Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest 

of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for use of the information contained in this 

document. This report does not constitute a standard, specifi cation, or regulation.

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and 

the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and 

maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality 

issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement. 
Technical Report Documentation Page

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed pages authorized

1. Report No.

FHWA-SA-10-025

2. Government Accession No.

 

3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

 

4. Title and Subtitle

SHSP Implementation Process Model – Supplement 

Number 1: Case Studies

5. Report Date

June 2010

6. Performing Organization Code

 

7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

100 CambridgePark Drive, Suite 400

Cambridge, MA 02140

10. Work Unit No.

 

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH61-05-D-00025

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

Offi ce of Safety E-71-320

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE

Washington, DC 20590

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Final Report

May 2010-August 2010

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

 

15. Supplementary Notes

FHWA: Tamiko Brim-Burnell, Offi ce of Safety 

16. Abstract

This document supports the Strategic Highway Safety Plan Implementation Process Model (IPM). It features 

case studies derived from the experiences of States that were used as models during the development of the 

IPM. Each case study describes a noteworthy practice actually used by the State, the results achieved, and 

key accomplishments. Users can obtain additional information by calling or e-mailing the contact person 

identifi ed within each case study. 

17. Key Words

Transportation safety, SHSP implementation, 

HSIP, HSP, CVSP, transportation planning

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available to the 

public through the National Technical Information 

Service, Springfi eld, VA 22161.

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No of Pages

62

22. Price

 
June 2010

Message from the FHWA Associate Administrator of the Offi ce of Safety

This Case Study Supplement is a companion document to The Essential Eight – Fundamental 

Elements and Effective Steps for SHSP Implementation – also known as the SHSP Implementation 

Process Model (IPM). The four fundamental elements of the IPM include leadership, collaboration, 

communication, and data analysis. These complement the four effective steps of the IPM: 

emphasis area action plans; linkage to other plans; marketing; and monitoring, evaluation, and 

feedback.

The case studies in this document demonstrate noteworthy practices used by States in their SHSP 

implementation efforts. Most of them are currently in use by IPM “model” States, i.e., States 

whose practices were studied as part of the IPM development effort. The remaining noteworthy 

practices were identifi ed during testing of the IPM by a variety of “pilot” States.

The Supplement groups case studies according to their relevance to particular IPM chapters. 

Individual case studies provide summaries of each practice, their key accomplishments, the 

results, and contact information for those interested in learning more. The IPM was designed 

to be fl exible and can be adapted to meet the needs of each State. The case studies demonstrate 

the range of approaches States have taken to implement their SHSPs effectively. Readers are 

encouraged to draw from these case studies and adapt them to their needs.

Sincerely yours,

Joseph S. Toole

Associate Administrator for Safety

Federal Highway Administration

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

 Washington DC 20590
How to Use This Document

While this document can be used as a stand-alone reference for noteworthy practices related to 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) implementation, it is designed primarily as a companion 

document to The Essential Eight – Fundamental Elements and Effective Steps for SHSP Implementation – 

also known as the SHSP Implementation Process Model (IPM).

The case studies are organized according to which IPM chapter they most closely relate and the 

individual chapters within both documents are identifi ed by their matching color tabs. In the 

IPM, the pages of Chapter 2: Leadership, Collaboration, and Communication are identifi ed by 

red color tabs. Within this document (the Case Study Supplement), the individual case studies 

associated with leadership, collaboration, and communication are also identifi ed with red color 

tabs. 

The title of each case study also contains information that identifi es the particular IPM chapter to 

which it is most relevant. This information is in the form of a two-number code within the title. 

The fi rst number identifi es the IPM chapter for which the case study has the most relevance. The 

second number provides a unique identifi cation for the case study. Two examples will serve to 

illustrate this point:

Case Study 2-3 – Collaborative Problem Solving

The number “2” in the title of this case study refers to the IPM chapter it is associated with. In 

this case, Chapter 2: Leadership, Collaboration, and Communication. The number “3” indicates 

that this is the third case study related to Chapter 2 of the IPM. The color tab for this case study 

is red – the same as the color tab for Chapter 2 of the IPM.

Case Study 4-6 – Multiagency Policy Council Supporting Safety Legislation

Similarly, the number “4” in the title of this case study refers to IPM Chapter 4: Emphasis Area 

Action Plans, and the number “6” indicates that this is the sixth case study related to Chapter 4. 

The color tab for this case study is blue – the same as the color tab for Chapter 4 of the IPM.

As described, both the color tabs and the individual case study titles link this Case Study 

Supplement to the IPM.
i

Table of Contents

Case Study 2-1 – SHSP Operations Manager ..............................................................................1

Case Study 2-2 –SHSP Project Seed Money ................................................................................2

Case Study 2-3 – Collaborative Problem Solving .......................................................................3

Case Study 2-4 – Motor Vehicle Administration Partner ...........................................................4

Case Study 2-5 – Emergency Medical Services Partner .............................................................5

Case Study 2-6 – LTAP Support to Local Agencies ....................................................................6

Case Study 2-7 – Technical Support to Local Agencies ..............................................................7

Case Study 2-8 – State Safety Charter .........................................................................................8

Case Study 2-9 – Electronic Communication System .................................................................9

Case Study 2-10 – Teen Driver Study Commission Adopts SHSP Strategies 

 and Advances Legislation ............................................................................10

Case Study 2-11 – Law Enforcement Partnership with Engineering ......................................11

Case Study 3-1 – MOU Among Data Generators .....................................................................13

Case Study 3-2 – Centralized Data Source ................................................................................14

Case Study 3-3 – Data Decision Support Tool ...........................................................................15

Case Study 3-4 – Local Safety Planning Improved Through MPO Outreach .......................17

Case Study 3-5 – Data Analysis Strategies .................................................................................18

Case Study 3-6 – LTAP Provides Software and MDOT Provides Support for Local Safety 

Data Analysis ..................................................................................................19

Case Study 4-1 – Road Safety Audits .........................................................................................20

Case Study 4-2 – Emphasis Area Team Facilitators .................................................................21

Case Study 4-3 – SHSP Implementation Chart .........................................................................22

Case Study 4-4 – Links to Existing Organizations ....................................................................23

Case Study 4-5 – Three-Tiered Programming ..........................................................................24

Case Study 4-6 – Multiagency Policy Council Supporting Safety Legislation .......................25

Case Study 5-1 – MPO Participation in SHSP ..........................................................................26

Case Study 5-2 –Prioritizing Safety in the Transportation Improvement Program..............27

Case Study 5-3 – Safety Element in Performance Reviews ......................................................28

Case Study 5-4 – A Systems Approach to Project Selection .....................................................29

Case Study 5-5 – Training Improves Local Safety Planning Capacity ...................................30
Case Study 5-6 – Centralized HSIP Funding and Evaluation Results in Safety Projects 

Aligned with SHSP .........................................................................................32

Case Study 5-7 – Local Government Assistance .......................................................................34

Case Study 5-8 – Focusing HSP Grant Applications ................................................................36

Case Study 5-9 – Local Safety Coordinators Adopt SHSP Strategies and Actions ................37

Case Study 5-10 – Grant Writing Assistance Focuses on SHSP ..............................................38

Case Study 5-11 – SHSP Committee Provides Forum for Data Collection Improvements ...39

Case Study 5-12 – Collaborative Process Improves Work Zone Safety ..................................40

Case Study 5-13 – Truck Safety Commission Supports SHSP Efforts ....................................41

Case Study 5-14 – Enforcement and Engineering Collaboration ............................................42

Case Study 5-15 – Engaging Local Agencies in Commercial Vehicle Inspections .................43

Case Study 5-16 – SHSP/HSIP Alignment .................................................................................44

Case Study 6-1 – SHSP Newsletters ...........................................................................................45

Case Study 6-2 – SHSP Leadership Summit .............................................................................46

Case Study 6-3 – Branding and Marketing the SHSP ..............................................................47

Case Study 6-4 – Legislative Symposium...................................................................................48

Case Study 7-1 – Tracking Local Project Implementation ......................................................49

Case Study 7-2 – SHSP Steering Committee Manages Implementation 

with Tracking Tools ........................................................................................50
Case Study 2-1

SHSP Operations Manager

1

 Case Study 2-1 – SHSP Operations Manager

Prior to the development of the SHSP, the Georgia 

Department of Transportation (GDOT) created 

a Safety Action Plan. The plan was based on 

the NCHRP 501 Integrated Safety Management 

Process (ISMP). Fundamental to the ISMP is an 

interdisciplinary organizational structure formed 

through a coalition of highway safety agencies that 

allocates different responsibilities to specifi c groups 

or people who must work together to maximize 

safety. Day-to-day management responsibility falls 

to the operations manager, a coalition appointee.

After SAFETEA-LU required States to develop an SHSP, GDOT merged its Safety Action Plan 

into the SHSP and developed its structure based on the ISMP. GDOT stepped aside from 

the leadership role to encourage an interdisciplinary and intery structure so partners and 

stakeholders would not view their participation as directed by GDOT. They felt stakeholders 

would be more likely to participate and provide legitimate feedback if the Governor’s Offi ce 

of Highway Safety (GOHS) took responsibility for leading the SHSP effort.

GDOT and GOHS developed a memorandum of understanding creating a SHSP Operations 

Manager position housed in the GOHS. The Operations Manager acts as the focal point for 

the SHSP. As part of GOHS, the Operations Manager dedicates time and effort to facilitating 

the development and implementation of the SHSP, as well as coordinating communication 

among GOHS, GDOT, and the other partners and stakeholders. The Operations Manager is 

funded by GDOT with Highway Safety Improvement Program funds.

Results

The State demonstrated its commitment to the SHSP by creating a full-time staff position to 

oversee its management and implementation. The Operations Manager handles the day-today administration of the SHSP process and provides support to the SHSP Leadership Team. 

As the focal point of the SHSP process, the Operations Manager facilitates all activities.

Key Accomplishments

• Created the position of full-time 

SHSP operations manager to provide 

leadership and coordination.

• Centralized SHSP communications 

through the operations manager.

• Formalized safety collaboration 

between the DOT and GOHS via a 

memorandum of understanding.

Contact: Randy Clayton

SHSP Operations Manager

Georgia Governor’s Offi ce of Highway Safety

404-651-8503

rclayton@gohs.ga.gov
2

Case Study 2-2

SHSP Project Seed Money

 Case Study 2-2 – SHSP Project Seed Money

After Georgia’s initial development of the SHSP, 

stakeholder participation in the process slowed 

and dedication to the implementation process 

needed a boost. Stakeholders needed clear 

incentives to participate in the process and tangible 

implementation tools. Therefore, Georgia decided to 

allocate $10 million seed money from the §406 Safety 

Belt Performance Award to fund implementation of 

SHSP programs and projects.

The SHSP Leadership Team is responsible for deciding which projects are funded through the 

seed money. Project ideas fi rst come from the emphasis area task teams, and the Leadership 

Team prioritizes projects based on benefi t/cost, expected fatality reduction, and the extent to 

which projects address SHSP emphasis areas. A project prioritization matrix is used to rank 

proposed projects based on the extent to which each one will reduce fatalities. The matrix 

uses the estimated percent contribution of each emphasis area addressed by the project to the 

total number of fatalities Statewide to calculate a project score. The score is then used to rank 

proposed SHSP projects. The team intends to fund strategies and/or projects that address 

as many of the 4Es (e.g.; engineering, enforcement, education, and emergency response) as 

possible.

The implementation funds serve as an incentive for SHSP stakeholders to collaborate on 

multidisciplinary projects and work beyond agency boundaries. Because projects addressing 

the 4Es are diffi cult to implement within a single agency, the Leadership Team places an 

emphasis on providing resources for these projects.

Results

The SHSP process has gained momentum and received renewed interest as a result of this 

new funding strategy. Dedicated funding provides an incentive for partners representing the 

4Es to collaborate on projects and for the 4Es to be incorporated into overall strategies.

Key Accomplishments

• Dedicated signifi cant funding to SHSP 

implementation.

• Developed criteria for project 

identifi cation and a prioritization 

process based on expected fatality 

reduction.

• Reenergized emphasis area teams.

Contact: Randy Clayton

SHSP Operations Manager

Georgia Governor’s Offi ce of Highway Safety

404-651-8503

rclayton@gohs.ga.gov
3

Case Study 2-3

Collaborative Problem Solving

 Case Study 2-3 – Collaborative Problem Solving 

The process to develop and implement an effective 

SHSP requires a multidisciplinary approach from the 

state’s safety stakeholders. Working collaboratively 

to identify and solve the State’s transportation safety 

problems is central to the plan’s success.

