Page 1 of 46

VERMONT

2021 ANNUAL REPORT

U.S. Department ofTransportation 

Federal Highway Administration 

HIGHWAY SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 

Photo source: Federal Highway Administration
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 46

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 .......................................................................................................................18

Funds Programmed.........................................................................................................................18

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................20

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................25

General Highway Safety Trends......................................................................................................25

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................31

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................34

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................35

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................35

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................36

Project Effectiveness.......................................................................................................................39

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................41

Optional Attachments..........................................................................................................................45

Glossary..............................................................................................................................................46
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 46

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence

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

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

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

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

schedules, lists, or other data.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 46

Executive Summary

During the state fiscal year (July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021), VTrans worked on the development of 12 projects 

and on the construction of 14 projects to remediate hot spot and corridor locations. VTrans further continued to 

work with local municipalities on systemic safety to address lane departure crashes at horizontal curves and 

installed signs in ten towns.

For the state fiscal year, the total amount of funding that was obligated during the reporting period was 

$17,630,733. Of this amount, $13,089,681 was obligated from HSIP Section 148 and $4,541,052 was 

obligated from Section 164.

Over the years, the HSIP and other related safety efforts have been efficient at reducing the number of major 

crashes (fatal + serious injury crashes) on Vermont roads. One of the principal measures of success that 

illustrates this is the reduction in the five-year average of major crashes from the 2008-2012 baseline period for 

the current Strategic Highway Safety Plan. This five-year average is now down to 273.2 major crashes for the 

2016-2020 period from 375.6 major crashes for the 2008-2012 period.

The five-year averages of the number of fatalities and serious injuries went down as well when compared to 

the Strategic Highway Safety Plan baseline period. For the same periods, the five-year average of the number 

of fatalities went from 70.0 fatalities to 61.4 while the five-year average of the number of serious injuries went 

from 384.8 to 275.6 serious injuries.

During the reporting period, VTrans has been working with a consultant to review its HSIP structure and 

processes. While no changes have been made during this reporting period, it is expected that changes will be 

implemented during the next reporting period.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 46

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 overall program structure is centralized.

HSIP staff review high crash locations on the federal aid network and identify potential projects. Solutions are 

proposed to mitigate crash patterns and crash types. Crash modification factors and benefits-to-costs ratios 

(B/C ratio) are used to determine the best solutions. A project must have a B/C ratio of greater than 1 to be 

further considered.

A group of senior management review the recommendations for further advancement of the projects to scoping 

or design.

Major HSIP projects are designed by consultants or Agency staff following the normal project development 

process.

Small projects such as signage, markings, beacons and brush cutting are implemented via work orders done 

by the Agency.

Statewide projects related to signs and markings are contracted out yearly.

The Agency incorporates the SafetyEdge and centerline rumble stripes on all paving projects according to 

Agency guidelines. 

Selected projects are evaluated using simple before and after crash data for a period of three-years before and 

three years after construction.

VTrans is currently reviewing its HSIP based on best practices from other states and modifications to the 

overall structure will be made during the next reporting period.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Operations

HSIP staff is located within the Operations and Safety Bureau and is part of the Traffic Operations and Mobility 

team.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 46

High Crash Locations, which are currently used as a basis for the identification of HSIP sites, are generated by 

staff located within the Data Unit of the Operations and Safety Bureau.

The programming of HSIP projects is performed by staff located within the Asset Management Bureau.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Other-Central Office via High Crash Location Reviews

VTrans does not have a competitive HSIP process and the districts at VTrans are maintenance districts and 

are not responsible for designing projects.

Funds are currently distributed to projects by the central office based on a project being a high crash location 

and being related to one of the critical emphasis areas in the SHSP.

A set aside is used for a systemic safety program on local roads.

VTrans is currently in the process of reviewing and developing a new allocation method.

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

Local roads that are part of the Federal Aid System are addressed the same way as state- maintained roads, 

using the approved HSIP ranking methodology for the identification of locations with potential safety problems. 

The local roads that rank within the subset of top locations are reviewed through an engineering study. Low 

cost remedial actions are implemented via a statewide project, while high cost solutions are implemented by 

VTrans through the regular design process.

VTrans operates a Systemic Local Road Safety Program (SLRS) to enhance highway safety on local roads by 

implementing signage, beacon and marking improvements. The SLRS program addresses rural and or urban 

roads that are locally maintained by a municipality and focuses on risk factors rather than primarily on crash 

history to identify sites for improvements. Based on the analysis of crash data and contributing factors such as 

road alignment and intersection control, VTrans has determined that the focus of the SLRS program for this 

year should be on paved rural roads at curves with radii of less than 750 feet since these have the greatest risk 

for single motor vehicle crashes and since single motor vehicle crashes represent a large proportion of fatal 

and serious injury crashes.

Approximately $800,000 of HSIP funds are used for the SLRS program.

Upon the request of a municipality, VTrans will perform a road safety audit of any local road to assist the 

municipality with local safety concerns. A multidisciplinary team is put together, a site visit is performed and a 

report outlying suggestions is provided to the municipality. The municipality is responsible for implementing the 

suggestions at its discretions.

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

• Design

• Districts/Regions

• Governors Highway Safety Office

• Local Aid Programs Office/Division
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 46

• Maintenance

• Operations

• Planning

• Traffic Engineering/Safety

• Other-Programming

In Vermont, the Governor’s Highway Safety Office is called the State Highway Safety Office and is part of 

VTrans.

