Page 1 of 39

DELAWARE 

2020 ANNUAL REPORT 
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 39

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 .......................................................................................................................7

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................16

Funds Programmed .........................................................................................................................16

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................18

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................21

General Highway Safety Trends ......................................................................................................21

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................27

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................29

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................30

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................30

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................30

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................34

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................35

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................38

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................39
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 39

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.”
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 39

Executive Summary

The Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) has prepared this Annual Report for state fiscal year 

2020 (July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020) to demonstrate the success of their safety program. During the 

2020 reporting period, DelDOT continued its successful core HSIP programs – Hazard Elimination Program 

(HEP), Highway Rail-Grade Crossing Program (HRGX), and Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) as well as 

its systemic safety program. During the 2020 reporting period, DelDOT installed new median barrier along SR 

1 and I-95, continued Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) installations, completed a pedestrian safety 

audit along US 13 in Dover, began data analysis for a pedestrian safety audit in the City of Wilmington, 

completed the development of signing and pavement marking improvement recommendations for all freeway 

ramps in Delaware susceptible to wrong way driving, balanced safety and congestion at flashing red arrow 

(FRA) locations, and implemented previous years' HEP recommendations. DelDOT continued evaluating HighFriction Surface Treatment (HFST) applications to date for their durability, revised their standard HFST 

specifications, and is actively pursuing new contracts for additional applications. 

DelDOT completed studies for the first two years of its HEP (2018 and 2019) in which sites were selected 

using a modified site selection methodology. Annually, ten HEP roadway segment sites are selected using the 

Critical Ratio methodology to identify high crash locations. The Critical Ratio method (also known as the Rate 

Quality Control Method) uses a statistical test to determine whether the crash rate at a particular location is 

significantly higher than a predetermined average crash rate (crash rates are based on three years of fatal and 

injury crash data) for locations of similar characteristics. Additionally, the Intersection HEP studies five 

signalized and five unsignalized intersections that are identified using a crash severity index weighting method 

to prioritize improvements at intersections with the highest potential for reduction in crashes. Collectively, 

DelDOT studies 20 locations annually through its HEP. Under the FY 2020 HRGX, two locations were 

identified with a benefit/cost ratio greater than 1.0 (and where improvements were not already proposed) and 

evaluations were begun. Additional information on DelDOT’s HRGX can be found in the 2020 RailwayHighway Crossing Program Annual Report. Both programs continued to identify both low-cost remedial 

improvements and long-term safety improvement needs. Throughout the reporting period, DelDOT worked to 

refine the Department's rumble strip details and design guidance, adding in the use of sinusoidal shoulder and 

center line rumble strips (aka mumble strips). DelDOT is currently finalizing the design and will distribute 

department-wide for comment and acceptance for use on future projects. In summer 2020, DelDOT began 

efforts to reinstate a High Risk Rural Roads Program in support of Delaware's current and proposed Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan. In addition, DelDOT continued working on improvements and enhancements to its Crash 

Analysis Reporting System (CARS) and implementation of safety projects developed from the HSIP. 

Each year DelDOT meets with the SHSP core committee to identify, review and evaluate the implementation of 

countermeasures to support the Emphasis Areas identified in the 2015 SHSP. Progress is tracked through 

implementation matrices by Emphasis Area. In the first half of 2020, DelDOT and its safety partners began 

efforts to update its SHSP, which is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2020. 

The success of these programs is demonstrated by the annual decline in the combined number of fatalities and 

serious injuries (based on 5-year rolling averages) from 2015 to 2019, resulting in a 5-year decrease of 25 

percent. From 2016 to 2018, annual fatalities averaged 117; however, reached 133 in 2015 and 2019. DelDOT 

led efforts, in conjunction with Delaware’s Office of Highway Safety and Delaware State Police, to identify 

Delaware’s 2021 safety performance measure targets, which are included in this report. Based on a 

preliminary assessment, Delaware has met or made significant progress toward meeting three of the five 2019 

safety performance measure targets.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 39

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. 