States demonstrating success with implementation 

of their SHSPs fi nd collaborative arrangements 

are the norm and tend to have superior inter/

intraagency communication. Partners talk to one 

another on a frequent basis, building trust and understanding. This collaboration helps 

expand the SHSP’s reach to the broader safety community, and fosters the mindset that “we 

all understand what the safety priorities are.”

Collaboration results in wiser use of the State’s limited resources. States have found this 

approach helps improve their crash data collection and analysis capabilities. Solutions arrived 

at collaboratively among several agencies and data users result in improved processes and 

cost sharing. Collaboration on SHSP projects brings new partners to the effort and expands 

resources to assist with SHSP implementation.

One success story involves a close partnership between the Utah Department of Transportation 

(UDOT) and Utah Department of Public Safety’s Highway Safety Offi ce (HSO). The HSO 

includes the UDOT Traffi c and Safety Engineer in its annual NHTSA-required Highway 

Safety Plan process. This relationship is reciprocated by UDOT. UDOT includes the HSO as 

a partner to use HSIP fl exible funds to implement behavioral programs. UDOT also provided 

a portion of STP Enhancement Funds to the SHSO for education and outreach programs 

involving pedestrian safety. 

The benefi ts of the SHSP collaborative approach carry over to other projects as well. Personnel 

involved with the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) are intimately 

involved in SHSP implementation. As a result, the MCSAP and the SHSP work in concert to 

address commercial vehicle traffi c safety. This collaboration has led to the adoption of new 

technologies, such as speed detection signs, specifi cally addressing commercial vehicle safety.

Results

The State’s adoption of a collaborative problem solving approach resulted in improved data 

collection and analysis capabilities, new interagency collaborations on planning activities, 

and improved utilization of limited State resources.

Key Accomplishments

• Built trust and understanding through 

inter/intraagency communication.

• Improved data collection and analysis 

capabilities.

• Considered safety in a wider range of 

transportation planning processes.

Contact: Robert Hull 

Director, Traffi c and Safety Division 

Utah DOT

801-965-4273

rhull@utah.gov
4

Case Study 2-4

Motor Vehicle Administration Partner

 Case Study 2-4 – Motor Vehicle Administration Partner

The Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA) 

is a member of the SHSP Executive Committee and 

signed a MOU stating their support for the SHSP. 

Once the SHSP was developed, it was important 

to the Management Committee and the SHSP 

Champion that Executive Committee members 

live up to the commitments in the MOU and take 

responsibility for implementation. This was a theme 

mentioned at each Executive Committee meeting 

and at both Traffi c Safety Summits. At an Executive Committee meeting in December 2006, 

members were asked to assume responsibility to monitor implementation of the various 

emphasis areas. Given their important role in safety, the MVA agreed to lead implementation 

for the following emphasis areas:

• Distracted Driving;

• Older Drivers;

• Younger Drivers;

• Motorcycle Safety; and

• Truck and Bus Safety.

Each of these areas relates specifi cally to work conducted by the MVA. Because these efforts 

involve several offi ces and divisions within the MVA, the Administrator felt it was important 

to have a single individual coordinate all activities, including the preparation of quarterly 

progress reports. In January 2007, the Administrator designated an individual within the 

MVA to monitor the work of the emphasis area teams because “we are a safety agency, and 

it is important we do our part to improve safety through the SHSP,” he said. No additional 

funding was necessary for this position as the SHSP coordinator responsibilities were assigned 

to an existing MVA staff member.

In addition to the SHSP coordinator, two MVA staff members volunteered and continue to 

be actively involved as emphasis area team leaders, and the MVA has taken a lead role on 

numerous individual strategies and action steps.

Results

Propelled by the Administrator’s leadership, the Maryland MVA has taken an active role in 

ensuring SHSP implementation: a single designated coordinator overseeing fi ve emphasis 

areas, two emphasis area team leaders, and a number of leaders for strategy and action steps. 

Refl ecting this commitment to the SHSP, and safety as a whole, the MVA created a Driver 

Safety Division.

Key Accomplishments

• Assumed a strong leadership role in 

SHSP implementation.

• Secured MVA employee involvement 

and buy-in on SHSP implementation.

• Created Driver Safety Division within 

MVA.

Contact: Nanette Schieke

Chief, Driver Safety Division

Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration

410-787-7977

nschieke@marylandmva.com
5

Case Study 2-5

Emergency Medical Services Partner

 Case Study 2-5 – Emergency Medical Services Partner

Originally, Maryland’s SHSP development 

process envisioned EMS as part of all emphasis 

areas. However, given the importance of EMS in 

improving safety, the State EMS Director felt a more 

focused effort was needed. The Executive Director 

of the Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical 

Service Systems (MIEMSS) discussed the issue with 

the SHSP Executive Committee, and they decided 

to add EMS as a separate emphasis area. The EMS 

emphasis area team, which includes key EMS and 

law enforcement representatives, developed an 

action plan funded primarily by the State EMS 

agency.

The MIEMSS Public Information Director was assigned to work with the Executive Director 

and other members of the emphasis area team on the implementation plan and serve as 

cochair of the SHSP Public Information Committee. This committee meets periodically to 

review various public information and education activities such as the “Choose Safety for 

Life” campaign launched in the summer of 2008.

MIEMSS promotes safe driving through a number of other activities, such as the “Drunk 

Driving – It’s Been Done to Death” media campaign launched in October 2007. The agency 

also advises the Distracted Driving emphasis area team. For example, with their input the 

team eliminated an action step to implement the use of screens for blocking traffi c incidents 

from motorist view due to the view shared by both EMS and law enforcement that the action 

was unworkable.

Results

Creation of an EMS emphasis area raised visibility of this important safety component among 

SHSP stakeholders. The EMS team made signifi cant contributions to public information 

efforts. EMS stakeholders actively contribute to other emphasis areas, further reinforcing the 

4E approach to safety.

Key Accomplishments

• Involved EMS agency as a prominent 

stakeholder and leader in the SHSP 

implementation effort.

• Established a separate EMS emphasis 

area to increase EMS role in safety 

implementation.

• Provides EMS knowledge and 

expertise to all of the SHSP 

implementation teams.

Contact: Jim Brown

Director of Public Information and Media Services 

Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services 

Systems

410- 706-3994

jbrown@miemss.org
6

Case Study 2-6

LTAP Support to Local Agencies

 Case Study 2-6 – LTAP Support to Local Agencies

Communicating the SHSP to local agencies is 

a required fi rst step toward implementation of 

safety strategies at the local level. Local Technical 

Assistance Programs (LTAP) serve as conduits, 

transferring highway technology from FHWA, the 

State DOT, and universities to local transportation 

agencies. Utah is using the LTAP to disseminate 

information about the SHSP to local jurisdictions.

LTAPs provide workshops, publications, videos, and 

other training materials to local agencies to improve 

the effectiveness of their transportation programs. 

They also support Road Safety Audits (RSA) and provide direct technical assistance for 

dealing with transportation challenges.

In Utah, LTAP personnel regularly promote the State’s SHSP in their work with local agencies. 

Actions by local agencies can directly impact SHSP implementation efforts. LTAP personnel 

are helping local agencies collect and manage crash data, thereby improving its accuracy, 

timeliness, and completeness. LTAPs also provide software with potential safety benefi ts to 

local agencies (e.g., sign inventory software).

LTAP staff are able to give insight into local issues and concerns to UDOT through their 

involvement with local agencies. UDOT personnel also gain additional knowledge of local 

issues through their participation in RSAs. This local information is provided to the SHSP 

emphasis area working groups to fi ne tune or modify their action plans.

Results

By tapping into relationships already in place through the LTAP program, Utah is able to 

collect information, ideas, and other inputs from local agencies and share it with emphasis 

area teams, ensuring that local input is considered as the SHSP is implemented.

Key Accomplishments

• LTAP staff routinely promote SHSP 

concepts when working with local 

transportation agencies, broadening 

the reach of the SHSP.

• Local agencies receive assistance with 

data collection and input efforts.

• SHSP working groups receive local 

insight and hear about local concerns 

via LTAP personnel.

Contact: Robert Hull 

Director, Traffi c and Safety Division

Utah DOT

801-965-4273

rhull@utah.gov
7

Case Study 2-7

Technical Support to Local Agencies

 Case Study 2-7 – Technical Support to Local Agencies

To support SHSP implementation at all levels, New 

Jersey identifi ed a need to increase technical safety 

support to local agencies. The Transportation 

Safety Resource Center (TSRC) was established by 

hiring a professional safety engineer from outside 

the university and by securing funding through 

the HSIP using State planning and research (SPR) 

funds. Rutgers University initially proposed 

the establishment of a research center to provide 

local technical assistance and training. FHWA 

suggested NJDOT be involved as a partner. NJDOT 

recommended that instead of establishing the center 

to conduct research, it would be more benefi cial as 

an operating entity of NJDOT in helping to support 

SHSP implementation.

The TSRC at Rutgers Center for Advanced 

Infrastructure and Transportation (CAIT) now serves as a one-stop shop for technical support 

to local governments on engineering, planning, training, and outreach. This assistance has 

been particularly important in the development and deployment of safety initiatives to 

implement the SHSP. The TSRC’s engineering support services include needs assessments 

and recommendations on low-cost countermeasures. The TSRC helps local agencies enhance 

crash data processing, conduct safety analysis, and develop data mining applications. The 

Center also provides technical support to the Safety Conscious Planning Network, which 

supports SHSP implementation at the regional level.

The TSRC has partnered with the NJ Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) at Rutgers 

CAIT to develop and deliver training programs and technical assistance on crash data analysis 

using advanced decision support systems. Additional training has been provided on traffi c 

signal design, electrical signal design, road safety audits, and guardrail design.

Results

The TSRC has helped local agencies improve their safety analysis capabilities. With support 

from the Center, local agencies have been able to effectively disseminate traffi c safety data to 

support local safety initiatives and grant applications such as developing and implementing 

a larger number of “quick-fi x,” low-cost safety projects. TSRC resources have enabled local 

stakeholders to develop better NJDOT project submittals, which include safety needs and 

potential solutions, allowing for a more effi cient response.

Key Accomplishments

• Established a resource center to assist 

county and municipal engineers 

in identifying low-cost safety 

improvements and developing 

better quality applications for project 

funding.

• Developed safety training programs 

for local agencies.

• Developed a new resource for 

technical support of NJDOT safety 

and engineering staff.

• Created a user friendly safety data 

warehouse to provide on-line safety 

data and analysis to local stakeholders 

Statewide.

Contact: Sarah Weissman

Program Manager 

Transportation Safety Resource Center 

732-445-0579, Ext. 135

scweiss@rutgers.edu
8

Case Study 2-8

State Safety Charter

 Case Study 2-8 – State Safety Charter 

In 2005, to strengthen the commitment to safety, the 

Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and 

SHSP steering committee were given authority by 

the Governor and key agency Directors to make 

decisions regarding the safety planning process. To 

formally document Ohio’s commitment to safety 

and the collaborative process, lead agency Directors 

signed a MOU, known as the “Safety Charter.” The 

charter will be updated as trends change. The charter 

identifi es eight overarching strategies defi ning the 

agencies’ shared mission and Ohio safety priorities:

• Crash data improvements;

• Use of a multidisciplinary approach;

• Coordination of resources at all levels of government;

• Coordination across jurisdictional boundaries;

• Pursuit of innovative technologies;

• Education of road system users;

• Involvement by nontraditional partners; and

• On-going evaluation.

The charter also commits Ohio to reduce the fatality rate to no more than 1.0 per 100 million 

vehicle miles of travel or 1,100 fatalities per year by the end of 2008. In 2010 the Charter will 

be updated to include county engineers and other local government representatives.

The charter was signed by the leadership of ODOT, the Ohio Rail Development Commission, 

the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, the Ohio Department of Public Safety (DPS), State 

Highway Patrol, FHWA, FMCSA, NHTSA, and FRA. Signatories pledged the necessary 

resources to address the principles outlined.

Results

All partner agencies committed in writing to contribute resources and support the SHSP goals. 

The charter formally empowers ODOT and SHSP leadership to manage and implement the 

SHSP.

Key Accomplishments

• Developed a formal agreement among 

stakeholder agencies to support SHSP.

• Publicly declared a fatality reduction 

goal to focus stakeholder agency 

efforts.

• Added fl exibility to the agreement 

to allow the SHSP goals to change as 

new data become available.

