Page 1 of 44

NEVADA 

2020 ANNUAL REPORT 
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 44

Table of Contents

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

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

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

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 6

Program Structure................................................................................................................................. 6

Program Administration ..................................................................................................................... 6

Program Methodology .....................................................................................................................10

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................20

Funds Programmed .........................................................................................................................20

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................22

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

General Highway Safety Trends ......................................................................................................25

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................31

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................32

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................34

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................34

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................35

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................39

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................40

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................43

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................44
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 44

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence

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

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

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

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

schedules, lists, or other data.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 44

Executive Summary

The annual Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) report for 2020 summarizes the activities of the 

Nevada Department of Transportation’s HSIP as required by Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) 

Act. The FAST Act continues the HSIP to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries 

on all public roads, including non-State-owned public roads and roads on tribal lands. The HSIP requires a 

data-driven, strategic approach to improving highway safety on all public roads that focuses on performance 

(FAST Act § 1113; 23 U.S.C. 148).

The FAST Act continued to allocate funds for the HSIP program in the Federal Fiscal Years 2016 – 2020. 

Available program funds for the purpose of this report are considered to be those funds obligated during the 

2019 Federal Fiscal Year. The activities of the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) are primarily 

designed to develop safety improvement projects for the following areas:

· High crash locations (intersections, and roadway segments)

· Pedestrian related safety improvements

· Urban intersection safety improvements

· Urban lane departure crash mitigation

· Rural intersection safety improvements

· Rural lane departure crash mitigation

· Systemic safety Improvements

· Tribal low-cost safety improvements

The crash data on all public roadways contained in this report is extracted from the Nevada Citation and 

Accident Tracking System (NCATS) and Brazos crash databases and prepared for NDOT Traffic Safety 

Engineering’s analysis as a normalized view. After the crash data is downloaded from the NCATS and Brazos 

databases, it is processed through geolocation software and is linearly referenced to the statewide street 

centerline data. The geolocation software tools automate the cleanup of location attributes and assign a spatial 

location to the crash data through a series of database procedures.

The NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering team has experienced significant turnover in the last few years. New 

leadership and team members have been reviewing innovative ideas and challenging old processes. The team 

is excited to use internal and external best practices to strengthen traffic safety in Nevada.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering is gearing up to launch a new pilot project using the NDOT Local Public 

Agency (LPA). This process was approved on August 5th, 2020 and will be reported on in the 2021 HSIP 

Report. NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering hopes that this will lead to a true partnership with the local agencies. 

Local agencies can support this process by working with NDOT and the FHWA to develop a Local Road Safety 

Plan tailored to the needs in each community.

The HSIP program is administered by the NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering section, a centrally located 

component of the NDOT. The methods used by the Traffic Safety Engineering section to identify, select, 

implement, and evaluate safety improvement projects have been compiled in the NDOT’s “HSIP Manual.” A 
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 44

copy of the current updated NDOT Safety Procedural Manual and other information can be found on the NDOT 

website at https://www.nevadadot.com/ .
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 44

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 HSIP program is managed by the NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering Team. The team is located in the 

Planning Division of NDOT. 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Planning

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

 SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

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

Under the systemic roadway improvements approach, NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering evaluates local roads 

for safety improvements such as Slope Flattening/Shoulder Widening, Flashing Yellow Arrows, Rumble Strips, 

and turn pockets with acceleration/deceleration lanes on rural highways. NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering 

uses recommendations made during Road Safety Assessment (RSA) completed on local and tribal roads to 

develop projects. 

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering is coordinating with Nye County and FHWA to complete a Local Road Safety 

Plan (LRSP). The plan will determine Emphasis Areas and identify potential Safety Projects for the county. 

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering is developing a plan to reach out to other counties and local entities to 

support the development of LRSP's statewide. 

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering has developed a low-cost safety improvement project with the Pyramid Lake 

Paiute Tribe. The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe’s Wadsworth Project is an infrastructure improvement project 

designed to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety along a stretch of SR-447 that runs through the heart of 

Wadsworth. SR-447 runs past an elementary school, head start center, tribal childcare center and community 

center. The project will improve traffic safety for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists traveling along SR-447, 

reducing injury and fatality crashes and accomplishing key goals established in the Tribe’s 2015 Transportation 

Safety Plan. This project is supported by a 2017 RSA. Future tribal road projects will be supported by tribal 

plans, RSA's and LRSP's. 
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 44

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning.

