Fall 2011: Volume 5 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 1 

A Message from FHWA Associate 

Administrator for Safety, Tony Furst 

Approximately 19 percent of the U.S. 

population lived in rural areas in 2010, yet 

rural fatalities accounted for 55 percent or 

18,026 of all traffic fatalities in 2010. When the 

vehicle miles traveled are factored in, the 

fatality rate on these roads, 1.85, is 2.5 times 

higher than on urban roads.

As FHWA works toward significantly reducing 

fatalities and serious injuries on all roadways, we are 

committed to comprehensively addressing rural road safety 

issues. We will continue to work closely with locally focused 

organizations and practitioners to develop tools and resources 

for these road owners so they have access to the road safety 

information, knowledge, and resources needed to address 

safety issues in their jurisdictions. 

It is imperative that local and rural highway practitioners 

routinely integrate safety into their projects and programs and 

several local agencies are making large strides in these areas. 

This edition of the Safety Compass is focused on local and 

rural road safety information and highlights some noteworthy 

practices occurring in select jurisdictions. 

 

A Publication of the Federal Highway Administration Safety Program Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 

In This Issue: 

Roundabouts Improve Safety on 

Rural Roadways ....................... 2

Rhode Island’s Safety 

Improvements through High 

Risk Rural Roads Program ....... 3

Road Geometry, Surface 

Materials Are Key to Safety on 

Gravel Roads............................ 4

Using Road Safety Audits in 

Kansas to Focus on High Risk 

Rural Roads.............................. 6

Safe Routes to School Gets 

Kids Walking in Rural 

Communities............................. 6

U of M Hosts Center for 

Excellence in Rural Road 

Safety ....................................... 8

MDOT’s Local Safety Initiative 

Supports Local Agency Safety 

Efforts ....................................... 9

USLIMITS2 Helps Practitioners 

Set Appropriate Speed Limits . 10

Other News around the Office of 

Safety ..................................... 10

Anthony T. Furst 

Associate 

Administrator, 

Office of Safety 
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 2 

Roundabouts Improve Safety on Rural 

Roadways 

By Hillary N. Isebrands, PE, PhD, Safety Engineer, 

Federal Highway Administration 

In the last edition of the Safety Compass, we 

featured the updated guidance on Proven Safety 

Countermeasures, where modern roundabouts 

were described as one of the innovative 

intersection designs that significantly reduces 

fatal and injury crashes. In this edition, we will 

take a closer look at the safety benefits of 

modern roundabout in rural areas with high 

speed approaches. 

During 2009, 41 percent of all fatal motor vehicle 

crashes in the United States occurred on twolane rural roads. Six percent of all these fatal 

crashes occurred at unsignalized intersections on 

rural two-lane roads (NHTSA, FARS). The 

difference in the speeds of vehicles at a rural 

intersection is often a major factor in the severity 

of rural intersection crashes (i.e., driver runs 

through a stop sign or traffic signal or misjudges 

the gap and pulls out in front of a vehicle 

traveling 55 mph on the through route). As 

transportation agencies seek countermeasures to 

improve safety at rural intersections, roundabouts 

can be a “game changing” intersection design 

that reduces the potential for injury crashes, 

provides overall intersection efficiency, and 

allows flexibility in the intersection layout. 

By design, roundabouts command a change in 

driver behavior with slower speeds for all traffic – 

whether in an urban or suburban environment 

with posted speeds of 35 mph or on a rural twolane highway with a posted speed of 55 mph. 

Regardless of the location and speed limit, the 

average driver navigates roundabouts between 

15 and 25 mph. Roundabouts also reduce the 

number of conflict points at an intersection, from 

the 32 at a traditional 4-legged intersection on 

two-lane roads down to 8, and change the types 

of crashes that occur, reducing the number of 

right angle crashes significantly. 

New research has expanded the safety data 

available for rural roundabouts with high speed 

approaches (Isebrands 2011, Isebrands Forthcoming 2013). Rural roundabouts significantly

reduced total crashes by 62 to 67 percent and 

injury crashes by 85 to 88 percent at 19 rural 

roundabouts. In 2008, an average of 5 years 

after construction of the roundabout, no fatal 

crashes had been reported at these 

intersections, whereas 11 fatal crashes were 

reported during a similar time period when the 

intersections were two-way stop controlled.. 

Moreover, the number of angle crashes, which 

tend to have a higher likelihood of causing 

injuries at high speeds, decreased by 83 percent. 

