Page 1 of 39

MINNESOTA

HIGHWAY SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

2021 ANNUAL REPORT

U.S. Department ofTransportation 

Federal Highway Administration 

Photo Source: 

Photo by Rich Kemp, Minnesota Department of Transportation. 

(https://www.newsline.dot.state.mn.us/images/20/April/01/Message%20MondayCOVID19-March302020-001.jpg) 
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 39

Table of Contents

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

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence............................................................. 3

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

General Highway Safety Trends......................................................................................................20

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

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................27

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................28

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................28

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................28

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

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

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

Glossary..............................................................................................................................................39
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 39

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence

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

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

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

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

schedules, lists, or other data.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 4 of 39

Executive Summary

The many challenges of 2020 are reflected in changes to transportation behavior and ultimately into traffic 

safety. Over the preceding five years, fatalities and serious injuries have decreased approximately 9% 

annually; this year, there was a 3% increase in serious injuries and 8% increase in fatalities.

These increases in deadly outcomes were coupled with a 15% reduction in vehicle miles traveled. Further 

analysis shows that the COVID-19 pandemic may have resulted in poorer traffic safety culture. Increases in 

high risk behavior may be fueling the increases in strategic focus areas (e.g. rises in speed, motorcycle, 

unbelted, and impaired fatal and serious injury crashes). Single vehicle run-off-road crashes--more prevalent in 

rural areas and correlated to these high risk behaviors--in turn rose in 2020.

Changing travel patterns impacted these severe crashes. Vehicle traffic shifted from the state system to the 

county and city roads--with a similar pattern in fatal and serious injury crashes. Based on statewide continuous 

monitoring sites, walking and bicycling nearly doubled. This resulted in an increase in vehicle-bicycle severe 

crashes but not in pedestrian crashes.

Many of these patterns confirm that Minnesota should continue to support our HSIP initiatives while exploring 

new strategies to ensure there is not a plateau in traffic safety. Minnesota uses a Toward Zero Deaths initiative 

to coordinate regional, grassroots safety efforts. This inter-agency, inter-disciplinary approach has consistently 

focused on improving traffic safety culture and driver behaviors including impairment, speeding, distraction, 

and seat belt use.

The Department of Transportation distributes HSIP funds geographically across all regions, setting aside funds 

for local agencies. Proactive safety and local planning have allowed wide-deployment of traffic safety 

countermeasures across all public roads, particularly the state and county systems.

New Strategic Highway Safety Plan action teams and evaluation of the existing TZD organizational structure 

will help direct further statewide strategies to ensure Minnesota can return to mitigating these severe 

outcomes.
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 39

Introduction 

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

a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 

924.15, States are required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP implementation 

and evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent with the HSIP Reporting Guidance dated 

December 29, 2016 and consists of five sections: program structure, progress in implementing highway safety 

improvement projects, progress in achieving safety outcomes and performance targets, effectiveness of the 

improvements and compliance assessment.

Program Structure

Program Administration

Describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State. 

The Minnesota HSIP program is split between Local and State projects. MnDOT Office of Traffic Engineering 

(OTE)--formerly Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology (OTST)--solicits projects from local governing units for 

the next four years; a parallel solicitation for State projects is issued to the districts. These solicitations aim to 

fully program safety projects in the next two years, but projects three to four years out are awarded to ensure 

planning. A parallel process is conducted within the Minneapolis-St Paul Metro that is coordinated through the 

MPO. Funding is distributed between Local and State based on fatal and serious injury crashes; distribution 

between each district or Area Transportation Partnership is based on the location of these fatal and serious 

injury crashes.

OTE approves all State and Local HSIP projects before they are entered in the STIP: the award memo 

received is the basis for being allowed to enter the STIP.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Operations

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process

• Formula via Districts/Regions

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

MnDOT distributes funds to local roads through the Greater Minnesota Combined Solicitation. OTE with 

representatives from State-Aid and MnDOT District Traffic Engineers, prioritize the local HSIP projects for each 

Area Transportation Partnership (ATP). Districts are given the opportunity to comment on the prioritization of 

projects. 

The allocation of HSIP funds is based on the distribution of fatal and A-injury crashes. Funds are distributed as 

follows:

Step 1: Funds are split based on % of K and A crashes in each District. 

Step 2: Funds are split again based on % of K and A crashes occurring on State vs. local system.
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 39

After the new crash reporting system was implemented in 2016, Minnesota experienced an increase in 

Suspected Serious Injury (A) crashes. This change was not uniform across all roadway jurisdictions. MnDOT is 

in the process of updating the HSIP targets based on the updated crash data. Current HSIP targets are 

approximately 40% state agency, 60% local agencies; revised targets would change the HSIP targets to 

approximately 30% state agency, 70% local agencies. While the methodology has been outlined, MnDOT is 

working to finalize the programming targets anticipated for 2026 or 2027.