Describe coordination with internal partners.

Depending on the characteristics of the site to be reviewed, Design, Operations and Maintenance staff as well 

as the State Highway Safety Office Enforcement Liaison are asked to take part to the visit of the site and to

formulate some recommendations. Key individuals are contacted several weeks in advance, usually by email, 

by the lead investigator. For each site, along with a request to attend an on-site meeting, the lead investigator 

also sends relevant background information such as crash information and a general description of the 

problem.

Once countermeasures are identified through the general HSIP planning process, major design projects are 

discussed by a committee of senior management. The projects that are selected by the committee are then 

programmed by the Asset Management Bureau .

Pavement markings and sign projects are designed by VTrans Traffic Design Section or their consultants. The 

coordination of projects with other units happens during the review of the projects.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

• Law Enforcement Agency

• Local Government Agency 

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

Describe coordination with external partners.

As with internal partners, external partners are involved during the conduct of road safety audits and safety 

reviews. They are asked to take part to the visits of the sites and to formulate some recommendations. Key 

individuals are contacted several weeks in advance, usually by email, by the lead investigator. For each site, 

along with a request to attend an on-site meeting, the lead investigator also sends relevant background 

information such as crash information and a general description of the problem.

Describe HSIP program administration practices that have changed since the last 

reporting period.

During the reporting period, VTrans has been working with a consultant to update the SHSP and to perform an 

evaluation of the HSIP. While there have been no changes in current practices during this reporting period, it is 

anticipated that new practices will be implemented during the next reporting period.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 46

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

elaborate. 

There has been a continued challenge in the deployment of HSIP countermeasure projects identified through 

the HSIP planning process in that they follow the same design process as every other road and bridge projects 

and that there is no priority put on HSIP projects compared to other projects. While it is to be understood that 

the complexity of a project can affect the length of time it takes to complete the project, the current practice 

naturally leads to long implementation periods in some cases.

HSIP funds are used to implement projects that come out directly from the HSIP planning process performed 

by the Operations and Safety Bureau. However, HSIP funds are also used by other business units at VTrans 

such as Traffic Design, Roadway Design and Municipal Assistance, to design and construct other safety 

projects in accordance with strategies of the Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

The Assets Management & Programming Bureau at VTrans is responsible for programming projects and 

therefore the Operations and Safety Bureau is not directly responsible for programming safety projects.

The delivery of low-cost projects on local roads, such as the installation of signs, markings and beacons (via 

HRRR or SLRS programs) has been an issue. While, since 2012, VTrans has been developing and contracting 

regional projects to implement these low-cost solutions on town and city owned roads (thus making sure that 

federal procurement procedures are followed), the time lag between the road reviews and the installation of the 

low-cost improvements has been lengthy (two to five years). VTrans has been working on developing an 

alternative contracting process to accelerate the delivery of these low-cost projects using the Indefinite Delivery 

Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) model. VTrans has been using the IDIQ process for a few years now but did not have 

the IDIQ category for sign work. VTrans has worked to set up and advertise an RFP for that scope of work. 

The first solicitation in spring 2020 received no proposals. The solicitation was re-advertised but did not provide 

an adequate number of qualified bidders for the sign category.

During this reporting period, VTrans has been working with a consultant to review its HSIP and assessed best 

practices to remediate the issues mentioned above. It is expected that new processes will be put in place 

during the next reporting period.

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes?

Yes 

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• Horizontal Curve

• HRRR

• Local Safety

• Low-Cost Spot Improvements

• Sign Replacement And Improvement

• Other-Major Project Spot Improvements

The HRRR program refers to the applicability of the High Risk Rural Roads Special Rule under 23 USC 

148(g)(1) and is in effect only if Vermont triggers the Special Rule.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 46

The Local Safety program refers to the general reviews of rural local roads and the construction of low-cost 

measures.

The Horizontal Curves program refers to the systemic review of curves on local rural roads.

Low-Cost Spot Improvements and Major Project Spot Improvements refer to countermeasures implemented at 

high crash locations.

Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology:7/24/2019

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

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

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Other-Surface Type

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Systemic Approach

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?

• Other-In partnership with volunteer towns

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
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 46

Available funding:100

Total Relative Weight:100

The regional planning commissions seek volunteer towns from those where high-risk curves identified through 

a systemic analysis are found. Sites are reviewed and signs are installed.

Program: HRRR

Date of Program Methodology:2/19/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

• Other-FAST Act Special Rules

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Funding set-aside only if special rules apply

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Other-Fatal and all injury 

crashes • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-statewide project for low cost improvements

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

Available funding:100

Total Relative Weight:100
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 46

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology:2/19/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

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 • Volume • Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Other-In partnership with volunteer towns

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

Available funding:100

Total Relative Weight:100

This is VTrans’ former HRRR program prior to the establishment of the HRRR Special Rule. This program is 

being replaced by reviews based on systemic analysis. The program is still active in that there are still projects 

to be constructed.

The reviews were done on local rural roads with high crash frequency in towns selected by the regional 

planning commissions.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 46

Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Date of Program Methodology:10/3/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

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

• Lane miles • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash rate

• Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

• 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?