This research also included an approach speed 

data analysis on 10 rural roundabout approaches 

and 3 rural stop controlled approaches. Average 

approach speeds 100 ft from the roundabout 

yield line were 2.5 mph lower than average 

approach speeds 100 ft from the stop bar at twoway stop-controlled intersections, indicating that 

drivers are able to take the cues from the 

advanced signing and approach geometry to 

adjust their speeds before entering the 

intersection. 

The States of Maryland, Washington, and 

Kansas were all pioneers in constructing rural 

roundabouts with high-speed approaches, 

starting over a decade ago. Consistent and 

convincing safety experience at these early rural 

roundabouts have paved the way for other State 

DOTs and local governments to consider 

roundabouts on rural two-lane, high speed 

roadways It is estimated that nearly 50 rural 

roundabouts with high-speed approaches are in 

operation today across 15 states. And as that 

number increases, we expect fatal and injury 

crashes at those intersections to move towards 

zero. 

Photo by H. Isebrands
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 3 

References 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2009 

http://www.nhtsa.gov/FARS

Isebrands, H. “Quantifying safety and speed data 

for rural roundabouts with high-speed approaches.” Dissertation. Iowa State University. Ames, 

Iowa. 2011. 

Isebrands, H. and S. Hallmark. “Statistical 

Analysis and Development of a Crash Prediction 

Model for Roundabouts on High-Speed Rural 

Roadways Transportation Research Record: 

Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 

Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington D.C. (Accepted and 

Forthcoming 2013.) 

Rhode Island’s Safety Improvements 

through High Risk Rural Roads Program

By Jeffry C. Martins, RIDOT-Civil/Traffic Engineering; 

Sean Raymond, P.E., RIDOT - Senior Civil Engineer; 

Peter Pavao, P.E., PTOE, VHB – Safety & Operations 

Engineer; and Jacinda Russell, FHWA RI Division – 

Safety & Operations Engineer. 

In 2009 Rhode Island DOT (RIDOT) began 

refocusing its efforts in safety to ensure all safety 

funds were being used to implement 

improvements using a new program titled 

RISTARS (Strategically Targeted Affordable 

Roadway Solutions). The RISTARS Program 

was a “new” initiative and partnership between 

transportation planners, traffic engineers, safety 

engineers and operations staff. 

The goal of the RISTARS Program is to identify 

roadway improvements on freeway, secondary, 

and local roadway systems that: 

 Are high in benefit and relatively low in cost – 

from a few thousand dollars to $2,000,000 

maximum for a project; 

 Address existing mobility and safety problem 

areas; 

 Require minimal preliminary engineering and 

right-of-way; 

 Can be implemented in 3 to 36 months from 

spot location identification to construction 

completion; and 

 Can be included in upcoming projects (i.e., 

pavement preservation). 

RIDOT completed the pilot of the RISTARS 

program in Newport, Middletown, and 

Portsmouth (Aquidneck Island) in conjunction 

with a regional multimodal transportation 

planning study being completed by the 

Aquidneck Island Planning Commission (AIPC). 

The pilot consisted of 22 spot locations and 3 

corridors with the greatest need for safety 

improvements and congestion reduction. A Road 

Safety Audit (RSA) was conducted at each site 

and was followed by the identification and 

implementation of countermeasures. 

Example of a rural road targeted by the RISTARS 

program. 

In 2011, RIDOT expanded the RISTARS 

program to have a subprogram focusing on rural 

roads. Crash data from 2008 – 2010 was 

compiled and more than 20 high-crash locations 

were identified on major and minor rural 

collectors and local rural roadways as being 

eligible for inclusion in the High Risk Rural Roads 

Program. RSAs were performed at a handful of 

sites that represented different types of roadway 

facilities. RIDOT also reviewed RSAs previously 

performed at some of these locations. Based on 

the crash data trends and the RSAs, the major 

issues RIDOT identified were roadway departure 

and unsignalized intersection crashes. Because 

of the dispersed nature of most of the serious or 

fatal crashes, RIDOT opted to use both targeted 

Photo by D. Nabors
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 4 

systemic and site-specific improvements for the 

rural collector and local roads. 

RIDOT developed systemic improvement criteria 

to help identify the improvements that could be 

implemented on each eligible roadway. Systemic 

improvements selected include rumble strips and 

stripes, roadside delineation, and enhanced 

signage and striping at horizontal curves and at 

unsignalized intersections. RIDOT also proposed 

left- and right-turn lanes at eligible rural collector 

intersections. The RSA process also identified 

site-specific improvements as well, including 

removing skewed intersections, reducing an 

unsignalized intersection footprint, and 

resurfacing horizontal curves with high friction 

treatments. Enhanced bicycle improvements 

along one corridor in a major tourist area are also 

proposed, including installing the SafetyEdgeSM, 

geo-reinforced shoulders, enhanced signing, and 

“Share The Lane” pavement markings. The first 

contract for the HRRR improvements is slated for 

award later this year. RIDOT is planning to 

invest $2.8 million in these safety improvements 

through the HRRR Program. 