MnDOT has worked to develop a County Road Safety Plan for all 87 counties within the state based on 

systemic risk assessment. These plans are given priority in the selection process. Stand-alone safety projects 

rather than countermeasures within larger projects are given priority.

A subset of counties has opted to join OTE in updating the County Road Safety Plan. This phased update is 

continuing.

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

• Districts/Regions

• Local Aid Programs Office/Division

• Planning

• Traffic Engineering/Safety

Describe coordination with internal partners.

MnDOT's Office of Traffic Engineering (OTE) works closely with the State Aid for Local Transportation (SALT) 

office as well as district traffic engineers in the distribution of HSIP funds.

A representative from the State Aid office sits on the both the steering and selection committees for HSIP. The 

offices work together to educate local agencies and district personnel on the HSIP program. Once projects are 

selected the state aid office coordinates with the local agencies and provides support as necessary. 

The HSIP project selection committee asks for input from the district traffic engineers during the selection and 

award processes. District traffic engineers provide vital background information on proposed projects as well 

as adding the local perspective. Additionally, local partners are asked to provide some documentation that the 

district traffic engineer is aware of and supportive of their prospective project if it impacts MnDOT roadways.

MnDOT also holds quarterly TEO (Traffic Engineering Organization) Safety Subcommittee meetings, at which 

additional HSIP coordination occurs.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

• FHWA

• Governors Highway Safety Office

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

• Other-City Engineer Safety Committee

• Other-County Engineer Safety Committee

Describe coordination with external partners.

Districts and Counties collaborate extensively to develop and implement safety plans as funded by HSIP; a 

subset of Minnesota's 87 counties have opted in to updating these plans.
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 39

MPOs review the priorities of the HSIP selection committees to ensure compliance with long range goals. The 

annual HSIP solicitation briefings provide an overview of the process. 

MnDOT planning staff and FHWA completed a review of coordination with MPOs across all programs. The 

report highlighted HSIP coordination in Greater Minnesota (i.e. outside Twin Cities metro) needs improvement. 

The HSIP solicitation guidance has been updated to place greater emphasis on early coordination with MPOs. 

Minnesota's Toward Zero Deaths program is the primary way local partners can integrate and become 

involved in Statewide safety programming. TZD regional coordinators build coalitions through outreach and 

workshops helping to direct action among local partners.

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes?

Yes 

See attachment "HSIP funding guide FINAL.pdf" for current guidance. Minnesota anticipates updating the 

HSIP manual to better reflect the process for how applicants will coordinate and solicit approval from our eight 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations. This document is anticipated in late 2021 or early 2022.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• HSIP (no subprograms)

Program: HSIP (no subprograms)

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2015

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Volume

• Lane miles

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Probability of specific crash types
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 39

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Competitive application process

• selection committee

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:5

Available funding:5

Cost Effectiveness:5

Other-Treatment Effectiveness:5

Other-Site Selection: planning or spot location:5

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 67

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

• Cable Median Barriers

• Clear Zone Improvements

• Horizontal curve signs

• Install/Improve Lighting

• Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

• Install/Improve Signing

• Pavement/Shoulder Widening

• Rumble Strips

• Safety Edge

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

• Crash data analysis

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

• Road Safety Assessment

• SHSP/Local road safety plan
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 39

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes 

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

Connected vehicle and ITS projects are considered for HSIP funding in Minnesota. Funds for these initiatives 

are available from multiple sources, so while the projects are competitive in HSIP solicitation, investments and 

investigations in Minnesota have been funded outside of HSIP. MnDOT has created a standalone Connected 

Autonomous Vehicle (CAV-X) office to advance connected and automated vehicle and other advanced ITS 

technologies in Minnesota; a minimal amount of Section 164 funds will help support safety investigations in 

these areas. www.mndot.gov/automated/index.html

The Minnesota CAV-X office is funded separate from HSIP with state money set aside by the Legislature. ITS 

projects will continue to be competitive in HSIP solicitation rather than program support.

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

Yes 

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

Minnesota does not use the more advanced, predictive methods in the HSM. However, CMFs are used to rank 

and select reactive safety projects.

Central Office performs a limited form of Highway Safety Manual analysis at the request of District Traffic 

Engineering staff. Reactive projects use a simplified form of HSM methods. Spot location projects are 

evaluated based on prior crash history weighted by the appropriate crash modification factor for the crash type 

and countermeasure proposed; the resulting benefit-cost ratio is used to prioritize which of these reactive 

projects receive funding. While training on the HSM predictive analysis continues, widespread use for proactive 

projects has not been adopted: Minnesota has developed risk factors for proactive projects rather than a 

prediction of total crashes.