 Design

 Districts/Regions

 Governors Highway Safety Office

 Maintenance

 Operations

 Planning

 Traffic Engineering/Safety

Describe coordination with internal partners.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering coordinates with the NDOT Planning on a regular basis. Traffic Safety 

Engineering provides safety improvement guidance and review to the Planning team as projects develop. 

Traffic Safety Engineering recommends safety improvements for projects in the early stage of development.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering is frequently interacting with the NDOT Engineering Division. The Roadway 

Design and Project Management team are developing plans and specifications to make recommendations 

from recent Safety Management Plans (SMP’s), RSA’s and local planning documents a reality. Engineering 

teams participate at all levels, ranging from preliminary field design surveys, pre-design, intermediate design, 

final design and construction support.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering coordinates with Roadway Design to share the latest safety strategies and 

provide guidance for safety improvement ideas. This includes the utilization of Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

(SHSP) strategies, Highway Safety Manual (HSM) tools and other federal guidelines. Traffic Safety 

Engineering coordinates with the Roadway Design Scoping Section to initiate and recommend safety 

improvements on projects during the Scoping Phase.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering works with the NDOT District offices to understand locations of concerns. 

Once the concerns are identified, Traffic Safety Engineering can support the district construction and 

maintenance teams as they build and maintain safe NDOT infrastructure. NDOT District Operations and 

Maintenance teams participate in RSA’s, SMP’s and miscellaneous field inspections.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering collaborates with NDOT Traffic Operations when developing and 

implementing safety projects. Collaboration includes signal design, lighting design, operational analysis of 

roadway segments and intersections, and the development and discussion of safety strategies, methodologies 

and guidelines. Traffic Safety Engineering and Traffic Operations have partnered on the Traffic Incident 

Management (TIM) program and several interim approval projects with the FHWA. The TIM program has a 

primary goal of reducing fatalities and serious injuries from secondary crashes. Current interim approval 

projects include Wrong Way Driver systems with red flashing lights and Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon 

(RRFB) pedestrian crossing enhancements. NDOT is developing an experimental request to the FHWAMUTCD team for green pavement markings to be installed where bike lanes conflict or in mixing zones. All 

interim approval projects are approved by the FHWA and studied per agreement with NDOT and the FHWA.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering partners with the Nevada Department of Public Safety Office of Traffic Safety 

(DPS-OTS) on the development of the SHSP, the Critical Emphasis Areas (CEA’s) identified in the SHSP, the 

CEA Task Force Committees and the Zero Fatalities Initiative. DPS-OTS is NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering’s 

primary behavioral partner.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 44

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

 Academia/University

 FHWA

 Governors Highway Safety Office

 Law Enforcement Agency

 Local Government Agency 

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

 Tribal Agency

 Other-Emergency Medical Services

Describe coordination with external partners.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering coordinates with the University of Nevada Reno (UNR) and the University of 

Las Vegas (UNLV) for research projects. Current projects include pedestrian Safety, Safety Performance 

Functions (SPF) development, Traffic Data Collection and an Urban Street Lighting study. The UNLV School of 

Medicine maintains two (2) crash trauma databases.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering team partners with the FHWA. Team members share knowledge with the 

FHWA by attending webinars, peer-to-peers, and workshops. Traffic Safety Engineering and Traffic Operations 

leadership meets with the FHWA at least once a month to discuss the HSIP, interim approval programs and 

upcoming plans. The NDOT HSIP team works with the FHWA representative to ensure that any updates in 

HSIP procedures or best practices are shared and documented.

The Department of Public Safety – Office of Traffic Safety (DPS-OTS) serves as Nevada’s Governors Highway 

Safety Office. The NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering and DPS-OTS work together as defined in the SHSP. The 

teams share crash data and work together to ensure that safety messages reach road users in the State of 

Nevada. DPS-OTS and NDOT Traffic Safety share goals that are used to develop SHSP and HSIP 

Performance Measures.

Representatives from Local Government Agencies partner with the HSIP team by attending the annual Safety 

Summit hosted by NDOT, contribute and partner with SMP’s and participate as team members on CEA 

groups.

NDOT Traffic Safety works with and seeks input from a variety of regional planning organizations, including, 

but not limited to the Southern Nevada Regional Transportation Commission (RTC), RTC of Washoe County, 

Carson Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO), and Tahoe Regional Planning Authority (TRPA). 

These organizations are encouraged to attend the Safety Summit, contribute to SMP’s and serve as members 

of the CEA teams.