Road Geometry, Surface Materials Are Key 

to Safety on Gravel Roads 

By George S. Huntington, PE, Senior Engineer, 

Wyoming LTAP 

Between 2000 and 2009, 7,959 people died on 

our Nation’s dirt and gravel roads according to 

the FHWA’s Fatal Accident Reporting System 

(FARS). During this same period, 8,554 people 

died in work zones. Despite these similar 

numbers, safety professionals put a lot more 

emphasis on making our work zones safer than 

we do on making our unpaved roads safer. 

Why? 

The answer may be in part that crash data 

collection is tailored to paved roads, whereas the 

factors contributing to crashes on unpaved roads 

frequently aren’t well understood and often aren’t 

the same as those for paved roads. Often 

factors such as loose surface aggregate or 

washboards (rhythmic corrugations) are not 

recorded when crash data is collected. 

Therefore, we don’t know how many people die 

each year because their vehicles slide out of 

control due to a severely raveled surface. A 

compounding factor is that most gravel roads 

have too little traffic to provide us with statistical 

confidence about either crash locations or 

causes. This combination of obstacles makes it 

difficult to identify ways to save lives on these 

very low-volume, unpaved roads. 

Education, enforcement, and improved vehicle 

safety have all made unpaved roads safer. For 

example, the video titled Rural Road Crashes 

produced by the Iowa Traffic Safety Alliance is 

certainly helpful. Proactive efforts by law 

enforcement also help to lower speeds, reduce 

impaired driving, and increase seat belt usage. 

Improving vehicle safety also helps reduce both 

the consequences and the likelihood of crashes 

(although there may be problems with ABS brake 

systems on unpaved roads). But what can we 

do about those issues unique to unpaved roads? 

Two primary factors, the road’s geometry and its 

surfacing material, are under the control of those 

responsible for road maintenance. Crown, 

shoulder, foreslope, and ditch geometry may 

change each time a road is re-worked with a 

motor grader. Though we don’t have a good way 

to assess numerically the risks of loose 

aggregate, washboards, or fugitive dust, we can 

be confident that these all contribute to fatality 

crashes every year. But having good data will 

not address these problems; good maintenance 

practices that come from good training will. 

The more forgiving an unpaved road’s geometry 

is, the safer it is. Crown (cross slope) should be 

about 4 percent to provide drainage, but it 

shouldn’t be much steeper or drivers will be 

forced down the center of the road. Keeping in 

mind that vehicles on unpaved roads are likely to 

have stiffer suspensions and higher profiles, 

shoulder slopes and foreslopes should be a 

maximum of 4:1, with 6:1 or flatter being 

preferred so roadway departures don’t overturn 

vehicles. Similarly, culvert ends and approaches 

should have a slope of 10:1 or flatter. As for any 

road, the wider, flatter, and less obstructed the 

clear zone is, the less likely a roadway departure 

is to result in a fatality. Giving errant vehicles a 
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 5 

smooth transition to a ditch bottom where they 

can safely come to rest should be a goal of every 

motor grader operator responsible for maintaining unpaved roads. 

Good surfacing material is the other primary 

element of a safe, unpaved road surface. Loose 

aggregate can act like marbles, causing a driver 

to lose control of the vehicle. Poor quality 

aggregate can lead to excessive dust, which can 

obstruct a driver’s view of the road and oncoming 

traffic, leading to severe head-on collisions. 

Washboards, too, can contribute to a loss of 

vehicle control, particularly on curves. Another 

dangerous consequence of washboards can be 

that they tempt drivers to travel too fast so tires 

skim the washboard crests, providing a smoother 

but more dangerous ride. Unfortunately these 

problems are often worst right where vehicles 

turn and brake, causing increased raveling, loose 

aggregate, and washboards where vehicle 

control is most critical. 

Motor grader’s moldboard shaping the foreslope at 

about 31⁄2:1. It shouldn’t be any steeper. 