Contact: Sarah Weissman

Program Manager 

Transportation Safety Resource Center 

732-445-0579, Ext. 135

scweiss@rutgers.edu
9

Case Study 2-9

Electronic Communication System

 Case Study 2-9 – Electronic Communication System 

In developing the SHSP and following up on its 

implementation, New Jersey needed a means to 

effi ciently communicate with the members of its 

Safety Management Task Force. NJDOT wanted to 

establish a system enabling safety partners to post 

documents and resources, communicate information, 

and distribute updates on SHSP progress. A 

similar system had already been established on the 

Rutgers University Web site to facilitate studentfaculty communication utilizing a free, opensource collaboration and courseware management 

platform. In partnership with NJDOT, Rutgers 

developed and hosted a Web-based communication 

system specifi cally for SHSP participants, utilizing the capabilities of the preexisting Webbased system.

The NJDOT safety coordinator directed specifi cations and design of the system. Once the 

concept was established, the university developed and launched the system within a week. No 

formal agreement between the State and Rutgers was necessary and no funding was required 

other than staff time to set up the system. This system supports communication among safety 

partners outside NJDOT, which is fundamental to the success of SHSP implementation. 

While the system was designed to be a tool useful for educators, it has a wide range of 

components enabling group interaction. Project sites can be made publicly available or 

limited only to users invited to join. Some of the tools made available for the SHSP group 

were announcements, chat room, e-mail, e-mail archive, schedule, and resources. Each site 

incorporates an e-mail listserv so the site owner can communicate with the group easily, 

without having to manage large groups from personal e-mail accounts. One of the best 

features is the resources page that allows users to post documents to share with the group, 

negating the need for a separate FTP site.

Results

The electronic communication system provided an effective tool to keep SHSP partners 

informed and engaged, without being overbearing. The tool not only allows for the distribution 

of information but also for interaction and communication among partners, reducing the need 

to conduct time-consuming and expensive face-to-face meetings.

Key Accomplishments

• Utilized existing communication tool 

that was easily implemented at no 

cost.

• Established single Web site location 

to post documents, disseminate 

information, and communicate 

updates.

• Reduced need for travel and face-toface meetings while increasing level of 

information sharing.

Contact: Sarah Weissman

Program Manager 

Transportation Safety Resource Center 

732-445-0579, Ext. 135

scweiss@rutgers.edu
10

Case Study 2-10

Teen Driver Study Commission Adopts SHSP 

Strategies and Advances Legislation

 Case Study 2-10 – Teen Driver Study Commission Adopts 

SHSP Strategies and Advances Legislation

Despite a strong Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) 

law, New Jersey experienced a continued high 

volume of teen crashes. As a result, leadership 

identifi ed young driver crashes as an SHSP emphasis 

area. The SHSP Young Driver Emphasis Area Team 

developed three primary strategies and 10 action 

steps to reduce crashes among this population.

Concurrently New Jersey enacted a law establishing 

a Teen Driver Study Commission. The 15 member 

Commission is comprised of representatives of both 

the public and private sector as well as members of 

the State legislature. The charge of the Commission 

is to assess teen driving within New Jersey and 

recommend ways to reduce fatal and injury crashes. The Commission incorporated all of the 

young driver emphasis area strategies into their 47 recommendations. These are grouped 

into seven areas: Graduated Driver License, driver education, driver training, enforcement/

judicial, insurance industry, schools, and technology. Recommendations requiring legislative 

action were presented to the Highway Traffi c Safety Policy Advisory Council and the 

legislature.

Results

The leaders of the SHSP effort successfully partnered with the Teen Driver Study Commission 

and achieved agreement to move the SHSP strategies forward through the Commission. 

Although agencies receiving public funds are prohibited from lobbying, the private sector 

members of the Commission have been able to successfully champion bills included in the 

Commission’s recommended policy initiatives.

Key Accomplishments

• Enhanced communication and 

coordination among the private and 

public sectors and State legislators.

• Expedited the implementation of 

SHSP strategies by partnering with 

a public-private commission in the 

young driver emphasis area.

• Drafted legislation to strengthen 

the GDL law, require safety belt 

use in rear seats, and eliminate plea 

bargaining for GDL licensed drivers.

Contact: Pam Fischer

Director, Division of Highway Traffi c Safety

New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety

609-633-9272 

Pam.Fischer@lps.state.nj.us
11

Case Study 2-11

Law Enforcement Partnership 

with Engineering

 Case Study 2-11 – Law Enforcement Partnership with 

Engineering 

The Illinois DOT’s (IDOT) Bureau of Safety 

Engineering developed a strong partnership with law 

enforcement resulting in improved safety outcomes. 

In 2005, when the Bureau of Safety Engineering 

was created, it took on the responsibility of photo 

enforcement formerly handled by IDOT operations. 

By assuming this responsibility, the Bureau began 

working directly with the Illinois State Police who 

managed this effort in work zones. At the same 

time, the State was developing its fi rst SHSP and 

recognizing the importance of collaboration among 

the 4Es of safety. During a meeting involving law enforcement and engineers, police noted 

that when it rained on I-55 north of Springfi eld, cars were going off the road. The Bureau 

engineers investigated and identifi ed a pavement friction issue, which they fi xed. This 

experience served as a catalyst to ramping up collaboration between law enforcement and 

engineers, and IDOT started to integrate enforcement at district meetings as a regular part of 

doing business. 

IDOT began working closely with local law enforcement, particularly in high fatal crash 

counties. When IDOT identifi ed a high fatal crash rate in Williamson County, the State 

safety engineer contacted the Williamson County Sheriff’s offi ce to discuss the problem and 

identify solutions. The State safety engineer discussed the SHSP and explained that funding 

was available to support an integrated approach such as road safety audits and education to 

complement enforcement. Williamson County then developed a local comprehensive safety 

plan identifying locations with severe crash problems. In partnership with law enforcement, 

the county conducted RSAs, and IDOT implemented several safety projects with HSIP 

funding. IDOT took this same approach in other Illinois counties with high fatal crash rates. 

IDOT has emphasized cross-disciplinary education among engineers and law enforcement. 

For example, law enforcement offi cers serve as instructors conducting safety training as well 

as attending safety courses, which have included RSA training and a class on the Manual on 

Uniform Traffi c Control Devices. Law enforcement previously did not realize it had other 

tools to change behavior beyond writing tickets but have learned that they can contribute 

their knowledge of driver behavior to improve the roadway system. Engineers typically do 

not think about where police can pull over violators when they are designing roadways but 

are now incorporating law enforcement needs into their work. Law enforcement has gained 

a much better understanding of how crash report data is used by engineers to make roadway 

improvements, which is resulting in better data.

Accountability among law enforcement on safety has increased. For example, at monthly 

meetings Illinois State Police commanders review roadway fatality trends. If the numbers 

are down in a particular area, the commander is asked to explain what they are doing that is 

working so others can learn from them. If numbers are up, they are required to explain what 

Key Accomplishments

• Improved understanding among law 

enforcement and engineering of how 

safety roles complement each other.

• Improved safety accountability among 

law enforcement.

• Trained county crash reconstruction 

offi cers and State safety education 

offi cers on RSAs.
12

Case Study 2-11

Law Enforcement Partnership 

with Engineering

steps they plan to take to reverse the trend. This effort also encourages the Illinois State Police 

to work with local law enforcement. Given increasingly stretched resources, the State Police 

have recognized that to effectively get the numbers down, they must target patrols using the 

safety data. IDOT provides law enforcement with a list of hazardous locations in the State’s 

“5 Percent Report” so they can target enforcement to those locations.

Results

Overall in Illinois, from 2004 to 2008, fatalities have decreased 23 percent, from 1,355 to 

1,043. Since implementation of the SHSP was started in 2006, fatalities on the local system 

have dropped from 50 percent to 42 percent of total fatalities in 2009. As a result of the 

problem identifi cation, improvements, data-driven enforcement, and education conducted 

in Williamson County the number of fatalities has been cut sharply, from 18 in 2006 to 11 in 

2009, based on a three-year rolling average.

Contact: Priscilla Tobias, PE

State Safety Engineer

Bureau of Safety Engineering

Illinois DOT

217-782-3568

Priscilla.Tobias@illinois.gov
13

Case Study 3-1

MOU Among Data Generators

 Case Study 3-1 – MOU Among Data Generators

The Michigan DOT (MDOT), Department of 

State, and State Police signed a memorandum 

of understanding (MOU) defi ning crash data 

management and funding. The State agencies 

invested in a team of three people, including a 

dedicated project manager, over a fi ve-year period. 

The MOU provided a basis for ongoing cooperation 

and communication concerning Michigan’s data 

systems. Researchers can review current data 

without personal identifi ers within 24 hours of 

receiving crash reports. The Michigan Offi ce of 

Highway Safety Planning (OHSP) provides funding 

for a research center at Wayne State University, which provides public access to annual 

reports on safety data.

The State’s safety stakeholders understand they all need to be working with the same data and 

statistics for each crash type; therefore, a uniform data query was developed for Statewide use 

to ensure consistency in the number of crashes for each emphasis area and other crash types.

Michigan currently is transitioning to electronic crash reporting and citation management to 

reduce reporting errors. Paper crash reports have an average of 1.5 errors per form, while 

the error rate for electronic crash reports is very low given the quality checks that can be 

implemented (e.g., it is impossible to enter confl icting data such as the weather was sunny 

and the crash occurred at midnight). The OHSP contributed $1 million in funding in 2007 for 

electronic crash reporting equipment. One county currently operates a completely paperless 

system. Citation information is processed quickly; therefore, in areas with electronic data 

processes, a person can drive directly to the courthouse to pay the fi ne after receiving a citation.

Results

The State established a uniform crash reporting system with improved data quality, reliability, 

and timeliness. Data are now widely available to all potential users to improve safety data 

analysis and dissemination.

Key Accomplishments

• Developed an MOU to clearly defi ne 

roles, responsibilities, and funding 

obligations related to crash data 

management.

• Improved data quality and timeliness.

• Ensured consistent use of data 

Statewide through uniform data 

queries.

Contact: Dale Lighthizer

Supervising Engineer

Michigan DOT

517-373-2334

lighthizerd@michigan.gov
14

Case Study 3-2

Centralized Data Source

 Case Study 3-2 – Centralized Data Source

The SHSP process requires data from a variety of 

sources to support the emphasis areas. If a central 

data source is not available, emphasis area teams 

may use confl icting data. When the safety data 

used by multiple agencies is inconsistent, tracking, 

evaluation, and problem identifi cation are diffi cult.

To improve data consistency, Ohio created the Crash 

Statistics System (CSS), a single Statewide crash 

database for use by all agencies and the public. The 

CSS is managed by the Department of Public Safety 

(DPS), which is also responsible for license, citation, 

and vehicle registration data. The Ohio Enhanced 

Crash Location and Identifi cation System (OECLIS), 

managed by the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), uses the latest three years of 

crash data, which are merged with data on roadway characteristics and then analyzed to 

identify high-crash intersections and corridors. These databases support development of 

SHSP strategies and action plans.

A second element developed by ODOT, the GIS Crash Analysis Tool (GCAT), is an on-line 

GIS Web tool designed to enhance safety analysis capabilities. It allows users to extract crash 

data spatially and to create tables, charts, graphs, and collision diagrams based on the crash 

data selected from the map. The Crash Analysis Module (CAM) Tool is an Excel template 

that was built for the GCAT and helps facilitate common data analyses and queries, including 

crashes by day-of-week, light condition, weather condition, severity, and road condition.

State and local law enforcement agencies provide funds for data collection. ODOT staff 

cleans and maintains the data and provides data analysis support for metropolitan planning 

organizations (MPO) and local agencies. Ohio used §408 funds to develop the CSS portal.

Results

Ohio’s centralized process for safety data distribution has resulted in improved consistency 

in data analysis among all SHSP partners. Problem identifi cation, tracking, and evaluation 

of safety progress have improved. The CSS, GCAT, and CAM Tool have increased local 

government and MPO access to crash data and enabled agencies to easily perform basic crash 

analyses.

Key Accomplishments

• Developed a centralized data source 

for all SHSP partners resulting in 

more consistent safety analysis 

Statewide.

• Established common data analysis 

processes enabling problem 

identifi cation, tracking, and 

evaluation to be conducted in a 

consistent manner across agencies.

• Improved local agency and MPO 

safety analysis capabilities by 

providing user-friendly analysis tools.

Contact: Jonathan Hughes, P.E.

Offi ce of Systems Planning and Program 

Management

Ohio DOT

614-466-4019

jonathan.hughes@dot.state.oh.us
15

Case Study 3-3

Data Decision Support Tool

 Case Study 3-3 – Data Decision Support Tool

New Jersey recognized a need to provide 

transportation safety data in a more user-friendly 

format. NJDOT felt that easier access to data and 

enhanced analytic capabilities would encourage 

participation by safety partners in its various safety 

programs, including its SHSP efforts.