Representatives from Law Enforcement Agencies and Emergency Medical Services support and participate in 

the Nevada Safety Summit, contribute to SMP’s and serve as members of the CEA teams and TIM Collation.

Tribal Agency projects are generated by the RSA process or through tribal planning priorities. Projects are 

developed and executed with tribal input.

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

elaborate. 

Nevada is working with consultant forces to update the SHSP plan. A team from Kimley-Horn and Associates, 

Inc. is working with Traffic Safety Engineering and DPS-OTS to close out the 2016-2020 SHSP and develop 
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 44

the 2021-2025 SHSP. This team is reviewing stakeholders’ input and defining the strengths, opportunities and 

areas for improvement in SHSP implementation. The team is analyzing data and organizational structure to 

guide Nevada for the next five years.

The SHSP defines the ongoing commitments of the Nevada Safety Team. These commitments include 

quarterly meetings of the Nevada Executive Committee of Traffic Safety (NECTS) and quarterly meetings for 

all SHSP CEA Task Forces. Task forces currently include Intersection Safety, Impaired Driving Prevention, 

Occupant Protection, Pedestrian Safety, Lane Departure Prevention, Motorcycle Safety and Young Driver 

Safety. The Traffic Records Coordinating Committee (TRCC) has been integrated into the SHSP. 

The SHSP team coordinated the 2019 Nevada Traffic Safety Summit. The summit, held in Sparks, Nevada, 

hosted around 300 practitioners and focused on MYZERO. The Zero Fatalities goal is owned by every person 

and requires all of us to succeed. The theme for the Summit challenged each attendee to personalize the Zero 

Fatalities message and fully understand why zero is important to them. Rather than thinking of Zero as a 

concept, philosophy or ideal we task each participant to speak from the heart, to describe why they show up 

every day to do what they do to achieve Zero Fatalities on our roadways. 

The SHSP team is reassessing the fall 2020 Nevada Traffic Safety Summit due to COVID-19 Pandemic 

restrictions. The 2020 Summit will be a virtual event. Options are being evaluated on how to effectively engage 

stakeholders for this virtual event and provide opportunities for learning, partnering and for attendees to 

provide input on effective SHSP implementation.

Nevada is continuing it RSA program. Twelve (12) RSA’s were performed throughout the state in FFY 2020. 

These RSA’s were performed on post and pre-construction phase projects such as 3R preservation projects, 

capacity projects, corridor studies, high crash locations, and tribal planning projects. The RSA program will 

continue to be a cornerstone of the NDOT HSIP program. NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering is updating the 

RSA database so that the RSA recommendations can be found in one central file. The database will be used 

as a design and planning resource.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering works with other NDOT teams to perform engineering studies in support of 

the SHSP. Current studies include “A Data-Drive Approach to Implementing Wrong-way Driving 

Countermeasures” where NDOT has installed red Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon's (RRFB’s) on several 

off-ramps. This study is conducted under an interim agreement with the FHWA (4(09)-56 (E) - Red 

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons on Exit Ramps – Nevada DOT). As part of this interim agreement, NDOT 

is to study the effectiveness of these systems, and to submit semi-annual progress reports and a final 

evaluation report at the end of the experiment. The study will evaluate wrong-way driver systems that are 

MUTCD compliant and compare the data collected.

In support of the Lane Departure CEA Task Force, NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering has initialed a program 

that identifies locations statewide on rural roads where 2 or more chip seal applications have been installed 

over centerline rumble strips making them less effective. Locations are identified and centerline rumble strips 

are reinstalled through NDOT Districts.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering is working to develop a data driven approach to identify and prioritize 

locations for passing lanes. Once this is developed, Traffic Safety Engineering will work with the NDOT team to 

design, bid and build these projects.

In support of the Intersection CEA Task Force and a systemic approach to intersection safety, Traffic Safety 

Engineering worked with local agencies to identify and install retro-reflective backplate borders on traffic 

signals. Many traffic signals already have these retro-reflective borders and this project will install this FHWA 

proven safety countermeasure at the remaining intersections.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 44

Safety Management Plans are safety focused corridor studies intend to reduce the number of crashes on 

Nevada Roadways. The NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering team identifies corridors on arterial roads statewide 

to implement safety improvements. Three SMP’s kicked off in this reporting period. Locations were identified 

through the NDOT network screening process. The first is in Reno, Nevada on NV-647 (West 4th Street) 

between McCarran on the West and North Virginia Street on the East. The second is in Las Vegas, Nevada on 

off-system East Bonanza Road between Las Vegas Boulevard North and North Nellis Boulevard. The third is in 

North Las Vegas, Nevada on off-system East Care Avenue from Interstate 15 to North Sloan Lane.