Well-graded, crushed surfacing aggregate with 

adequate binder will reduce raveling, dust, loose 

aggregate, and washboards, making our 

unpaved roads safer. Aggregate should be wellgraded to provide a tight surface that resists 

water infiltration. The coarse material should be 

crushed, both to provide strength and to improve 

friction. Binder, the fine material passing a #200 

[4.75 μm] sieve, should hold the coarser material 

together. In wetter climates, silt and very fine 

sand may work well as surface tension holds 

them together. In dry climates, the binder should 

have some plasticity so it holds together even in 

very dry conditions. Appropriate dust control and 

soil stabilization agents also help maintain a tight 

surface. Surfacing aggregate should provide a 

tight surface that resists raveling and maintains 

solid contact with tires, providing drivers with full 

control of their vehicles. 

This alignment is dangerous since the clear zone is 

steep with trees on the outside of a downhill curve. 

Fortunately the surface is tightly bound with only 

minor washboards and loose aggregate. 

Guidance and Training Resources 

Two good sources for basic gravel roads safety 

training are the Minnesota LTAP video titled 

“Gravel Road Maintenance: Meeting the 

Challenge,” and the Gravel Roads Maintenance 

and Design Manual by the South Dakota LTAP. 

Both of these items are available at 

http://www.mnltap.umn.edu/publications/videos/g

ravelroadmaintenance/. These resources describe surfacing material properties that reduce 

loose aggregate, washboards, and dust. Surface 

geometry problems that may turn a minor 

roadway departure into a fatal crash or increase 

the likelihood of a head-on collision are also 

described. All unpaved road maintainers should 

familiarize themselves with gravel road safety 

issues. 

Just as for paved roads, we can’t completely 

control drivers, but we can and should make the 

roads themselves as safe as practical by 

considering these geometric and material safety 

issues when we maintain and improve our 

unpaved roads. 

Photo by G. Huntington

Photo by G. Huntington 
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 6 

Using Road Safety Audits in Kansas to 

Focus on High Risk Rural Roads 

By Steven A. Buckley, P.E., State Highway Safety 

Engineer, KDOT. 

In 2010, the Kansas DOT (KDOT) performed a 

Road Safety Audit (RSA) on a county highway in 

Saline County, home of the City of Salina 

(population 46,180). The highway is typical of 

many throughout the State: two-lanes, an asphalt 

surface with little or no shoulder, and intersected 

by a gravel township road approximately every 

mile. 

A Road Safety Audit (RSA) is a formal safety performance examination of an existing or future 

road or intersection by an independent, multidisciplinary team. It is a process that qualitatively 

estimates and reports on potential road safety 

issues and identifies opportunities for safety 

improvements. 

Using the RSA process, KDOT performed a 

detailed crash analysis, met with local officials, 

conducted a field review, collected necessary 

field data, developed recommendations, and 

prepared a final report. The RSA team included 

a representative from the Local Technical 

Assistance Program (LTAP), a former county 

engineer, two former State highway patrol 

troopers, two State traffic engineers, and a 

consultant. 

Several States are using their High Risk Rural 

Road Program (HRRRP) as a funding mechanism to implement improvements identified 

during an RSA, including Kansas. Funding for the 

Saline County RSA came in part from Federal 

and State safety dollars, and the resulting recommendations were eligible for High Risk Rural 

Road Program (HRRRP) funding. 

After the success of the RSA in Saline County, 

three more RSAs were performed during 2011: 

one each in Miami County, Montgomery County, 

and Ellis County. HRRRP funding was again 

used to implement RSA recommendations. 

Based on the success of these RSAs, KDOT 

continues to feed recommendations from RSAs 

into HRRR projects. To learn more about the 

RSA process and how it can be applied to 

improve rural road safety, please visit: 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/. For more information on the Kansas RSA program, please 

contact Steven Buckley, State Highway Safety 

Engineer, at Buckley@ksdot.org. For more 

information on the Kansas High Risk Rural 

Roads Program and how RSA recommendations 

are funded using the HRRRP, please contact 

Lynn Berges, HRRRP Manager, at 

LBerges@ksdot.org. 

Safe Routes to School Gets Kids Walking in 

Rural Communities 

By Hilary Culbertson, National Center for Safe Routes to 

School. 

Established by SAFETEA-LU and administered 

by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 

the Federal Safe Routes to School (SRTS) 

program provides funding to State DOTs for their 

ongoing efforts both to improve safety for child 

pedestrians and bicyclists (kindergarten through 

grade 8) and to encourage use of these modes 

for travel between home and school. 

Approximately 22 percent of schools participating 

in the Federal program are considered rural, 

making rural road safety for these school-age 

users an important focus of outreach and 

education efforts. 