• Other-Opeation & Safety Bureau Staff based on recommendations from Road Safety Audit 

Team 

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

Available funding:100

Total Relative Weight:100
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 46

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement

Date of Program Methodology:2/9/2015

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Other-Sign replacement needs

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Average Sign Age

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Programed by Asset Management & Performance Bureau

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

Available funding:100

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Other-Major Project Spot Improvements

Date of Program Methodology:2/19/2016

What is the justification for this program? 
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 46

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes • Traffic

• Lane miles • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

• 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

Available funding:1

Incremental B/C:2

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 13.8

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Horizontal curve signs
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 46

VTrans implements the systemic approach for signage on high-risk horizontal curves on town-maintained 

roads (the Systemic Local Roads Safety Program– SLRS). A number of sign projects were constructed during 

the reporting period.

Other improvements are implemented by policy or systematically:

The safety edge and rumble strips are installed on all paving projects as per policy.

Shoulder widening is also considered on paving projects based on physical and cost constraints.

VTrans has sign projects and pavement marking projects that are constructed yearly but systematically , on a 

statewide basis (and not based on the systemic approach).

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

• Stakeholder input

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

No

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

Yes 

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

VTrans has been using the overall safety management process discussed in Part B of the HSM to conduct the 

HSIP. 

VTrans has been using the critical rate method to screen the roadway network when identifying high crash 

locations.

VTrans has been using the methodology shown in Appendix 4a to updates its crash cost estimates.

VTrans has been using crash modification factors for estimating the crash reduction benefits when calculating 

benefits/costs ratios (B/C ratio) for evaluating alternatives.

VTrans uses the predictive equations presented in Part C of the HSM when conducting some site impacts 

analysis. A research project to calibrate the predictive equations for two-lane rural roads found in Chapter 10 of 

the HSM was completed in September 2019 by the UVM Transportation Center.

VTrans will be hiring a consultant during the next reporting period to recommend a process for incorporating 

Safety Performance Functions and the utilization of the Empirical Bayes (EB) method into the safety 

management process.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 46

Describe program methodology practices that have changed since the last reporting 

period.

Program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP since the last reporting period have not changed 

specifically for this reporting period but are expected to change in the next.

Vermont did not meet or make significant progress towards meeting its annual safety performance targets for 

the end of 2019, and as such had to comply with the provisions set forth in 23 U.S.C. 148(i) and develop an 

annual HSIP Implementation Plan for the following fiscal year (FFY22).

While the plan was not due to FHWA until the beginning of the next reporting and is not reflected in the list of 

projects shown in this report, the plan was mostly developed during this reporting period. The planning 

approaches for allocating funds based on crash priorities (critical emphasis areas, urban vs rural, state vs 

local) will carry in future implementations of the HSIP.

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

elaborate.

VTrans currently performs network screening and generates high crash locations using the critical rate method.

Our in-house algorithm is rigid and does not allow for specifying crash types or manner of crashes. As a result, 

our HSIP network screening is based on all crashes and cannot single out fatal and serious injury crashes or 

certain manner of collision, like single vehicle crashes.

The main concern about our HSIP ranking methodology for spot improvements continues to be that it only 

addresses roads or intersections that are Federal Aid System roads or intersections and does not include all 

local roads.

Another ongoing challenge with our current spot improvement methodology is that it tends to identify rural 

locations with very few crashes or urban locations with a large number of crashes at high traffic intersections. 

This results in the identification of sites that do not necessarily have the potential for their safety performance 

to be improved as they either do not display crash patterns in the case of sites with a low number of crashes or 

conditions are such that even if a crash pattern is observed, there are limitations in what additional 

improvements could be implemented.

VTrans has been working towards implementing the use of Safety Performance Functions and the Empirical 

Bayes (EB) method within the HSIP process to better identify hot spot locations. To this end, VTrans 

completed in September 2019, as part of a Traffic Records Committee Grant, the collection of MIRE data for all 

intersections on the Federal Aid System to further support the development of more advanced network 

screening methodologies. VTrans currently has an ongoing parallel project with the regional planning 

commissions for the collection of the FDE’s at intersections on local roads with a two-to-five-year completion 

horizon. Until the last reporting period, VTrans had been working at implementing AASHTOWare with the 

AASHTOWare consultant in creating a SafetyAnalyst data set. However, this effort came to a halt once it was 

learned that SafetyAnalyst would be sunset by 2022. VTrans will be evaluating new ways of implementing the 

use of Safety Performance Functions in the next reporting period with the use of a consultant.

Given that Vermont is a rural state with crashes that tend to be dispersed for specific crash types such as lane 

departure crashes and certain intersection crashes, high risk sites for these crash types are not captured by 

the usual hot spot network screening as they are not clustered. There is a need to supplement the traditional 

networking tools with systemic analyses.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 46

VTrans has performed a systemic analysis of curves on local and state roads in past years as part of FHWA’s 

Every Day Count 5 program. VTrans received TRCC funding for FFY22 and will expend on systemic lane 

departure analyses during the next reporting period.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 46

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State 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) $13,089,681 $13,089,681 100%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$4,541,052 $4,541,052 100%

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 $0 $0 0%

Totals $17,630,733 $17,630,733 100%

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

safety projects?

7%

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

7%

77% of the funding is programmed to state owned and operated projects and 16% of the funding is 

programmed to projects that have both state and local ownerships (i.e., statewide projects that contain some 

roads owned by the state and some roads owned by local municipalities.

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

2%

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

2%
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 46

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.

