Vermont

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2016 Annual Report

Prepared by: VT
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

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

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

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

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

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

Progress in Implementing Projects............................................................................................................... 7

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................... 7

General Listing of Projects.................................................................................................................. 10

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets .................................................................................... 21

Overview of General Safety Trends........................................................................................................ 21

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

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................36

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

Groups of similar project types............................................................................................................... 42

Systemic Treatments............................................................................................................................... 47

Glossary....................................................................................................................................................... 55
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

2. Executive Summary

During the state fiscal year (July 1, 2015 to June 30 2016), VTrans conducted a dozen of road safety 

audits at hot spot locations in collaboration with law enforcement officers around the states. The 

Agency further continued to work with local municipalities and introduced a systemic safety program to 

address local road safety.

For the state fiscal year (July 1, 2015 to June 30 2016), the total amount of funding that was obligated 

during the reporting period was $15,934,797. Of these, $9,499,358 was obligated from HSIP Section 148 

and $6,416,623 was obligated from Section 164.

During the reporting period, 22 projects using safety funds were in a design stage and 18 were 

completed or being constructed.

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

major crashes (fatal + serious injury crashes). One of the principal measures of success that illustrates 

this is the reduction in the five-year average of major crashes which passed from 376 major crashes for 

the 2008-2012 period to 319 for the 2011-2015 period.

In May 2016, a team of FHWA representatives conducted a review of the Vermont HSIP Process. The 

team found that VTrans was in general compliance with HSIP program requirements and had 

implemented many successful practices. The team further identified opportunities that VTrans could 

explore to enhance its current HSIP practice.
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

Introduction

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

achieving a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 

148(h) and 23 CFR 924.15, States are required to report annually on the progress being made to advance 

HSIP implementation and evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent with the HSIP MAP21 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

3. How are Highway Safety Improvement Program funds administered in the State? 

Central

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

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. 

During the reporting period, we expended on what we called our state high risk rural roads program to 

include all urban and rural local roads with traffic volumes of less than 5000 vehicles per day. The new 

program is now called Systemic Local Roads Safety Program (SLRS). 

For this new SLRS program, locations were identified by the regional planning commissions using crash 

risk factors (such as presence of a horizontal curve), crash data, and anecdotal information. For these 

locations, safety corridor reviews were performed to identify signing and marking improvements. These 

low cost treatments will be designed and implemented via a statewide project. The methodology used 

to select the SLRS projects was attached as an uploaded document under the Program Methodology 

Section. 

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 recommendations is provided to the municipality.

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

Design
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

Maintenance

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office

6. Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

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

as well as the Governor’s 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. 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.

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

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Other-Municipalities

Other-Regional Planning Commissions

Other-Law Enforcement

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

the last reporting period.

Other-No change. A draft HSIP manual was developed but not adopted yet

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

would like to elaborate.

There has been for a continued challenge in the deployment of HSIP countermeasure projects in that 

they follow the same design process as every other road and bridge projects at VTrans. The solution may 

be identified quickly, however there is no priority put on an HSIP projects compared to other projects 

and therefore, implementation can take several years as the safety project works through the same 

design process (PE, ROW and construction) as all VTrans projects. In addition, there is a new challenge 

with the programing of projects as VTrans went through a reorganization over the last two years and 

that the Office of Highway Safety is not directly programming safety projects as this function is now 

done by the Assets Management & Programming Bureau.
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

The delivery of low cost projects, such as the installation of signs or the upgrade of signal equipment on 

town highways has been an issue as well. While, since 2012, we have 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 two to four years. In addition, preparing formal 

plans for contacting purposes has also been time consuming. VTrans is working on developing an 

alternative contracting process to accelerate the delivery of these low cost projects. 

Program Methodology

10. Select the programs that are administered under HSIP. 

Low-Cost Spot Improvements Local Safety Other-School Zone Safety

11. Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Date of Program Methodology: 1/28/2005

 

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? 