These SMP’s will evaluate the needs of all modes of transportation and make recommendations for future 

projects. The purpose of a SMP is to conduct a safety focused corridor study aimed at all road users and to 

include collaboration with stakeholders and the public. A SMP includes the development of short and longrange transportation safety improvement projects that incorporate relevant studies, access management 

principles, public and stakeholder input, crash and capacity analyses, benefit/cost analysis, and other impacts 

to all road users. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) is created to help with the development of the SMP 

and to ensure that the plan was consistent with the needs of the many different stakeholders along the project 

corridor. The SMP process is consistent with the Nevada SHSP goal of reducing the number of fatalities and 

serious injuries on Nevada’s roadways.

Program Methodology

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

implementation and evaluation processes?

Yes

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering will systematically review this manual and update as appropriate.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

 HRRR

 Intersection

 Local Safety

 Pedestrian Safety

 Rural State Highways

 Segments

 Wrong Way Driving

 Other-Safety Management Plans

Program: HRRR

Date of Program Methodology:10/22/2012

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 44

 All crashes  Volume  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Other-Priority Ranking

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:2

Other-Combining with other projects:3

Other-Systemic Improvmeents:1

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology:3/9/1997

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Volume  Functional classification
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 44

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash rate

 Other-Societal Cost normalized by AADT

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?

 Other-Priority Ranking

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

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

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

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

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

Relative Weight in Scoring

Available funding:30

Other-combining with other projects with our traffic safety partners:20

Other-Societal costs per volume:50

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology:11/4/2019

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Volume  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 44

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

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?

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:50

Available funding:50

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology:3/15/2015

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Other-Land Use Generators  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Other-Land Use Generator Matrix (see attached)

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

program?

Yes
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 44

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Other-Priority Ranking

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

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

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

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

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

Relative Weight in Scoring

Available funding:30

Other-Combining with other projects being done by our traffic safety partners:20

Other-weight from land use generator matrix:50

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Rural State Highways

Date of Program Methodology:10/22/2012

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Volume  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 44

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

 Other-Priority Ranking

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

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

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

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

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:2

Other-Combining with other projects being done by our traffic safety partners:3

Other-Systemic Improvements:1

Program: Segments

Date of Program Methodology:9/15/2015

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Volume  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash rate

 Other-Societal cost per volume

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?

 Other-Priority Ranking
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 44

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

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

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

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

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

Relative Weight in Scoring

Available funding:30

Other-Combining with other projects being done by our traffic safety partners:20

Other-Societal cost per volume:50

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Wrong Way Driving

Date of Program Methodology:3/11/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Volume  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash frequency

 Crash rate

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

program?

No

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 44

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:50

Other-Combined with other projects:50

Program: Other-Safety Management Plans

Date of Program Methodology:6/15/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

 Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

 FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

 All crashes  Volume  Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

 Crash rate

 Other-Societal Costs normalized by ADT

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?

 Other-Priority Ranking

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

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

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

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

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

Relative Weight in Scoring

Available funding:30

Other-combining with other projects with our traffic safety partners:20

Other-Sociatal Cost per ADT:50
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 44

Total Relative Weight:100

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 5

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

 Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

 Crash data analysis

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

 Engineering Study

 Road Safety Assessment

 SHSP/Local road safety plan

 Other-Safety Management Plans

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

No

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.

The Highway Safety Manual’s process for Network Screening and Project Prioritization is used to help 

determine the priority of HSIP projects as well as the predictive methodologies. Project safety effectiveness is 

calculated by Highway Safety Manual processes.

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

elaborate.

Nevada was identified as a Focus State for Intersections by FHWA in July 2015. Because of this designation, 

Traffic Safety Engineering has continued to incorporate systemic and spot treatments at intersections such as 

Retroreflective Back Plates, pedestrian crossing islands and medians that will provide better corridor access 

management. NDOT is also currently utilizing the Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) methodology to 

evaluate intersection safety mitigation.

Nevada was also identified as a High Risk Rural Roads state and is incorporating systemic proven 

countermeasures such as rumble strips, curve improvements (including High Friction Surface Treatment), 

shoulder widening, slope flattening, and passing lanes into our HSIP program.

