Kansas

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2016 Annual Report

Prepared by: KS
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 ............................................................................................................................................ 1

Program Structure................................................................................................................................... 1

Program Administration ...................................................................................................................... 1

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

Progress in Implementing Projects......................................................................................................... 11

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

General Listing of Projects ............................................................................................................. 14

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets................................................................................. 25

Overview of General Safety Trends.................................................................................................... 25

Application of Special Rules............................................................................................................... 40

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation)......................................... 42

SHSP Emphasis Areas......................................................................................................................... 44

Groups of similar project types.......................................................................................................... 48

Systemic Treatments......................................................................................................................... 51

Project Evaluation ................................................................................................................................. 54

Glossary ................................................................................................................................................ 56
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

Executive Summary

In Kansas we continue to spend our HSIP dollars in a variety of independently managed sub-programs, 

including intersections, signing, pavement markings, lighting, rail, HRRR, and general safety 

improvements. The rail program is reported with the RHGCP report. This is the fourth year HRRR is 

reported with the HSIP report. We are working with our sub-program managers to develop program 

manuals specific to each sub-program in a manner consistent with the requirements of this report and 

related strategies in our Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

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

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

Our HSIP program is made up of seven sub-programs: lighting, pavement marking, signing, rail, 

intersections, HRRR, and general safety improvements. Lighting, pavement marking, signing, and general 

safety improvement projects are exclusive to the State Highway System, although projects may impact 

intersecting non-state roads. Intersections and rail projects may include local roads, that is, public roads 
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

not a part of the State Highway System. HRRR is exclusive to local roads. The rail program is addressed in

the Rail-Highway Grade Crossing Program report.

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

Design

Planning

Maintenance

Operations

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

Lighting sub-program: Projects are selected with input from the structural engineer in our State Bridge 

Office responsible for foundations for lighting, as well as field information from our Area Offices, and 

road safety audits performed by our Traffic Engineering Section.

Signing sub-program: This blanket replacement program was programmed to cover the entire state 

highway system in ten years. Our Area Offices complete a sign inventory for each project. Projects that 

are primarily on conventional roads the Area Offices typically install the new signs and posts. Projects 

that are on urban expressways and freeways are typically contractor let. Area Offices then administer 

the construction engineering duties.

Pavement Marking sub-program: Our pavement marking technician works closely with our district 

maintenance engineers to identify recommended routes. Works also with Traffic Engineering Section to 

identify locations in need of improved markings for safety.

Intersections sub-program: Projects are identified through solicitation to cities and their 

recommendations. Additionally, projects may be identified through studies such as Traffic Engineering 

Assistance Program reports (TEAP) and road safety audits. When the intersection is located on the State 

Highway System, our District and Area Offices are made part of the discussion as well. Once locations 

are identified a competitive process for funding begins. 

HRRR sub-program: District Offices provide construction oversight.

General Safety Improvements sub-program: Projects are selected and scoped in partnership with District 

and Area Offices.

All sub-programs: The Crash Data Unit in our Bureau of Transportation Safety & Technology manage and 

report on crash data as needed.

Identify which external partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Local Government Association

Other-Kansas Association of Counties

Other-Local Roads Emphasis Area Team (SHSP)

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

the last reporting period.

Other-Continuing transition to data-based allocation of funds to each sub-program.

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

would like to elaborate.

A total of $23,575,167 in safety funds (HSIP and Rail) was apportioned for FFY 2016, 

distributed to each sub-program as follows:

Lighting: $266,000 HSIP

Pavement Marking: $2,400,000 HSIP

Signing: $8,000,000 HSIP

Highway-Railway Grade Crossing and Rail: $8,963,254 ($8,963,254 Rail & $0 HSIP)

Intersection Safety: $1,015,735 HSIP

High Risk Rural Roads: $2,930,178 HSIP

General Safety Improvements: $0 HSIP

The following dollars were obligated for SFY 2016 in each program:

Lighting: $672,878.90 HSIP 

Pavement Marking: $1,650,911.26 HSIP 

Signing: $652,858.47 HSIP

Highway-Railway Grade Crossing and Rail: $6,179,260.28 ($2,864,762.59 Rail; 

$3,314,497.69 HSIP)
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

Intersection Safety: $487,200.00 HSIP

High Risk Rural Roads: $3,990,428.53 ($120,659.76 HRRR & $3,869,768.77 HSIP)

General Safety Improvements: $380,655.84 HSIP 

Each of the programs discussed further in this report are consistent with our SHSP. It is our 

intent that strategies identified or developed as part of the SHSP process will contribute to the 

continued success of these programs. A portion of our HSIP funding is programmed as part of 

our RHGCP. See RHGCP report for more information.