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

Relative severity index

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?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects 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
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

Ranking based on B/C 2

Available funding 1

11. Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 3/12/2009

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Horizontal curvature

Functional classification

Other-"rural" like roads

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

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?

Yes

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

Available funding 100

11. Program: Other-School Zone Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2014

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

Other-Presence of a School

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Other-Participation in the safe route to school program
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

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?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-All sites are advanced for signs and markings

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

All sites are advanced 1

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

55%

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

improvements?

Install/Improve Signing

Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or 

Delineation

13. What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

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

the last reporting period.

Road Safety audits

Systemic Approach
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

The consulting firm VHB has prepared a DRAFT HSIP Manual for VTrans. This draft manual has not been 

adopted yet. However, we have use the local systemic approach that is described in the draft manual to 

implement our local road safety program this summer (2016).

We also used to a greater extent Road Safety Assessments to perform hot spot reviews. 

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

you would like to elaborate. 

The main challenge concerning our HSIP ranking methodology for spot improvements continues to be 

that it does not address roads that are off the Federal Aid System. The current HSIP ranking 

methodology generates locations based on the high crash locations that are generated by VTrans’ 

Highway Safety Data Section. The data that the Highway Safety Data Section uses as input are only for 

the roads that fall under the Federal Aid highway system. Consequently, only locally maintained roads 

that are on the Federal Aid systems are considered as part of the ranking methodology of the HSIP. 

Given that Vermont is a rural state with crashes that tend to be dispersed, another ongoing challenge 

with our current sport 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.

A consultant reviewed our HSIP ranking process and proposed a new process that will better align with 

the SHSP. While this is still a draft document, part of this process is to use safety performance functions. 

VTrans acquired a license for SafetyAnalyst (which uses safety performance functions). We are currently 

developing a scope of work to create a database to assemble the required data and load it in 

SafetyAnalyst. We are hoping to include all public roads while implementing this methodology. We are 

expecting that SafetyAnalyst will solve the issues mentioned above. 

VTrans and the Vermont FHWA Division Office hosted the conduct of an HSIP review by a team of FHWA 

representatives in May 2016. The purpose of the review was to assess the status of HSIP planning, 

implementation and evaluation efforts, with a focus on streamlining HSIP project delivery, identifying 

safety efforts beyond the HSIP and advancing HSIP evaluation efforts. The review team prepared a final 

report documenting the review observations and recommendations. The Vermont FHWA Division Office 

will work with VTrans to develop an action plan to implement the recommendations.

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

16. Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

State Fiscal Year

17. Enter the programmed and obligated funding for each applicable funding category.
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

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

20 %

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

20 %

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

1 %

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

1 %

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

reporting period?

0 %

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

period?

0 %

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

overcome this in the future.

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

Amount Percentage Amount Percentage

HSIP (Section 148) $9,499,358.00 60 % $9,499,358.00 60 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) $18,815.00 0 % $18,815.00 0 %

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

$6,416,623.00 40 % $6,416,623.00 40 %

Totals $15,934,796.00 100% $15,934,796.00 100%
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

VTrans is exploring alternative contracting methods for the implementation of low cost safety 

improvements as part of its systemic local roads safety program.

The 2016 FHWA lead review of the Vermont HSIP process identified the development of a prioritization 

system that will produce a program of highway safety improvement projects for the next 3 years as a 

key to allocate funding where it provides the most benefits.

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

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

During the 2016 FHWA lead HSIP review, it was recognized that HSIP funds were used by other VTrans 

business units (other than the Office of Highway Safety) to develop and implement safety projects. 

