Page 1 of 32

NORTH DAKOTA

2019 ANNUAL REPORT
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 32

Table of Contents

Table of Contents.................................................................................................................................. 2

Disclaimer ............................................................................................................................................. 3

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 4

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 5

Program Structure................................................................................................................................. 5

Program Administration..................................................................................................................... 5

Program Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 7

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................10

Funds Programmed.........................................................................................................................10

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................12

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................15

General Highway Safety Trends......................................................................................................15

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................20

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................23

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................24

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................24

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................24

Project Effectiveness.......................................................................................................................27

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................28
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 32

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.”
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 32

Executive Summary

The North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is administered through the NDDOT's 

Programming Division. Safety investments are based on the state's current Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

(SHSP). The current SHSP document is called ND Vision Zero Plan and has six priority emphasis areas: 

• Lane departure 

• Intersections 

• Alcohol and/or drug related 

• Unbelted vehicle occupants 

• Speeding/aggressive driving 

• Young drivers. 

Lane departure and intersections are typically emphasis areas for individual HSIP projects. The 2018 

construction year included HSIP projects such as: low-cost signing/striping at rural high risk intersections, 

rumble strips, intersection geometry (add turn lanes), and signal modifications. In 2018, there were 105 crash 

fatalities in North Dakota, a decrease from the previous year and the lowest since 2010. This is an encouraging 

trend, but more can be done by striving for an ultimate goal of zero deaths. North Dakota has set a short-term 

goal to reduce annual motor vehicle crash fatalities to fewer than 75 by 2025.
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 32

Introduction

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

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

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

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

HSIP Reporting Guidance dated December 29, 2016 and consists of five sections: program structure, 

progress in implementing highway safety improvement projects, progress in achieving safety 

outcomes and performance targets, effectiveness of the improvements and compliance assessment.

Program Structure

Program Administration

Describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State. 

The NDDOT solicits state and local agencies to submit safety project applications each year. Potential projects 

are identified through the traditional "reactive" approach that address high crash locations, fatal crash locations 

or areas where road safety reviews took place. Projects are also developed using a "systemic" approach that 

apply low-cost treatments over a large area. The NDDOT central office reviews applications and 

selects/prioritizes. After projects are programmed, they get designed and implemented with the same process 

as regular federally funded transportation projects. Overall evaluation of the program is done though 

monitoring of the fatal and serious injury statistics as part of this annual report. NDDOT is currently working 

towards a methodology of evaluating individual safety projects.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

The Office of Transportation Programs at NDDOT has HSIP staff within the "Programming" division.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process

50% of the funds are dedicated to local roads

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

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

agencies can also submit applications for non-LRSP safety projects each year during the solicitation period. 

Selection of local and tribal road projects use the same methodology as State roads. 

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning. 

• Design

• Districts/Regions
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 32

• Governors Highway Safety Office

• Local Aid Programs Office/Division

• Planning

• Traffic Engineering/Safety

• Other-Safety Division, Local Government

Describe coordination with internal partners. 

Design

The Design Division is included in the distribution of the high crash listings. All road safety reviews require at 

least one member of the Design Division. Their participation and review of at-risk locations helps in the 

development of potential project countermeasures.

Planning

The Planning Division provides data for the development of the HSIP. Roadway features are collected and 

maintained in the Planning Division include: traffic volume, truck volumes, traffic projections, roadway features, 

roadway viewer (for state highways) and mapping. The Planning Division is also included in the distribution of 

the high crash listings.

Safety Highway Safety Office (SHSO)

The SHSO is the lead entity for the State's Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) and involves law 

enforcement and other partners in the process. In North Dakota, the behavioral strategies in the SHSP are 

largely funded through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) funds with funding going to 

various traffic safety partners including law enforcement agencies statewide for overtime enforcement of traffic 

safety laws. The SHSP process drives HSIP project priorities. Infrastructure strategies in the North Dakota 

SHSP are largely funded through HSIP and deployed through the State's Local Road Safety Program (LRSP) 

and State Road Safety Program (SRSP). These programs identify proven, low-cost road safety strategies and 

prioritize the road safety strategies for implementation at identified at-risk locations on the local and state road 

systems. 

Local Government

Members of the Local Government Division provide project development through city, county and tribal 

agencies. The local government assists in the solicitation of safety projects. They also participate in road safety 

reviews.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning. 