DelDOT’s Traffic Engineering Section leads the HSIP with support from both internal and external partners. 

The HSIP is comprised of several programs (and subprograms) that are designed to prioritize resources that 

target the most critical safety improvement opportunities as identified through data-driven approaches. The 

following programs are included in Delaware’s HSIP:

 Hazard Elimination Program (HEP) 

 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing (HRGX) 

 Systemic Safety Improvement Programs 

o Longitudinal Rumble Strips 

o Freeway Median Barrier 

o High Friction Surface Treatment 

o Horizontal Curve Assessments 

 Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) 

For the HEP, twenty spot locations throughout the state are chosen for safety studies each year. Ten sites are 

selected using the Critical Ratio methodology to identify high crash locations and ten intersection sites (5 

signalized; 5 unsignalized) are selected using a crash index methodology. For each site selected, DelDOT’s 

Traffic Section reviews crash data, performs a field review, and identifies potential safety improvement 

alternatives. For candidate locations where improvements are in project development, design, or construction, 

a safety audit is performed to confirm that the proposed improvements will address the identified crash 

problem. The HEP committee, which includes representatives from DelDOT (Traffic, Planning, Project 

Development, and the Maintenance Districts), Delaware State Police, FHWA, MPOs, and the counties and 

municipalities, meets to reach a consensus on the recommended safety improvements. Traffic control device 

improvements (i.e., signing, striping, lighting, and traffic signal upgrades) are then designed by DelDOT’s 

Traffic Section and implemented by DelDOT’s maintenance forces and/or on-call contractors. Projects 

requiring detailed design, public involvement, or resulting in right-of-way or environmental impacts are 

forwarded to DelDOT’s Project Development section for prioritization and inclusion in the Capital 

Transportation Program (CTP). 

For the HRGX, DelDOT uses FRA’s GradeDec.NET software to calculate benefit/cost ratios for all of 

Delaware’s public highway-rail grade crossings. The benefit/cost ratios take into account the most recent five 

years of crash data, train speeds, the number of trains per day, and AADT, in addition to several other factors. 

The benefit/cost ratios at each crossing are then calculated for various upgrade alternatives. Then, all at-grade 

crossings statewide are ranked according to their benefit/cost ratios to identify candidate locations for safety 

upgrades. 
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 39

Each of Delaware’s systemic safety improvement programs use a data-driven approach based on a number of 

factors, including traffic volumes, roadway characteristics, functional class, and crash history to identify and 

prioritize locations for implementing proven countermeasures. Before/after crash analysis has indicated the 

success of the high-friction surface treatment program. 

Delaware’s SHSP is a statewide-coordinated safety plan that provides a comprehensive framework, identifies 

specific goals and objectives, and integrates the four E's - engineering, education, enforcement and 

emergency medical services (EMS). Delaware’s SHSP core agencies include DelDOT, Office of Highway 

Safety (OHS), and Delaware State Police (DSP). Additionally, several other stakeholders (e.g., Federal 

Highway Administration, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, Delaware Department of Motor Vehicles, Delaware Department of Justice, Delaware Office of 

Emergency Medical Services, Delaware Transit Commission, WILMAPCO, Dover/Kent County MPO, City of 

Wilmington, Delaware T2/LTAP Center, and the general public) provide input and expertise towards the 

development of the SHSP. Together, the SHSP core agencies and stakeholders review fatal and serious injury 

crash data to identify emphasis areas to focus resources with the goal of reducing fatalities and serious 

injuries. DelDOT and its safety partners are actively working to update Delaware's SHSP by the end of 2020. 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Engineering

HSIP staff are located in DelDOT’s Division of Transportation Solutions – Traffic Engineering Section. 

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

 Other-Central Office via Formula 

DelDOT's Central Office distributes HSIP funds to cover general HSIP program activities, the installation of 

low-cost countermeasures (signing, marking, signals, etc.) identified through both the HSIP and projects 

designed through DelDOT's Project Development group. 