Currently the full HSM predictive models and IHSDM software are used for corridor studies and larger MnDOT 

projects to evaluate alternatives.
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 39

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $28,804,603 $13,189,169 45.79%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$12,509,823 $8,823,129 70.53%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $41,314,426 $22,012,298 53.28%

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

safety projects?

$14,770,986

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

$460,851

Minnesota distributes HSIP funds to local partners: 36% of the safety funds were programmed to local projects.

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

$2,252,000

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

$1,252,000

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

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

$0
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 39

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

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

$36,865,819

Due to uncertainties in 2020, Minnesota sought to smooth apportionment across programs. Currently, 

Minnesota programs to 100 percent of apportionment; while this change is relatively new yet, we expect to see 

improvements in HSIP over time relative to other programs.

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

the future.

MnDOT now programs HSIP funds to 100% apportionment and will monitor for effects on obligation rate. We 

expect this over-programming of safety will continue to raise the obligation rate. OTE continues to have ongoing discussions with MnDOT Districts on creating shelf ready safety projects to better capitalize on any costsavings in the HSIP projects.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program 

General Listing of Projects 

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

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

#0122016 

(SP 0104-06) 

DISTRICT-1 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

16.7 Miles $99723 $110803 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#0221122 

(SP 0283-34) 

METRO 

DISTRICT 

Roadside Barrier – cable 2 Miles $261000 $290000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

High tension 

cable median 

barrier 

#0321018 

(SP 0306-

31S) 

DISTRICT-4 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

29.4 Miles $896397 $995997 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Widen 

shoulders 

#0321018 

(SP 0306-

31S) 

DISTRICT-4 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

1 Duplicate 

project 

$207460 $207460 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Widen 

shoulders 

#0002342 

(SP 0406-

67S) 

DISTRICT-2 

Intersection 

geometry 

Innovative 

Intersection (e.g. 

MUT, RCUT, QR) 

5 Intersections $604352 $671502 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Reduced 

conflict 

intersection 

#0521133 

(SP 0502-

116) 

DISTRICT-3 

Roadside Barrier – cable 10 Miles $1176815 $1307572 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

High tension 

cable median 

barrier 

#1121155 

(SP 1110-15) 

DISTRICT-3 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

27 Miles $359293 $359293 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Rumble 

stripEs 

#1321086 

(SP 1301-

118) METRO 

DISTRICT 

Intersection 

geometry 

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes 

1 Intersections $744429 $827144 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Intersections Reduce rearends; 

intersection 

lighting 

#8120251 

(SP 172-010-

004) 

DISTRICT-7 

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Rapid 

Rectangular 

Flashing 

Beacons (RRFB) 

0.4 Miles $353698 $353698 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Pedestrians Improve 

midblock 

crossings 

#0316302 

(SP 1926-

22S) METRO 

DISTRICT 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout 

3 Intersections $1800000 $1800000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Intersections Roundabout 

Page 12 of 39 
 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

#2121026 

(SP 2180-

127) 

DISTRICT-4 

Roadside Roadside - other 1.98 Miles $676697 $751885 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Reduce 

winter 

weather 

crashes 

#2421006 

(SP 2481-60) 

DISTRICT-6 

Roadside Barrier – cable 5 Miles $644694 $644694 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

High tension 

cable median 

barrier 

#0012319 

(SP 2713-

123) METRO 

DISTRICT 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout 

1.1 Miles $4204800 $4672000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Intersections Roundabout 

#2721229 

(SP 2713-

124S) 

METRO 

DISTRICT 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout 

1 Intersections $2000000 $2000000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Intersections Roundabout 

#2721066 

(SP 2713-

134) METRO 

DISTRICT 

Miscellaneous Road safety 

audits 

1 Study $1000000 $1000000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Data Safety 

studies 

#2722013 

(SP 2763-62) 

METRO 

DISTRICT 

Lighting Continuous 

roadway lighting 

1.8 Miles $450000 $500000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#I940039 (SP 

2786-132S) 

METRO 

DISTRICT 

Lighting Interchange 

lighting 

0.5 Miles $107415 $119350 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#3421069 

(SP 3412-

73S) 

DISTRICT-8 

Lighting Interchange 

lighting 

1 Intersections $1608184 $1786871 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#4021071 

(SP 4006-

35S) 

DISTRICT-7 

Roadside Slope Flattening 16.7 Miles $1157794 $1387132 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Improve sight 

distances 

#5522014 

(SP 5501-40) 

