North Dakota

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2014 Annual Report

Prepared by: ND
ii

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery & Admission into Evidence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

Program Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 4

Progress in Implementing Projects............................................................................................................. 13

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................. 13

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

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets .................................................................................... 20

Overview of General Safety Trends........................................................................................................ 20

Application of Special Rules.................................................................................................................... 34

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................37

SHSP Emphasis Areas.............................................................................................................................. 38

Groups of similar project types............................................................................................................... 43

Systemic Treatments............................................................................................................................... 48

Glossary....................................................................................................................................................... 56
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

Executive Summary

The purpose of the overall HSIP program is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and 

serious injuries on all public roads through the implementation of infrastructure-related highway safety 

improvements. 
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

progress in achieving safety performance targets, and assessment of the 

effectiveness of the improvements. 

Program Structure

Program Administration

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

Central

District

Other

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

The NDDOT addresses safety on local roads through the Local Road Safety Program (LRSP). 

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

Design

Planning

Maintenance
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Other: Other-Safety Division, Local Government

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

Internal partners are included in the review of the HSIP project listings.

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

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Other: Other-Cities, Counties, and Tribal Governments

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

the last reporting period.

Multi-disciplinary HSIP steering committee

Other: Other-HSIP application form has been revised.
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

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

would like to elaborate.

Schedule for HSIP requests:

• October – send out HSIP solicitation letter 

• Mid December – HSIP application forms (SFN 59959) are due to NDDOT

• January through March – NDDOT analysis of HSIP requests

• April – Draft HSIP project listing

• August 31st – Final HSIP project list due to FHWA

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

Median Barrier Intersection Safe Corridor

Horizontal Curve Bicycle Safety Rural State Highways

Skid Hazard Crash Data Red Light Running Prevention

Roadway Departure Low-Cost Spot Improvements Sign Replacement And 

Improvement

Local Safety Pedestrian Safety Right Angle Crash

Left Turn Crash Shoulder Improvement Segments

Other: 

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology: 6/17/2014

 
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other-Intersection skew, 

intersections of curves, 

intersection traffic control 

device, presence of adjacent 

development

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

Other-Systemic project identification, local agency or NDDOT district requests

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

Yes

No

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

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

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

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

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 1

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit 2

Other 
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology: 6/17/2014

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other-shoulder width, access 

density

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

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

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

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

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

Available funding 1

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness 3

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

14

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

improvments?

Cable Median Barriers Rumble Strips

Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation Pavement/Shoulder Widening

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

Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails Clear Zone Improvements

Safety Edge Install/Improve Lighting

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal Other 

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Other: 

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

last reporting period.

Highway Safety Manual

Road Safety audits

Systemic Approach

Other: 

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

would like to elaborate. 

ROAD SAFETY REVIEWS

A road safety review (RSR) is a site visit of a roadway or intersection by a multi-disciplinary 

team in order to identify changes that may improve safety. RSRs are typically requested by a 

local agency or the NDDOT District and are most commonly performed at high crash locations 

and/or locations with negative public perception. However, they may be performed at other 

locations as well; such as locations where there is a perceived potential for safety improvement 

but it is not exactly clear what should be done. RSRs are typically not performed multiple times 

at one location, unless traffic patterns or nearby developments have changed since the 

previous RSR was performed. 
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

The road safety review is coordinated by the NDDOT traffic operations section. Typically, the 

RSR team consists of one or more representatives from the following organizations:

• NDDOT Traffic operations

• NDDOT District Maintenance

• NDDOT District Construction

• NDDOT Traffic Safety Design Section

• NDDOT Roadway Design Section

• NDDOT Safety Division

• NDDOT Local Government

• FHWA Safety Engineer

• City and/or County Engineer

• Local law enforcement (HP, City Police, BIA, etc)

SYSTEMIC SITE IDENTIFICATION

In the past, safety funds were focused mostly on infrastructure projects on state highways and 

were identified through the “black spot” method. However, because the severe crash data 

shows that 56% (from ND SHSP, page 4-2) are occurring on the county/local system, a majority 

of safety funds will now be directed to local roadways. Based on a commitment in the 2013 

North Dakota Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), the NDDOT is working with CH2MHill to 

develop “Local Road Safety Programs” (LRSP’s) for North Dakota. The LRSP’s have developed a 

systemic process to provide application of high-priority/low-cost safety strategies at “at-risk” 

locations. 