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

All roadways throughout the state are eligible for safety funding; however, the calculations used to identify high 

crash locations for the Hazard Elimination Program (HEP) include state roadways in DelDOT's road inventory 

where traffic volumes are available. DelDOT maintains approximately 85 percent of all roads in Delaware. 

Based on a review of statewide crash data on all public roadways from 2015 through 2019, less than 0.5 

percent of fatal and serious injuries were the result of crashes that occurred on roadways not maintained by 

DelDOT, indicating that crashes reported on these roadways would not likely meet the minimum crash criteria 

for the various HSIP elements. 

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning. 

 Design 

 Districts/Regions 

 Maintenance 

 Operations 

 Planning 

 Traffic Engineering/Safety 
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 39

Describe coordination with internal partners. 

Representatives from DelDOT's Traffic, Planning, Project Development, and Maintenance and Operations 

divisions participate in the HSIP as part of the HEP and SHSP committees. 

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning. 

 FHWA 

 Governors Highway Safety Office 

 Law Enforcement Agency 

 Local Government Agency 

 Local Technical Assistance Program 

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

 Other-National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

 Other-Delaware State Police 

 Other-Department of Justice 

 Other-Delaware Office of Emergency Medical Services 

 Other-Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 

Describe coordination with external partners. 

Representatives from DelDOT’s external partners participate in the HSIP via the HEP and/or SHSP 

committees. Together, DelDOT and these agencies work together to focus resources with the goal of reducing 

fatalities and serious injuries on Delaware's transportation system. 

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

elaborate. 

During FY 2020 (July 1, 2019 - June 30, 2020), components of Delaware’s HSIP included the Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), the Hazard Elimination Program (HEP), and the Highway-Rail Grade Crossing 

Safety Program (HRGX) as well as its systemic safety program. During the 2020 reporting period, DelDOT 

installed new median barrier along SR 1 and I-95, continued Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) 

installations, completed a pedestrian safety audit along US 13 in Dover, began data analysis for a pedestrian 

safety audit in the City of Wilmington, completed the development of signing and pavement marking 

improvement recommendations for all freeway ramps in Delaware, balanced safety and congestion at its 

flashing red arrow (FRA) locations, and implemented previous years' HEP recommendations. DelDOT 

continued evaluating High-Friction Surface Treatment (HFST) applications to date for their durability, revised 

their standard HFST specifications, and is actively pursuing new contracts for additional applications. 

Throughout the reporting period, DelDOT worked to refine the Department's rumble strip details and design 

guidance, adding in the use of sinusoidal shoulder and center line rumble strips (aka mumble strips). DelDOT 

is currently finalizing the design and will distribute department-wide for comment and acceptance for use on 

future projects. DelDOT continued enhancements to the Crash Analysis and Reporting System (CARS) and 

initiated new pedestrian safety studies along corridors exhibiting high pedestrian crash histories. In summer 

2020, DelDOT began efforts to reinstate a High Risk Rural Roads Program to support the current and 

upcoming SHSP. 

Program Methodology 

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

 Horizontal Curve 

 Intersection 
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 39

 Median Barrier 

 Pedestrian Safety 

 Segments 

 Other-Longitudinal Rumble Strips 

 Other-High Friction Surface Treatment 

Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2018

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Competes with HSIP projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 Horizontal curvature

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Other-All horizontal curves to be evaluated.

 Probability of specific crash types

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-Prioritized based on functional classification

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
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 39

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology:12/17/2018

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 

 All crashes

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 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

DelDOT's Intersection Hazard Elimination Program (Intersection HEP) considers both signalized and 

unsignalized intersections. Program methodology details are attached. 

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2018

What is the justification for this program? 
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 39

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Competes with HSIP projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 Other-All roadway departure 

crashes, head-on crashes, and 

cross-median crashes

 Volume

 Other-Roadway Miles

 Median width

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

 Relative severity index

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-Based on prioritization and funding availability

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:50

Ranking based on net benefit:50

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2018

What is the justification for this program? 
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 39

 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-All pedestrian crashes  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Probability of specific crash types

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?