DISTRICT-6 

Roadside Barrier – cable 7.2 Miles $897300 $997000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

High tension 

cable median 

barrier 

#5521007 

(SP 5580-98) 

DISTRICT-6 

Roadside Barrier – cable 5.8 Miles $862640 $862640 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

High tension 

cable median 

barrier 

Page 13 of 39 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

#5821130 

(SP 5880-

198) 

DISTRICT-1 

Roadside Barrier – cable 8.8 Miles $1886905 $1886905 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

High tension 

cable median 

barrier 

#6921062 

(SP 6918-95) 

DISTRICT-1 

Roadside Barrier – cable 3.3 Miles $532950 $592167 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

High tension 

cable median 

barrier 

#7421117 

(SP 7408-53) 

DISTRICT-6 

Roadside Barrier – cable 5.6 Miles $556090 $617878 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

High tension 

cable median 

barrier 

#8521123 

(SP 8504-83) 

DISTRICT-6 

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS 

Dynamic 

message signs 

1 Intersections $250000 $398587 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Intersections Improve 

visibility 

#8821207 

(SP 880CSPE-21) 

STATEWIDE 

Miscellaneous Transportation 

safety planning 

1 Manual $99000 $99000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 Noninfrasture Systemic Data Safety 

studies 

#8822035 

(SP 880CTZD-21) 

STATEWIDE 

Miscellaneous Transportation 

safety planning 

8 Regional 

coordinators 

$48606 $48606 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 Noninfrasture Systemic Traffic Safety 

Culture & 

Awareness 

Improve 

traffic safety 

culture 

#8822035 

(SP 880CTZD-21) 

STATEWIDE 

Miscellaneous Transportation 

safety planning 

1 Duplicate 

project 

$751394 $751394 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 Noninfrasture Systemic Traffic Safety 

Culture & 

Awareness 

Improve 

traffic safety 

culture 

#8821084 

(SP 8816-

3142) 

STATEWIDE 

Miscellaneous Transportation 

safety planning 

1 Study $250000 $250000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 Noninfrasture Systemic Traffic Safety 

Culture & 

Awareness 

Improve 

traffic safety 

culture 

#8821056 

(SP 8816-

3151) 

STATEWIDE 

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Pedestrian signal 

- other 

150 Intersections $102770 $102770 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Pedestrians Improve 

signal 

operations 

#8821054 

(SP 8822-

234) 

DISTRICT-2 

Lighting Intersection 

lighting 

20 Intersections $448188 $448188 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#8821047 

(SP 8824-

183) 

DISTRICT-4 

Lighting Intersection 

lighting 

12 Intersections $304332 $338147 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#8821118 

(SP 8826-

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

100 Miles $474197 $526885 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Rumble 

stripEs 

Page 14 of 39 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

216) 

DISTRICT-6 

#8821028 

(SP 8827-

339) 

DISTRICT-7 

Lighting Intersection 

lighting 

5 Intersections $269421 $269421 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#8821031 

(SP 8827-

340) 

DISTRICT-7 

Lighting Intersection 

lighting 

3 Intersections $51944 $51944 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#8821044 

(SP 8828-

247) 

DISTRICT-8 

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS 

Dynamic 

message signs 

3 Signs $134213 $134213 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Intersections Improve 

visibility 

#8821045 

(SP 8828-

248) 

DISTRICT-8 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Pavement 

markings 

78 Intersections $73560 $73560 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Delineate 

intersection 

maneuvers 

#8821046 

(SP 8828-

249) 

DISTRICT-8 

Roadway 

delineation 

Delineators postmounted or on 

barrier 

40 Miles $94340 $94340 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Delinate 

roadway 

#8821073 

(SP 8828-

259) 

DISTRICT-8 

Miscellaneous Transportation 

safety planning 

1 Study $90000 $90000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Data Safety 

studies 

#6921055 

(SP 069-070-

040; 6917-

147) 

DISTRICT-1 

Intersection 

geometry 

Innovative 

Intersection (e.g. 