The State contracted with the Rutgers University 

Transportation Safety Resource Center (TSRC) to 

develop a roadway safety decision support tool. 

This software program enables users to quickly 

fi lter, analyze, and map crash records. The tool also 

allows merging of specialized data sources with crash records, enabling in-depth analysis.

The TSRC developed the software as a Web-based application to enable public agency 

personnel to quickly analyze safety data. By hosting the tool on a platform of servers, large 

amounts of data can be accommodated with little effect on execution speed. The application 

processes queries submitted on-line, produces reports mapping crash location and severity, 

and identifi es contributing factors. Users can access the software from any Internet-enabled 

computer without requiring a high level of computing power. The program is secured 

through the use of login IDs and passwords to protect content and allows users to save fi lters 

and preferences. The program enables network screening, economic analysis, and diagnosis. 

The network screening layer integrates methodologies currently used by safety engineers to 

locate high-crash intersections or segments. Crash rates can be calculated for any fi lter/query. 

The software also includes a model to predict crash frequencies and severity for selected 

roadways. Future elements will incorporate the safety performance function calculations 

from the new Highway Safety Manual into the program for all classifi cations of roadways to 

determine which locations have the greatest potential for safety improvement.

The Center also provides engineering, planning, training, and outreach services to local 

governments and assists with crash data analysis to support SHSP implementation. NJDOT 

funds work of the TSRC through the HSIP.

Key Accomplishments

• Developed new system for on-line 

access to transportation safety data 

enabling safety partners to make datadriven safety decisions.

• Enhanced capabilities to analyze data 

and tailor reports to support safety 

initiatives.

• Distributed safety data broadly to 

encourage greater SHSP participation.
16

Case Study 3-3

Data Decision Support Tool

Results

The Web-based software tool supporting collection, analysis, and distribution of 

transportation safety data has been instrumental in the development and implementation 

of the SHSP. The approximately 500 agencies using the analysis software enjoy easy 

access to transportation safety data and can perform analyses to support their local safety 

initiatives as well as those at the State level. Broad dissemination of safety data and the 

availability of this tool has encouraged participation in the SHSP by safety partners at 

all levels.

Contact: Jonathan Hughes, P.E.

Offi ce of Systems Planning and Program 

Management

Ohio DOT

614-466-4019

jonathan.hughes@dot.state.oh.us
17

Case Study 3-4

Local Safety Planning Improved 

Through MPO Outreach

 Case Study 3-4 – Local Safety Planning Improved Through 

MPO Outreach

Because a large number of crashes were occurring 

off the State system, the Ohio Department of 

Transportation (ODOT) recognized that local 

jurisdictions needed to be more involved in safety 

analysis and countermeasure development. Since 

it is challenging to conduct outreach to so many 

jurisdictions, ODOT enlisted Ohio metropolitan 

planning organizations (MPO) to work with local 

governments to encourage their involvement in 

safety programs.

ODOT provided training and assistance for MPOs to help them develop more effective, 

safety-focused relationships with local governments. To support this effort, the State held 

a series of Safety Conscious Planning forums for MPOs to help them identify safety needs 

and defi ciencies. As a result of the forums, ODOT now assists MPOs with the development 

of safety work plans. These plans document regional safety goals and objectives, analyze 

regional crash data, identify regional high-crash locations, propose safety improvements, 

and identify funding strategies. They also facilitate coordination with local transportation 

agencies to implement highway system improvements.

MPOs analyze safety data in their regions and develop lists of high-priority locations and/or 

driver behaviors to target for improvement. Safety studies and projects are then developed 

from this list and funded with local, State, and Federal funds. In some cases the Ohio DOT 

provides funding for consultant services to support MPO safety studies.

Results

MPOs are now working with local jurisdictions to analyze data and develop safety work 

plans. They are focused on addressing regional high-crash locations, understanding regional 

crash trends, and assisting local governments with funding applications. As a result of these 

partnerships, a number of major and minor safety projects have been implemented in local 

jurisdictions.

Key Accomplishments

• Provided technical assistance and 

funding for local government to 

identify and implement safety 

projects.

• Developed a culture of safety at the 

local level.

• Increased the study of local safety 

issues.

Contact: Michelle May

Safety Program Manager

Ohio DOT

614- 644-8309

Michelle.May@dot.state.oh.us
18

Case Study 3-5

Data Analysis Strategies

 Case Study 3-5 – Data Analysis Strategies

To thoroughly investigate the behavioral aspects 

of highway safety, a number of datasets must be 

merged. In Georgia, the DOT provides locationspecifi c crash data to the Governor’s Offi ce of 

Highway Safety (GOHS) in raw database format. 

Other agencies provide injury, trauma, licensing, 

and citation data to the GOHS separately. All data 

must be integrated to perform comprehensive safety 

analysis. The GOHS realized it needed to improve 

its analytic capabilities to incorporate data analyses 

into grant applications.

A 2004 Traffi c Records Assessment recommended the GOHS hire an epidemiologist to 

strengthen safety data analysis. Epidemiology is the study of factors affecting the health and 

illness of populations, including injuries from car crashes. Therefore, the GOHS hired an 

epidemiologist to provide data analysis support. Rather than collecting and analyzing crash 

and injury data separately, the epidemiologist looks at factors that contribute to both crashes 

and injuries. The epidemiologist works closely with GDOT to manage data needs for the 

SHSP.

Results

The addition of an epidemiologist to GOHS staff has greatly strengthened SHSO crash 

analysis capabilities. The epidemiologist analyzes the clearinghouse of safety data available 

and creates queries specifi c to the GOHS’s data needs. These data runs are readily accessible 

to staff for grant applications and other needs.

Key Accomplishments

• Added an epidemiologist to GOHS 

staff to provide enhanced behavioral 

safety data analysis.

• Developed a safety data 

clearinghouse.

• Merged various datasets to improve 

safety data analyses.

Contact: Michelle May

Safety Program Manager

Ohio DOT

614- 644-8309

Michelle.May@dot.state.oh.us
19

Case Study 3-6

LTAP Provides Software and MDOT Provides 

Support for Local Safety Data Analysis

 Case Study 3-6 – LTAP Provides Software and MDOT 

Provides Support for Local Safety Data Analysis

Because the fatal crash rate on non-State highways was 

higher than on State highways, Michigan recognized 

that additional tools were needed to support local 

safety planning and programming. The Local 

Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) developed a 

GIS-based integrated roadway management system 

to analyze and report on local roadway inventory, 

safety, and condition. The software’s safety module 

helps local practitioners conduct several analyses, 

including identifying trends in crash frequency and 

severity, determining segments eligible for the High-Risk Rural Roads funding program, and 

identifying intersections of concern in their jurisdictions. Crash report data are embedded in 

the software so users can easily access crash reports when conducting safety analysis. These 

new analysis capabilities result in projects targeted to locations with high rates of fatal and 

serious injury crashes. Previously, it was common for projects to be targeted at locations 

based on resident complaints. Development of standard data queries aligned with SHSP 

emphasis areas is underway.

The software also includes diagnostic tools to analyze crash patterns to identify locations 

where infrastructure improvements can reduce crash frequency and severity. Once problem 

areas are defi ned, users can follow built-in links to National Cooperative Highway Research 

Program safety documentation to identify promising countermeasures. MDOT-funded 

enhancements to the safety module and provides funding for the LTAP to offer the software 

and training at no cost to local agencies.

Since the establishment of the MDOT Local Safety Initiative in 2004, three dedicated staff have 

provided engineering support to local agencies by conducting local crash analysis using the 

software. Additionally, MDOT conducts fi eld reviews of locations of interest with the local 

agency and provides suggestions for safety countermeasures. When staff conducts outreach 

to local agencies they provide information on the State’s SHSP to increase alignment of local 

activities with Statewide safety goals and strategies.

Results

More than one-half of counties have voluntarily sought support on safety data analysis, 

countermeasure development, and training from the local safety initiative. The local capacity 

for safety analysis has improved, and the number and quality of local safety projects has 

increased.

Key Accomplishments

• Increased the number and quality of 

local safety projects.

• Developed local agency analysis 

capabilities on safety trends including 

development of charts and maps.

• Aligned local safety efforts with the 

SHSP.

Contact: Tracie Leix

Supervising Engineer, Local Safety Initiative

Michigan DOT 

517-373-8950

LeixT@michigan.gov
20

Case Study 4-1

Road Safety Audits

 Case Study 4-1 – Road Safety Audits 

In Maryland several SHSP emphasis area teams 

(Keep Vehicles on the Roadway, Intersections, 

Young Drivers, and Pedestrians) identifi ed Roadway 

Safety Audits (RSAs) as a strategy to improve 

safety. Prior to the SHSP, the Offi ce of Planning 

had developed an RSA program designed around 

Maryland’s roadway standards. To coordinate 

all RSA activities across the State, the Maryland 

Department of Transportation (MDOT) established a 

Roadway Safety Audit Committee. The committee, 

made up of senior management and staff from MDOT districts and the Offi ces of Planning 

and Preliminary Engineering, Highway Development, Traffi c and Safety, and Maintenance, 

will develop RSA policy and criteria for audit locations, as well as review selected locations, 

fi ndings, and recommendations. This new process will help identify issues requiring a 

systemwide response. The committee will track implementation of audit fi ndings to evaluate 

their effectiveness and to revise standards as needed.

Results

The work of the RSA Committee is linked with the RSA implementation strategy in the SHSP. 

The Director of the Offi ce of Planning and Preliminary Engineering is a member of the SHSP 

Management Team and coordinates RSA fi ndings with emphasis area action plans.

Key Accomplishments

• Prevented duplication of effort by 

emphasis area teams and Offi ce 

of Planning personnel through a 

centralized RSA process.

• Linked emphasis area RSA strategies 

with existing State RSA program to 

institutionalize the SHSP process.

Contact: Mary Dietz

Chief, Regional and Intermodal Planning Division

Maryland State Highway Administration

410-545-5570

mdeitz@sha.state.md.us
21

Case Study 4-2

Emphasis Area Team Facilitators

 Case Study 4-2 – Emphasis Area Team Facilitators

Michigan formed 12 emphasis area teams facilitated 

by Offi ce of Highway Safety Planning staff to 

develop and implement action plans for the SHSP 

emphasis areas. Given the nature of the topics 

and the range of stakeholders involved, the most 

effective management strategy is to tailor each team’s 

operation to its dynamics. Team management varies 

in the use of subcommittees, meeting frequency, and 

approaches for writing action plans.

Depending on the topic and group dynamics, team facilitators assist each team’s stakeholders 

in developing a management strategy. For example, the Young Driver Action Team conducts 

many of its meetings, including all members so subgroups can learn from each other. The 

committee chair of the Senior Mobility Team meets with individual stakeholders on specifi c 

topics and handles engineering and behavioral issues separately. Teams try to calibrate their 

meeting schedules to the group’s level of activity to ensure maximum productivity during 

meetings and keep members actively involved. The Motorcycle Team meets as a committee 

of the whole two to three times per year, avoiding meetings in summer because it is the 

busiest season for the motorcycle community.

Teams use both a centralized and decentralized approach for developing action plans. Some 

teams employed subgroups to write sections and subsequently merged them into a complete 

plan. Some agencies drafted a plan and sought comment from the team members. One team 

hired a consultant to write the draft plan followed by input from the team members. A strong 

leader collects all input and fi nalizes the language for each action plan for consistency and 

clarity.

Results

All emphasis area action teams successfully developed plans for SHSP implementation, and 

all teams are actively implementing strategies identifi ed in the plans.

Key Accomplishments

• Developed action plans for all 

emphasis areas in the SHSP.

• Garnered maximum stakeholder 

involvement through tailored team 

management strategies.

• Achieved cross-education of team 

members with a range of expertise.

Contact: Mike Prince

Director

Michigan Offi ce of Highway Safety Planning

517-333-5301

princem@michigan.gov
22

Case Study 4-3

SHSP Implementation Chart

 Case Study 4-3 – SHSP Implementation Chart

One of the most challenging aspects of SHSP 

implementation is tracking the responsibilities and 

activities undertaken by multiple partners to address 

different emphasis areas. To comprehensively 

manage this process, Ohio developed 

“Implementation Charts,” which are easy-to-use 

templates for documenting the strategies, action 

steps, and implementation responsibilities within 

each SHSP emphasis area. Each action step includes 

a brief description, relative performance indicators, the agency or agencies responsible 

for implementation, relative cost, timeline, and whether this is a new or existing program. 