Three SMP’s were completed during the reporting period. These SMP’s followed the process identified in the 

HSIP Manual and analyzed SR-659 (North McCarran Boulevard) in Reno; off-system Sahara Avenue in Las 

Vegas, Nevada; and off-system Jones and SR-574 (Cheyenne Avenue) in Las Vegas, Nevada. Safety 

mitigation recommendations from these SMP’s area being scoped with the local road owners. These 

recommendations include access management, pedestrian crossings with flashing beacons and refuge 

islands, new signal head placement and signal head realignment, multi-use paths, buffered bike lanes and 
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 44

sidewalks. NDOT Roadway Design and Project Management will design these projects with support from 

Traffic Safety Engineering. These projects will be contracted through an NDOT contract using HSIP funds.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering and Traffic Operations is continuing to expand the TIM program throughout 

the state. The primary goal of the of the TIM program is to reduce fatalities and serious injuries from secondary 

crashes by providing coordination and education to all partners, including enforcement and emergency 

services.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 44

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Federal 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) $31,172,024 $14,087,448 45.19%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $1,487,814 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $5,000,000 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $31,172,024 $20,575,262 66.01%

Programmed projects were canceled or moved from FFY2020 to later years due to changes in NDOT Traffic 

Safety Engineering Staff and productivity impacts from the Covid-19 pandemic.

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

safety projects?

5%

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

5%

$772,226.00 was obligated and programmed on SR-447, Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe Community of Wadsworth 

for low cost pedestrian and road safety improvements.

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

25%

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

25%

Non-Infrastructure Safety Projects include those obligated and programmed to support the SHSP, RSA 

program, and data collection efforts.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 44

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

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

$0

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

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

$9,000,000

The FFY2020 STIP was closed showing projects that have been cancelled. Funding of $1,596,762 for the 

cancelled projects has not been transferred to other core program areas so it was not appropriate to list it 

above.

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

the future.

The NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering team experienced unprecedented turnover in the reporting period. This 

turnover, coupled with impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, has forced the team to review its processes and 

procedures. New Traffic Safety Engineering Leadership is working with the data analysis and engineering 

teams to challenge the process and develop a plan that is transparent, sustainable and repeatable. The team 

has made a commitment to Nevada's FHWA representative to systematically review and update the HSIP 

Manual, HSIP processes and projects throughout the state of Nevada.

Describe any other aspects of the State’s progress in implementing HSIP projects on 

which the State would like to elaborate. 

Nevada is developing a process to support and fund local and regional projects in a sustainable manner. 

FHWA recently approved a pilot project using the NDOT Local Public Agency (LPA) program. State HSIP 

projects will be identified and pursued using processes established in the HSIP Manual.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 44

General Listing of Projects

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

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY

SUBCATEGOR

Y

OUTPUT

S

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/ARE

A TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP STRATEGY

Install RetroReflective Borders 

on Traffic Signal 

Backplates

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic 

signal - add 

backplates with 

retroreflective 

borders

2422 Signal 

heads

$821580.00 $862659.00 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

35,00

0

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersection

s

Improve sight distance 

and traffic control visibility

US 95 in Churchill, 

Lyon, and Mineral 

Counties -. road 

rehabilitation 

project with 

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

4.5 Miles $4000000 $23003063 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther4,000 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Combine with 

3R project

Lane 

Departure

Keep vehicles in their 

lanes through 

improvements/engineerin

g

US 93, Elko 

County - Road 

Rehabilitation with 

passing lanes

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

6 Miles $819021.69 $13596157.0

0

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther2,500 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Combine with 

3R project

Lane 

Departure

Keep vehicles in their 

lanes through 

improvements/engineerin

g

US 95 in Nye 

County - Road 

Rehabilitation with 

Shoulder widening, 

Slope Flatting, 

Turn Lanes 

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

30 Miles $455185.00 $21317105 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther2,900 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Combine with 

3R project

Lane 

Departure

Keep vehicles in their 

lanes through 

improvements/engineerin

g

Low Cost 

Pedestrian and 

Road Safety 

Projects on SR 447 

in Pyramid Lake 

Paiute Tribe 

Wadsworth 

Community 

Pedestrians 

and bicyclists

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

.38 Numbers $772226.00 $1319769 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 800 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Tribal Safety 