 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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Available funding:34

Ranking based on net benefit:33

Cost Effectiveness:33

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Segments

Date of Program Methodology:12/17/2018

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 39

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 Other-Fatal and Injury Crashes 

Only

 Volume

 Other-Roadway Miles  Other-Roadway Type

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Critical rate

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?

 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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Ranking based on B/C:25

Available funding:25

Ranking based on net benefit:25

Cost Effectiveness:25

Total Relative Weight:100

Program methodology details are attached. 

Program: Other-Longitudinal Rumble Strips

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2018

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Competes with HSIP projects
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 39

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 Other-All roadway departure 

crashes

 Volume

 Other-Roadway Miles

 Horizontal curvature

 Functional classification

 Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Probability of specific crash types

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-Based on prioritization and funding availability

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

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

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:2

Ranking based on net benefit:1

Program: Other-High Friction Surface Treatment

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2018

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 
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 39

 Other-All wet weather roadway 

departure crashes

 Volume

 Other-Roadway Miles

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Other-Based on prioritization and funding availability

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

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

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on net benefit:1

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements? 

 20

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

 Cable Median Barriers 

 High friction surface treatment 

 Horizontal curve signs 

 Install/Improve Signing 

 Upgrade Guard Rails 

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

 Crash data analysis 

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

 Engineering Study 

 Road Safety Assessment 

 SHSP/Local road safety plan 
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 39

 Stakeholder input 

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes 

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

DelDOT has accepted the SPaT Challenge and we expect to have our first systems operational shortly. As 

vehicle manufacturers increase deployment of connected vehicles, the implementation of red light violation 

warnings and other associated applications at traffic signals via DSRC will be supportive of safety initiatives 

related to the “Intersections” emphasis area of the SHSP. Moving ahead, we expect to have a higher level of 

coordination between ITS/CAV initiatives and HSIP/SHSP initiatives than we have had in the past. 

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. 

DelDOT uses the HSM to compare alternatives and countermeasures under consideration for its HSIP.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 39

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) $9,250,000 $981,948 10.62%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$900,000 $900,000 100%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$2,408,900 $2,308,837 95.85%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$704,600 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$7,600,000 $109,105 1.44%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $20,863,500 $4,299,890 20.61%

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

safety projects? 

$0

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

$0

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

$113,961

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

$113,961

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
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 39

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.

The Department struggled with awarding an open-ended High Friction Surface Treatment contract. The 

contract was advertised twice; however, both times bids were approximately 100% over the engineer's 

estimate. This, coupled with DelDOT's intent to utilize HRRR special rule funds which had to be obligated by 

the end of FFY20 ultimately did not permit us to move forward with using these funds for this work.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 39

General Listing of Projects 

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

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

2020 SHSP Noninfrastructure Transportation safety planning 1 Statewide $269192.91 $269192.91 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

All

Flashing 

Red Arrow 

Safety 

Studies

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety planning 1 Statewide $171628.47 $171628.47 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

2020 HEP 

Studies

Noninfrastructure Transportation safety planning 20 Locations $795243.65 $795243.65 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot All

SR54 

Corridor 

Study

Noninfrastructure Road safety audits 1 Corridor $47938.82 $47938.82 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 7,800 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians

Site N, CoW 

sites

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal timing - leftturn phasing (permissive to 

protected/permissive)

1 Intersections $11265.25 $11265.25 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther14,500 25 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

2016 HEP 

Pavement 

Markings

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway delineation - other 1 Statewide $9017.25 $9017.25 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Multiple

Brackenville 

& Mill Creek 

Signal 

Design

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 1 Intersections $202799 $202799 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 11,150 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Philly Pike & 

I-495

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - modify turn lane 

storage

1 Intersections $207699.5 $207699.5 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 22,400 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

2017 HEP 

Pavement 

Markings

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway delineation - other 1 Statewide $133595.76 $133595.76 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Multiple

N. Adams 

City of 

Wilmington

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

modernization/replacement

3 Intersections $114897.7 $114897.7 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Minor Arterial 4,500 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 48 & N. 