• Academia/University

• FHWA

• Law Enforcement Agency

• Local Government Agency 

• Local Technical Assistance Program

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

• Tribal Agency

• Other-and other traffic safety advocates/partners
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 32

Describe coordination with external partners. 

All the entities are involved at SHSP at some level (Executive Leadership Team, SHSP Steering Committee, 

SHSP Implementation Team or general SHSP stakeholder).

Regional Planning Organizations: North Dakota has 3 MPO's that must approve any HSIP applications that are 

submitted by their respective cities. The MPO's were also included in the team that developed the ND Local 

Road Safety Program (LRSP).

Local Government Agency, Tribal Agency: The cities, counties, and tribal agencies are solicited each year for 

potential safety projects. They are encouraged to submit projects directly from the LRSP or at high crash 

locations. 

Law Enforcement Agency: Law enforcement and HSIP personnel are extensively involved in North Dakota's 

SHSP process. The Programming Division Director serves on the SHSP Steering Committee and as 

chairperson for two SHSP emphasis area teams (Lane Departure and Intersection implementation Teams). 

Law enforcement serve at all levels of the SHSP including the SHSP Executive Leadership Team, the SHSP 

Steering Committee and SHSP Implementation Teams.

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

elaborate. 

Schedule for HSIP requests:

• Fall – send out HSIP solicitation letter and high crash location lists/maps, HSIP application forms (SFN 

59959) are due by the end of the year

• Winter – NDDOT analysis of HSIP requests and Draft HSIP project listing

• Spring – verify the construction year for previously approved projects

• Summer – finalize HSIP project listing, send responses out on approvals (or non-approvals) for the 

HSIP applications

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

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes?

No

NDDOT is working towards a future HSIP manual.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

• HSIP (no subprograms)
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 32

Program: HSIP (no subprograms)

Date of Program Methodology:3/1/2017

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 Traffic Horizontal curvature 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

• Other-Systemic

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? 

• Competitive application process

• 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

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 29
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 32

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? 

• Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

• Horizontal curve signs

• Install/Improve Lighting

• Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

• Install/Improve Signing

• Pavement/Shoulder Widening

• Rumble Strips

• Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

• Crash data analysis

• Engineering Study

• Road Safety Assessment

• SHSP/Local road safety plan

• Stakeholder input

• Other-National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) and other evidence-based practices

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

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

The NDDOT has implemented the ITS technology of ICWS (Intersection Conflict Warning Systems).

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

No

NDDOT is currently working on integrating the HSM into its HSIP process.
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 32

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding. 

Federal Fiscal Year

2019 Federal Fiscal Year (Oct 1, 2018 through August 19, 2019)

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $16,908,000 $11,769,698 69.61%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $16,908,000 $11,769,698 69.61%

(as of 8/19/19)

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

safety projects?

$4,130,000

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

$3,100,000

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

$0

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

$0
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 32

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

during the reporting period under 23 U.S.C. 126? 

0%

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

the reporting period under 23 U.S.C. 126? 

0%

Discuss impediments to obligating HSIP funds and plans to overcome this challenge in 

the future. 

None
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 32

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

US 281 and ND 

46

Parking Truck parking 

facilities

1 Locations $142000 $157800 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Var State 

Highways in 

Minot District - 

SRSP

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

signing - add 

basic advance 

warning

69 Intersections $864000 $960000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Improve visibility of 

intersections by 

providing enhanced 

signing, delineation, 

or pavement 

markings/messages

Var State 

Highways in 

Valley City 

District - SRSP

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

signing - add 

basic advance 

warning

58 Intersections $928000 $1031000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Improve visibility of 

intersections by 

providing enhanced 

signing, delineation, 

or pavement 

markings/messages

Var State 

Highways in 

Fargo District - 

SRSP

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

signing - add 

basic advance 

warning

58 Intersections $775000 $861000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Improve visibility of 

intersections by 

providing enhanced 

signing, delineation, 

or pavement 

markings/messages

ND 1804 & 

Washington St 

Roundabout

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $2313000 $2570000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Construct 

roundabouts at 

appropriate 

locations

ND 1 & ND South 

of Oakes

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - 

add left-turn lane

1 Intersections $469500 $521667 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Provide left turn 

lanes at 

intersections

Various BIA 

Roads in Spirit 

Lake Reservation

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - 

paved or other

1 Locations $430000 $430000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Local Road or 

Street

0 State Park, 

Forest, or 

Reservation 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Apply shoulder 

treatments - Widen

Shoulder

Various State 

Highways - 

Statewide

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

1 Statewide $6332000 $7036000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systematic Roadway 

Departure

Bismarck 

Restriping

Roadway Roadway 

narrowing (road 

diet, roadway 

reconfiguration)