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

Intersection Sign Replacement And 

Improvement

Local Safety

Other-Pavement Marking Other-Lighting Other-General Safety 

Improvements

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology: 8/25/2016

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic

Volume

Population

Functional classification

Other-Fatal and SI crashes Lane miles Other-Turn lanes

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

Crash rate

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

No

If no, describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

State: consider only pattern and crash rate; The method for local road projects is more time-consuming 

to validate counter-measures, including information such as EPDO, CMFs and BC.

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

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 3

Available funding 4

EPDO and crash rate 1

Project viability 2

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2006

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

Other-Sign inventory

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Other-Pre-programmed blanket replacement program

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Projects were pre-programmed based on a blanket replacement program.

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

Per established cyclical program 1
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 2/11/2011

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic

Volume

Population

Horizontal curvature

Lane miles Functional classification

Roadside features

Other-Shoulder width, sign 

sheeting type, percent in district, 

past projects, cost, road safety 

audit, county priority

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Crash rate

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

Yes

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

No

If no, describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

This program applies only to local roads (non-state owned and operated.)

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other-Scoring rubric

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding 2

Scoring rubric 1
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

Geographical distribution 3

Program: Other-Pavement Marking

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2006

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Volume

Population

Other-If we considered only 

traffic volumes, only high volume 

districts (1 and 5) would get 

funded, thus population is taken 

into account. At the district level, 

we then consider higher volume 

routes first and take into account 

retro-readings.

Other-Retro-reflectivity. 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Pavement Marking Specialist works closely with district maintenance engineers to select projects.

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding 1

Program: Other-Lighting

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2006
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

Volume Other-Road type: Interchanges

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Other-Locations are brought to our attention

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Lighting Unit

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding 1

Program: Other-General Safety Improvements

Date of Program Methodology: 2/10/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Volume

Population

Median width

Horizontal curvature

Lane miles Functional classification

Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Crash rate

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

selection committee
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding 2

Cost Effectiveness 1

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

21%

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

improvements?

Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or 

Delineation

Install/Improve Lighting

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Other-Highway Safety Manual and CMF Clearinghouse

Other-Crash data analysis to identify systematic countermeasures

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

last reporting period.

Other-None
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

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

would like to elaborate. 

Intersections sub-program:

Kansas chooses to devote a portion of its HSIP funding to intersection projects, as Intersections have 

been identified as one of the emphasis areas in our Strategic Highway Safety Plan. Recently, the majority 

of funds have been spent in the metro areas. Metropolitan and Urban jurisdictions are requested to 

submit three years of crash data for up to four high-crash locations on any system where the major street 

is not classified as a local street or rural minor collector within their areas. High-crash locations are 

determined and ranked by descending equivalent-property-damage-only (EPDO) accident rate. The top 

ranking projects are considered for funding. To determine if a location is a high-frequency location on 

Rural State Highways, a comparison is made between the actual crash rate and the statewide average 

rate for similar highways. KDOT conducts county-wide road safety audits. From these audits, city 

submittals and from traffic studies, high-crash locations are established. High-crash locations are ranked 

in descending EPDO crash rate order, with further analysis done on the top ten locations. Identified highcrash locations are prioritized on the basis of the average annual net return for each location. The 

average net return is a dollar amount found by subtracting the average annual costs from the average 

annual benefits. First priority is given to the location with the highest average annual net return. 

Remaining projects are selected in descending order until funds are exhausted. Exceptions to this 

practice might be caused by the unavailability of city matching funds, future projects that may encompass 

the selected location, a grouping of proximate locations into one project, or combining several smaller 

projects for a total net return larger than another single project. Projects on County Roads and other 

roadways are selected by local units of government. These projects are subject to approval by the 

Federal Highway Administration and are administered by KDOT.

Lighting sub-program:

Because lighting is beneficial to the safety and operation of the highway system, this set-aside program 

was established in FY 2000. Projects are selected by the Bureau of Transportation Safety & Technology 

(BTS&T) based on the roadway's volume and the potential for night-time crash history. This program is 

limited to projects which are not included under any other KDOT program. Projects are scheduled until 

the available lighting funds are exhausted. This is the 11th year KDOT has used HSIP funds to improve 

lighting.