Relative cost is qualitatively classifi ed as low (less than $100,000), moderate ($100,000 to 

$500,000), moderate to high ($500,000 to $2 million), or high (more than $2 million). The 

timeline is classifi ed as short (less than one year), medium (one to two years), or long (more 

than two years). The charts also document the status of activities as individual action steps 

are undertaken. The Implementation Charts are in an easy-to-read format and provide the 

fundamental information necessary for tracking SHSP implementation.

Results

By using the Implementation Charts, partners are better able to track the status of action items 

and ensure tasks are completed on time. Additionally, action step responsibilities are clearly 

defi ned, communicated, and reported so each agency takes ownership for specifi c aspects of 

SHSP implementation.

Key Accomplishments

• Successfully tracked SHSP 

implementation progress across 

multiple agencies.

• Facilitated ownership of strategy 

implementation efforts by lead 

agencies.

Contact: Michelle May

Safety Program Manager

Ohio DOT

614-644-8309

Michelle.May@dot.state.oh.us
23

Case Study 4-4

Links to Existing Organizations

 Case Study 4-4 – Links to Existing Organizations

Once the SHSP is developed, it is important to 

integrate SHSP implementation activities into the 

efforts of existing groups and coordinate with other 

implementation plans. In Maryland several safety 

Task Forces had been operating for a number of years 

prior to development of the SHSP. These included 

the Young Driver Task Force, Impaired Driving 

Coalition, Safety Belt Coalition, and Pedestrian 

Safety Coalition. SHSP leadership worked with 

these groups to include SHSP emphasis area 

strategies in their work plans.

Maryland also legislatively mandated a Task Force to Combat Driving Under the Infl uence 

of Drugs and Alcohol, which examined current impaired driving laws in the State and 

recommended improvements. The Impaired Driving emphasis area incorporated the work 

of this task force into its plan and leveraged the progress already made on impaired driving 

legislation. To strengthen implementation of the motorcycle section of the SHSP, Maryland 

used information from an existing motorcycle assessment performed by NHTSA to help 

develop the action plan for the Motorcycle Safety Emphasis Area. The NHTSA assessment 

was conducted by a team of experts from outside the State and provided a fresh look at the 

issue. Using the results of the assessment improved the action plan and avoided duplication 

of effort.

Results

Integrating SHSP implementation efforts into the work of existing task forces institutionalized 

the SHSP implementation process, avoided duplication of effort, and increased the number 

groups involved in implementation. SHSP action plans are now aligned with other State 

efforts enhancing coordination on action planning, ensuring seamless implementation of 

SHSP strategies, and increasing effi ciency.

Key Accomplishments

• Leveraged existing resources to 

implement SHSP action plans.

• Engaged additional stakeholders 

in the SHSP action planning and 

implementation process.

• Avoided duplication between SHSP 

implementation and other efforts.

Contact: Vern Betkey

Chief

Maryland Highway Safety Offi ce

410-787-5824

vbetkey@sha.state.md.us
24

Case Study 4-5

Three-Tiered Programming

 Case Study 4-5 – Three-Tiered Programming

Through the SHSP process States identify a full 

range of potential safety strategies. Implementation 

of each strategy ranges from relatively easy to very 

challenging. Likewise, the potential benefi ts of 

strategies vary signifi cantly. Therefore, Utah has 

stratifi ed its SHSP approach to focus on the strategies 

with the greatest expected benefi ts and manage the 

level of implementation effort.

The safety leadership team in Utah designed the 

SHSP using a three-tiered approach. The fi rst tier 

represents emphasis areas with the most signifi cant issues and addresses strategies with the 

greatest potential for reducing fatalities and injuries. These areas require a comprehensive 

approach and include roadway departure crashes; safety restraint use; impaired, aggressive, 

drowsy, and distracted driving; intersection safety; and young driver safety. Emphasis area 

leaders are assigned from the leadership team with the primary responsibility for the issue.

The second tier addresses programs or processes currently underway in Utah. The safety 

leadership team determined these programs must continue to be supported and enhanced. 

The safety areas in this category include pedestrian, child, work zone, motorcycle safety, 

railroad crossing, older drivers, bicycle safety, and truck safety.

The third tier represents opportunities to further reduce fatalities and injuries and recognizes 

these areas would take signifi cant effort and resources to develop. Programs included in this 

tier address the crash data system, emergency services capabilities, and the safety management 

system (defi ned as not just planning, but actual physical connections among projects). 

Emerging issues, such as the role of the courts in traffi c safety, also are addressed here. There 

is some fl uidity in this tier, which provides the ability to take advantage of knowledgeable 

people and technology, manage new problems, and identify new opportunities as they come 

up. These strategies can be elevated to a higher tier without updating the entire SHSP.

Results

The SHSP’s three-tiered design focuses efforts on implementing the most feasible strategies 

having the largest potential safety benefi ts. It accommodates emerging issues and 

opportunities by providing the fl exibility to move programs among the tiers without having 

to revise the plan.

Key Accomplishments

• Enabled various types of safety 

programming to be addressed 

differently via a tiered approach.

• Allowed safety stakeholders to take 

advantage of new opportunities.

• Reduced the need to rewrite the SHSP 

because fl exibility is written into the 

Plan.

Contact: Robert Hull 

Director, Traffi c and Safety Division

Utah DOT

801-965-4273

rhull@utah.gov
25

Case Study 4-6

Multiagency Policy Council Supporting 

Safety Legislation

 Case Study 4-6 – Multiagency Policy Council Supporting 

Safety Legislation

Prior to the passage of SAFETEA-LU and the 

development of the SHSP, the Governor of New 

Jersey established an interagency Highway Traffi c 

Safety Policy Advisory Council. The Council 

was conceived as a forum for discussing State 

transportation safety needs and as a mechanism 

for facilitating safety legislation. Council members 

are appointed by the Governor and include 

representatives from FHWA, NJDOT, Division of 

Highway Traffi c Safety, Highway Safety Council, 

Motor Vehicle Commission, Emergency Medical 

Services, Department of Health, Department of 

Education, municipal law enforcement, courts, private sector corporations, and the general 

public. The Council holds bimonthly public meetings.

The Council provides a means for identifying legislative proposals through the SHSP and 

presenting them for consideration without direct lobbying, which is prohibited for agencies 

receiving public funds. Many Council members participated in development of the New 

Jersey’s SHSP and have an extensive understanding of its purpose and objectives. Since its 

formation the Council has made legislative proposals to the Governor regarding the State’s 

Highway Safety Plan (HSP) and it now also reports on SHSP implementation progress.

Results

The Highway Traffi c Safety Policy Advisory Council provides an institutionalized means of 

reviewing SHSP progress and recommending legislative actions to the Governor.

Key Accomplishments

• Tapped into an existing mechanism to 

move SHSP legislative strategies into 

the implementation pipeline.

• Engaged an existing Statewide 

Safety Council in tracking SHSP 

implementation progress.

• Established a process for the Governor 

and State legislature to be briefed 

annually on SHSP progress.

Contact: Pam Fischer

Director

New Jersey Division of Highway Traffi c Safety

609-633-9272

Pam.Fischer@lps.state.nj.us
26

Case Study 5-1

MPO Participation in SHSP

 Case Study 5-1 – MPO Participation in SHSP 

Prior to the initiation of the SHSP development 

process, New Jersey had fully embraced Safety 

Conscious Planning and established working 

relationships with its MPOs on transportation safety 

planning. The SHSP process took metropolitan 

planning organization (MPO) engagement to 

the next level. A contact with responsibility for 

transportation safety was identifi ed in each MPO, 

and each agency established a transportation safety 

program.

Once the SHSP development process was underway, 

MPO safety programs were incorporated into it. Some MPOs have now developed regional 

safety action plans linked directly to the SHSP emphasis areas. MPOs have also developed 

alliances with local agencies and organizations to facilitate implementation.

The MPOs view themselves as “Safety Ambassadors” to county and local governments. They 

provide technical guidance on the collection and analysis of data, develop solutions, and 

prepare funding proposals. Each MPO collects and analyzes regional safety data. They also 

develop and implement such safety countermeasure programs as RSAs, safety belt surveys, 

and deer crash avoidance education programs.

The MPOs have incorporated their safety goals into their long-range plans and use them 

as a basis for prioritizing projects in their TIPs. Their safety programs and activities are 

also incorporated into their UPWPs and they have dedicated full-time staff assigned to 

transportation safety.

MPO efforts are a natural and vital element of the SHSP process. Good communication between 

the NJDOT and the regional agencies facilitated their participation; no formal Memorandums 

of Agreement were established, and little or no additional funding was provided.

Results

MPO participation in the SHSP resulted in the development of their own safety programs 

and action plans aligned with the SHSP. Increased MPO involvement in safety via the SHSP 

process has resulted in MPOs using safety as a criterion in project prioritization.

Key Accomplishments

• Developed MPO safety plans aligned 

with the SHSP.

• Deployed regional and local safety 

countermeasures.

• Incorporated safety projects into 

regional TIPs.

• Enhanced communication between 

NJDOT and regional, county, and 

local offi cials.

Contact: Patricia Ott

Director, Traffi c Engineering and Safety

New Jersey DOT

609-530-2488

Patricia.Ott@dot.state.nj.us
27

Case Study 5-2

Prioritizing Safety in the Transportation 

Improvement Program

 Case Study 5-2 – Prioritizing Safety in the Transportation 

Improvement Program

While safety is required in transportation planning 

and is frequently stated as a planning goal, often 

safety issues are not given suffi cient weight in the 

project selection process to ensure safety projects are 

advanced into the programming phase. To increase 

the number of safety projects programmed, several 

Michigan metropolitan planning organizations 

(MPO) have developed prioritization processes that 

explicitly consider safety.

MPO project prioritization often takes the form of weighting project factors using a point 

system. Incorporating safety into the weighting process can be achieved through allocating 

a certain number of points to safety, which may vary depending on whether a project is 

categorized as capacity, preservation, or non-motorized. For example, one MPO allocated up 

to 20 points out of a possible 100 to safety-related factors for preservation projects and 20 points 

out of 125 points for capacity projects. Safety factors considered included separation of nonmotorized modes from vehicles, crash rates, and whether a project includes countermeasures 

such as signs and striping to reduce crashes and severity.

The Michigan Offi ce of Highway Safety Planning funds a consultant to analyze safety data 

and identify hazardous locations in most of the MPO planning areas. As part of the project 

prioritization process, several MPOs consider whether a project addresses a hazardous 

location included in the safety analysis.

Results

Through the SHSP process, awareness of the Michigan safety goal among MPOs has increased. 

The number of requests for local safety funds has increased, as well as the funding available 

for such projects.

Key Accomplishments

• Increased use of safety as a factor in 

prioritizing TIP projects.

• Achieved better understanding of 

safety problems through data analysis 

in MPO areas.

• Increased number of local safety 

projects proposed.

Contact: Marsha Small

Manager, Statewide Transportation Planning

Michigan DOT

517-373-9054

smallm@michigan.gov
28

Case Study 5-3

Safety Element in Performance Reviews

 Case Study 5-3 – Safety Element in Performance Reviews

One way to institutionalize the SHSP and safety is 

to embed it into agency culture. States are taking 

this next step by including safety as measurement 

criteria in key employee performance reviews.

In Michigan, the Michigan Department of 

Transportation (MDOT) Chief Operating Offi cer 

modifi ed performance reviews for district MDOT 

staff to incorporate safety. Specifi c measurement 

criteria in the review include partnering with 

agencies and organizations to raise safety awareness, 

train, provide guidance, and improve safety on 

all State and local roadways. The review also states staff should continue to implement 

recommendations in the SHSP. Staff is evaluated on progress on certain countermeasures, 

including successful implementation of the work zone safety policy and rumble strip and 

cable barrier programs.

In Utah, the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) Chief Operating Offi cer took a more 

quantitative approach to measuring safety progress with the performance reviews for regional 

and group directors. Measurement criteria included specifi c timeframes for identifying and 

submitting safety spot improvement projects, beginning construction on non-advertised safety 

spot improvement projects, and completing a regional review of possible locations that may 

meet signal warrants after receipt of the requested study. Regional and group directors were 

all given a numeric goal by which to reduce traffi c-related and pedestrian fatalities, which 

equated to a two percent reduction from the previous year. Regional directors are also required 

to conduct quarterly staff meetings to review fatalities and identify action items to address 

each goal. Included in a monthly meeting between the Regional and Group leaders and the 

Department Deputy Director is a review of current traffi c fatalities. The Governor-appointed 

Transportation Commission is also updated by DOT staff on the current status of traffi c fatalities.