4 Locations $1089900 $1211000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Install center buffer 

between opposing 

lanes
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 32

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

Bottineau County 

Road Projects 

from LRSP

Roadway Rumble strips - 

edge or shoulder

$477360 $530400 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Install shoulder 

rumble strips

Steele County 

Road Projects

from LRSP

Roadway Rumble strips - 

edge or shoulder

$86490 $96100 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Install shoulder 

rumble strips

ND 200 & ND 49 

Roundabout

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $650000 $585000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Construct 

roundabouts at 

appropriate 

locations

4 Miles N of 

Wilton

Alignment Horizontal curve 

realignment

1 Curves $317000 $352000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Provide improved 

geometry for 

horizontal curves

US 83 & 128 Ave 

NW -- Ruthville 

#2

Lighting Intersection 

lighting

1 Intersections $135000 $150000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Improve visibility of 

intersections by 

providing 

appropriate street 

lighting

Minot 

Crosswalks - 

RRFB's

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Modify existing 

crosswalk

2 Crosswalks $76500 $85000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Improve pedestrian 

and bicycle facilities 

to reduce conflicts 

between motorists 

and non-motorists

US 2 & US 52 

Safety Corridor 

(Brooks Jct - 

Velva)

Roadway Roadway - other 34 Miles $2475000 $2750000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Location was 

selected by 

an internal 

DOT 

committee

Lane 

Departure

Designate as Safety 

Corridor

US 85 Safety 

Corridor (Watford 

City - Alexander)

Roadway Roadway - other 14 Miles $1507500 $1675000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Location was 

selected by 

an internal 

DOT 

committee

Lane 

Departure

Designate as Safety 

Corridor

ND 8,22,23 

Passing/Climbing 

Lanes #1

Roadway Install / remove / 

modify passing 

zone

$139500 $155000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Location was 

selected by 

an internal 

DOT 

committee

Lane 

Departure

ND 8, 22, 23, 

200, 1804 

Passing/Climbing 

Lanes #1A

Roadway Install / remove / 

modify passing 

zone

$378000 $420000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Center 

Pedestrian 

Crossing

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian 

beacons

3 Crosswalks $31500 $35000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Improve pedestrian 

and bicycle facilities 

to reduce conflicts 
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 32

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

between motorists 

and non-motorists

Var State 

Highways in 

Bismarck District 

- SRSP

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

signing - add 

basic advance 

warning

70 Intersections $1016820 $1129800 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Improve visibility of 

intersections by 

providing enhanced 

signing, delineation, 

or pavement 

markings/messages

Var State 

Highways in 

Dickinson District 

- SRSP

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

signing - add 

basic advance 

warning

99 Intersections $957375 $1063750 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Improve visibility of 

intersections by 

providing enhanced 

signing, delineation, 

or pavement 

markings/messages

Var State 

Highways in 

Williston District - 

SRSP

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

signing - add 

basic advance 

warning

64 Intersections $744300 $827000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Improve visibility of 

intersections by 

providing enhanced 

signing, delineation, 

or pavement 

markings/messages

US 83 Safety 

Corridor (Wilton - 

Washburn)

Roadway Roadway - other 18 Miles $1800000 $2000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Location was 

selected by 

an internal 

DOT 

committee

Lane 

Departure

Designate as Safety 

Corridor

Var Loc - 

Statewide - 

Individual

Noninfrastructure Noninfrastructure - 

other

$1618600 $2000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

N/A Intersections

SHSP Planning 

and 

Implementation

Noninfrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

$45000 $50000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

N/A Intersections

Small Scale 

Improvements

Noninfrastructure Noninfrastructure - 

other

$100000 $111000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

N/A Intersections

Statewide crash 

report evaluation

Noninfrastructure Data/traffic 

records

$225000 $250000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

N/A Data

Highway Safety 

Improvements

Noninfrastructure Noninfrastructure - 

other

$112500 $125000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

N/A Intersections
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 32

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Fatalities 105 148 170 148 135 131 113 116 105

Serious Injuries 380 462 575 517 519 555 433 426 360

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.270 1.620 1.690 1.470 1.280 1.310 1.160 1.190 1.060

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

4.600 5.060 5.700 5.120 4.940 5.530 4.450 4.380 3.650

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

8 10 7 2 12 8 10 7 8

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

27 39 25 30 32 31 21 24 28
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 32

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 32

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 32

Describe fatality data source. 