VTrans will be working in the future to develop a process to track all projects that use HSIP funds during 

implementation and to gauge their effectiveness on reducing highway fatalities and serious injuries after 

Error! Hyperlink reference not valid._msocom_1
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

General Listing of Projects

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

Project Improvement Category Outpu

t 

HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Fundin

g 

Catego

ry

Functiona

l 

Classificat

ion

AAD

T

Spe

ed

Roadwa

y 

Owners

hip

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strategy

MORRISTO

WN STP 

HES 030-

2(28) -

Developme

nt

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics -

modify skew angle

0.01 

Miles

108000 108000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

720

0

40 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Geometry

HINESBUR

G HES 021-

1(19) -

Developme

nt

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

0.3 

Miles

75000 75000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

860

0

40 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Geometry

HINESBUR

G HES 021-

1(19) -

Developme

nt

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

0.3 

Miles

17000 17000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

860

0

40 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Geometry

NEW 

HAVEN 

HES 032-

1(8) -

Developme

nt

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/uns

pecified

0.3 

Miles

30000 30000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

400

0

45 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Geometry
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

SOUTH 

HERO STP 

HES 028-

1(22) -

Developme

nt

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

0.01 

Miles

126000 126000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

890

0

50 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Geometry

HARTFORD

-

ROYALTON 

IMG 

SIGN(48) -

Constructi

on

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

21.32 

Miles

800000 800000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

240

00

65 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

WINOOSKI 

HES 

5100(13) -

Constructi

on

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometry -

other

0.03 

Miles

410000 410000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

110

00

25 City of 

Municip

al 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Pedestria

ns

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

BRATTLEB

ORO NHG 

SIGN(53) -

Developme

nt

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

0.242 

Miles

160000 160000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

154

00

35 Town or 

Townshi

p 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

ROCKINGH

AMHARTFORD 

IMG 

SIGN(54) -

Developme

nt

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

34 

Miles

150000 150000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

192

00

0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

MORRISTO

WN STPG 

Intersection traffic 

control Intersection 

0.6 

Miles

232000 232000 HSIP 

(Sectio

Rural 

Minor 

110

00

0 State 

Highwa

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Geometry
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

SGNL(47) -

Constructi

on

traffic control - other n 148) Arterial y 

Agency

STATEWID

E HES 

GARD(2) -

Constructi

on

Roadside Barrier- metal 1 

Numb

ers

1259000 1259000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

STATEWID

E HES 

WKZN(7) -

Planned

Non-infrastructure 

Enforcement

1 

Numb

ers

2000 2000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Work 

Zones

Speed 

Managem

ent with 

ITS and 

Infrastruct

ure

STATEWID

E HES 

SHSP(6) -

Planned

Non-infrastructure 

Data/traffic records

1 

Numb

ers

5000 5000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Data Improve 

Data 

Quality

STATEWID

E HES 

SHSP(7) -

Planned

Non-infrastructure 

Transportation safety 

planning

1 

Numb

ers

73000 73000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 Private 

(Other 

than 

Railroad

)

Writing 

the SHSP

STATEWID

E HES 

SHSP(13) -

Planned

Non-infrastructure 

Educational efforts

1 

Numb

ers

31500 31500 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 Private 

(Other 

than 

Railroad

)

Distracte

d Driving

Improve 

Driver 

Complianc

e

STATEWID

E HES 

SHSP(14) -

Planned

Non-infrastructure 

Outreach

1 

Numb

ers

5000 5000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

All 

Drivers 

and the 

General 

Improve 

Driver 

Complianc

e
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

164 Public

STATEWID

E HES 

SHSP(15) -

Planned

Non-infrastructure 

Outreach

1 

Numb

ers

35000 35000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 Private 

(Other 

than 

Railroad

)

All 

Drivers

Improve 

Driver 

Complianc

e

BARRE 

CITY HES 

037-1(8) -

Developme

nt

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

0.02 

Miles

58000 58000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

690

0

25 City of 

Municip

al 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Geometry

BURLINGT

ON HES 

5000(18) -

Developme

nt

Intersection traffic 

control Modify control -

two-way stop to 

roundabout

0.04 

Miles

680000 680000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

630

0

25 City of 

Municip

al 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Operation

s

COLCHESTE

R HES NH 

5600(14) -

Developme

nt

Interchange design 

Interchange design -

other

1.025 

Miles

350000 350000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

228

00

35 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

MILTON 

HES 028-

1(27) -

Constructi

on

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs and traffic control -

other

0.02 

Miles

42620.7

8

42620.7

8

Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 50 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

COLCHESTE

R HES 028-

1(28) -

Constructi

on

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

0.02 

Miles

593386.