Across the country, rural SRTS programs often 

face similar challenges, including a lack of 

existing bike and pedestrian infrastructure, a 

dispersed population, and community concerns 

about safety. However, these challenges are 

often met with strong local leadership, community 

partnerships, and strategic application of Federal 

SRTS funding to improve safety and access for 

rural walking and bicycling students.

Photo courtesy of KDOT 
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 7 

Conducting Strategic Infrastructure 

Improvements 

Often, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure is 

incomplete or aging in rural areas, especially 

where the distances between destinations make 

non-motorized modes of transportation less 

practical. In New Hampshire, however, rural 

communities have relied on a combination of 

strategic infrastructure improvements and 

community leadership to further the goals of the 

SRTS program, according to John Corrigan, the 

State’s SRTS coordinator. 

In Gorham, N.H., Principal Karen Cloutier 

chaperones a “walking school bus” of Edward Fenn 

Elementary School students. 

For instance, in Gorham, NH, Principal Karen 

Cloutier of Edward Fenn Elementary School 

noticed that the town had a network of sidewalks, 

but they didn’t connect to the school. She applied 

for and was awarded SRTS funding that paid for 

a walkway that links the town's sidewalk to the 

entrance of the elementary school. She and a 

physical education teacher now lead “walking 

school buses” of their students from opposite 

ends of town in all seasons and all weather. 

“If the school is open, the kids walk,” said 

Corrigan. “In the snow belt, it takes a major storm 

to close the school.” 

Like many of the older towns in the region, 

Littleton, NH had an extensive sidewalk network, 

although it had aged and was crumbling in 

places. In response, the town demonstrated its 

commitment to being a livable and walkable 

community by using SRTS and Transportation 

Enhancement funds to upgrade the walkways. 

Accommodating a Dispersed Population 

One of the most significant challenges to a rural 

SRTS program is a small and dispersed 

population. For instance, in Putney, VT, a rural 

area with a town population of approximately 

2,600 residents, most K-8 students who attend 

Putney Central School live a considerable 

distance from the school. This distance 

prevented children from walking or bicycling to 

school. 

With support from the Putney Central School 

Health Committee, the school’s students and 

staff participated in several unique healthfocused activities, including forest walks, a 

healthy snack program, and an organic 

gardening activity. A trained educator came to 

teach students about bicycle safety, and the 

school participated in Walk to School Day every 

year. 

In preparation to expand Walk to School Day into 

a weekly activity, the school learned that parents 

enjoyed driving their children to school in order to 

spend time with them and meet other parents 

and teachers. In response, Putney Central 

implemented weekly Family Walk to School 

Days. To make walking to school feasible for 

students and parents, the school arranged for the 

parents to park their cars at the town center, one 

mile south of the school. It even added a coffee 

hour for participating parents to encourage 

community building. 

Improving Safety Conditions near Schools 

Sometimes, the greatest challenge to 

implementing an effective SRTS program is 

parental concerns about child safety. At 

Longview Elementary School in Moses Lake, 

WA, residents were concerned about the safety 

challenges presented by the two main roads 

leading up to the school’s entrance. 

In response, Safe Kids of Grant County and the 

Moses Lake Police Department worked together 

to improve safety conditions by providing trained 

crossing guards at the intersections in front of the 

school. The groups also worked to reduce the 

speed limit in the surrounding neighborhood 

Photo by J. Corrigan 
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 8 

during school hours, and, after applying for and 

receiving SRTS funding, the school was able to 

expand its SRTS education for students and fund 

the construction of a multi-use pathway and a 

sidewalk. 

Safe Routes to School programs are making it 

safer for students to walk and bicycle to school 

across the country. To read more about what 

SRTS programs have accomplished, visit 

www.saferoutesinfo.org/data-central/successstories. 

U of M Hosts Center for Excellence in Rural 

Road Safety 

Established in 2005 by the Federal 

Transportation Act, the University of Minnesota’s 

Center for Excellence in Rural Safety (CERS) is 

designed to offer an array of tools and information resources to advance USDOT’s strategy 

to increase safety on our Nation’s rural roads. 

Sponsored in part by the Federal Highway 

Administration, CERS provides citizen-centered 

research, training, and outreach to enhance rural 

safety and to meet the online and seminar 

training needs of rural transportation practitioners 

and policymakers. The Center's mission is to 

facilitate training, research and educational exchange in the areas of travel safety and choices, 

technology, economic development, citizen participation, and community development. 

Since its inception, the Center has conducted 

research, developed tools and information resources, and publicized rural safety best practices through its websites, webinars, and a quarterly e-mail newsletter. Some of its most significant activities include: 

 The Rural Highway Safety Clearinghouse. 