Project

Pedestrians Implement geometric 

improvements through 

engineering

Intersection 

Improvements at 

Eastern Ave and 

Washington in 

Clark County

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometrics -

modify 

intersection 

corner radius

1 Intersection

s

$1489383.0

0

$1787438 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther36,00

0

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Safety 

Management 

Plan 

recommendatio

n

Intersection

s

Implement geometric 

improvements through 

engineering

Intersection and 

Pedestrian Safety 

Improvements on 

McCarran in Spark, 

NV

Pedestrians 

and bicyclists

Medians and 

pedestrian 

refuge areas

1.5 Miles $1803784.0

0

$1898720 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther30,00

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Safety

Management 

Plan 

recommendatio

n

Pedestrians Implement geometric 

improvements through 

engineering

Intersection and 

Pedestrian Safety 

Improvements on 

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometrics -

modify 

2 Intersection

s

HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther30,00

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Safety 

Management 

Plan 

Intersection

s

Implement geometric 

improvements through 

engineering
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 44

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY

SUBCATEGOR

Y

OUTPUT

S

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/ARE

A TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP STRATEGY

McCarran in Spark, 

NV

intersection 

corner radius

recommendatio

n

IMPROVE CRASH 

DATA 

COLLECTION 

AND ANALYSIS 

AT THE 

UNIVERSITY OF 

NEVADA LAS 

VEGAS

Noninfrastructure Data/traffic 

records

1 Agency $31455.00 $33027.75 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A N/A 0 0 Other Local 

Agency

Systemic Data

IMPROVE CRASH 

DATA 

COLLECTION 

AND ANALYSIS IN 

ESMERALDA 

COUNTY

Noninfrastructure Data/traffic 

records

1 Agency $18492.00 $19416.60 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A N/A 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Data

IMPROVE CRASH 

DATA 

COLLECTION 

AND ANALYSIS IN 

LANDER COUNTY

Noninfrastructure Data/traffic 

records

1 Agency $58425.00 $61346.25 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural N/A 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Data

IMPROVE CRASH 

DATA 

COLLECTION 

AND ANALYSIS IN 

NYE COUNTY

Noninfrastructure Data/traffic 

records

1 Agency $185095.86 $194350.65 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural N/A 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Data

THE CONTINUED 

IMPLEMENTATIO

N OF SHSP TO 

ADDRESS THE 

SEVEN CRITICAL 

EMPHASIS 

AREAS 

(PEDESTRIANS, 

IMPAIRED 

DRIVING, 

OCCUPANT 

PROTECTION, 

INTERSECTIONS, 

Noninfrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

1 Planning 

Program

$1900000.0

0

$1995000.00 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

0 Multiple 

agencies

Planning Planning Planning

STATEWIDE RSA, 

RSA 

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURE AND 

TRAFFIC SAFETY 

ENGINEERING 

STUDIES FOR 

FFY 2020-21 

Noninfrastructure Road safety 

audits

12 RSA's $1732800.0

0

$1819440.00 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

N/A N/A 0 All Routes 

Statewide

In conjunction 

with project 

scoping

Multiple 

Emphasis 

Areas
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 44

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMEN

T CATEGORY

SUBCATEGOR

Y

OUTPUT

S

OUTPUT 

TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGOR

Y

LAND 

USE/ARE

A TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATIO

N

AADT SPEE

D

OWNERSHI

P

METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP STRATEGY

US 95 FROM 

12.16 MILES 

NORTH OF 

BEATTY TO 3.67 

MILES SOUTH OF 

THE NY/ES 

COUNTY LINE

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - 

paved or other

30 Miles $1487814 HRRR 

Special 

Rule (23 

U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Principal ArterialOther2,900 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Combine with 

3R project

Lane 

Departure

Keep vehicles on road 

thru engineering 

improvements

SAFETY 

MANAGEMENT 

PLAN (FFY 2020-

2023) 

Noninfrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

9 Studies $5000000 $5000000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Multiple/Varies 0 State and/or 

Local Roads

HSM Network 

Screening

Multiple 

Emphasis 

Areas

Used an average for the function class, speed and AADT for the multiple intersection locations where the retro-reflective borders were installed. 

US 95 in Nye County project uses both HRRR funds (1,487,814)and HSIP funds ($455,185). 

The project on McCarran included both intersection and pedestrian safety improvements, therefore we entered 2 lines for this one project.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 44

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fatalities 246 261 266 290 325 329 309 329 304

Serious Injuries 1,254 1,048 1,205 1,144 1,097 1,232 1,094 1,199 976

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.100 1.150 1.130 1.140 1.300 1.320 1.095 1.196 1.086

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

5.970 4.590 3.900 4.490 4.370 4.910 3.880 4.358 3.486

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

48 61 68 80 83 86 108 88 76

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

190 197 211 199 181 206 229 203 178
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 44

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual Serious Injuries

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

Page 27 of 44

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

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

Page 28 of 44

Describe fatality data source. 