VTrans currently does not have any difficulty obligating its HSIP funds as there are some significant safety 

projects which will be going to construction.

VTrans has made great progress over the past decade or so on intersection crashes. If intersections eventually 

cease to be a SHSP focus area, VTrans may have some additional challenges in spending HSIP funds.

When flexibility was allowed, VTrans flexed a very small percentage of overall HSIP funding for education and 

outreach efforts.

A consultant has been hired by VTrans to review its HSIP during this reporting period. A preliminary analysis 

shows that Vermont’s crash history (in terms of SHSP emphasis area, area type, functional class, and roadway 

ownership) and HSIP funding decisions have not been in alignment.

VTrans and its consultant will be identifying ways, during the next reporting period, to better apportion HSIP 

funds to target fatal and serious injury crashes and locations where high risks are present.

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

which the State would like to elaborate. 

The consulting firm that has been hired by VTrans to review its HSIP during this reporting period recognized 

that HSIP funds had been used by other VTrans business units (other than by section responsible for the 

HSIP) to develop and implement safety projects and that the tracking of projects that uses HSIP funds had 

been difficult.

VTrans and its consultant are currently developing a process to better select and track projects.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 46

General Listing of Projects

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

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

BARRE TOWN 

STP HES 

0169(8) - 

Construction

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection realignment 0.01 Miles $203430.25 $203430.25 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 5,200 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Geometry

BENNINGTON 

HES 1000(19) - 

Development

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - other 0.3 Miles $-67728.22 $-67728.22 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Collector 0 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Infrastructue

s for all Users

BRATTLEBORO 

STP 2000(29) - 

Development

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrians and bicyclists 

– other

1.25 Miles $475203.64 $475203.64 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther0 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Bicycle or 

Pedestrian 

Improvement

BRIDPORTMIDDLEBURY 

HES RMBL(5) - 

Construction

Roadway Rumble strips – center 7.354 Miles $98905 $98905 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Major Collector 0 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Improve 

Driver 

Compliance

BURLINGTON 

HES 5000(18) - 

Construction

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

0.317 Miles $1020000 $1020000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther6,300 25 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Operations

BURLINGTON 

STP 

2035(15)C/1 - 

Construction

Railroad grade 

crossings

Railroad grade crossings - 

other

1 Locations $381604.5 $381604.5 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Local Road or 

Street

0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Infrastructue

s for all Users

CHARLOTTE 

NHG SGNL(49) - 

Complete

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal – 

modernization/replacemen

t

0.055 Miles $-22494.67 $-22494.67 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Operations

ESSEX STP 

5400(7) - 

Complete

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal – 

modernization/replacemen

t

0.25 Miles $-16192.9 $-16192.9 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 0 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Operations

FAIR HAVENRUTLAND 

TOWN NHG 

SIGN(70) - 

Construction

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

37.658 Miles $150000 $150000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systematic Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

HARTFORD 

HES 0113(77) - 

Complete

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

2.15 Miles $-24277.05 $-24277.05 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Infrastructue

s for all Users

HARTFORD 

NHG SGNL(60) - 

Development

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal – 

modernization/replacemen

t

3 Locations $50000 $50000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Infrastructue

s for all Users
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 46

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

HINESBURG 

HES 021-1(19) - 

Construction

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify auxiliary lanes 0.403 Miles $3296157.2

5

$3296157.2

5

Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Minor Arterial 8,600 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Geometry

MORRISTOWN 

STP HES 030-

2(28) - Complete

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection realignment 0.01 Miles $-85636.4 $-85636.4 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 7,200 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Geometry

NORWICH 

STPG SGNL(57) 

- Development

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal – 

modernization/replacemen

t

3 Locations $90000 $90000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Major Collector 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Operations

PLAINFIELD NH 

028-3(41) - 

Development

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

0.11 Miles $250000 $250000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 30 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Operations

RUTLAND 

TOWN NHG 

SGNL(59) - 

Development

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal – 

modernization/replacemen

t

1 Locations $25000 $25000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther25,29

1

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Operations

SHELBURNESOUTH 

BURLINGTON 

NHG 

SGNL(51)C/1 - 

Construction

Intersection 

traffic control

Systemic improvements – 

signal-controlled

2.962 Miles $2260000 $2260000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther0 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersection

s

Improve 

Operations

SHELBURNESOUTH 

BURLINGTON 

NHG 

SGNL(51)C/2 - 

Construction

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal – 

modernization/replacemen

t

1.212 Miles $762102 $762102 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Infrastructue

s for all Users

SOUTH 

BURLINGTONCOLCHESTER 

IM 089-3(79) - 

Complete

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Congestion detection / 

traffic monitoring system

5.6 Miles $-34656.56 $-34656.56 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate32,60

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Data Speed 

Management 

with ITS and 

Infrastructure

SOUTH HERO 

STP HES 028-

1(22) - 

Development

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify auxiliary lanes 0.01 Miles $300600 $300600 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 7,922 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Geometry

SPRINGFIELD 

STP 016-2(23) - 

Complete

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

0.32 Miles $24831.01 $24831.01 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Operations

ST. ALBANS 

TOWN STPG 

SGNL(61) - 

Development

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal – 

modernization/replacemen

t

2 Locations $25000 $25000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Infrastructue

s for all Users
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 46

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

STATEWIDE - 

NORTHEAST 

REGION STPG 

MARK(314) - 

Construction

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1630.722 Miles $2000000 $2000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 State & Town Systematic Lane 