Results

Incorporation of safety into the performance review process raised the profi le of safety and 

ensured it is integrated into the work processes of DOT district staff.

Key Accomplishments

• Established regular processes by 

which DOT district staff work with 

local agencies to provide technical 

assistance on safety and support 

safety project development.

• Aligned DOT district staff efforts with 

the SHSP.

• Institutionalized safety within agency 

culture.

Contact: Mark Bott

Traffi c Operations Manager

Michigan DOT

517-335-2625

bottm@michigan.gov

Robert Hull 

Director, Traffi c and Safety Division

Utah DOT

801-965-4273

rhull@utah.gov
29

Case Study 5-4

A Systems Approach to Project Selection

 Case Study 5-4 – A Systems Approach to Project Selection

Historically, States focused problem identifi cation 

analysis on fatal crashes to identify locations for the 

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). This 

long-standing practice was reinforced by Federal 

agencies’ performance goals focusing on fatal crash 

reduction. Fatal crashes should be a foundation of 

the process, but not the exclusive focus.

To reduce the tendency to “chase fatalities and 

injuries,” Utah is adopting a proactive and 

preventive “safe systems” approach. The SHSP 

process provided focus and guidance for the Utah 

Department of Transportation’s (UDOT) migration 

to this approach. The State has fundamentally 

changed the way crash problems are addressed 

leading to a comprehensive approach to the HSIP.

Historically, all or most projects were nominated by regions or districts. Through this new, 

broader approach, UDOT now analyzes Statewide data and the Central Offi ce nominates half 

of the safety projects Statewide. This is a fundamental change in UDOT’s safety planning 

culture. Bringing the Central Offi ce into the project selection process helps to avoid regional 

political issues and pressures and encourages objectivity. The deciding factor for project 

selection is not which entity is submitting the project, but which project has the most favorable 

benefi t/cost ratio.

The UDOT Central Offi ce reviews every project, not just safety-specifi c projects, to determine 

safety defi ciencies and, if necessary, adds safety-related improvements to the project scope. 

To resolve complaints that too much money was being spent on safety to the detriment of 

pavement preservation, exceptions were made when an element fi t into a UDOT project 

programmatic focus area (e.g., rumble strips), which meant the element would have been 

added anyway. Exception requests can also be considered if the cost of the safety improvement 

is signifi cant (i.e., 20 percent or more of the total project cost).

Results

Utah has moved towards a safe systems approach to developing transportation projects. It is 

now standard practice to consider systematic safety solutions. As a result, the State maintains 

a high annual expenditure of HSIP obligations.

Key Accomplishments

• Made a paradigm shift to a safe 

systems approach to HSIP project 

selection.

• Established a process for the DOT 

Central Offi ce to nominate HSIP 

projects based on objective criteria.

• Implemented a process to review 

all transportation projects with 

respect to safety and to add safety 

improvements to the scope where 

benefi cial.

• Achieved high annual expenditures of 

HSIP obligations.

Contact: Robert Hull 

Director, Traffi c and Safety Division 

Utah DOT

801-965-4273

rhull@utah.gov
30

Case Study 5-5

Training Improves Local Safety 

Planning Capacity

 Case Study 5-5 – Training Improves Local Safety 

Planning Capacity

To reduce fatalities and injuries throughout New Jersey, 

agencies and organizations at the local level need to 

participate in safety planning. However, many local 

governments and metropolitan planning organizations 

(MPO) have limited staff and resources available 

to conduct safety studies; therefore, the New Jersey 

Department of Transportation (NJDOT) recognized a 

need to increase safety capacity at the local level.

On a regular basis, NJDOT provides MPOs and local 

governments a list of locations with a high-crash 

frequency. Local jurisdictions are required to conduct studies to identify contributing crash 

factors and develop strategies to improve safety at these locations. NJDOT developed a Safety 

Study Guidelines Course to train local governments, MPOs, and consultants retained by local 

governments to determine crash contributing factors and to identify strategies for improving 

high-crash locations.

The course trains people how to apply a systematic process to conduct safety studies. The 

process involves fi ve components:

• Confi rm and clarify problems, goals, and project needs;

• Collect data;

• Analyze data and select relevant studies (i.e., volume, signal warrant, capacity analysis, 

sight distance);

• Identify and evaluate countermeasures; and

• Recommend a plan.

The course also familiarizes students with the project development process, project selection 

criteria, and key individuals typically involved in the process.

NJDOT strongly encourages local governments to participate in the Safety Study Guidelines 

Course. Consultants performing safety studies for local governments or MPOs are required 

to complete the Safety Study Guidelines Course before working on projects utilizing Federal 

funding.

Key Accomplishments

• Improved the ability of local 

governments to conduct safety 

studies according to State guidelines.

• Enhanced the safety culture in local 

agencies.

• Improved consistency of safety 

studies among local governments 

and MPOs.
31

Case Study 5-5

Training Improves Local Safety 

Planning Capacity

Results

The course has improved the SHSP by providing a consistent format and guidelines for safety 

studies. Instead of simply providing technical analysis support to local agencies, the training 

enhances the safety knowledge and culture of local governments and MPOs. City, county, 

and regional planners and engineers now have increased capacity to perform safety studies, 

including roadway safety audits, and are educated about the SHSP process.

Contact: Patricia Ott

Director, Traffi c Engineering and Safety

New Jersey DOT

609-530-2488

Patricia.Ott@dot.state.nj.us
32

Case Study 5-6

Centralized HSIP Funding and Evaluation Results 

in Safety Projects Aligned with SHSP

 Case Study 5-6 – Centralized HSIP Funding and Evaluation 

Results in Safety Projects Aligned with SHSP

To continue to reduce highway fatalities and serious 

injuries the Ohio Department of Transportation 

(ODOT) recognized the need to ensure safety projects 

were being developed at the local level. It was critical 

that projects be evaluated based on criteria designed 

to ensure that locations with the greatest safety 

needs were being addressed throughout the State. 

ODOT also wanted to provide more opportunity for 

local agencies to propose safety projects.

To achieve these goals, ODOT centralized Highway 

Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funding and 

developed a management process that includes 

district safety review teams (DSRT). In each ODOT 

district, a safety review team was formed, including 

ODOT representatives from planning, production, highway management, and traffi c 

engineering, as well as representatives from law enforcement agencies and local metropolitan 

planning organizations (MPO). Representatives from the Ohio Traffi c Safety Offi ce and the 

FHWA were also invited to participate. Many members of DSRTs were actively involved 

in the SHSP process, which encouraged the alignment of district safety activities with State 

priorities. Each DSRT develops and adopts annual work plans, reviews safety studies, and 

recommends countermeasures.

To identify high-risk locations and countermeasures, each DSRT reviews an ODOT-provided 

list of intersections and highway segments with high-crash frequencies. Districts are required 

to perform safety studies to determine contributing crash factors and to develop plans to 

implement safety improvements. As part of this effort information on high-risk locations 

also is provided to local jurisdictions. Project sponsors are encouraged to examine a full 

range of mitigation options, including those that are short-term and low-cost (e.g., new signs, 

pavement markings, and drainage improvements), as well as those that are mid-term and 

mid-cost (e.g., new traffi c signals, turn lanes, and realignments).

District offi ces may pay for these improvements through their annual district budgets 

or they may apply for HSIP funding. The DSRTs submit project applications for funding 

consideration on behalf of local agencies. Local governments and MPOs can also propose 

projects with support from the DSRT and receive assistance with safety studies.

A six-member committee at ODOT headquarters reviews applications for projects generated 

via the DSRT process. Projects are evaluated and prioritized based on uniform and objective 

criteria that align with the SHSP. Selection criteria include:

• Crash frequency/density;

• Crash rate;

Key Accomplishments

• Established district-level safety teams 

to identify hazardous locations and 

develop projects aligned with the 

SHSP.

• Developed objective criteria 

for project identifi cation and 

prioritization resulting in increased 

alignment with the SHSP.

• Provided support for safety studies 

by local governments and MPOs 

providing more opportunities for local 

agencies to propose safety projects.
33

Case Study 5-6

Centralized HSIP Funding and Evaluation Results 

in Safety Projects Aligned with SHSP

• Severity Index (represents the relative cost to society of a specifi c type of crash);

• Equivalent property-damage-only rate;

• Percent commercial motor vehicle-related;

• Rate of return; and

• High-risk rural roads.

The committee may approve a project proposal, select a different safety strategy, or request 

further study before allocating funding.

Results

The centralized HSIP funding process has resulted in the development of safety projects 

closely aligned with the SHSP. The process is generating increased safety project proposals 

by local agencies and MPOs.

Contact: Michelle May

Safety Program Manager

Ohio DOT

614-644-8309

Michelle.May@dot.state.oh.us
34

Case Study 5-7

Local Government Assistance

 Case Study 5-7 – Local Government Assistance

In 2005, Georgia represented nearly 20 percent of the 

total increase in motor vehicle fatalities nationally. 

The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) 

had traditionally spent most of its safety dollars 

on improvements to State route intersections. 

However, approximately 36 percent of fatalities and 

41 percent of crashes were occurring on off-system 

routes. The State realized it could not reach its goal 

of 1.0 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles of travel 

by addressing on-system locations alone.

The State developed an off-system safety program in 2005 by providing each district $1 

million per year dedicated to off-system safety projects. Each district hired an off-system 

coordinator (consultant) to manage the program. The off-system coordinators provide 

technical assistance and traffi c engineering expertise to local governments to help identify 

projects and prepare cost estimates. GDOT and local governments entered into agreements 

enabling local governments to let and award their own projects. Some districts divide dollars 

evenly among counties based on need. Others require local participation to leverage funding. 

If districts are not able to prepare projects in time to obligate the full $1 million, remaining 

balances are distributed among the other districts. GDOT conducts spot inspections once 

work begins.

Program eligibility criteria were developed with input from FHWA, GDOT senior 

management, and district engineers. Eligible activities include:

• Centerline raised pavement markers;

• Shoulder, centerline, and edge line rumble strips;

• Edge line (20 feet or wider roadways), centerline, and stop-bar pavement markings;

• Signing;

• Chevrons;

• Vegetation removal;

• Guardrail – excluding routine upgrades;

• Guardrail delineation; and

• Traffi c signals if a crash warrant is met and adequate turn lanes exist.

Key Accomplishments

• Established dedicated funding source 

for off-system safety improvements.

• Distributed off-system safety funding 

to 103 counties.

• Reduced off-system crashes.

• Improved safety knowledge at the 

county and municipal level.
35

Case Study 5-7

Local Government Assistance

Results

As a result of dedicated funding for off-system improvements, local jurisdictions have 

received increased technical assistance and traffi c engineering expertise to identify projects 

and prepare cost estimates. County and city interest in identifying safety issues and making 

safety improvements has increased. Off-system safety improvements have reduced crashes 

in a number of SHSP emphasis areas.

Contact: Kathy Zahul

Traffi c Safety and Design

Georgia DOT

404-635-8134

kzahul@dot.ga.gov 
36

Case Study 5-8

Focusing HSP Grant Applications

 Case Study 5-8 – Focusing HSP Grant Applications

The Maryland Highway Safety Offi ce (MHSO) 

recognized the need to institutionalize the link 

between the Highway Safety Plan (HSP) and the 

SHSP through the grant application process. Each 

year the MHSO conducts grant application seminars 

for prospective grantees for the upcoming fi scal 

year. During the seminars, the MHSO Director 

and other presenters instruct attendees to relate 

their applications directly to the emphasis areas, 

strategies, and action steps in the SHSP.

The MHSO provides potential grantees with materials to support linking grant applications 

with the SHSP. Each seminar attendee receives a copy of the SHSP objectives and emphasis 

areas and a full copy of the SHSP on CD. In the grant application software a pop-up was 

added to remind grantees that programs should be directly related to the SHSP; this pop-up 

appears every time the grantee enters information about an objective or activity.

MHSO program coordinators prescreen grant applications before a project is submitted 

to the fi nal grant review team. Among other criteria, program coordinators evaluate each 

application on how it relates to the SHSP.

Results

In the fi rst year after instituting the new process, the MHSO has seen a concerted effort by 

grantees to ensure projects are within the scope of the SHSP.

Key Accomplishments

• Directly linked the behavioral HSP of 

the SHSO to the SHSP.

• Raised awareness of State and 

local level grantees of the need 

to implement projects targeting 

established SHSP goals and objectives.