FARS

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

ownership. 

Year 2019

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

22 0.97

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0 0 0 0

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

34.6 2.13

Rural Minor Arterial 9.8 2.4

Rural Minor Collector 2.6 1.85

Rural Major Collector 9 2.49

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

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

Page 29 of 44

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

5.2 1.01

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

23.2 0.52

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

8.6 0.48

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

61.6 1.87

Urban Minor Arterial 92.2 1.8

Urban Minor Collector 27.6 1.27

Urban Major Collector 0 0 0 0

Urban Local Road or 

Street

21 0.44
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 44

Year 2015

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

County Highway 

Agency

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

Indian Tribe Nation

Due to an incomplete record of 2019 A-Type spatially located crashes, A-Type injuries will not be reported per 

function class in the 2020 HSIP report. NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering expects to have the issue resolved by 

the end of January 2021 and will share this data as appropriate.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 44

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2021 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:330.2

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

The target was set to meet Nevada's SHSP Zero Fatalities Interim Goal of reducing the 2004 to 2008 5-year 

moving average for each performance measure in half by 2030. The current trend was projected through 2021 

and then reduced in 2021 based on a linear reduction to meet the 2030 Interim Goal.

Number of Serious Injuries:1154.7

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

The target was set to meet Nevada's SHSP Zero Fatalities Interim Goal of reducing the 2004 to 2008 5-year 

moving average for each performance measure in half by 2030. The current trend was projected through 2021 

and then reduced in 2021 based on a linear reduction to meet the 2030 Interim Goal.

Fatality Rate:1.226

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

The target was set to meet Nevada's SHSP Zero Fatalities Interim Goal of reducing the 2004 to 2008 5-year 

moving average for each performance measure in half by 2030. The current trend was projected through 2021 

and then reduced in 2021 based on a linear reduction to meet the 2030 Interim Goal.

Serious Injury Rate:3.835

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

The target was set to meet Nevada's SHSP Zero Fatalities Interim Goal of reducing the 2004 to 2008 5-year 

moving average for each performance measure in half by 2030. The current trend was projected through 2021 

and set to equal the projected value since it is below the 2030 Interim Goal.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:309.8

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

The target was set to meet Nevada's SHSP Zero Fatalities Interim Goal of reducing the 2004 to 2008 5-year 

moving average for each performance measure in half by 2030. The current trend was projected through 2021 

and then reduced in 2021 based on a linear reduction to meet the 2030 Interim Goal.

Each target is set through a data driven process by extrapolating existing trends in the data through the target 

year of 2021 and then applying a reduction to meet Nevada's SHSP Interim Goal of reducing the 2004 to 2008 

5-year moving average for each performance measure in half by 2030. The targets are realistic and achievable 

based on the reduction being representative of the current projects and strategies within the HSIP and SHSP.

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

safety performance targets. 

In August 2020, the Chief of NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering reached out to RTC Southern Nevada, CAMPO 

and TRPA to demonstrate how we set safety performance targets. This presentation will be saved and shared 
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 44

with other MPO's and stakeholders as appropriate. Targets are set using the 5 year moving average as vetted 

through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the FHWA.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2019 Safety Performance Targets (based 

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

reasons for differences in the actual outcomes and targets.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES TARGETS ACTUALS

Number of Fatalities 319.2 319.2

Number of Serious Injuries 1186.4 1119.6

Fatality Rate 1.209 1.199

Serious Injury Rate 4.970 4.201

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

299.1 287.6

Actual 2019 performance measures were less than or equal to that the projected target values. This indicates 

that Nevada's mitigation strategies are working for the reporting period. NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering will 

continue to work with it partners in the areas of law enforcement, education and emergency medical response 

to keep trending downward. NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering will continue to manage and prioritize HSIP 

funds to improve the State Transportation System. Every life saved and every serious injury avoided lessens or 

eliminates the cost for society and reduces the demands on law enforcement, emergency medical services and 

trauma centers.

Applicability of Special Rules

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

Yes

$1,487,814.00 was programmed and obligated on a roadway rehabilitation project @ US 95 in Nye County for 

shoulder widening and slope flattening to reduce lane departure crashes.

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

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

37 37 46 55 53 62 63

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

103 100 110 130 129 115 124
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 44

Reported data is still preliminary. It will not be finalized until FARS publishes finalized 2019 data.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 44

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

 Change in fatalities and serious injuries

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

the State's program level evaluations.