Washington 

St

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

1 Intersections $6158.77 $6158.77 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther6,000 25 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

US13 and 

SR24 

Lighting

Lighting Intersection lighting 1 Intersections $235837 $235837 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther22,300 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 39

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

Boxwood & 

Birmingham

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 Intersections $15195 $15195 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 13,700 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians

SR30 & 

Sand Hill 

Road

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - two-way stop to 

all-way stop

1 Intersections $3079.7 $3079.7 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 3,925 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

North Broad 

& Frogtown

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

1 Intersections $4037 $4037 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Major Collector 26,600 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR1 & Cave 

Neck

Access 

management

Median crossover - unspecified 1 Intersections $9017.25 $9017.25 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther35,200 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Boxwood & 

Jackson

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 Intersections $12051 $12051 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 13,700 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians

US13 & 

Webbs Lane

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

1 Intersections $4037 $4037 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther38,700 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

High Friction Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

1 Statewide $1656.4 $1656.4 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Curved 

guardrail 

inventory - 

consultant 

tasks

Roadside Barrier- metal 1 Statewide $600.74 $600.74 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Philly Pike 

Lighting 

Design

Lighting Lighting - other 1 Corridor $18218.13 $18218.13 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Minor Arterial 14,800 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians

US13 Dover 

Pedestrian 

Study

Noninfrastructure Road safety audits 1 Corridor $44262.38 $44262.38 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Minor Arterial 60,000 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians

Bethany 

RRFB

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - Pedestrian 

Hybrid Beacon

8 Locations $95999.7 $95999.7 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal ArterialOther18,100 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians

Mini 

Roundabout 

- Glasgow 

Ave

Noninfrastructure Road safety audits 1 Intersections $12936.03 $12936.03 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Major Collector 15,000 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Roundabout 

Support 

Services

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 1 Statewide $21847.23 $21847.23 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 39

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

Philly Pike 

road Diet

Roadway Roadway narrowing (road diet, 

roadway reconfiguration)

1 Corridor $27329.46 $27329.46 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Minor Arterial 14,800 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Multiple

High Friction 

Support

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

1 Statewide $21158.94 $21158.94 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Signalized 

Median 

Crossover 

Documents - 

Construction 

Support

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection traffic control - other 1 Statewide $3712.83 $3712.83 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

US9 and 

Sussex 

Central

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

1 Intersections $22582.3 $22582.3 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Minor Arterial 13,300 25 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

I-95 and 

SR1 

Freeway 

Median 

Barrier 

Design

Roadside Barrier - cable 25.3 Miles $46454.74 $46454.74 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 39

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends 

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

years. 

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fatalities 103 116 101 125 133 120 119 111 133

Serious Injuries 633 608 628 625 567 593 477 377 393

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.140 1.270 1.080 1.310 1.340 1.180 1.230 1.180 1.400

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

7.010 6.650 6.740 6.530 5.720 5.840 4.930 4.020 4.140

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

19 34 28 30 39 30 38 29 39

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

86 75 82 72 61 64 41 63 66
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 39

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 39

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 39

At the time of reporting, annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data is unavailable for calendar year 2019. As 

such, 2019 fatality and serious injury rates were calculated based on projected 2019 VMT values. 2019 VMT 

was projected from known 2018 VMT using FHWA's VMT forecasting growth rates (May 2019 release), which 

indicates a 1.1% annual growth rate for the 20-year period from 2017-2037 for "baseline economic growth". 

For the purposes of this reporting, state data was used for both the number of fatalities and serious injuries. 

Describe fatality data source. 