Departure

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE - 

NORTHEAST 

REGION STPG 

SIGN(66) - 

Complete

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

43.435 Miles $-4204.15 $-4204.15 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systematic Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE - 

NORTHWEST 

REGION STPG 

MARK(307) - 

Complete

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1 Locations $-43607.02 $-43607.02 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State & Town Systematic Lane 

Departure

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE - 

NORTHWEST 

REGION STPG 

MARK(311) - 

Complete

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1 Locations $6618.65 $6618.65 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State & Town Systematic Lane 

Departure

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE - 

NORTHWEST 

REGION STPG 

MARK(315) - 

Construction

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1581.322 Miles $1500000 $1500000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 0 State & Town Systematic Lane 

Departure

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE - 

NORTHWEST 

REGION STPG 

SIGN(65) - 

Complete

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

46.304 Miles $-51745.92 $-51745.92 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systematic Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE - 

NORTHWEST 

STPG SIGN(63) 

- Complete

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

52.918 Miles $-48255.9 $-48255.9 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systematic Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE - 

SOUTH 

REGION STPG 

MARK(316) - 

Construction

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1447.313 Miles $1500000 $1500000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State & Town Systematic Lane 

Departure

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE - 

SOUTH 

REGION STPG 

MARK(316) - 

Construction

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1447.313 Miles $152281.25 $152281.25 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State & Town Systematic Lane 

Departure

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 46

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

STATEWIDE - 

SOUTHEAST 

REGION STPG 

SIGN(67) - 

Closing

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

40.155 Miles $-17630.97 $-17630.97 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systematic Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE - 

SOUTHWEST 

STPG SIGN(64) 

- Complete

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

31.121 Miles $27179.07 $27179.07 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systematic Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE 

HES HRRR(25) - 

Development

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related warning 

signs and flashers

95 Miles $3830.26 $3830.26 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Local Road or 

Street

0 45 Town or 

Township 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE 

HES HSIP(7) - 

Complete

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

42.023 Miles $-2280.43 $-2280.43 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE 

HES SHSP(19) - 

Planned

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - other 1 SHSP/HSI

P 

Evaluation 

Program

$93774.6 $93774.6 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

N/A Data Improve Data 

Quality

STATEWIDE 

HWCR(330) - 

Planned

Miscellaneous Data collection 1 Crash 

Program

$272400 $272400 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

N/A Data Improve Data 

Quality

STATEWIDE 

IMG MARK(117) 

- Construction

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

339.098 Miles $729301.3 $729301.3 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systematic Lane 

Departure

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE 

STP 2030(13) - 

Development

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

1 Locations $61344.13 $61344.13 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Multiple/Varie

s

Multiple/Varies 0 State & Town Systematic Intersection

s

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE 

STP HRRR(24) - 

Development

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

1 Locations $15314.45 $15314.45 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Local Road or 

Street

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWIDE 

STP HRRR(24) - 

Development

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

1 Locations $59685.55 $59685.55 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Local Road or 

Street

0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STOWE STPG 

SGNL(52) - 

Development

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify auxiliary lanes 1 Locations $135000 $135000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 0 30 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersection

s

Improve 

Geometry

WALLINGFORD

-RUTLAND NHG 

SIGN(68) - 

Construction

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs (including 

post) - new or updated

20.834 Miles $1479880 $1479880 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

23,30

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systematic Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 46

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTIO

N

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

WILLISTON STP 

5500(17) - 

Development

Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

0.706 Miles $600000 $600000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 31,28

4

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane 

Departure

Improve 

Geometry

All of the projects listed were obligated between 7/1/20 and 6/30/21. The list does not include projects that were obligated prior to that period.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 46

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 77 69 44 57 62 69 68 47 61

Serious Injuries 311 312 288 297 320 255 257 260 236

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.070 0.970 0.623 0.780 0.842 0.929 0.926 0.640 1.018

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

4.322 4.384 4.080 4.062 4.345 3.435 3.499 3.540 3.940

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

10 5 5 9 6 8 6 3 8

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

40 38 25 36 37 29 31 33 21
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 46

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 46

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 46

Describe fatality data source.

FARS

Past years for which the sate motor vehicle crash database were used have been changed to FARS numbers.

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

ownership.

Year 2020

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

6.2 20

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

6.6 23.4

Rural Minor Arterial 13.4 49.8

Rural Minor Collector 1.6 9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 46

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 Major Collector 14.2 55.2

Rural Local Road or 

Street

10.2 35.2

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

0.4 6.2

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0.4 0.8

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

4.6 24.2

Urban Minor Arterial 1.4 13.4

Urban Minor Collector

Urban Major Collector 1.8 15.6

Urban Local Road or 

Street

0.6 6.2
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 46

Year 2020

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

41 159

County Highway 

Agency

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

14.8 60.6

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

5.8 35.6

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

Indian Tribe Nation

Provide additional discussion related to general highway safety trends.

A group public and private entities under the organization of the Vermont Highway Safety Alliance (VHSA) 

continues to collaborate towards safety efforts in Vermont.

Another uncommon aspect of safety implementation in Vermont is that VTrans not only manages the Highway 

Safety Improvement Program but it also operates the State Highway Safety Office. This has facilitated the 

coordination and implementation of behavioral countermeasures targeted at the Critical Emphasis Areas listed 

in the SHSP.