State Motor Vehicle Crash Database

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

ownership. 

Year 2018

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

9.8 28.2 0.6 1.75

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

36 90.4 1.48 3.69

Rural Minor Arterial 15.4 42.6 1.79 4.93

Rural Minor Collector

Rural Major Collector 20.8 76.4 4.37 16.32

Rural Local Road or 

Street

19.8 56.6 1.45 3.85

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 32

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)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

2 6.4 0.42 1.32

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

6.6 53.6 0.8 6.48

Urban Minor Arterial 4 36.2 0.65 5.81

Urban Minor Collector

Urban Major Collector 1 16.6 0.37 6.06

Urban Local Road or 

Street

3.4 28 0.66 5.56
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 32

Year 2018

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

74.8 236.4

County Highway 

Agency

31.4 113

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

8.8 83.6

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

Indian Tribe Nation

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets 

Calendar Year 2020 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:108.3

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

Review of historical data and expert group input.
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 32

Number of Serious Injuries:413.9

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

Review of historical data and expert group input.

Fatality Rate:1.106

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

Review of historical data and expert group input.

Serious Injury Rate:4.230

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

Review of historical data and expert group input.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:33.4

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

The long-term goal of the North Dakota SHSP is to move toward zero deaths. Targets were 

established with consideration of this long term goal but also considering SMART objectives. The 

targets were considered specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-oriented.

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

safety performance targets. 

The State Highway Safety Office (SHSO) resides in the NDDOT. The SHSO (i.e., the NDDOT Safety Division) 

and other NDDOT Divisions including Local Government, Programming and planning/Asset Management 

review performance measure data and define the method to set the targets. Proposed targets are then shared 

by the NDDOT at a regular meeting between NDDOT and the MPOs.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2018 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. 

Number of Traffic Fatalities

North Dakota’s target for traffic fatalities in the 2019 HSP was based on five-year averages, with the goal of 

reducing the number of traffic fatalities from a 5-year (2012-2016) average of 139.4 to a 5-year (2015-2019) 

average of 127.3 by December 31, 2019. North Dakota’s current 5-year traffic fatality average (2014-2018) is 

120.0, indicating North Dakota will likely meet the 2019 target. 
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 32

A review of recent crash data shows there were 105 motor vehicle crash fatalities in 2018, a 9.5 percent 

decrease from the previous year when there were 116 fatalities. As a result of fewer fatalities in the last three 

years, North Dakota has experienced a decreasing trend across the 5-year traffic fatality averages since 2015.

This translates to annual decreases in the 5-year fatality averages ranging from 4.8 percent to 7.8 percent.

North Dakota would have to experience a large increase in the number of traffic fatalities in 2019 to raise the 5-

year average (2015-2019) above the target. As of the time of this progress note, there have been 35 traffic 

fatalities to date in 2019 which is comparable to the fatality counts at this same point in time in both 2017 and 

2018. 

Number of Serious Injuries

North Dakota’s target for serious traffic injuries in the 2019 HSP was based on five-year averages, with the 

goal of reducing the number of serious traffic injuries from a 5-year (2012-2016) average of 515.8 to a 5-year 

(2015-2019) average of 486.2 by December 31, 2019. North Dakota’s current 5-year serious traffic injury 

average (2014-2018) is 458.6, indicating North Dakota will likely meet the 2019 target. 

A review of recent crash data shows there were 360 serious injuries resulting from motor vehicle crashes in 

2018, a 15.5 percent decrease from the previous year when there were 426 serious injuries. As a result of 

fewer serious injuries in the last three years, North Dakota has experienced a decreasing trend across the 5-

year serious injury averages since 2015. This translates to annual decreases in the 5-year serious injury 

averages ranging from 1.1 percent to 6.4 percent.

North Dakota would have to experience a large increase in the number of serious traffic injuries in 2019 to 

raise the 5-year average (2015-2019) above the target. There would need to be more than 657 serious traffic 

injuries in 2019 for the state not to meet the 2019 target, and as of the time of this progress note there has only 

been 88 serious injuries to date in 2019.