MUT, RCUT, QR) 

1 Intersections $460690 $514850 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Reduced 

conflict 

intersection 

#0121202 

(SP 001-070-

008) 

DISTRICT-1 

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control 

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers 

101 Curves $90900 $101000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Delineate 

curves 

#0421186 

(SP 004-070-

032) 

DISTRICT-2 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

12.7 Miles $33802 $37558 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Rumble 

stripEs 

#0521195 

(SP 005-070-

008) 

DISTRICT-3 

Roadway 

delineation 

Wider Edge Lines 

(6 inch markings) 

5.5 Miles $34098 $37887 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

Page 15 of 39 
 

2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

#0821022 

(SP 008-070-

006) 

DISTRICT-7 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

9 Miles $495000 $632936 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#0921165 

(SP 009-070-

009; 009-

070-010) 

DISTRICT-1 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

15.3 Miles $640968 $712186 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#1021206 

(SP 010-030-

008) METRO 

DISTRICT 

Lighting Intersection 

lighting 

35 Intersections $310050 $344500 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#1121213 

(SP 011-070-

009) 

DISTRICT-3 

Roadway 

delineation 

Wider Edge Lines 

(6 inch markings) 

130 Intersections $135000 $150000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Delineate 

intersection 

maneuvers 

#1721109 

(SP 017-070-

004) 

DISTRICT-7 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

6.3 Miles $251250 $279167 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#1821182 

(SP 018-070-

015) 

DISTRICT-3 

Roadway 

delineation 

Wider Edge Lines 

(6 inch markings) 

41 Miles $107152 $119058 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

#2721068 

(SP 027-605-

030) METRO 

DISTRICT 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Modify traffic 

signal timing – 

left-turn phasing 

1 Intersections $534600 $594000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Pedestrians Improve 

signal 

operations 

#2721100 

(SP 027-681-

037) METRO 

DISTRICT 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Modify traffic 

signal timing – 

left-turn phasing 

1 Intersections $636300 $707000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Pedestrians Improve 

signal 

operations 

#3021178 

(SP 030-070-

013) 

DISTRICT-3 

Roadway 

delineation 

Wider Edge Lines 

(6 inch markings) 

17.4 Miles $88865 $98739 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

#3421201 

(SP 034-070-

012) 

DISTRICT-8 

Roadway 

delineation 

Wider Edge Lines 

(6 inch markings) 

49.7 Miles $155616 $172907 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

#4221231 

(SP 042-070-

012) 

DISTRICT-8 

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking 

91.8 Miles $350000 $408623 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

Page 16 of 39 
 

 

2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

#4321216 

(SP 043-070-

015) 

DISTRICT-8 

Roadway 

delineation 

Wider Edge Lines 

(6 inch markings) 

90 Miles $54629 $60699 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

#4721135 

(SP 047-070-

013) 

DISTRICT-8 

Lighting Intersection 

lighting 

15 Intersections $161979 $179977 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#4921176 

(SP 049-070-

024) 

DISTRICT-3 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

13.5 Miles $472148 $2114595 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#4921175 

(SP 049-070-

025) 

DISTRICT-3 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

11.2 Miles $383651 $1719634 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#5621214 

(SP 056-070-

027) 

DISTRICT-4 

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking 

279.2 Miles $182178 $202420 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

#6521199 

(SP 065-070-

011) 

DISTRICT-8 

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking 

128.2 Miles $76726 $193889 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

#6621146 

(SP 066-070-

023) 

DISTRICT-6 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

8.9 Miles $333340 $2523696 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#7020119 

(SP 070-602-

023) METRO 

DISTRICT 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout 

1 Intersections $1906409 $2391232 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Spot Intersections Roundabout 

#7121064 

(SP 071-070-

041) 

DISTRICT-3 

Lighting Intersection 

lighting 

8 Intersections $372600 $414000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#7221067 

(SP 072-070-

009) 

DISTRICT-7 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder) 

3 Miles $502800 $1998057 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Widen 

shoulders 

#7721187 

(SP 077-070-

015) 

DISTRICT-3 

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking 

30.9 Miles $143081 $158978 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

Page 17 of 39 
 

 

 

 

2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

#7921090 

(SP 079-070-

017) 

DISTRICT-6 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

8.5 Miles $525116 $2907800 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#7922010 

(SP 079-070-

019) 

DISTRICT-6 

Lighting Intersection 

lighting 

38 Intersections $252225 $280250 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#7921230 

(SP 079-070-

020) 

DISTRICT-6 

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking 

4.6 Miles $400000 $2588494 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Rumble 

stripEs 

#8021232 

(SP 080-070-

010) 

DISTRICT-3 

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control 

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers 

36 Curves $50760 $56400 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Delineate 

curves 

#8121032 

(SP 081-070-

002) 

DISTRICT-7 

Lighting Intersection 

lighting 

2 Intersections $42000 $42000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#8321149 

(SP 083-070-

014) 

DISTRICT-7 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

6.9 Miles $90000 $1425000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#8321150 

(SP 083-070-

015) 

DISTRICT-7 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

8.7 Miles $64800 $1680000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#8721227 

(SP 087-070-

018) 

DISTRICT-8 

Roadway 

delineation 

Wider Edge Lines 

(6 inch markings) 