The LRSP’s have identified certain characteristics that help identify and prioritize locations that 

have the most risk. For consistency in application of safety improvements, the problem 

identification and countermeasure selection for potential safety projects on state highways will 

generally follow the same process that has been developed for the local roadways in the LRSP’s. 

Because of the higher design standards of state highways versus local roadways, some 

variations of this process are necessary and are discussed in detail in the following sections. 

Also, some countermeasures have already been applied system-wide on all state highways 

(such as shoulder rumble strips).

Potential projects are identified using a star rating system. A star is assigned for each risk factor 

that is present at any given location. Separate inventories of the state highway system have 

been developed using the following facility types:
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

• Highway segments (State Highways, US Highways)

• Highway intersections (State Highway/State Highway, US Highway/State Highway, etc)

• Horizontal curves on state highways
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Calendar Year

State Fiscal Year

Federal Fiscal Year

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

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) 11284000 68 % 10560226.83 67 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) 0 0 %

HRRR Special Rule

Penalty Transfer -

Section 154

5289006 32 % 5289006 33 %

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

Incentive Grants - 

Section 163

Incentive Grants 

(Section 406)

Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STP, NHPP)

0 0 % 0 0 %

State and Local Funds 0 0 % 0 0 %
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

Totals 16573006 100% 15849232.83 100%

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

3 %

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

3 %

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

0 %

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

0 %

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

period?

0 %
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

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

period? 

0 %

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

overcome this in the future.

None

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

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

None
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

General Listing of Projects

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

Project Improvement Category Outp

ut 

HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Fundin

g 

Catego

ry

Functional 

Classificati

on

AAD

T

Spee

d

Roadwa

y 

Owners

hip

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strategy

Recovery 

ApproachesVarious 

Locations 

Devils Lake 

Dist

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unsp

ecified

0 13500 15000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Safer 

slopes 

and 

ditches

US 2 Turn 

Lanes - Dist 

Bndry to W 

of Surrey

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

0 13950

00

15500

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Provide 

turn 

lanes

ND 16 & 

McKenzie 

Cnty 38

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unsp

ecified

0 22500 25000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Safer 

slopes 

and 

ditches

ND 200 and 

Hensler Road

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unsp

ecified

0 26100 29000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Safer 

slopes 

and 

ditches
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

ND 66, 

Structure 

#066.029.07

6

Roadside Drainage 

improvements

0 79740

0

88600

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Remove 

object 

in 

hazardo

us 

location

s

Rumble 

strips on BIA 

roads

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

0 24498

5

24498

5

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural Local 

Road or 

Street

0 0 Indian 

Tribe 

Nation

Roadway 

Departure

Rumble 

strips

US 52 and ND 

3 near 

Harvey

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

0 47070

0

52300

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Provide 

turn 

lanes

One-way 

signs on 

Divided 

Highways 

(eastern 

districts)

Roadway signs and traffic 

control Roadway signs 

(including post) - new or 

updated

0 58500

0

65000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Enhanc

ed 

signing

ND 21 from 

US 85 to ND 

22

Roadway Roadway 

widening - curve 

0 17590

00

19550

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Improve

d 

geomet

ry

ND 22 from 

W Jct ND 21 

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add left0 11439 12710 HSIP (Sectio

Rural 

Minor 

0 0 State 

Highway 

Intersecti Provide 

turn 
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

thru New 

England

turn lane 00 00 n 148) Arterial Agency ons lanes

US 83 Turn 

Lanes

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

0 43798

0

48177

8

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Provide 

turn 

lanes

US 83 Turn 

Lanes

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

0 17490

4

19239

4

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Provide 

turn 

lanes

Districtwide 

Retroreflecti

vity

Roadway signs and traffic 

control Sign sheeting -

upgrade or replacement

0 14400

00

16000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

n/a 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Enhanc

ed 

signing

US 81 (19th 

Ave N) at 

NDSU Barns

Advanced technology and 

ITS Congestion detection / 

traffic monitoring system

0 67500 75000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 City of 

Municip

al 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Dynami

c 

warning 

signs

Districtwide 

Retroreflecti

vity

Roadway signs and traffic 

control Sign sheeting -

upgrade or replacement

0 15300

00

17000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Enhanc

ed 

signing

Intersection 

of US 2 & RP 

23.9

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

0 27216

0

30240

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Provide 

turn 

lanes
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

19
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

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

Performance Measures* 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Number of fatalities 118 114 122 133 142