During this reporting period, the frequency of fatalities and serious injuries have decreased.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering focuses on developing projects that will reduce the numbers of fatalities and 

serious injuries using HSIP funds as outlined in the strategies and action items under the current CEAs of the 

Nevada SHSP. 

Projects completed during this reporting period that are related to these emphasis areas were:

 Intersection safety projects in Sparks, Nevada at SR-659 (South McCarran Boulevard) at East Glendale 

Avenue and East Greg Street

 Pedestrian safety project in Sparks, Nevada on SR-659 (North McCarran Boulevard) from East 

Victorian Avenue to East Lincoln Way

 Pedestrian safety project on SR-447 through the Pyramid Lake Paiute Community of Wadsworth, 

Nevada

 Lane Departure safety projects on US-93 and US-95 which included truck climbing lanes, passing 

lanes, shoulder widening and slope flattening.

As a strategy under the Intersection CEA, NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering completed a systemic project in 

Washoe County that added retro-reflective borders to over 2000 signal heads.

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program?

 # miles improved by HSIP

 # RSAs completed

 HSIP Obligations

 Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

 More systemic programs

 Policy change

Describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting 

period.

NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering is currently developing a new system for project delivery on local roadways. 

The team will be working with the FHWA and building of the current NDOT Local Public Agency program and 

the success of other states.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 44

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2019

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury 

Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Lane Departure 114.4 313.4 0.42 1.21

Intersections 60 434.8 0.24 1.67

Pedestrians 77.2 170.4 0.29 0.57

Bicyclists 7.72 45.36 0.03 0.18

Older Drivers 43.28 68.68 0.21 0.23

Motorcyclists 59.4 204.6 0.21 0.79

Work Zones 8.72 26.76 0.03 0.11

Young Drivers 30.6 97.2 0.07 0.36

Occupant Protection 70.4 201.4 0.28 0.79

Impaired 70.8 128.2 0.23 0.56
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 44

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

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

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

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

Page 37 of 44

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the 

reporting period?

No

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

Page 38 of 44

During this reporting period NDOT Traffic Safety Engineering has started the following reports to evaluate 

countermeasure effectiveness:

 Roundabout Benefit Cost Analysis 

 Complete Streets Before and After Analysis 

 Implementing Wrong Way Driver Countermeasures 

 Green Bike Sharrows Benefit Analysis 
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 44

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 

2016 HSIP (before and after evaluation) will be reported in the 2021 HSIP report. FHWA has emphasized the critical value of having a full 3 years of after data. Project specific after data will not be available until after the 2020 HSIP 

reporting deadline.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 44

Compliance Assessment

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

 10/11/2016

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2016 To: 2020

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

 2021

Nevada is developing the SHSP update with consultant support. The team is currently reviewing the structure, strategies and action steps. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the project schedule, but the team is confident that the 

new SHSP will be ready around the end of 2020.

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

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

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12) [12]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 

[8]

100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9) [9]

100 100

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21) [21]

100 100

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20) [20]

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100 100

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 75

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100 100 100
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 44

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]

20 20

Access Control (22) 

[23]

45 45

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

30 30

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 44

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]

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

100 100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 92.50 91.11 66.25 66.25 45.45 45.45 66.67 66.67 100.00 100.00

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

NDOT spent the reporting period identifying collection methods and securing funding to further MIRE FDE requirements. 

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. 

Nevada has identified several proactive actions to meet the MIRE fundamental data elements deadline of September 30, 2026. Completed actions to at the time of reporting include: mapping of the overlap between HPMS and MIRE data 

elements, meeting with essential database management personnel to create a MIRE database utilizing structures outlined in MIRE in an effort to ensure the data is up-to-date, and identification of safety data gaps not addressed by MIRE, 

State, or Federal guidance. Process for identifying and expanding a record of crash, roadway, traffic and vehicle data on public roadways continue to be refined. Implementation of Road Video Lidar Data asset extraction will be will allow 

Nevada to develop a system for managing state owned assets. This is to start on October 1st, 2020. Collection prioritization will start with Federal-aid roads and then expand to non-Federal-aid roads. Once data is collected it will be 

implemented using MIRE data in safety tools and other methodologies. Once complete, evaluations shall include HSIP quality control measures that will ensure the accuracy of the State’s safety data and establish performance metrics.
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 44

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

HSIP Flow Chart.pdf

HSIP Procedure Manual July 2020.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2020 Nevada Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 44

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.