42

593386.

42

Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 50 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Geometry
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

HYDE PARK 

HES 030-

2(34) -

Constructi

on

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometry -

other

0.1 

Miles

649363.

72

649363.

72

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Driver 

Complianc

e

ESSEX STP 

5400(10) -

Developme

nt

Intersection traffic 

control Modify control -

two-way stop to 

roundabout

0.2 

Miles

10000 10000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 45 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Operation

s

STATEWID

E -

NORTHWE

ST REGION 

STPG 

SIGN(58) -

Devel

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Sign 

sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

41.066 

Miles

86400 86400 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 50 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

BARRE 

TOWN HES 

STPG 

6100(6) -

Developme

nt

Intersection traffic 

control Systemic 

improvements - signalcontrolled

0.196 

Miles

45000 45000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

119

00

35 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Operation

s

STATEWID

E HES 

RRCS(1) -

Planned

Non-infrastructure 

Educational efforts

1 

Numb

ers

465.22 465.22 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Lane 

Departur

e

Improve 

Highway 

Delineatio

n

BRISTOL 

HES 021-

1(28) -

Constructi

on

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replacem

ent

0.02 

Miles

673214 673214 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

620

0

25 Town or 

Townshi

p

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Operation

s
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

BERLIN 

STPG 

SGNL(40) -

Constructi

on

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replacem

ent

1 

Numb

ers

9422.81 9422.81 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

122

00

40 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Operation

s

GUILFORDROCKINGH

AM IMG 

SIGN(44) -

Closing

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

36 

Miles

234028.

97

234028.

97

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 65 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

ALBURGHCOLCHESTE

R STPG 

SIGN(45) -

Constructi

on

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

39.011 

Miles

62400.0

3

62400.0

3

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 50 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

BARTONDERBY 

STPG 

SIGN(46) -

Constructi

on

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

25.3 

Miles

57372.8

8

57372.8

8

HSIP

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 50 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

STATEWID

E -

SOUTHWE

ST REGION 

STPG 

SIGN(47) -

Const

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

1 

Numb

ers

50874.6

4

50874.6

4

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 50 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

STATEWID

E - SOUTH 

REGION 

STPG 

MARK(305) 

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1 

Numb

ers

1353777

.41

1353777

.41

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Improve 

Highway 

Delineatio

n
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

- Construc

STOWE 

HES 

0235(22) -

Developme

nt

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/uns

pecified

0.048 

Miles

18000 18000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Geometry

STATEWID

E - SOUTH 

REGION 

STPG 

SIGN(57) -

Developme

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

55.514 

Miles

99800 99800 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

BERLINGUILDHALL 

NHG 

SIGN(59) -

Developme

nt

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

61.714 

Miles

119700 119700 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

STATEWID

E HES 

MARK(404) 

-

Constructi

on

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1 

Numb

ers

730141.

58

730141.

58

Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Rural 

Minor 

Collector

0 0 Town or 

Townshi

p 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Improve 

Highway 

Delineatio

n

STATEWID

E - NORTH 

REGION 

STPG 

MARK(302) 

- Closing

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1 

Numb

ers

1352368

.1

1352368

.1

Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Improve 

Highway 

Delineatio

n

STATEWID

E - SOUTH 

REGION 

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1 

Numb

ers

652751.

88

652751.