Contact: Vern Betkey

Chief

Maryland Highway Safety Offi ce

410-787-5824

vbetkey@sha.state.md.us 
37

Case Study 5-9

Local Safety Coordinators Adopt SHSP 

Strategies and Actions

 Case Study 5-9 – Local Safety Coordinators Adopt SHSP 

Strategies and Actions

The New Jersey Division of Highway Traffi c 

Safety (DHTS) funds Community Traffi c Safety 

Program (CTSP) coordinators in every county in 

the State. They work with local stakeholders to 

identify traffi c safety problems, develop appropriate 

countermeasures, and implement or advocate 

solutions. The coordinators are the county-level 

focal point for communication and cooperation 

among local government agencies, the DHTS, and 

the private sector on traffi c safety issues.

The DHTS Director and staff directs CTSP coordinators to link their programs directly with 

the SHSP in order to extend implementation to the local level. Since FY 2009, behavioral 

strategies and action steps within the SHSP (impaired driving, occupant protection, pedestrian 

safety, distracted driving, older drivers, younger drivers, motorcycle safety, and aggressive 

driving) have been fully adopted as elements in the CTSP business plans.

This has been further strengthened by the development of a CTSP program evaluation that 

directly links CTSP activities with the SHSP. Performance and outcome measures used to 

monitor and evaluate CTSP activities relate to the strategies and actions in the SHSP.

Results

All CTSP activities are driven by SHSP emphasis area action plans. CTSP strategic planning 

documents and program evaluations are linked to SHSP implementation.

Key Accomplishments

• Used existing CTSP network to focus 

local safety activities on implementing 

SHSP action steps.

• Developed CTSP program evaluation 

tool to monitor local implementation 

of behavioral strategies and actions in 

the SHSP.

Contact: Pam Fischer

Director

New Jersey Division of Highway Traffi c Safety

609-633-9272

Pam.Fischer@lps.state.nj.us 
38

Case Study 5-10

Grant Writing Assistance Focuses on SHSP

 Case Study 5-10 – Grant Writing Assistance Focuses on SHSP

The Michigan Offi ce of Highway Safety Planning 

(OHSP) partners with police on traffi c enforcement 

efforts as part of its annual Highway Safety Plan 

(HSP). To receive funding, each year every county 

law enforcement agency and the State Police write 

grant applications describing the data-driven need 

for traffi c enforcement efforts. Law enforcement 

agencies typically have few grant writing resources, 

and in the past it took considerable time to revise 

grant application drafts by both law enforcement 

and OHSP staff. To assist law enforcement with this process, the OHSP developed a law 

enforcement grant shell, or template, to provide a framework for applications.

The OHSP populates the template with current crash data on key SHSP emphasis areas, 

including safety belts and impaired driving. The grant shell describes general enforcement 

strategies to support the SHSP, including national mobilization efforts defi ned by NHTSA 

and strategies based on State problem identifi cation. The grant application does not dictate 

methods for enforcement so each agency can customize approaches for its region, but it 

provides consistency on addressing SHSP goals related to law enforcement.

Results

This approach has allowed law enforcement to minimize time writing grant applications and 

improved the quality of the applications.

Key Accomplishments

• Developed effi cient grant application 

process.

• Used current, centralized data rather 

than local data.

• Strengthened the partnership between 

the Highway Safety Offi ce and law 

enforcement.

Contact: Mike Prince

Director

Michigan Offi ce of Highway Safety Planning

517-333-5301

princem@michigan.gov
39

Case Study 5-11

SHSP Committee Provides Forum for Data 

Collection Improvements

 Case Study 5-11 – SHSP Committee Provides Forum for Data 

Collection Improvements

Since data is the foundation of transportation safety 

planning, the Ohio Department of Transportation 

identifi ed data improvement as one of the priority 

emphasis areas in its SHSP. Each year the Federal 

Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) 

publishes a State-by-State safety data quality rating 

that summarizes the completeness, timeliness, 

accuracy, and consistency of State-reported 

commercial motor vehicle crash and inspection 

records. States receive either a poor, a fair, or a good 

rating. Ohio received a “fair” rating and wanted to 

improve its “timeliness” rating to receive Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) 

incentive funds.

Ohio’s TRCC is responsible for overseeing data improvements included in the SHSP. The 

TRCC is the perfect forum for addressing this issue since all the necessary partners are 

members of the committee. Ohio’s Department of Public Safety (DPS), which provides 

motor carrier crash data to the FMCSA, did not realize that by not meeting the Federal 

data reporting deadline, the State was being penalized. Through its participation in Traffi c 

Records Coordinating Committee (TRCC) meetings, DPS learned of this problem and was 

able to modify its data reporting process to accommodate the deadline. The policy changes 

involved the department obtaining crash data from local governments in a timelier manner 

to meet FMCSAs data reporting requirements.

Results

By improving the timeliness of its data reporting, and therefore its safety data quality rating, 

Ohio received several hundred thousand dollars in MCSAP incentive funds.

Key Accomplishments

• Used collaborative process of the 

TRCC to conduct problem solving 

related to data quality.

• Improved quality of commercial 

vehicle safety data resulting in the 

receipt of MCSAP funding.

• Implemented improvements in one of 

the key SHSP emphasis areas.

Contact: Tom Hollingsworth

Chief, Traffi c Statistics 

Ohio Department of Public Safety

 614 -387-2800

THollingsworth@dps.state.oh.us 
40

Case Study 5-12

Collaborative Process Improves 

Work Zone Safety

 Case Study 5-12 – Collaborative Process Improves Work 

Zone Safety

Work zones are often high-crash locations, and many 

of the crashes in work zones involve commercial 

vehicles. Enforcement can be challenging, especially 

if the work zones are not designed to accommodate 

enforcement activities. For example, if the work 

zone covers a long stretch of road, law enforcement 

offi cers may not have adequate room to safely pull 

vehicles over.

Ohio’s SHSP identifi ed work zone safety as an emphasis area. A team consisting of engineers, 

law enforcement offi cers, and Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) personnel 

was formed to better understand the issue of work zone safety. This Work Zone Safety Team 

collaborated with key agencies to discuss issues, pool resources, target efforts, and develop a 

comprehensive work zone safety plan.

To improve work zone safety performance, the Team develops a comprehensive plan to 

improve safety and enable improved enforcement for all work zones scheduled by the Ohio 

Department of Transportation (ODOT) each year. This multiagency effort incorporates 

resources and input from the highway patrol, engineering, MCSAP, and the Ohio Traffi c 

Safety Offi ce. The group works together to identify work zone areas to target with increased 

enforcement and inspection efforts. The highway patrol identifi ed appropriate locations 

for speed enforcement. MCSAP provided truck enforcement and truck inspection support. 

In some cases, the Department of Public Safety used §402 funds to provide additional non 

truck-related enforcement. The Team also provides construction zone signage information to 

improve safety and aid enforcement efforts.

Results

The Work Zone Safety Team now conducts annual strategic planning related to safety in 

and around work zones. As a result, the ODOT engineering department has changed its 

construction zone design practices to better accommodate trucks. The department also has 

adopted practices that better accommodate enforcement activities in its work zones.

Key Accomplishments

• Developed collaborative process for 

safety planning focused on work 

zones.

• Increased consideration of safety in 

work zone design.

Contact: Michelle May

Safety Program Manager

Ohio DOT

614-644-8309

Michelle.May@dot.state.oh.us
41

Case Study 5-13

Truck Safety Commission Supports 

SHSP Efforts

 Case Study 5-13 – Truck Safety Commission Supports 

SHSP Efforts

The Michigan legislature established a Truck Safety 

Commission (TSC) with a dedicated Truck Safety 

Fund to increase commercial vehicle safety. The 

Commission is appointed by the Governor and 

includes members from Michigan Department of 

Transportation, the State Trucking Association, 

higher education institutions, the Department 

of Motor Vehicles, labor groups, private motor 

carriers, and the Offi ce of Highway Safety Planning. 

Revenue for the Fund is generated from local 

trucking company fees, vehicle registrations, and 

motor carrier fees. Truck safety grants support commercial vehicle education, enforcement, 

and research. While the Commission predated the SHSP, the existing structure has been 

tapped to implement strategies for the commercial vehicle safety emphasis area. The TSC’s 

annual strategic plan serves as the emphasis area action plan for commercial vehicle safety.

TSC activities supporting the SHSP include truck driver continuing education, Share the Road 

Safely public education, special enforcement operations, education, training for prosecutors 

and magistrates, and research to enable progress tracking.

Results

Dedicated funding, communication, and collaboration stimulated by the TSC has enabled 

enhanced commercial vehicle safety efforts and resulted in improved truck safety.

Key Accomplishments

• Utilized existing organizational 

structure to maximize commercial 

vehicle safety efforts.

• Conducted commercial driver safety 

belt survey.

• Streamlined court processes through 

prosecutor education on commercial 

vehicle regulations.

Contact: Mike Prince

Director

Michigan Offi ce of Highway Safety Planning

517-333-5301

princem@michigan.gov
42

Case Study 5-14

Enforcement and Engineering Collaboration

 Case Study 5-14 – Enforcement and Engineering 

Collaboration

The Michigan Department of Transportation 

(MDOT) engineering staff and the State Police 

developed a commercial vehicle strategy team 

comprised of six individuals from each agency for 

enhanced communication and collaboration.

The catalyst for formation of the team was a 

professionally facilitated three-day meeting during 

which participants discussed organizational and 

operational challenges and the need for a new 

approach. During this initial meeting, the concept 

of the Commercial Vehicle Strategy Team was generated, and the group developed a mission 

statement, goals, and defi ned a quarterly meeting structure.

On an ongoing basis, the team collaborates on truck size and weight and safety issues with 

a subcommittee dedicated to each. The subcommittees make recommendations to the 

Committee at large on improvements.

Results

As a result of input from the Strategy Team, MDOT has installed 15 new weigh stations 

and maintained and enhanced other stations previously targeted for closure. The State has 

installed wireless weigh-in-motion technology at 21 locations, and repairs and enhancements 

are being made to existing sites. MDOT has installed safe enforcement sites (pull-out stations) 

where trucks can be safely pulled over for size and weight inspections.

Key Accomplishments

• Developed structure for enhanced 

collaboration on commercial vehicle 

issues.

• Increased discussion of truck safety 

issues to support the SHSP.

• Installed new infrastructure to 

increase truck regulatory enforcement.

Contact: Captain Robert Powers

Traffi c Safety Division

Michigan State Police

517-336-6447

powersr@michigan.gov
43

Case Study 5-15

Engaging Local Agencies in Commercial 

Vehicle Inspections

 Case Study 5-15 – Engaging Local Agencies in Commercial 

Vehicle Inspections

Commercial vehicle safety is an emphasis area in 

the Michigan SHSP, with goals including reduced 

fatigue-related crashes, improved heavy truck 

maintenance, and a strengthened commercial driver 

license program. The commercial vehicle safety 

emphasis area action plan identifi es enforcement 

as a strategy for achieving SHSP goals; however 

State resources are limited. To extend enforcement 

capabilities, the State Police developed programs to 

engage local law enforcement in commercial vehicle 

inspections.

Michigan State Police conduct basic commercial vehicle inspection introductory classes 

and train local police agencies to conduct North American commercial vehicle inspections. 

Through a Special Transportation Enforcement Team (STET), State Police provide fi eld 

training and mentoring for local offi cers certifi ed to conduct inspections. The STET offi cers 

work alongside local police during special training sessions. During a typical event, State 

Police set up temporary operations at a weigh station, rest area, or along the roadside and offer 

fi eld training to local offi cers certifi ed in North American inspections. This format enables 

experienced State commercial vehicle enforcement specialists to communicate enforcement 

strategies and best practices to local law enforcement.

Results

Thirty local agencies have been certifi ed to conduct North American standard inspections and 

hours of service enforcement, and some local agencies have established dedicated commercial 

vehicle enforcement teams.

Key Accomplishments

• Increased commercial vehicle 

inspections.

• Improved local law enforcement 

knowledge of Federal safety 

regulations and commercial vehicle 

safety issues.

• Increased local offi cer confi dence in 

conducting truck inspections.

Contact: Lt. Ron Crampton

Traffi c Safety Division

Michigan State Police

517-336-6476

CramptonR@michigan.gov
44

Case Study 5-16

SHSP/HSIP Alignment

 Case Study 5-16 – SHSP/HSIP Alignment

Because the target fatal crash rate had not been 

achieved on the non-DOT portion of its road 

network, Michigan recognized that greater focus 

on local safety projects was needed. The Michigan 

Department of Transportation (MDOT) has a policy 

to distribute a cover letter to regional engineers and 

system managers strongly encouraging submission 

of safety projects in the annual call for projects. In 

addition, to provide more focus at the local level, 

the 2008 call for projects highlighted the need for 

local safety projects. As part of the process, MDOT 

delivered presentations on the SHSP at State 

conferences to increase awareness and alignment of 

safety projects with the emphasis areas.