Over the years, leaving the road and crashes taking place at intersections have been the two crash types that 

have typically accounted for a large proportion of major crashes (fatal plus serious injury crashes) and those 
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 46

that are more readily addressed by the HSIP or other systematic efforts. For several years, VTrans has been 

implementing statewide policies related to the inclusion of centerline rumble stripes and the SafetyEdge on all 

paving projects. The most recent Highway Safety Plan prepared by the State Highway Safety Office includes 

projects that are targeted at driver behaviors that lead to the occurrence of leaving the roadway including 

reducing impaired driving, reducing speeding and reducing distracted driving.

While many states have seen the number of fatalities increase significantly during the pandemic, the number of 

fatalities in Vermont has remained within the usual range during that period. On-the-other-hand, Vermont has 

seen a significant decrease in the number of vehicle miles travelled during the pandemic, in the order of 18%. 

Furthermore, law enforcement presence on Vermont’s highways has been scaled back during the pandemic in 

an effort to limit the transmitting of the corona virus which may have contributed to higher travel speeds during 

that period.

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2022 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:58.0

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

While the coordinating committee realized that the actual value for this target had plateaued over the years, the 

committee favored the idea of the 2022 safety target for fatal crashes not to be higher than the one from the 

previous year (the 2021 target was 58). With this in mind, the committee decided to keep the 2022 target the 

same as for 2021.

A 2022 target of 58 provides a decrease of 5.5% from the five-year average of 61.4 in 2016–2020 and 

supports the goal of the SHSP by providing a reduction in the five-year average above 4.0% over two years.

Number of Serious Injuries:260.0

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

Serious injuries have been trending down over the last several years. The Excel trendline proposes that the 

five-year average will be around 270 serious injuries in 2022. A value below this trendline was selected in order 

to achieve progress towards the SHSP goal.

The proposed target suggests a decrease of 2.1% from the five-year average of 265.6 in 2016-2020 to a fiveyear average of 260 by the end of calendar year 2022.

This proposed target is downwards and supports the overall reduction intent of the SHSP.

Fatality Rate:0.820

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

This measure is highly dependent on the number of vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Vermont's 2021 target for 

the fatality rate five-year average was 0.82. This number is slightly higher than what is estimated (0.80) for a 

2% SHSP yearly reduction with 2020 normal conditions and is also lower than what could be obtained for a 2% 
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 46

SHSP yearly reduction under existing conditions with the lower VMT due to pandemic restrictions (0.84). 

Vermont is still seeing a 15-18% reduction in traffic volumes as compared to 2019, and VTrans does not 

expect the VMT to get back to the usual 7.5 billion range in the near future. However, the coordinating 

committee decided to retain the same rate as for the 2021 target (0.82).

The proposed target suggests a decrease in the fatality rate per 100 million VMT of 5.8% from the five-year 

average of 0.871 in 2016-2020 to a five-year average of 0.820 by the end of calendar year 2022 and supports 

the goal of the SHSP by providing a reduction in the five-year average above 4.0% over two years.

Serious Injury Rate:3.700

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

A value of 3.65 was established for the 2021 target for the suspected serious injury rate five-year average. The 

actual 2020 value was 3.75. A 2020 value would have been around 3.60 to 3.68 with more realistic VMTs and 

maybe a slightly higher number of injuries. More normal conditions for 2020 suggest that an even lower value 

of near 3.5 would be needed to keep up with the SHSP. However, the coordinating committee felt that keeping 

this target near the 2021 value (3.65) would be preferable. This is another target that is dependent on the VMT 

and as mentioned previously, VTrans does not expect VMT to go back to pre-pandemic levels in the near 

future.

The proposed target suggests a decrease of 1.4% from the five-year average of 3.752 in 2016-2020 to a fiveyear average of 3.7 by the end of calendar year 2022.

This proposed target is downwards and supports the overall reduction intent of the SHSP.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:35.0

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

The 2021 target for the number of non-motorized fatalities and non-motorized suspected serious injuries fiveyear average was 36. This value is about what is expected to happen from the Excel trend line for 2022. This 

value is slightly higher than what VTrans calculated as a target that supports the SHSP (34.8). To align with 

the SHSP, the coordinating committee decided to use a 5-year average of 35.

The proposed target suggests a decrease in the five-year average of 3.3% from the five-year average of 36.2 

in 2016-2020 to a five-year average of 35 by the end of calendar year 2022.

This proposed target is downwards and supports the overall reduction goal of the SHSP.

VTrans has attempted to align the 2020 safety performance targets with the overall five-year goal of the SHSP 

rather than by trend lines. VTrans believes that this approach is more useful for making decisions towards 

investments.

VTrans endeavored to determine what the safety targets should be in order to make progress towards a 10% 

SHSP overall reduction in the of fatal and serious injury crashes five-year average over five years (assuming 

that the 10% goal from the previous SHSP will be continued in the next SHSP update). The year 2022 will be 

the first year of VTrans’ updated SHSP. To keep it simple, VTrans assumed a 2% reduction per year. The 10% 

reduction should be from the 2021 averages, but because these are unknown for now, VTrans assumed a 4% 

reduction from the 2020 actual values.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 46

VTrans used Excel trend lines and generated predictions with ARIMA models for the year 2022 for all five fiveyear average safety targets as reference points.