88

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Roadway 

Departur

e

Improve 

Highway 

Delineatio
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

STPG 

MARK(303) 

- Construc

Agency n

WINOOSKICAMBRIDG

E STPG 

SIGN(55) -

Developme

nt

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

23.94 

Miles

100000 100000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

STATEWID

E -

NORTHEAS

T STPG 

SIGN(56) -

Constructi

on

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

56.307 

Miles

345604.

68

345604.

68

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

STATEWID

E - NORTH 

REGION 

STPG 

MARK(304) 

- Construc

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1 

Numb

ers

1748979

.88

1748979

.88

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Improve 

Highway 

Delineatio

n

STATEWID

E -

NORTHEAS

T REGION 

STP 

HRRR(16) -

Closin

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

1 

Numb

ers

283.12 283.12 HRRRP 

(SAFET

EA-LU)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 0 Town or 

Townshi

p 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

STATEWID

E -

SOUTHEAS

T REGION 

STP 

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

1 

Numb

ers

1779.55 1779.55 HRRRP 

(SAFET

EA-LU)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 0 Town or 

Townshi

p 

Highwa

y 

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

HRRR(18) -

Comple

Agency

WATERBU

RY AREA 

STP 

WKZN(9) -

Constructi

on

Work Zone 1 

Numb

ers

65579.6

7

65579.6

7

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Work 

Zones

Improve 

Driver 

Complianc

e

STATEWID

E - NORTH 

REGION 

STP 

HRRR(22) -

Developme

n

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

1 

Numb

ers

140000 140000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 0 Town or 

Townshi

p 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

STATEWID

E - SOUTH 

REGION 

STP 

HRRR(23) -

Developme

n

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

1 

Numb

ers

150000 150000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 0 Town or 

Townshi

p 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

STATEWID

E IMG 

MARK(115) 

-

Constructi

on

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

1 

Numb

ers

1323227

.53

1323227

.53

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Improve 

Highway 

Delineatio

n

STATEWID

E STPG 

TMNG(6) -

Developme

nt

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal timing - general 

retiming

1 

Numb

ers

30000 30000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Operation

s
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

STATEWID

E IMG 

MARK(114) 

- Complete

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs (including post) -

new or updated

1 

Numb

ers

6733.76 6733.76 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 65 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Older 

Drivers

Improve 

Infrastruct

ues for all 

Users

FERRISBUR

GH NHG 

SGNL(42) -

Constructi

on

Intersection traffic 

control Intersection 

traffic control - other

0.02 

Miles

413932.

47

413932.

47

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 50 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Operation

s

WATERBU

RY NHG 

SGNL(43) -

Constructi

on

Intersection traffic 

control Intersection 

traffic control - other

0.01 

Miles

39908.2

3

39908.2

3

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 40 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Operation

s

LUDLOW 

HES 

SGNL(44) -

Developme

nt

Intersection traffic 

control Intersection 

traffic control - other

0.02 

Miles

20000 20000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 50 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Operation

s

COLCHESTE

R-ESSEX 

STPG 

SGNL(45) -

Constructi

on

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replacem

ent

4.656 

Miles

7500 7500 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 35 Town or 

Townshi

p 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Operation

s

HYDE PARK 

HES 030-

2(23) -

Constructi

on

Interchange design 

Interchange design -

other

0.02 

Miles

3000 3000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

870

0

40 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Geometry

STATEWID

E -

SOUTHEAS

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs and traffic control -

1 

Numb

ers

16752.7

8

16752.7

8

HRRRP 

(SAFET

EA-LU)

Urban 

Local 

Road or 

0 0 Other 

Local 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

T REGION 

STP 

HRRR(14) -

Closin

other Street

STATEWID

E -

SOUTHWE

ST REGION 

HES 

HSIP(6) -

Closing

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs and traffic control -

other

1 

Numb

ers

8927 8927 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Urban 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 0 Other 