In letters to the county road association and 

municipal league announcing the call for high-risk 

rural road and local safety projects, MDOT requires benefi t/cost or time-to-return analysis 

on all project submissions for better alignment with the SHSP. To support local agencies in 

completing this requirement, MDOT provides a listing of accepted crash reduction factors 

for commonly submitted projects. The letters also promote submission of non-motorized 

projects, which aligns with the SHSP’s emphasis area on pedestrians and bicycles. To help 

with identifi cation of high-risk locations, MDOT provides fatal and serious-injury crash maps 

by region on the Web site. Regional MDOT staff provides assistance to local agencies on 

project development when requested to make sure safety projects fi t into a SHSP focus area.

Results

By providing local agencies more details on the types of safety projects MDOT seeks, the 

quality of submittals is improving and safety projects are aligning with SHSP emphasis areas.

Key Accomplishments

• Established a strong safety focus in 

regional DOT offi ces emphasizing the 

SHSP.

• Provided improved guidance on 

safety project development to local 

agencies resulting in improved project 

quality and focus on the most serious 

hazardous locations.

• Implemented multiple pedestrian 

safety projects including countdown 

pedestrian signals, dynamic speed 

signs in school areas, pedestrian 

freeway overpasses, and grade 

separation of a bike path crossing.

Contact: Jim D’Lamater

Safety Engineer

Michigan DOT

517-335-2224

dlamaterj@michigan.gov
45

Case Study 6-1

SHSP Newsletters

 Case Study 6-1 – SHSP Newsletters

Sustaining support and interest in the SHSP is 

diffi cult, particularly since people involved in 

implementation usually have other responsibilities 

as well. To maintain interest and activity in the 

SHSP, Maryland publishes a quarterly newsletter 

highlighting Statewide and local activities 

conducted by emphasis area and regional teams. 

The newsletter is sent to an extensive e-mail 

distribution list, including members of the SHSP 

Executive Committee, the SHSP implementation 

team, participants of the two SHSP Summits, elected offi cials, and other key Federal and State 

stakeholders. The newsletter includes a Champion’s Corner highlighting the contributions of 

exceptional SHSP supporters who devote signifi cant time and energy to the plan.

Maryland usually publishes the newsletter following the quarterly meetings of the SHSP 

Implementation Team at which time emphasis area and regional team leaders provide 

progress reports. The Governor has agreed to contribute a safety message on a periodic basis, 

and newsletter recipients submit ideas for future articles. An SHSP consultant creates the 

newsletter with funding from the Maryland Highway Safety Offi ce, and content is approved 

by the SHSP Management Team.

Results

The SHSP Newsletter is helping maintain momentum for SHSP implementation by keeping 

a broad range of safety stakeholders informed on its progress. The newsletter credits those 

that are moving the implementation process forward and motivates stakeholders to continue 

implementation efforts. This marketing tool keeps safety stakeholders abreast of State and 

regional activities and events related to safety.

Key Accomplishments

• Used a newsletter as a vehicle 

for ongoing SHSP marketing to 

stakeholders.

• Highlighted accomplishments of key 

SHSP supporters via a newsletter.

• Educated a wide audience about 

ongoing safety activities.

Contact: Vern Betkey

Director

Maryland Highway Safety Offi ce

410-787-5824

vbetkey@sha.state.md.us
46

Case Study 6-2

SHSP Leadership Summit

 Case Study 6-2 – SHSP Leadership Summit

As Maryland moved forward on implementation, 

the need for greater participation at the regional and 

local level became clear. To address this concern, 

the Management Team determined the second 

SHSP Summit should focus on leadership and on 

how individuals at the local level could participate 

in the process. A regional approach also provided 

an opportunity to involve the metropolitan planning 

organizations (MPO) and other regional planning 

agencies. This was viewed as a way to address 

the SHSP requirement that the plan apply to all 

public roads. These organizations have a direct link to local elected offi cials, an important 

constituency for SHSP success. The Secretary of Transportation sent a letter to mayors, county 

council members, and other elected offi cials asking them to create a team from their counties. 

The Community Traffi c Safety Program (CTSP) coordinators, who are active in every county 

in the State, were tasked to assist with the formation of the Summit teams.

More than 400 individuals attended the Summit and participated in the regional breakout 

sessions where data were provided on the region’s most serious transportation safety 

problems. Participants viewed the data and selected the applicable emphasis areas. They 

reviewed the SHSP Statewide strategies and action steps and adapted those that were relevant.

Results

Following the Statewide Summit, two regions went on to hold Regional Safety Summits, 

with support provided by the CTSP coordinators and the State Highway Administration’s 

district personnel. One region invested in a radio campaign to promote safety. The Baltimore 

Metropolitan Council established a standing committee on highway safety. The effort also 

resulted in the development of a young driver program by one county’s Superintendent of 

Public Schools, a group that had previously not been as active in SHSP implementation.

Key Accomplishments

• Engaged a wide range of stakeholders 

at the regional and local levels.

• Achieved increased communication 

and coordination among safety 

disciplines.

• Developed new ideas and approaches 

to SHSP implementation at the local 

level.

Contact: Vern Betkey

Director

Maryland Highway Safety Offi ce

410-787-5824

vbetkey@sha.state.md.us
47

Case Study 6-3

Branding and Marketing the SHSP

 Case Study 6-3 – Branding and Marketing the SHSP

SHSPs provide a State’s safety stakeholders with 

clear and consistent goals, performance measures, 

and strategies for addressing motor vehicle-related 

fatalities and injuries. States are using branding and 

marketing to increase exposure and gain support of 

their plans among their partners and the public.

States with a strong core goal have been successful 

in using it as the message to promote their SHSP. Such messages include “Zero Fatalities: 

A Goals We Can Live With,” “Toward Zero Deaths,” and “Target Zero.” Developing goals 

like this requires strong support from everyone in the participating agencies’ management 

structures. Other States have chosen effective yet softer messages such as, “Blueprint to 

Arrive Alive” or “Blueprint to Safer Roadways” to promote their SHSPs.

Branding focuses the public on the SHSP and its related programs, and not on an agency. 

This is effective in promoting the safety coalition’s partnership, eliminating any agency’s 

“baggage” (intraagency or with the public), and mitigating turf issues among coalition 

members. One State refl ected on the advantage of a branded message as, “It doesn’t belong 

to anybody; it belongs to everybody.”

Branding the SHSP ensures all partners send a consistent message. Logos, messaging, and 

collateral artwork are often created and distributed to coalition members and provided 

to safety partners, ensuring unity of appearance Statewide. At least one State (Utah) is 

implementing an integrated and comprehensive media/marketing plan to further promote 

their SHSP and zero goal. Media campaigns, billboards, and events heighten awareness and 

support for SHSP programs through a unifi ed marketing plan. The unifi ed plan is a year-long 

coordination effort to maximize the media resources available for outreach and allows for a 

near weekly safety campaign message through varying media outlets. Federal funds are used 

to support the cost of the marketing plan, and some costs are absorbed by individual agencies 

through their normal marketing efforts.

Results

Effective branding combined with a comprehensive media/marketing plan has resulted 

in increased stakeholder and public recognition and support of the State’s SHSP and its 

implementation strategies.

Key Accomplishments

• Fostered increased public awareness 

and support through SHSP branding.

• Promoted SHSP successes via a 

marketing plan.

Contact: Robert Hull 

Director, Traffi c and Safety Division 

Utah DOT

801-965-4273

rhull@utah.gov
48

Case Study 6-4

Legislative Symposium

 Case Study 6-4 – Legislative Symposium

To enlist the support of New Jersey legislators for 

safety initiatives, the State’s metropolitan planning 

organizations (MPOs), with support of New Jersey 

Department of Transportation (NJDOT) and the 

Division of Highway Traffi c Safety, organized and 

facilitated a Statewide legislative symposium. The 

half-day event was designed to educate legislators 

about New Jersey’s safety needs and market the 

SHSP.

The symposium agenda included presentations by NJDOT on pedestrian and bicycle safety 

initiatives, by the State Police on aggressive driving programs, by Mothers Against Drunk 

Driving (MADD) on impaired driving, and by the New Jersey Safety Council on young 

drivers. Legislators also were asked to discuss pending legislation relevant to transportation 

safety.

To encourage participation in advance of the symposium, legislators were sent information 

about New Jersey’s SHSP and initiatives being pursued through the State’s Transportation 

Safety Policy Advisory Council. It was critical that no lobbying for specifi c legislation be 

conducted during the symposium, as it is prohibited for agencies receiving Federal funding. 

However, with increased information about New Jersey’s safety needs, legislators were 

better educated about the kinds of approaches they could pursue legislatively to further the 

State’s safety agenda. All costs, including staff time for preparation and meeting space, were 

underwritten by the MPOs.

Results

Given the success of the event and the positive response from legislators, New Jersey intends 

to conduct this symposium again in the future.

Key Accomplishments

• Educated State legislators on the 

SHSP.

• Initiated dialogue between safety 

professionals and State legislators.

• Presented technical information on 

data necessary to identify and support 

legislative initiatives.

Contact: John D. Ward

Associate Director, Planning Division

Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission

 215-238-2899

jward@dvrpc.org
49

Case Study 7-1

Tracking Local Project Implementation

 Case Study 7-1 – Tracking Local Project Implementation

Ohio’s SHSP includes an emphasis area focused 

on the reduction of fi xed-object, intersection, crossmedian, and head-on crashes. Strategies include 

identifying locations with high numbers of such 

crashes and making safety improvements to them. 

To monitor project implementation, the Ohio 

Department of Transportation (ODOT) developed 

a formal process to track district-level progress on safety projects, countermeasures, and 

studies.

ODOT monitors district performance via the Safety and Congestion Work Plan. The database 

supporting the Work Plan includes recommended low- and moderate-cost countermeasures 

for specifi c locations. It also provides fi elds for estimated and actual costs, estimated and 

actual start date, estimated and actual completion date, progress, and crashes over the 

past three years. If a project milestone is not met, the project appears on a past due list. 

Project locations are populated by ODOT, and county managers provide status updates on 

countermeasures for each location.

Results

The project tracking tool has enabled ODOT to closely monitor safety project implementation 

in the districts. The system has been effective in informing ODOT of project delays and 

backlogs so issues can be addressed quickly.

Key Accomplishment

• Developed a database enabling ODOT 

to track implementation of district 

safety countermeasures by location.

Contact: Michelle May

Safety Program Manager

Ohio DOT

614-644-8309

Michelle.May@dot.state.oh.us
50

Case Study 7-2

SHSP Steering Committee Manages 

Implementation with Tracking Tools

 Case Study 7-2 – SHSP Steering Committee Manages 

Implementation with Tracking Tools

To ensure implementation of the SHSP is progressing 

according to plan, the Steering Committee requires 

emphasis area team leaders to report the status of 

their action items on a quarterly basis. To support 

this effort the Ohio Department of Transportation 

(ODOT) has developed two tools to streamline the 

tracking and evaluation process.

Quarterly reports display the priority strategies, give 

an update on the annual safety goal, and provide the 

actual number of fatalities to date by emphasis area. 

Each emphasis area team leader provides updates on the status of individual implementation 

activities for each priority strategy. The SHSP steering committee receives a master quarterly 

report to enable comprehensive tracking of implementation.

Example of Quarterly Report Entry:

Emphasis Area I – Fixed Object Crashes.

Priority Strategy – Conduct RSAs.

Comments – ODOT staff has identifi ed locations and begun RSA reviews. All RSAs are to be 

conducted by the end of 2009.

ODOT analysts also provide automated quarterly reports to the Steering Committee showing 

fatalities and incapacitating injuries by emphasis area. The spreadsheet shows fatalities 

for a three-year period. This report allows the Steering Committee to track fatality and 

incapacitating injury trends and measure progress against goals.

Results

ODOT developed user-friendly tracking and evaluation tools to improve the SHSP Steering 

Committee’s ability to monitor implementation progress. The procedures developed provide 

relevant and timely information to the Steering Committee so implementation challenges are 

identifi ed early and can be addressed.

Key Accomplishments

• Developed user-friendly tracking 

tools enabling the Steering Committee 

to monitor SHSP implementation 

progress.

• Established a process for emphasis 

area team leaders to regularly update 

SHSP leadership on implementation 

status.

Contact: Michelle May

Safety Program Manager

Ohio DOT

614-644-8309

Michelle.May@dot.state.oh.us