Pavement Marking sub-program: 

This set-aside program was established in FY 1996 to address pavement marking necessary due to 

pending new federal requirements for minimum retro-reflectivity of pavement markings. Improvements in 

this category utilize high-performance, long-life pavement marking materials. Efforts are also made to 

identify those marking materials with wet-weather retro-reflectivity. This program is limited to projects that 

do not have high-performance markings included under any other KDOT program. Projects are selected 

by the BTS&T based upon a roadway's traffic volumes, past performance of marking material, geometry, 

surface condition, surface type, crash history, and, in the case of new marking materials, the research 

benefit. This is the 11th year KDOT has used HSIP funds to improve pavement markings.

Signing sub-program:

This program was established in 1996 to address necessary sign replacements on the State Highway 

System due to pending (now final) federal requirements for minimum retro-reflectivity of highway signs. 

This program schedules sign replacements based upon highway route-mileage statewide and the total 

mileage of all the routes in each District Sub-Area with multiple Sub-Areas in each District being 

addressed each year. This program excludes signs on any other state project that include sign 

replacement for that highway route in the same year. This program also excludes any signs that were 

replaced within seven years of the scheduled date of the replacement project. This is the ninth year 

KDOT has used HSIP funds to improve permanent signing. The projects in the program are administered 
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

using two separate methods. Sub-Areas comprised primarily of routes classified as freeways and 

expressways with interchanges are let to contract via normal letting procedures. Sub-Areas with routes 

that are classified as expressways and conventional roads are administered by releasing contracts to 

purchase the signs and posts with installation performed by KDOT maintenance crews. However, due to 

KDOT maintenance work force reductions, the program will rely on contractors to install the signs 

regardless of route classification within some Sub-Areas.

HRRR sub-program:

This program focuses on low-cost safety improvements at site-specific locations and systematiic 

improvements to signing, pavement marking, roadsides, and horizontal curves. A scoring rubric is used to 

rank applications. 

General Safety Improvement sub-program:

Every year the FHWA provides funds for DOT’s to make safety improvements to their system through the 

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). As a pilot KDOT developed a program that directed up to 

$6,000,000 of HSIP funds to projects that were selected using a new system that combines quantitative 

safety analysis and prediction (IHSDM) with District input. The goal was to distribute these funds 

throughout the state and address spot locations, like individual curves, intersections, or short tangent 

sections that were identified with tools developed for the Transparency Report. Moreover the hope is that 

the program can help address locations that demonstrate a potential safety issue but have not been 

addressed through traditional KDOT funding programs. This program has not received additional funding 

since the original $6,000,000 was allocated to it. However, projects in the program continue to be let to 

contract which is why the program continues to be included in this report.

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

State Fiscal Year

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

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) $11,149,431.00 100 % $11,149,430.00 99 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) $0.00 0 % $120,660.00 1 %

Totals $11,149,431.00 100% $11,270,090.00 100%
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

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

27 %

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

$7,304,927.00

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

0 %

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

$0.00

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

period?

$0.00

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

period?

$0.00

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

overcome this in the future.

Signing sub-program: The FY16 program experienced delays due to timing of the request for project 

data collection and the availability of field staff to collect the data. Several project lettings have been 

delayed to the next fiscal year and they are the significantly larger signing projects.

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

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

Nothing to note at this time.
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

13
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

General Listing of Projects

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

Projec

t

Improvemen

t Category 

Output HSIP Cost Total Cost Funding 

Category

Functional 

Classificatio

n

AADT Spee

d

Roadway 

Ownershi

p

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strategy

C0060-

01

Alignment 

Vertical 

alignment or 

elevation 

change

0.37 

Miles

500000 880785 HRRRP 

(SAFETEA

-LU)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

825 35 County 

Highway 

Agency

C4593-

01

Alignment 

Vertical 

alignment or 

elevation 

change

0.14 

Miles

311010 350008 HRRRP 

(SAFETEA

-LU)