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

safety performance targets. 

In Vermont, the “State Highway Safety Office” is part of the Vermont Agency of Transportation. The “State 

Highway Safety Office” and the unit that is responsible for the HSIP reporting are both under the Operations & 

Safety Bureau.

The three safety performance measures that are common to both the NHTSA’s Highway Safety Plan and 

FHWA’s Highway Safety Improvement Program (Number of fatalities, Fatality rate, Number of serious injuries) 

were developed initially by the Data Unit of the Operations & Safety Bureau using trend lines. The resulting 

measures were then reviewed between HSP and HSIP staff for appropriateness.

The other two measures (Serious injury rate and Pedestrian & Bicycle Fatalities and Serious Injuries) are 

required only for FHWA’s Highway Safety Improvement Program. These two measures were also originally 

determined by the Data Unit and further reviewed by HSIP staff for appropriateness.

A coordination meeting was held with the Chittenden County MPO, the “State Highway Safety Office”, the Data 

and HSIP Units of the Operations and Safety Bureau as well with the Planning and Policy Bureau to discuss 

the draft targets and finalize the five measures.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Vermont does not wish to establish separate targets for the urbanized areas.

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2020 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 58.0 61.4

Number of Serious Injuries 275.0 265.6

Fatality Rate 0.820 0.871

Serious Injury Rate 3.700 3.752

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

36.0 36.4

Vermont determined to have made no significant progress towards meeting its 2020 targets as only three out 

of the five safety performance targets were met or were equal or better than the 2018 baseline performances.

• Vermont did not meet the 2020 target for the number of fatalities. The actual 5-year average 

performance for 2016-2020 (61.4) was higher than the established target for 2020 (58) and it was also 

not better than the 2014-2018 baseline (60.0).
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 46

The number of fatalities in 2016 was 47. Fatalities in Vermont have been in the 60s in recent years. The 

number of fatalities in 2016 was much lower than usual and contributed to a lower trend line and lower goal 

setting.

• Vermont did not meet the 2020 fatality rate target. The actual performance for 2016-2020 (0.871) was 

higher than the established target for 2020 (0.820). Similarly, it was also not better than the 2014-2018 

baseline (0.820).

The number of vehicle miles traveled during 2020 were approximately 18% lower due to the pandemic while 

the number of fatalities in 2020 did not change significantly as it remained in the typical range.

• Vermont met the number of serious injuries target. The actual performance for 2016-2020 (265.6) was 

lower than the established target for 2020 (275). The actual performance (265.6) was also better than 

the 2014-2018 baseline (283.4).

• Vermont made progress towards achieving the rate of serious injuries target. While the actual 

performance for 2016-2020 (3.752) was higher than the established target for 2020 (3.700), the actual 

performance (3.752) was better than the 2014-2018 baseline (3.884). 

As noted previously, the number of vehicle miles traveled during 2020 were approximately 18% lower due to 

the pandemic and this contributed to an unusual higher rate in 2020.

• Vermont made progress towards achieving the number of non-motorized fatalities and non-motorized 

serious injuries target. While the actual performance for 2016-2020 (36.4) was higher than the 

established target for 2020 (36.0), the actual performance (36.0) was better than the 2014-2018 

baseline (38.2). 

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

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

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

7 11 11 13 13 11 11

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

27 18 31 31 26 30 25
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 46

Evaluation 

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

• Change in fatalities and serious injuries

• Other-Change in fatal and serious injury crashes

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

the State's program level evaluations.

The overall effectiveness of the HSIP is measured by changes in the number of fatalities and serious injuries 

as well as by changes in the number of fatal and serious injury crashes (referred to as major crashes in the 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan).

Over the years, the HSIP and other related safety efforts have been efficient at reducing the number of major 

crashes on Vermont roads

Fatal and Injury Crashes (Major Crashes):

While the trend in the five-year average of the number of fatal crashes has mainly plateaued from the 2012-

2016 period to the 2016-2020 period to around 57.0 fatal crashes, the five-year average of the number of 

serious injury crashes has been going down, passing from 253.6 serious injury crashes to 216.0.

Overall, the trend in the five-year average of the number of major crashes has been downward from 310.4 

major crashes to 273.2 major crashes.

Fatalities and Serious Injuries:

The five-year average of the number of fatalities went down when comparing the same two periods, passing 

from 62.0 to 61.4 fatalities. Similarly comparing the same two period, the five-year average of the number of 

serious injuries went down from 305.6 to 265.6 serious injuries.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program?

• # RSAs completed

• Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

Describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting 

period.

While there have been no significant programmatic changes during this reporting period, VTrans has been 

evaluating its overall HSIP with the help of a consultant during this reporting period and it is expected that 

programmatic changes will be implemented in the next reporting period.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 46

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2020

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)

Lane Departure All 37.6 133.8 0.54 1.9

Intersections All 12.4 55.4 0.18 0.78

Pedestrians All 6 23.6 0.09 0.34

Bicyclists All 0.4 7.4 0.01 0.1

Older Drivers All 11.2 30.6 0.16 0.43

Motorcyclists All 8 31.2 0.12 0.44

Work Zones All 0.8 1.6 0.01 0.02
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 46

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Lane

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcyclists Work Zones

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Lane

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older DriversMotorcyclists Work Zones