This web site provides a filtered and quick 

starting point for resources and best practices 

on rural road safety. Resources on the site 

are organized by broad safety topics such as 

the four E’s (education, emergency medical 

services, enforcement, and engineering) and 

more specific topics such as distracted 

driving, safety planning, and work-zone 

safety. The latest findings in rural safety 

research, such as the impacts from 

Minnesota’s primary seat belt law and the 

FHWA Rural Safety Innovation Program 

projects, are also featured on the site. 

http://www.ruralhighwaysafety.org 

 CrashHelp. Since rural crashes account for a 

high percentage of trauma injury and death, 

CERS developed CrashHelp to reduce the 

adverse health impacts of automobile crash 

trauma. CrashHelp provides multimedia data 

directly into emergency rooms, providing 

hospitals with advance notification of crash 

severity and related information that can be 

used to best prepare for the patient’s arrival. 

Ambulance crew paramedics and emergency 

medical technicians use a mobile smart 

phone to securely capture pictures, digital 

audio recordings, video, and the most basic 

patient and incident information. 

http://www.ruralsafety.umn.edu/research/cras

hhelp.html 

 SafeRoadMaps. SafeRoadMaps.org, unveiled 

in July 2008, is a web-based, crash-mapping 

tool that plots every roadway fatality in the 

Nation to the local level. Since going live, 

more than 12 million visitors have gone to the 

site to see a map or satellite image of all the 

road fatalities that have occurred in a chosen 

area. Details about each crash are also 

available, such as whether the driver was 

wearing a seat belt, drinking, or speeding. In 

addition, the tool notes which life-saving 

public policies, such as strong seat belt laws, 

are being employed in the chosen area. 

http://saferoadmaps.org/ 

 Rural Transportation Safety: A Summary of 

Useful Practices is a brief handbook providing 

the public, engineers, and policy-makers with 

a variety of methods and tools for increasing 

rural highway safety. It provides three general 

areas of safety improvements including 

policy, engineering, and organizational 

changes. It includes cases of successful 

Toward Zero Death (TZD) program 

implementation as examples of ways to focus 

safety efforts. 

http://www.ruralsafety.umn.edu/research/rural

roadposter.html 

To learn more about the Center for Excellence 

and its research, events, and resources, or to 
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 9 

sign up for the quarterly e-newsletter, visit 

http://www.ruralsafety.umn.edu/ 

MDOT’s Local Safety Initiative Supports 

Local Agency Safety Efforts 

By Michigan DOT 

The Local Safety Initiative (LSI) was created in 

2004 by the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) for the purpose of assisting local 

agencies with locating and analyzing locations 

that have data supported traffic safety concerns. 

LSI is staffed by three full-time MDOT engineers. 

The Local Safety Initiative uses a three-pronged 

approach to helping local agencies identify 

potential safety concerns and improve safety of 

local roads: 

 LSI taps into MDOT's traffic safety 

engineering expertise to provide local agencies with crash analysis and safety field 

reviews. RoadSoft, a GIS-based asset management program developed by Michigan’s 

Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP, 

located at Michigan Technological University), 

uses local road data to identify intersections 

and corridors with the most critical safety 

concerns. Once the analysis is complete, it is 

sent to the local agency for review and a field 

review is then conducted with the agency. 

During the field review phase, low-cost countermeasures that may provide the greatest 

potential safety impact for each location are 

discussed as are possible funding sources. 

 LSI provides safety engineering training for 

local agencies in two forms: by supplying 

safety resources (such as intersection safety 

strategies or vegetation control) to participating agencies and by partnering with Michigan 

LTAP to provide a basic traffic and safety 

engineering class for local agencies. 

 The LSI staff works directly with the LTAP in 

support of its efforts to refine and improve the 

RoadSoft program, and many LSI staff suggestions have been incorporated into the 

software, resulting in a safety module that is 

easier to use and more intuitive for users. 

LSI has assisted many different types of 

agencies in Michigan, from metropolitan 

agencies and large road commissions with 

several traffic engineers on staff to rural road 

commissions with an engineer-manager who 

shares many duties. The LSI staff recognize that, 

when performing crash analysis and providing 

safety suggestions for rural agencies, they will 

encounter different challenges than those faced 

by urban agencies. For example, lane departure 

crashes tend to be more heavily represented in 

rural settings. On urban roadways, intersections 

may be very close together, influencing the entire 

segment, whereas in rural settings, LSI staff 

engineers almost always gap out intersection 

crashes. As a result, intersections of interest are 

analyzed separately. 