State Motor Vehicle Crash Database

For the purposes of reporting the most recent statewide crash data trends, crash data from Delaware’s Crash 

Analysis Reporting System (CARS) was used. It should be noted that safety performance measure targets 

(and the trend line analyses to derive the targets) relied on FARS data as required by the SPM Final Rule. 

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

ownership. 

Year 2019

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

0 1

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

2.2 5.8 1.3

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 39

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)

Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

5.8 25.2 0.75 3.21

Rural Minor Arterial 6.2 16 2.14 5.75

Rural Minor Collector 6.8 14 3.97 8.17

Rural Major Collector 14.2 39 2.44 6.71

Rural Local Road or 

Street

11.4 33.6 2.67 7.84

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

7.8 25.8 0.53 1.78

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

3.8 10 0.55 1.44

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

30.6 118 1.35 5.25

Urban Minor Arterial 15 83.8 1.32 7.46

Urban Minor Collector 1 5 7.81

Urban Major Collector 10.4 56 1.24 6.63

Urban Local Road or 

Street

8 50 0.8 5.06
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 39

Year 2019

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

0

County Highway 

Agency

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

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

At the time of reporting, annual vehicle miles traveled data is unavailable for calendar year 2019. As such, 

2019 crash rates were calculated based on projected 2019 VMT values. 2019 VMT was projected from known 

2018 VMT using FHWA's VMT forecasting growth rates (May 2019 release), which indicates a 1.1% annual 

growth rate for the 20-year period from 2017-2037 for "baseline economic growth". Data by roadway ownership 

is not available at this time. 

Provide additional discussion related to general highway safety trends. 

The number of fatalities (based on 5-year rolling averages) per year remained relatively steady from 2015 to 

2019, ranging from 117.4 to 120.8. During the same period, the number of serious injuries (based on 5-year 
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 39

rolling averages) per year have steadily declined from 612 in 2015 to 475 in 2019, a reduction of over 20 

percent. Statewide vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in 2017 to 2019 were approximately five (5) percent lower 

than 2015 and 2016. Fatalities per VMT (based on 5-year rolling averages) decreased in 2016, 2017, and 2018 

compared to 2015; however, returned to 2015 levels in 2019. Serious injuries per VMT (based on 5-year rolling 

averages) have decreased annually from 2015 to 2019. In 2019, serious injuries per VMT was approximately 

25 percent lower than in 2015. The raw number of fatalities and serious injuries per year for the State of 

Delaware are relatively low; therefore, there is greater potential for larger fluctuations in fatality rates and 

serious injury rates as compared to other larger states and national rates, even though the raw number of 

fatalities and serious injuries may only differ by a few on a year-to-year basis.

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2021 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:112.4

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

During 2015, DelDOT, OHS, DSP, and other statewide safety partners collaborated in the development of the 

2015 Delaware Strategic Highway Safety Plan: Toward Zero Deaths, which provides a framework to reduce 

fatalities and serious injuries resulting from crashes on Delaware’s roadways. The 2015 SHSP established a 

multi-year overall goal which includes annual target reductions.In 2017, DelDOT and OHS performed extensive 

data and trendline analyses to identify potential methodologies for establishing Delaware’s 2018 SPM targets 

and met with FHWA and NHTSA representatives to review the data and establish the 2018 SPM targets. At 

that time, DelDOT and OHS agreed to use the annual target reductions included in Delaware’s 2015 SHSP 

overall goal as the basis for developing Delaware’s 2018 SPM targets. In 2018 and 2019, DelDOT, OHS, and 

DSP reconvened to establish Delaware’s SPM targets and agreed to follow the 2018 SPM target setting

methodology for the 2019 and 2020 SPM targets. In 2020, the three agencies coordinated to set 2021 SPM 

targets and agreed to follow the established target setting methodology for the serious injury targets (SPM 3 

and 4) while maintaining the targets established in 2020 for the fatality and non-motorized crash targets (SPM 

1, 2, and 5) for 2021. Since SPM target setting began in 2017, CY2019 marked the first year that the number 

of fatalities increased compared to the prior year – a trend inconsistent with the State’s goals. Maintaining the 

prior year’s targets for SPM 1, 2 and 5 ensures the establishment of aggressive targets while not establishing 

unachievable targets.