82.9 Miles $48496 $53884 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

#8821219 

(SP 088-070-

059) 

DISTRICT-2 

Roadway 

delineation 

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking 

374.6 Miles $425635 $472928 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

#8821156 

(SP 088-070-

067) 

DISTRICT-1 

Roadway 

delineation 

Wider Edge Lines 

(6 inch markings) 

190.9 Miles $818000 $966486 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

#8821203 

(SP 088-070-

071) 

DISTRICT-4 

Roadway 

delineation 

Wider Edge Lines 

(6 inch markings) 

1421.6 Miles $969341 $1077046 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Enhanced 

edgelines 

Page 18 of 39 
 

 

2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program 

PROJECT 

NAME 

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE 

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($) 

FUNDING 

CATEGORY 

LAND 

USE/AREA

TYPE 

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP 

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION 

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA 

SHSP 

STRATEGY 

#8821173 

(SP 088-070-

074) 

DISTRICT-2 

Lighting Intersection 

lighting 

25 Intersections $314820 $349800 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Intersections Intersection 

lighting 

#8821183 

(SP 088-070-

075; 074-

070-006; 

081-070-001) 

DISTRICT-7 

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder 

10.3 Miles $370800 $1222800 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 County 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Lane 

Departure 

Shoulder 

paving & 

rumble 

stripEs 

#2720174 

(SP 141-030-

047) METRO 

DISTRICT 

Intersection 

traffic control 

Modify traffic 

signal timing – 

left-turn phasing 

5 Intersections $1485000 $2196876 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148) 

N/A N/A 0 0 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency 

Systemic Pedestrians Improve 

intersection 

crossings 

#8821233 

METRO 

DISTRICT 

Miscellaneous Transportation 

safety planning 

1 Peer 

exchange 

$13000 $13000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164) 

N/A N/A 0 0 Noninfrasture Systemic Traffic Safety 

Culture & 

Awareness 

Improve 

outreach and 

coordination 

with safety 

partners 

Page 19 of 39 
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 39

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 395 387 361 411 392 358 381 364 394

Serious Injuries 1,268 1,216 1,044 1,127 1,992 1,849 1,660 1,520 1,569

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

0.693 0.679 0.629 0.707 0.666 0.597 0.630 0.601 0.765

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

2.224 2.134 1.819 1.939 3.385 3.083 2.747 2.503 3.047

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

47 41 22 51 67 48 52 60 55

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

155 146 126 158 291 279 221 202 203
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 39

330

340

350

360

370

380

390

400

410

420

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Annual Fatalities

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Annual Serious Injuries
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 39

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 39

Describe fatality data source.

State Motor Vehicle Crash Database

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

ownership.

Year 2020

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

Rural Minor Arterial

Rural Minor Collector

Rural Major Collector

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 39

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Local Road or 

Street

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

Urban Minor Arterial

Urban Minor Collector

Urban Major Collector

Urban Local Road or 

Street
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 39

Year 2020

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway 

Agency

178.4 466.8 0.53 1.39

County Highway 

Agency

132.4 672.6 0.95 4.81

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

20 112.6 1.69 9.44

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

45.8 457 0.48 4.8

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

Indian Tribe Nation

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2022 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:352.4

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

Target equal to 2021.
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 39

Number of Serious Injuries:1463.4

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

Target equal to 2021.

Fatality Rate:0.582

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

Progression from 2019 to SHSP goal.

Serious Injury Rate:2.470

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

Progression from 2019 to SHSP goal.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:258.4

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

Progression from 2019 to SHSP goal.

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

safety performance targets. 

Methodologies were coordinated between MnDOT and Department of Public Safety based on input from 

respective stakeholders. Given the challenges of 2020, it was recognized the 2022 targets should (1) take into 

account the pandemic spike in fatalities; (2) measure progress toward Strategic Highway Safety Plan goal 

rather than prior trends alone; and (3) not be set higher than prior years. This last point was particularly 

important to our MPO partners.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2020 Safety Performance Targets (based 

on data available at the time of reporting). For each target, include a discussion of any 

reasons for differences in the actual outcomes and targets.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES TARGETS ACTUALS

Number of Fatalities 375.4 377.8

Number of Serious Injuries 1714.2 1718.0

Fatality Rate 0.626 0.652

Serious Injury Rate 2.854 2.953

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

317.0 295.6

Traffic safety in Minnesota was a significant challenge in 2020. Unexpected changes in behaviors (i.e. 

increases in higher risk strategic focus areas) coupled with unintuitive increases in fatalities while decreases in 

vehicle miles traveled significantly impacted safety performance metrics. Historically, Minnesota has seen 
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 39

approximately 10% annual reductions in fatalities and 9% annual reductions in serious injuries; in 2020, 

fatalities increased 8% while serious injuries increased 3%.

