75 99.75 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

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

- While MDOT has reviewed traffic control for 100% of the state, traffic control for several locations remains indeterminate. The state will continue working towards 100% completion of this effort as available data allows. 

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

- The state is in the final stages of completing this assessment with only intersection traffic control remaining. As critical data becomes accessible to aid in this effort, the state intends to finish these remaining items in time to meet the 

2026 deadline
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 35

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Q46 - Before and After Tracking2022 - FINAL.pdf

Compliance Assessment:
2022 Mississippi Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 35

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.