Number of Serious Injuries:379.0

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

See response for number of fatalities.

Fatality Rate:1.134

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

See response for number of fatalities.

Serious Injury Rate:3.962

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

See response for number of fatalities.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 39

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:89.0

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

See response for number of fatalities.

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

safety performance targets. 

After coordinating with the Delaware Office of Highway Safety (OHS) and Delaware State Police (DSP) in 

Spring 2020, DelDOT distributed the draft of agreed-upon safety performance measures to statewide 

stakeholders for their comment via email. Members of Delaware’s SHSP committee accounted for a majority of 

the stakeholders included in the distribution of the draft targets. This includes, but is not limited to, the 

representatives from Delaware’s MPOs, Delaware State Police, and Delaware’s Office of Emergency Medical 

Services. DelDOT did not receive any objections to the draft safety performance measure targets.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2019 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 119.0 123.2

Number of Serious Injuries 507.4 481.4

Fatality Rate 1.190 1.266

Serious Injury Rate 5.078 4.930

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

85.0 94.0

2019 SPM targets were established during 2018 to consider safety performance through the end of calendar 

year 2019. Per FHWA guidelines, fatality data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and traffic 

volume data from the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) will be used to officially assess 

whether a state met or made significant progress towards meeting its annual SPM targets. It should be noted 

that the actual performance reported with this question is automatically generated from data documented 

previously in this report. As previously noted, crash data from Delaware’s Crash Analysis Reporting System 

(CARS) was used instead of FARS data. These data sources are close but not always identical; therefore, the 

discussion below reflects the use of FARS data as required by the SPM Final Rule with the exception of CY 

2019 since FARS data is not yet available. Similarly, 2019 HPMS data is not yet available, so projected 2019 

VMT data was utilized. For these reasons, officially determining whether Delaware met or made significant 

progress towards meeting its 2019 SPM targets is not possible at this time; however, a preliminary assessment 

was completed using the best available data at the time of reporting. Based on this preliminary assessment 

(described below), Delaware has met or made significant progress toward meeting three of the five 2019 

Safety Performance Measure Targets.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 39

1. Number of Fatalities – Delaware’s projected 2015-2019 5-year rolling average value is 122.6 or 3.6 

fatalities greater than the 119.0 target. Fatalities decreased annually in 2016 to 2018 compared to 2015 

until 2019, when fatalities increased to 133, matching the 2015 performance. 

2. Number of Serious Injuries – Delaware’s projected 2015-2019 5-year rolling average value is 481.4 or 

26.0 serious injuries lower than the 507.4 target; therefore, this SPM is met. At the end of September 

2017, Delaware implemented a change to its serious injury definition in accordance with a federal 

mandate which could be contributing to this decline. DelDOT and its safety stakeholders have 

discussed this at length and are continuing to do so during development of its 2020 SHSP. 

3. Rate of Fatalities – Delaware’s projected 2015-2019 5-year rolling average value is 1.242, which is 

slightly higher than the 1.190 target and 1.196 baseline. Refer to SPM #1 (number of fatalities) for 

additional details. 

4. Rate of Serious Injuries – Delaware’s projected 2015-2019 5-year rolling average value is 4.930 or 

0.148 less than the 5.078 target; therefore, this SPM is met. Refer to SPM #3 (number of serious 

injuries) for additional details. 

5. Combined Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries – Delaware’s projected 2015-2019 

5-year rolling average value is 94.2, which is higher than the 85.0 target and lower than the 96.4 

baseline. By being lower than the baseline, this SPM is met. 