In addition to forming statewide Strategic Highway Safety Plan action committees--particularly in areas with 

rising trends during the prior year--Minnesota has invested in a programmatic evaluation of the Toward Zero 

Deaths program. After 18 years of regional grassroots safety efforts, our stakeholders are looking for what may 

be the next organizational change lest we plateau after achieving low-cost/high-impact strategies. In 

implementing this new TZD 2.0 strategy, we hope to educate and engage more partners and to open flexibility 

within the interagency, statewide traffic safety programs.

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

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

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

53 79 77 68 59 68 61

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

105 88 160 164 150 174 130

Minnesota has monitored the changes in fatalities and serious injuries over the course of the COVID-19 

pandemic. Over this period, we have seen reduced numbers of older drivers involved in any crash. In 2020, 

there were reductions in older driver fatalities and serious injuries while pedestrian involvement remained 

relatively flat. We hypothesize this may be more a factor of exposure and Stay At Home/quarantine protocols 

rather than changes in traffic safety culture.
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 39

Evaluation 

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

• Change in fatalities and serious injuries

• Other-Change in fatal and serious injury crashes

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

the State's program level evaluations.

Based on the current trends, fatal and serious injury crashes have been trending downward across all systems. 

Last year (2020) was a particular challenge in Minnesota and across the country: fatalities rose on the local 

systems (e.g. county and municipal). However serious injuries continue to be down over the last five years. 

This suggests there may be some mitigation of the rise in unsafe behavior and severe crashes.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program?

• Other-Under consideration

Minnesota has developed Action Teams around key SHSP focus areas: these teams hope to develop leading 

indicators on how to measure progress toward implementing SHSP strategies.

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2020

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number 

of 

Fatalitie

s

(5-yr 

avg)

Numbe

r of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr 

avg)

Fatality 

Rate

 (per 

HMVMT

)

(5-yr 

avg)

Serious 

Injury 

Rate

 (per 

HMVMT

)

(5-yr 

avg)

NUMBER 

OF K+A 

CRASHE

S

Othe

r 2

Othe

r 3

Younger Drivers Crash involving 

driver age 14-20

284.2

Older Drivers Crash involving 

driver age 65+

321.6

Speed Speed-related 403.2

Impaired Crash involving 

alcohol/drug 

impaired driver or 

non-motorist

488
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 39

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number 

of 

Fatalitie

s

(5-yr 

avg)

Numbe

r of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr 

avg)

Fatality 

Rate

 (per 

HMVMT

)

(5-yr 

avg)

Serious 

Injury 

Rate

 (per 

HMVMT

)

(5-yr 

avg)

NUMBER 

OF K+A 

CRASHE

S

Othe

r 2

Othe

r 3

Unbelted Occupant Crash involving an 

unbelted occupant 

killed or seriously 

injured

269

Inattentive Crash involving 

inattentive/distracte

d driver

183.6

Pedestrian Vehicle/pedestrian 221

Bicyclist Vehicle/bicycle 69.4

Motorcycle Crash involving 

motorcycle

300.2

Single Vehicle Run-offroadRun-off-road 571.6

Head-on Head on 200.4

Intersection/Interchang

e

Intersections 872.2

Work Zone Crash in work zone 40.4

Commercial Vehicle Truck-related 155.2
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 39

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Fatalities

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

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Serious Injuries

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

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 39

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the 

reporting period?

Yes

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Fatality Rate

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

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Serious Injury Rate

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

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 39

Please provide the following summary information for each countermeasure 

effectiveness evaluation. 

CounterMeasures: Raise Posted Speed Limit 

Description: Raise posted speed limit on two-lane, twoway state highways 

Target Crash Type: All 

Number of Installations: 

Number of Installations: 

Miles Treated: 4511 

Years Before: 3 

Years After: 3 

Methodology: Before/after using empirical Bayes or Full 

Bayes 

Results: 

The segments analysis showed a 7% 

statistically significant increase in total 

crashes. There were insignificant 

increases/decreases in injury, run-offroad, and head-on crashes with most 

segment CMFs hovering close to 1. This 

aggregate result along with before and 

after operating speed data from another 

MnDOT study concludes that the speed 

limit increase from 55 mph to 60 mph had 

a very minor to no effect on total and injury 

crashes or operating speeds. 