Local 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWID

E HES 

HSIP(7) -

Developme

nt

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Roadway 

signs and traffic control -

other

1 

Numb

ers

20000 20000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

Statewide 0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

Signs and 

Markings

STATEWID

E HES 

HSIP(8) -

Planned

Non-infrastructure 

Data/traffic records

1 

Numb

ers

45000 45000 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Data Improve 

Data 

Quality
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

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

Performance Measures* 2011

(5-yr avg)

2012

(5-yr avg)

2013

(5-yr avg)

2014

(5-yr avg)

2015

(5-yr avg)

Number of fatalities 68 70 69 63 61

Number of serious injuries 399 385 361 339 318

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 0.92 0.97 0.96 0.89 0.85

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5.44 5.31 4.98 4.74 4.43

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

22
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

23
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

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

Year - 2015

Function 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 - INTERSTATE

4.8 23 0.39 28.78

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

11 28.8 1.55 12.22

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

8.6 44.2 0.9 41.73

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

3.2 12 1.49 5.57

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

14.2 61.8 1.23 30.67

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

9 42.8 0.92 4.39

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

1.8 4.2 0.37 0.93

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0.6 2.4 1.03 3.97

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

2.4 32.6 0.53 7.2

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

1.8 23.6 0.51 6.6

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

1.8 15.8 0.79 6.75

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

0.8 11 0.2 2.83
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

25
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

26
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

27
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

28
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

29
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

30

Year - 2015

Roadway Ownership Number of 

fatalities

Number of serious 

injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 42 203.8

TOWN OR TOWNSHIP HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

14.8 70.2

CITY OF MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

3.6 36
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

31
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

32
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

33

Note that the data for State Highway Agency also include some crashes that took place on Vermont Class I Roads that would be owned by towns 

and cities. 

Note also that HMVTMs by Roadway Ownership are not available.

In addition, urban boundaries were changed from 2013 to 2014 which could result in changes in mileage when compared to previous years. 
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

34

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

elaborate.

A unique element of safety implementation in Vermont is the presence of the Vermont Highway Safety 

Alliance (VHSA), a group of public and private organizations that works towards highway safety. At the 

basis on the VHSA is the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP).

Major crashes are defined as crashes that either resulted in a fatal injury or in an incapacitating injury.

The most recent 5-years of data shows that Vermont continues to make progress in the goal of reducing 

major crashes on the State’s highways. While the 2011 through 2015 data shows steady progress, it is 

the longer term historical trends that tell the true story of progress made. Looking back to the 

development of the 2012-2016 SHSP, major crashes Statewide from 2004 through 2011 were trending 

downward at a rate of 10.9%. 

As a result of the dedication and hard work of the VHSA and its partners, there has been a 15% 

reduction over the last 4 years, and a major crash reduction of 25.7% since 2004.

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 and those that are more readily 

addressed by the HSIP. 

The previous 5-year rolling average calculated for the period 2004-2011 showed a 7% reduction in major 

crashes for leaving the road. The 2012-2016 SHSP set a goal of reducing lane departure major crashes by 

10%. The data shows that the major crashes associated with leaving the road continued to reduce at an 

average rate of 7 to 8%.

The previous 5-year rolling average calculated for the period 2004-2011 showed an 8% reduction in 

major crashes at intersections. The 2012-2016 SHSP set a goal of reducing lane departure major crashes 

by 10%. The data shows that this goal was met with an overall major crash reduction at intersections by 

19% from 2004 through 2015.

The most current evaluation of data shows a doubling of major crashes for younger drivers under 25 

when compared to younger drivers under 21. This indicates the potential need to expand the younger 

driver age group and consider specific strategies to target drivers between the ages of 21 and 25.

Application of Special Rules

27. Present the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians 65 

years of age and older.