Fatality Rate

North Dakota’s target for the traffic fatality rate in the 2019 HSP was based on five-year averages, with the 

goal of reducing the rate of traffic fatalities from a 5-year (2012-2016) average of 1.382 to a 5-year (2015-2019) 

average of 1.271 by December 31, 2019. North Dakota’s current 5-year fatality rate average (2014-2018) is 

1.200, indicating North Dakota will likely meet the 2019 target.

North Dakota experienced a 0.7 percent decrease in the number of licensed drivers in 2018 but saw small 

increases in population (0.6 percent), the number of registered vehicles (2.2 percent) and the number of 

vehicle miles traveled (1.5 percent). A review of recent traffic fatality rates shows annual variance over the last 

five years, but an overall decreasing trend across the 5-year fatality rate averages. This translates to annual 

decreases in the 5-year fatality rate averages ranging from 6.2 percent to 7.2 percent. The current 5-year 

average traffic fatality rate (2014-2018) is 1.200.

It is unlikely that North Dakota will experience a large enough increase in the number traffic fatalities in 2019 to 

raise the 5-year average rate (2015-2019) above the target given the fact that the annual vehicle miles traveled 

(VMTs) in the state is on the rise due to an upswing in oil activity in the state. In 2018, the number of VMTs 

increased 1.7 percent from the previous year. Yet the number of traffic fatalities to date is comparable to the 

fatality counts at this same point in time in both 2017 and 2018. As of the time of this progress note, there have 

been 35 traffic fatalities to date in 2019. 
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 32

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No 

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

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

15 8 10 10 9 14 19

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

22 21 36 37 35 27 29
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 32

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

• Change in fatalities and serious injuries

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

the State's program level evaluations. 

An annual program level evaluation has not been completed at this time. However there are some positive 

signs: the number of fatalities has decreased for the 6th year in a row, the 2018 fatality rate is at is lowest level 

of the past 10 years and the serious injury numbers are following similar trends.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

• More systemic programs

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures. 

Year 2018

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury 

Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Lane Departure 65.4 214.2 0.66 2.15

Intersections 25.2 132 0.25 1.32
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 32

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Lane Departure Intersections

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Lane Departure Intersections

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 32

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the 

reporting period? 

No

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Lane Departure Intersections

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Lane Departure Intersections

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017 2014-2018
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 32

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 32

Compliance Assessment

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

 09/18/2018

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2018 To: 2023

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

 2023

NDDOT Vision Zero

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

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

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

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9)

100 100

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21)

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20)

Surface Type (23) 33 1

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10)

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13)

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18)

Functional Class 

(19)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Median Type (54)

Access Control (22) 33 1
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 32

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

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

One/Two Way 

Operations (91)

Number of Through 

Lanes (31)

33 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79)

100

AADT Year (80)

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120)

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122)

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123)

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79)

100

AADT Year (80)

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197)

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

Ramp Length (187) 100 100
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 32

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

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

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199)

Interchange Type 

(182)

Ramp AADT (191) 100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192)

Functional Class 

(19)

100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 55.50 44.56 12.50 0.00 36.36 27.27 66.67 55.56 100.00 100.00

*Based on Functional Classification

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. 

The Department will continue to collect required MIRE FDE elements already required by HPMS. In addition, the accessibility of HPMS Data for safety analysis will be investigated. The Department will continue its efforts implementing 

Data Governance, and will develop a comprehensive plan for closing the gap between available data and required MIRE data elements by 2026. In 2019, NDDOT hired a Data Scientist to co-lead development and implementation of 

formal data governance/data management for the Office of Transportation Programs. Their first assignment is to coordinate updating and implementing the MIRE FDE improvement plan.

Did the State conduct an HSIP program assessment during the reporting period? 

The purpose of the assessment was to review the current HSIP program and identify potential approaches to improve program effectiveness. The assessment identified four strategies:

• Increase the number of outreach efforts to work with NDDOT districts and local agencies to improve the number and quality of HSIP applications.

• Provide additional technical assistance to local agencies to overcome barriers to their participation

• Improve the process for screening and prioritizing candidate locations for investment, with a focus on systemic risk assessments

• Consider expanding the data elements available to support improved/expanded system screening and prioritization
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 32

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2019 North Dakota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 32

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.