In addition, because rural road agencies typically 

have a lower number of crashes, LSI staff engineers focus more on preventive crash measures 

rather than reactive measures. Systematic fixes 

also may be suggested for locations that have 

similar characteristics throughout the agency’s 

jurisdiction (i.e., larger-size dual “Stop” and “Stop 

Ahead” signs to be placed at all intersections 

above a certain ADT threshold). 

According to a 2011 survey administered by LSI 

staff engineers, 85 percent of local agencies that 

participated in the LSI program were satisfied 

with the experience, and 70 percent felt that the 

suggestions provided by the LSI were useful and 

appropriate to their needs. 

LSI’s work has improved the quality of proposals 

submitted for the safety call for projects through 

MDOT’s Local Agency Programs safety funding 

and High Risk Rural Roads funding. Projects in 

the past also have been funded directly by LSI. 

LSI staff also has performed before- and aftercrash studies for local agencies on a selective 

basis. 

To date, the LSI has worked with 17 Michigan 

cities and 78 percent of Michigan’s 83 counties. 

LSI services are provided to local agencies free 

of charge and on a voluntary basis. 
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 10 

USLIMITS2 Helps Practitioners Set 

Appropriate Speed Limits 

Speeding is a major factor in motor vehicle traffic 

crashes. Exceeding the posted speed limit or 

driving too fast for conditions contributes to over 

30 percent of all traffic crash fatalities. The 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office 

of Safety is committed to reducing speedingrelated fatalities and serious injuries. As part of 

the efforts to assist States and locals to reduce 

speeding related crashes, FHWA has recently 

released USLIMITS2, a web based tool designed 

to help practitioners set credible and consistent 

speed limits for specific segments of roads. 

USLIMITS2 is applicable to all types of roads 

ranging from rural local roads and residential 

streets to urban freeways. The original USLIMITS 

was developed under a National Cooperative 

Highway Research Project in 2006. FHWA 

recently adopted the program with enhancements and made it available with user/customer 

support on the FHWA server at 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/uslimits/. 

User-friendly, logical, and objective, USLIMITS2 

is of particular benefit to local communities and 

agencies without ready access to engineers 

experienced in conducting speed studies for 

setting appropriate speed limits. For experienced 

engineers, USLIMITS2 can provide an objective 

second opinion and increase confidence in speed 

limit setting decisions. 

Users input factors including route type, section 

length, annual average daily traffic, 50th and 85th 

percentile speeds, statutory speed limit, and 

crash history, among others. They receive a 

recommended speed limit and a list of issues that 

might need to be further investigated. Users can 

save their project file and/or create Word and 

Excel versions of their reports. 

Access the USLIMITS2 tool at: 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/uslimits/. 

Read the original study report at: 

http://wwwcf.fhwa.dot.gov/exit.cfm?link=http://onli

nepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trbnet/acl/NCHRP%20

0367_FinalReport.pdf 

To access other speed management tools and 

resources developed by the FHWA Office of 

Safety, or for more information on FHWA’s speed 

management program, please visit 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ or contact 

Guan Xu (guan.xu@dot.gov, 202-366-5892). 

Other News Around the Office of Safety 

2013 National Roadway Safety Awards – Call 

for Nominations 

The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and 

Roadway Safety Foundation (RSF) are now 

accepting applications for the 2013 National 

Roadway Safety Awards. Jointly sponsored by 

USDOT FHWA and RSF, these awards 

recognize roadway safety achievements in the 

following categories: 

 Infrastructure Improvements – Physical 

improvements to the roadway or roadside that 

improve safety; 

 Operational Improvements – Improvements 

to traffic safety operations; and 

 Program Planning, Development, and 

Evaluation – Programs that identify and 

address State and local needs by making 

effective use of safety data and evaluations. 

Nominated projects and programs are judged 

based on their effectiveness, innovation, and 

efficient use of resources. 

Additional details, instructions, and application 

packets are available at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov

or www.roadwaysafety.org. All nominations must 

be received by March 31, 2013 to be considered. 

The program is available to U.S. nominees only, 

including U.S. territories and funded operations 

such as District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, 

and the Mariana Islands. 

For more information, contact 

awards@roadwaysafety.org or (202) 857-1228. 