Rural Major 

Collector

2850 55 County 

Highway 

Agency

C4673-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

75 Miles 150982 150982 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

C4674-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

43 Miles 84920 87307 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

C-

4675-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

44 Miles 149565 149565 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency

C-

4676-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

77 Miles 97368 124600 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency

C-

4677-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

92 Miles 227200.6 2229643.55 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency

C-

4678-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

23.5 

Miles

47116.59 49596.42 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

C-

4679-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

62 Miles 106560.9 95608.48 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency

C-

4680-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

74 Miles 70915.47 85342.02 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency

C-

4681-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

74 Miles 202858.5 214281.68 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

C-

4682-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

51 Miles 96258.28 101383.49 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency

C-

4684-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

49 Miles 83347.71 83894.72 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency

C-

4685-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

97 Miles 117525 118113.21 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency

C-

4686-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

40 Miles 78799.32 83046.27 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

00 County 

Highway 

Agency
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

post) - new 

or updated

C4687-

01

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics -

modify skew 

angle

0.342 

Miles

206783.1

4

22975.9 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

420 60 County 

Highway 

Agency

C4688-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

284 

Miles

64838.65 68361.43 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

C4690-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

252 

Miles

117465.0

2

117602.06 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

C4691-

01

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

0.339 

Miles

214335.3

6

238464.73 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1780 55 County 

Highway 

Agency

C4692-Roadway 

signs and 

0 Miles 41417.13 41417.13 HSIP 

(Section 

Rural Major 

Collector

0 0 County 

Highway 
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

01 traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

148) Agency

KA4016-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

7.309 

Miles

44270 44270 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

465 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4110-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

142.062 

Miles

515563.4

5

523097.28 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4110-

02

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

143.07 

Miles

51500 51500 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4110-

03

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

201.813 

Miles

181854.5

3

184303.13 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

replacement

KA4110-

04

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

129.497 

Miles

76187.9 76912.94 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressways

0 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4111-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

205.015 

Miles

182000 189960.42 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4111-

02

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

34.198 

Miles

286900 287367.94 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Mix of Rural 

Minor 

Arterial and 

Minor 

Collector

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4112-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

50.68 

Miles

84100 84582 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Mix of Rural 

Major and 

Minor 

Collector

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4113-

02

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

88.606 

Miles

52455.27 52455.27 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Mix of Rural 

Principal 

Arterial 

Other, Rural 

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

Minor 

Arterial, 

Major 

Collector 

and Minor 

Collector

KA4113-

03

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

119.136 

Miles

102158.6

9

102158.69 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Mix of Rural 

Principal 

Arterial 

Other, Rural 

Minor 

Arterial, 

Major 

Collector 

and Minor 

Collector

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4114-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

57.729 

Miles

87360 88318.07 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Mix of Rural 

Minor 

Arterial and 

Major 

Collector

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4114-

02

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

115.426 

Miles

167750 167831 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Mix of Rural 

Minor 

Arterial and 

Major 

Collector

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4115-

01

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

60.876 

Miles

37200 37594.32 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Mix of Rural 

Major and 

Minor 

Collector

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

22

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

KA4115-

02

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

94.678 

Miles

50520 50883.09 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Mix of Rural 

Principal 

Arterial 

Other, 

Major 

Collector 

and Minor 

Collector

0 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

KA4174-

01

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

5.804 

Miles

241937.3

6

253403.18 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressways

2250

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Pavemen

t 

Markings

KA4175-

01

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

1.91 

Miles

69890.65 105179.31 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

2150

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Pavemen

t 

Markings

KA4180-

01

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

2.73 

Miles

330968.2

2

289959.33 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressways

8850

0

60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Pavemen

t 

Markings

KA4183-

01

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

18.202 

Miles

809957.5

6

1257369.9

4

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Pavemen

t 

Markings
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

pavement 

markings -

remarking

KA4353-

01

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

22.886 

Miles

650627 537500 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Pavemen

t 

Markings

KA4360-

01

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

11.23 

Miles

175429 177500 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressways

1260

0

70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Pavemen

t 

Markings

KA4366-

01

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

5.4 

Miles

108154 118300 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

1060

0

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Pavemen

t 

Markings

KA4367-

01

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

0.7 

Miles

61608 66700 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

7960 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Pavemen

t 

Markings

KA4212-

01

Lighting Site 

lighting -

interchange

1 

Number

s

412956.2

6

466483.3 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

9600

0

60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersection

s
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

Expressways

KA4187-

01

Lighting Site 

lighting -

interchange

1 

Number

s

330908.6

4

462914.1 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressways

9440

0

60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersection

s

KA4277-

01

Roadway 

Pavement 

surface - high 

friction 

surface

0.5 

Miles

119111 132345 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressways

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

C4855-

16

Miscellaneou

s 

200000 200000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

TEAP 

Studies 

for LPAs
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

25

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* 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Number of fatalities 401 398 392 391 377