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 46

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Lane

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcyclists Work Zones

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Lane

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcyclists Work Zones

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 46

Project Effectiveness

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

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

LYNDON 

STPG 

SGNL(48) US 

5 @ RED 

VILLAGE 

ROAD, 

LYNDON

Rural Major 

Collector

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – new traffic 

signal

7.00 11.00 2.00 9.00 11.00 0.64

RUTLAND 

TOWN NHG 

019-3(60) US7 

& GREEN 

MOUNTAIN 

PLAZA & 

SEWARD 

ROAD, 

RUTLAND 

TOWN 

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) 

- Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal – 

modernization/replacement

16.00 23.00 4.00 3.00 20.00 26.00 -0.15

MORRISTOWN 

STPG 

SGNL(47) 

ALTERNATE 

VT ROUTE 

100/VT ROUTE 

100/BISHOP 

MARSHALL 

DRIVE + 

ALTERNATE 

VT ROUTE 

100/BRIDGE 

STREET

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – new traffic 

signal

9.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 12.00 5.00 0.51

Three years of before and three years of after crash data are displayed in the table. The projects shown were constructed between 2016 and 2017.

Describe any other aspects of HSIP effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate.

Of the seven emphasis areas identified in the SHSP, lane departure crashes and intersection crashes are the two areas that specifically relate to engineering and the HSIP.

The 2017-2021 SHSP has target reductions for intersection and lane departure major crashes that have been set at 10% of 2012 thresholds. This represents a five-year target of 72 major crashes for intersection crashes and a five-year 

average target of 186 major crashes for lane departure crashes.

The latest five-year average (2016-2020) for lane departure and intersection crashes indicates that progress has been made beyond these goals.

The latest five-year average (2016-2020) for lane departure crashes is 160.4 major crashes and is below the SHSP target of 186 major crashes.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 46

Similarly, the latest five-year average (2016-2020) for intersection crashes is 57.0 major crashes and is also below the SHSP target of 72 major crashes at intersections.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 46

Compliance Assessment

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

 04/26/2017

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2017 To: 2021

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

 2022

VTrans has initiated the process of updating the SHSP. The aim is to have a final draft by December 2021.

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]

33 33

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]

50 50

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100 100 100
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 46

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]

44 44

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

89 89 100 44

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 100 96

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]

71 70

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

50 50

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

83 83

AADT Year (80) [82] 83 83

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

100 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

100 100
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 46

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]

20 20

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

20 20

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

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): 89.78 89.78 85.88 85.75 76.36 76.36 100.00 93.33 100.00 100.00

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

The FHWA Office of Safety performed, in the first half of 2021, a comprehensive assessment of VTrans’ data compared to the MIRE data elements. In providing the updated current percent completed of MIRE fundamental data elements, 

VTrans leveraged the MIRE scorecard from FHWA. Consequently, some of the percentages have gone down compared to the 2020 status update as a result of the scorecard and VTrans’ initial assessments, as VTrans was not 

interpreting the level of completeness the same as FHWA.

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.

Over the course of the last several years, VTrans has been working to modify databases to support the MIRE data elements, creating new data, and working with a focus on building out the fundamental data elements (FDEs). Much data 

for the FDEs exist to support the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) or other systems within VTrans, but there were some elements that were identified at the beginning of the process that did not exist. There has been 

significant progress toward meeting the MIRE FDE requirements, but there is still work to be done.

In 2021, the FHWA Office of Safety performed an assessment for the VTrans MIRE data and provided a scorecard. Based on this, VTrans is between 84% and 100% complete on having the coverage and format necessary to meet the 

MIRE FDE requirements. This assessment identified several areas where attributes at VTrans do not meet the required criteria and there will need to be revisions to the VTrans process for maintaining and reporting these fields. There 

were also gaps identified in data that need to be filled and some alterations to how data is currently being classified. 
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 46

One area of success for MIRE is the development of the intersection data, coordination with a vendor early in the process to build out data for the federal aid highways, working with the Regional Planning Commissions (RPCs) to build out 

local road data, and the integration of processes to pull data from other sources to map to the data elements in the intersection point (nodes) and approach (node legs) data layers. There are still some gaps in this dataset, but there has 

been a significant amount of work done to date and processes that are in place to allow for the remainder of FDEs to be defined.

Tasks needed to comply with the 2026 deadline include:

• Review of the areas for improvement identified in the FHWA MIRE Assessment. 

• Build out some data elements to match MIRE requirements, such as non-NHS highways to have full coverage of the ARNOLD data.

• Incorporate more detailed pavement classification to match MIRE schema 

• Perform a rigorous assessment of what exists, identify gaps, and develop a data acquisition plan.

• Continue to develop validation tools and processes to ensure the highest quality of data.

• Expand the technology and methodologies for collecting the MIRE FDEs. 

• Develop extract, transform and load (ETL) processes to reformat existing enterprise data to the MIRE data element schema.

• Determine a process for data exchange with other agencies that will collect data.

• Estimating the costs, levels of staffing, or resource requirements to collect the MIRE FDEs.

• Identifying funding for the collection, storage, and maintenance of the MIRE FDE data.

• Making the data accessible through the on-line geodata portal through web services.
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 46

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

Vermont HSIP Manual February 19 2016.pdf

Vermont HSIP Low Cost Program October 2016.pdf

Systemic Local Road Safety Program.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Vermont Status Progress Towards Meeting its Safety Targets.pdf

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2021 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 46

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.