Applicability of Special Rules 

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

Yes 

The HRRR Special Rule applies for FY2020. Under the rule, Delaware must obligate $900,000 in FY2020 

towards HRRR safety projects. The Department intended on using these funds to award an open-end High 

Friction Surface Treatment contract; however, struggled with awarding the contract. The contract was 

advertised twice; however, both times bids were approximately 100% over the engineer's estimate. This, 

coupled with DelDOT's intent to utilize HRRR special rule funds which had to be obligated by the end of FFY20 

ultimately did not permit us to move forward with using these funds for this work. As such, the Department has 

obligated these funds to implement rural safety countermeasures as part of the 2019's Hazard Elimination 

Program, as well as reinstate a High Risk Rural Roads Program for the next several years. The program is 

under development at the time of reporting; therefore, program methodology and evaluation details are 

unavailable at this time. 

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 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

14 20 14 17 19 16 27

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

55 42 42 42 46 27 31

As required, the number of fatalities is based on FARS data and the number of serious injuries is based on 

State data. At the time of reporting, 2019 FARS data is unavailable; therefore, State data is reported for CY 

2019.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 39

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness 

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

 Benefit/Cost Ratio 

 Change in fatalities and serious injuries 

 Economic Effectiveness (cost per crash reduced) 

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

the State's program level evaluations. 

See response to Question 33 for discussion of the change in fatalities and serious injuries. 

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

 # miles improved by HSIP 

 # RSAs completed 

 More systemic programs 

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements 

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures. 

Year 2019

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)

Roadway Departure 34.2 77.2 0.34 0.76

Intersections 34.4 204.6 0.34 2.01

Pedestrians 30.4 45.4 0.3 0.44
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 39

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Roadway Departure Intersections Pedestrians

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Roadway Departure Intersections Pedestrians

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 39

At the time of reporting, annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data is unavailable for calendar year 2019. As 

such, 2019 fatality and serious injury rates were calculated based on projected 2019 VMT values. 2019 VMT 

was projected from known 2018 VMT using FHWA's VMT forecasting growth rates (May 2019 release), which 

indicates a 1.1% annual growth rate for the 20-year period from 2017-2037 for "baseline economic growth". 

Delaware’s 2015 SHSP includes 7 data-driven emphasis areas. Crash statistics for emphasis areas related to 

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

Roadway Departure Intersections Pedestrians

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Roadway Departure Intersections Pedestrians

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 39

driver behavior (i.e., Impaired Driving, Unrestrained Motorists, Speeding) are reported in Delaware’s annual 

Highway Safety Plan.

As shown, the number of roadway departure fatalities (based on 5-year rolling averages) has decreased from 

2016 to 2019 and the number of roadway departure serious injuries has decreased annually from 2015 to 

2019. The number of intersection fatalities (based on 5-year rolling averages) has generally increased from 

2015 to 2019; however, the number of intersection serious injuries are generally decreasing. Pedestrian 

fatalities (based on 5-year rolling averages) have increased slightly from 2015 to 2019; however, pedestrian 

serious injuries have decreased annually during this same period.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 39

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)

See 

comments.

No elaboration at this time.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 39

Compliance Assessment

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

 12/31/2015

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2016 To: 2020

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

 2020

DelDOT and its safety partners are actively working to update Delaware's SHSP by the end of 2020. 

Provide the current status (percent complete) of MIRE fundamental data elements collection efforts using the table below. 

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

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12) [12]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 

[8]

100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9) [9]

100 100

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21) [21]

100 100

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20) [20]

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100 100

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100 100 100
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 39

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Median Type (54) 

[55]

100 100

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100 100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

100 100

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

100 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

100 100
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 39

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201) [191]

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

100 100

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

100

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

100 100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 100.00 94.44 100.00 100.00 90.91 100.00 100.00 88.89 100.00 100.00

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

There are no non-state maintained interchanges/ramps in the state; therefore, the non-state maintained interchange/ramp section is not applicable. A value of 100 % was entered for the purposes of reporting. 

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. 

DelDOT is working towards meeting the FDE requirement by September 2026.
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 39

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

2018 HSIP Methodology Update Memo 2018-12-17.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2020 Delaware Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 39

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.