Number of serious injuries 370 369 376 409 453

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1 1 1 2 2

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

5 5 5 5 5

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

21
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

22
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

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

Year - 2013

Function 

Classification

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

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

9 0 0.57 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

47 0 2.13 0

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

21 0 2.7 0

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

21 0 7.88 0

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

30 0 1.61 0

URBAN PRINCIPAL 3 0 0.6 0
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

4 0 0.58 0

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

3 0 0.52 0

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0.16 0

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

3 0 0.85 0
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

25
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

26
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

27
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

28
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

Year - 2013

Roadway Ownership Number of 

fatalities

Number of serious 

injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 114 135 1.25 1.47

COUNTY HIGHWAY AGENCY 7 53 0.07 0.57

TOWN OR TOWNSHIP HIGHWAY AGENCY 0 0 0 0

CITY OF MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY AGENCY 10 54 0.11 0.59

STATE PARK, FOREST, OR RESERVATION AGENCY 11 7 0.13 0.08

LOCAL PARK, FOREST OR RESERVATION AGENCY 0 0 0 0

OTHER STATE AGENCY 0 0 0 0

OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 0 0 0 0

PRIVATE (OTHER THAN RAILROAD) 0 0 0 0

RAILROAD 0 0 0 0

STATE TOLL AUTHORITY 0 0 0 0

LOCAL TOLL AUTHORITY 0 0 0 0

OTHER PUBLIC INSTRUMENTALITY (E.G. AIRPORT, 

SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY)

0 0 0 0
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

30
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

31
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

32
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

33
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

34

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

None

Application of Special Rules

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

age of 65. 

Older Driver

Performance Measures

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Fatality rate (per 

capita)

0.132 0.116 0.124 0.14 0.118

Serious injury rate 

(per capita)

1.092 0.902 0.756 0.646 0.45

Fatality and serious 

injury rate (per capita)

1.228 1.022 0.882 0.79 0.572

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

Number of fatalities age 65 and older + Number of Injuries age 65 and older / 1000 population = Rate

Example year 2012: 

22 Fatalities age 65 and older

77 Injuries age 65 and older

2012 population is 144,000

22+77/144=0.69

(0.69+0.64+0.46+1.07+1.09)/5 = 0.79

Fatalities Injuries Population Rate 5-yr Average 

 (Age 65+) (Age 65+) (Age 65+, in 1000s) (fat + inj) (fat + inj)

 

2005 23 188 142 1.49

2006 18 177 146 1.34

2007 10 156 144 1.15
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

35

2008 16 143 146 1.09

2009 29 128 147 1.07 1.23

2010 12 54 145 0.46 1.02

2011 23 69 144 0.64 0.88

2012 22 77 144 0.69 0.79

2013 10 50 
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

36

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

37

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)

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

Safety Improvement Program?

None

Benefit/cost

Policy change

Other: 

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

Shift Focus to Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Include Local Roads in Highway Safety Improvement Program

Organizational Changes

None

Other: Other-Using systemic approach to apply low-cost countermeasures for at-risk locations

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

None
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

38

SHSP Emphasis Areas

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

Year - 2013

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Lane Departure 62 219 0.68 2.38 0 0 0

Intersections 24 64 0.26 0.69 0 0 0
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

39
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

40
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

41
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

42
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

43

Groups of similar project types

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

Year - 2013

HSIP Subprogram TypesTarget 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Roadway Departure 62 219 0.68 2.38 0 0 0

Intersection 24 64 0.26 0.69 0 0 0
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

44
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

45
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

46
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

47
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

Systemic Treatments

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Year - 2013

Systemic 

improvement

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Rumble Strips 62 219 0.68 2.38 0 0 0
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

49
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

50
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

51
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

52
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

53

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

which you would like to elaborate. 

None
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

BefOther 

Injury

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

AftOther 

Injury

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ 

Cost Ratio)

n/a
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

55

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached
2014 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

56

Glossary

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

annual fatality rate).

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

collaborative process. 

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

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

or feature or addresses a highway safety problem. 

HMVMT means hundred million vehicle miles traveled.

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

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

activities.

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

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

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

February 13, 2013. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

roadway features that are correlated with specific severe crash types. 

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

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

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