File Name: 202006.pdf

CounterMeasures: Longitudinal Rectangular Rumble Strips 

Description: 

Target Crash Type: All 

Number of Installations: 

Number of Installations: 

Miles Treated: 1200 

Years Before: 

Years After: 

Methodology: Regression cross-section 

Results: 

On rural two-lane undivided roads, the 

CMF for centerline + shoulder rumble 

strips was: 0.73 for all crashes; 0.68 for 

single vehicle run-off-road crashes; 0.64 

for head-on or sideswipe opposite 

direction crashes On rural two-lane 

undivided roads, the CMF for shoulder 

ONLY rumble strips was: 0.68 for all 

crashes; 0.76 for single vehicle run-offroad crashes On rural four-lane divided 

roads, the CMF for shoulder ONLY rumble 

strips was: 0.66 for all crashes; 0.40 for 

single vehicle run-off-road crashes. 

File Name: 202007.pdf
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 39

CounterMeasures: Flashing Yellow Arrow Signal Head 

Description: 

Target Crash Type: All 

Number of Installations: 

Number of Installations: 

Miles Treated: 

Years Before: 

Years After: 

Methodology: Regression cross-section 

Results: 

On rural two-lane undivided roads, the 

CMF for centerline + shoulder rumble 

strips was: 0.73 for all crashes; 0.68 for 

single vehicle run-off-road crashes; 0.64 

for head-on or sideswipe opposite 

direction crashes On rural two-lane 

undivided roads, the CMF for shoulder 

ONLY rumble strips was: 0.68 for all 

crashes; 0.76 for single vehicle run-offroad crashes On rural four-lane divided 

roads, the CMF for shoulder ONLY rumble 

strips was: 0.66 for all crashes; 0.40 for 

single vehicle run-off-road crashes. 

File Name: tse-fya-report.pdf
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 39

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 39

Compliance Assessment

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

 07/01/2020

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2020 To: 2024

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

 2024

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

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

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12) [12]

100 100 100 100 100 90

Route Number (8) 

[8]

100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9) [9]

100 100

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21) [21]

100 100

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20) [20]

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100 100 100 80

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 100 100 100 90

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 100 100 100 90

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100 100 90
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 39

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

Median Type (54) 

[55]

100 100

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100 100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100 100 100 100 90

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

95 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

95 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

95 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

95 100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

95 100

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

95 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 95 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

95 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

95 100

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

100 100
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 39

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201) [191]

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

100 100

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

95 100

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

100 100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

70 100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 100.00 100.00 95.00 100.00 96.36 100.00 100.00 97.78 100.00 90.00

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

Based on a recent FHWA review, Minnesota is collecting 84.5% of the MIRE FDEs. Going forward, a process for cataloging metadata and documenting in a data dictionary is the priority.

Describe actions the State will take moving forward to meet the requirement to have complete access to the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads by September 30, 2026.

Minnesota has made great strides in achieving complete MIRE FDE access. While the fields are available, the Office of Transportation System Management is reviewing to ensure that every element has a corresponding source that is 

reliably updated. This will improve clarity and data quality for further safety analysis and to meet the requirement of full access by September 30, 2026.
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 39

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

HSIP funding guide FINAL.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

202006.pdf

202007.pdf

tse-fya-report.pdf

Compliance Assessment:
2021 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 39

Glossary

5 year rolling average: means the average of five individuals, consecutive annual points of data 

(e.g. annual fatality rate).

Emphasis area: means a highway safety priority in a State’s SHSP, identified through a data-driven, 

collaborative process.

Highway safety improvement project: means strategies, activities and projects on a public road 

that are consistent with a State strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous 

road location or feature or addresses a highway safety problem.

HMVMT: means hundred million vehicle miles traveled.

Non-infrastructure projects: are projects that do not result in construction. Examples of noninfrastructure projects include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities, 

improvements in the collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement 

activities.

Older driver special rule: applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and 

pedestrians over the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2-year period for which 

data are available, as defined in the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Interim Guidance 

dated February 13, 2013.

Performance measure: means indicators that enable decision-makers and other stakeholders to 

monitor changes in system condition and performance against established visions, goals, and 

objectives.

Programmed funds: mean those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP) to be expended on highway safety improvement projects.

Roadway Functional Classification: means the process by which streets and highways are 

grouped into classes, or systems, according to the character of service they are intended to provide.

Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP): means a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary plan, based on 

safety data developed by a State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148.

Systematic: refers to an approach where an agency deploys countermeasures at all locations across 

a system.

Systemic safety improvement: means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high 

risk roadway features that are correlated with specific severe crash types.

Transfer: means, in accordance with provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, a State may transfer from an 

apportionment under section 104(b) not to exceed 50 percent of the amount apportioned for the fiscal 

year to any other apportionment of the State under that section.