Number of serious injuries 1700 1655 1603 1503 1395

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.33 1.31 1.3 1.27 1.2

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5.66 5.43 5.31 4.89 4.44

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

26
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

27
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

28

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

Year - 2015

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

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

21 87 0.58 2.45

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

9 18 0.69 1.46

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

72 158 2.29 5.04

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

46 124 2.04 5.5

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

7 23 2.08 6.83

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

48 152 1.82 5.71

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

56 146 3.13 8.09

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

22 121 0.55 2.98
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

13 57 0.67 2.98

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

25 199 1.74 13.97

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

27 146 0.64 3.42

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0.09

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

9 47 0.41 2.21

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

20 118 0.84 4.97
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

30
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

31
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

32
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

33
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

34

Year - 2015

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

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 202 647 1.12 3.59

OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 175 750 1.31 5.61
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

35
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

36
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

37
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

38
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

39
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

40

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

The goal in our Strategic Highway Safety Plan is to cut in half fatalities and serious injuries between 2009 

and 2029. In 2009 our five-year fatality average was 416, meaning we need to be at 354 by 2015. We are 

at 377. In 2009 our five-year serious injury average was 1763, meaning we need to be at 1499 by 2015. 

We are at 1395. In summary, we are ahead of pace in serious injuries and behind pace in fatalities. Of 

course, the vision in our SHSP is zeros, across the board.

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

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Fatality rate (per capita) 0.15 0.16 0.16

Serious injury rate (per 

capita)

0.31 0.3 0.29

Fatality and serious injury 

rate (per capita)

0.46 0.47 0.45

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

Fatality rate per capita per year equals total number of older drivers and pedestrians (65+) killed based 

on FARS data, divided by the state population figured for Kansas provided in the guidance.

Serious injury rate per capita per year equals total number of older drivers and pedestrians (65+) 

seriously injured based on the state crash database, divided by the state population figured for Kansas 

provided in the guidance.

Fatality and serious injury rate per capita per year equals the fatality rate plus the serious injury rate.

The rates per capita per year are then averaged over five years. For example, the 5-yr average for 2012 

equals the average of the five years 2008 thru 2012.

The metrics for measuring the older driver population changed with the May 2016 guidance. Data was 

not available for years prior to 2008. As such, annual performance measure data is not available for 

2006 or 2007 and five-year performance measure data is not available for 2010 or 2011.
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

41

Here is the data we used:

Year Fatals Disabled Total

State 

Population 

Figure

2006 74 105 179

2007 47 120 167

2008 47 109 156 367

2009 50 108 158 367

2010 65 129 194 379

2011 55 120 175 382

2012 68 113 181 394

2013 70 119 189 406

2014 63 84 147 418

Comparing the five-year average fatality and serious injury rate (per capita) for 2012 and 2014 rounded 

to the nearest tenth gives 0.5 and 0.5. The older driver rule does NOT apply.
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

42

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

43

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

Safety Improvement Program?

None

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

None

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

N/A
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

44

SHSP Emphasis Areas

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

Year - 2015

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

Roadway Departure 231 692 0.73 2.21

Intersections 79 417 0.25 1.33

Pedestrians 23 70 0.07 0.22

Bicyclists 5 28 0.02 0.09

Older Drivers 82 209 0.26 0.67

Motorcyclists 45 203 0.14 0.65

Work Zones 6 39 0.02 0.13

Occupant Protection 153 310 0.49 0.99

Teen Drivers 46 239 0.15 0.76

Impaired Driving 142 267 0.45 0.85

Large Commercial 

Vehicles

62 129 0.2 0.41
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

45
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

46
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

47
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

Groups of similar project types
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

49

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

Year - 2015

HSIP Subprogram Types

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Other-Lighting Night-time 161 417
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

50
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

51

Systemic Treatments
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

52

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Systemic 

improvement

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

SKIP We have not yet established performance measures for these programs. See Question 32 for related crash data.
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

53

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

which you would like to elaborate. 

It remains our intent to develop performance measures for each of these HSIP sub-programs in 

preparation for next year's report. This will be in concert with completing new "white papers" for each 

eligible sub-program, and be driven by our SHSP which includes reallocation of HSIP funding as a key 

strategy for the emphasis areas intersections and roadway departure. As an example, three of these 

programs (lighting, pavement marking, and signing) can be measured by wet-weather and/or nighttime 

crashes. Data can be shown to demonstrate a positive trend in each of these areas.
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

Project Evaluation

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

Bef-All 

Injuries

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

Aft-All 

Injuries

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ Cost 

Ratio)

None NA
2016 Kansas Highway Safety Improvement Program

55

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached
2016 Kansas 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. 

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.