Registration Opens for Walk to School Day 

2012 

Registration is now open for the 16th annual 

Walk to School Day, which celebrates the many 

benefits of walking and bicycling to school. Walk 

to School Day 2012 will take place on 
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 11 

Wednesday, October 3. Event registration is free 

and available to individuals and organizations 

holding an October event in the United States at 

http://www.walkbiketoschool.org/. Registering a 

Walk to School Day event provides organizers 

access to free, downloadable materials on the 

newly redesigned website, including stickers, 

certificates and customizable fliers. They can 

also easily create and share a walking or 

bicycling to school route via the new Map-aRoute tool available at 

http://maps.walkbiketoschool.org/. 

International Walk to School Day is a global 

event that involves communities from more than 

40 countries walking and biking to school. It 

began in 1997 as a one-day event. Over time, it 

has become part of a movement for year-round 

safe routes to school. Today, thousands of 

schools across America – from all 50 states, the 

District of Columbia and Puerto Rico – participate 

every October. For more information on Walk to 

School activities in the U.S., visit 

http://www.walkbiketoschool.org/. 

FHWA Office of Safety Issues New Safety 

Strategic Plan 

FHWA is pursuing many opportunities to further 

drive down fatalities and serious injuries on the 

Nation’s roadways. To capitalize on these 

opportunities, the FHWA’s safety units, 

comprising the Office of Safety, Office of Safety 

Research and Development, and the Resource 

Center Safety and Design Technical Services 

Team, collaborated to develop Safe Roads for a 

Safer Future – A Joint Safety Strategic Plan

(SSP). 

The strategic planning process has brought these 

safety units together to focus on a common 

vision, and the plan itself ensures that each unit 

makes decisions that put all the units on a path 

toward the same set of goals. The safety units 

will use the SSP to identify and prioritize strategies, many of which will originate in existing 

roadmaps or in other program planning activities, 

to support the established goals. The safety units 

will also use this information when developing 

their Unit Performance Plans and individual performance plans. Teams within each safety unit 

and out among the field offices will carry out 

projects and activities to support identified 

strategies and achieve the SSP goals. 

The SSP doesn’t just communicate safety 

priorities and commitments by providing input 

into the Safety Roadmaps and other planning 

tools, it also supports all four of FHWA’s strategic 

goals in the areas of national leadership, 

program delivery, system performance, and 

corporate capacity (see the FHWA Strategic Plan

at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/fhplan.html for 

more information). It does this through a vision, 

mission, and goals that complement and support 

FHWA’s own strategic mission and goals. The 

SSP outlines a plan for advancing people and 

programs that will provide leadership and a level 

of excellence in technical execution that will 

move the Nation significantly closer to realizing 

the vision of zero deaths and injuries on our 

Nation’s roadways. 

The Vision, Mission, and Goals for Safety 

Vision: Toward zero deaths and serious injuries on 

the Nation’s roadways. 

Mission: Exercising leadership throughout the 

highway community to make the Nation’s roadways 

safer by: 

• Developing, evaluating, and deploying lifesaving countermeasures; 

• Advancing the use of scientific methods and 

data-driven decisions; 

• Fostering a safety culture; and 

• Promoting an integrated, multidisciplinary 

(4E’s)1

 approach to safety. 

Goals: Fifteen goals are grouped in four different 

perspectives: 

• Employee Learning and Growth (internal); 

• Business Practices/Internal Processes 

(internal); 

• Program and Service Delivery (external); 

and 

• Customers, Stakeholders, and Partners 

(external). 

__________________________________ 

1

 The “4E’s” include engineering, education, enforcement, 

and emergency medical services. 
Fall 2012: Volume 6 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 12 

For more information on the SSP, how it fits into 

the overall USDOT and FHWA strategic planning 

process, and how it will be implemented to 

achieve the safety vision, please go to 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/, where Safe Roads for 

a Safer Future – A Joint Safety Strategic Plan will 

be available beginning in late August for viewing 

or download. For more information about the 

SSP, please contact Chimai Ngo, 

chimai.ngo@dot.gov, 202-366-1231. 

 

Safety Compass Newsletter 

A publication of the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, 

Federal Highway Administration 

The Safety Compass newsletter is 

published for Internet distribution 

three times a year by the: 

FHWA Office of Safety 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Room E71-105 

Washington, DC 20590 

The Safety Compass can also be viewed at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov. 

Editor-in-Chief 

Karen Timpone 

karen.timpone@dot.gov 

Your comments and highway safety related articles are welcomed. This 

newsletter is intended to increase highway safety awareness and information and 

to provide resources to help save lives. 

You are encouraged to submit highway safety articles that might be of value to the 

highway safety community. Send your comments, questions and articles for 

review electronically to Karen Timpone, karen.timpone@dot.gov.