Older Driver 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

35

Performance Measures (5-yr avg) (5-yr avg) (5-yr avg) (5-yr avg) (5-yr avg)

Fatality rate (per capita) 0.13 0.13 0.134 0.146 0.124

Serious injury rate (per 

capita)

0.362 0.366 0.358 0.352 0.322

Fatality and serious injury 

rate (per capita)

0.492 0.494 0.49 0.496 0.444

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

The Injury A Incapacitating Injury category was use to represent Serious Injuries.

The number of people 65 years of age and older (per 1,000 total population) for each year was obtained 

from Section 148: Older Drivers and Pedestrians Special Rule Final Guidance, dated May 19, 2016..

The five year average Fatal (F) and Serious Injuries (SI) per capita for Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of 

age and older for year ending in 2012 and 2014 was calculated for the following periods respectively, 

2014 (2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010) and 2012 (2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008).

For each period, the rate was calculated by summing up the fatal and serious injuries for a given year 

and dividing the total for that year by the population figure for the year. The rates for the period were 

then summed up and divided by 5 to obtain the five-year average for the two ending year (2012 and 

2014). 

All rates were calculated to the hundredths after the decimal point and then rounded to the nearest 

tenths. 

The 2014 rate was 0.4 and the 2012 rate was 0.5. There is no increase in 2014 compared to 2012 and 

therefore the rule does not apply.

The calculations are shown on the attached document to this question.
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

36

28. Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

37

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

Safety Improvement Program?

Other-crash reduction

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

Include Local Roads in Highway Safety Improvement Program

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

We implemented a systemic program for local roads under 5000 vehicles per day. We performed a data 

tree and concluded that on rural roads, horizontal curves that were combined with a vertical alignment 

were important crash risk locations. We worked with the regional planning commissions to identify 

corridors for improvement and performed safety review with road foremen in selected towns. Signage 

improvements will be implemented by the State.
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

38

SHSP Emphasis Areas

32. Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year - 2015

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target 

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)

Other-1

(5-yr 

avg)

Other-2

(5-yr 

avg)

Other-3

(5-yr 

avg)

Lane Departure All 32.4 142.4 0.45 1.99

Intersections All 7.8 72.6 0.1 1.01

Pedestrians All 5.8 24.8 0.08 0.35

Bicyclists All 0.8 10.2 0.01 0.14

Older Drivers All 94 56.2 0.26 0.78

Motorcyclists All 8.4 40 0.12 0.56

Work Zones All 0.4 1.4 0.01 0.02
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

39
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

40
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

41
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

42

Groups of similar project types
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

43

33. Present the overall effectiveness of HSIP subprograms.

Year - 2015

HSIP Sub-program 

Types

Target 

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)

Other-1

(5-yr 

avg)

Other-2

(5-yr 

avg)

Other-3

(5-yr 

avg)

Low-Cost Spot 

Improvements

Run-offroad32.4 142.4 0.45 1.99
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

44
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

45
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

46
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

47

Systemic Treatments
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

34. Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Year - 2015

Systemic 

improvement

Target 

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)

Other-1

(5-yr 

avg)

Other-2

(5-yr 

avg)

Other-3

(5-yr 

avg)

Install/Improve 

Signing

All 14.8 69.8 0.64 3.04
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

49
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

50
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

51
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

52
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

53

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

which you 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 current SHSP has target reductions for intersection and lane departure major crashes that have 

been set at 10% of 2012 thresholds. In terms of numbers, 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 (2011-2015) for lane departure crashes is 163 major crashes, which is below 

the SHSP target of 186 major crashes. 

For the emphasis area concerning intersections, the latest five-year average is 71 major crashes. This 

five-year average is just below the SHSP target of 72 major crashes at intersections.
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached

Program Structure: Program Methodology Updated May 29 2015 Systemic Local Roads Safety 

Program TPI Guidance.pdf

Program Structure: Program Methodology VTrans 2015-2016 HSIP Methodology to Select Hot 

Spot Locations.pdf

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets: 

Application of Special Rules

Question 28 Calculations.xls
2016 Vermont Highway Safety Improvement Program

55

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.