Page 1 of 42

CALIFORNIA 

2022 ANNUAL REPORT 

Disclaimer: This report is the property of the State Department of Transportation (State DOT). The State DOT 

completes the report by entering applicable information into the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Highway 

Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) online reporting tool. Once the State DOT completes the report pertaining to its 

State, it coordinates with its respective FHWA Division Office to ensure the report meets all legislative and regulatory 

requirements. FHWA’s Headquarters Office of Safety then downloads the State’s finalized report and posts it to the 

website (https://highways.dot.gov/safety/hsip/reporting) as required by law (23 U.S.C. 148(h)(3)(A)). 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 42

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 .......................................................................................................................8

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

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

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

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................23

General Highway Safety Trends ......................................................................................................23

Safety Performance Targets ............................................................................................................29

Applicability of Special Rules ...........................................................................................................31

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................33

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................33

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................33

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................37

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................38

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................41

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................42
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 42

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. 407 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.” 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 42

Executive Summary

Caltrans formed the Division of Safety Programs in 2020 to lead and champion the traffic safety paradigm shift 

throughout Caltrans. The historical processes and procedures of the State’s HSIP are key components of 

implementing new safety strategies and Caltrans will use this HSIP Annual Report to identify opportunities to 

improve the HSIP process. The Office of Strategic Safety and Implementation leads HSIP reporting under 

direction of the Chief Safety Officer and the Deputy Division Chief of Safety Programs for Road Safety. 

Caltrans' 2020-2024 Strategic Plan incorporated a Safe System Approach and adopted several new strategies 

to achieve its Safety First goal. 

HSIP projects are the Department’s highest priority. The goal of protecting the safety of all road users, 

particularly our most vulnerable road users such as bicyclists and pedestrians, we are incorporating equity as 

we work towards zero deaths. 

Caltrans has embarked on developing a holistic safety program that will focus on the "4 Pillars of Traffic 

Safety”:

Double Down on What Works 

Accelerating Advanced Technology 

Implementing a Safe System Approach 

Institutionalizing Equity 

Safe System Approach established as policy - Established a Director's Policy for Road Safety to adopt and 

begin institutionalizing a Safe System Approach. 

Evolving the Safety Culture - Caltrans 2020-2024 Strategic Plan published including the Safe System 

Approach and a goal of zero fatalities and serious injuries. Embarked on a Road Safety Action Plan initiative to 

incorporate road safety into districts and divisions regular business processes. 

Organizational Structure - Conducted 27 hiring actions and increased ad hoc external support to address 

turnover and established new roles for high-level, ongoing commitment to safety. Examples include: 

Executive Safe System Advisor 

Safety Planning Branch 

Proven Safety Countermeasures Champion 

Safety Targets Specialist 

Dedicated Resource Manager 

Maintenance Project Liaison 

Leveraging expanded consultant and FHWA support 

Increasing potential for proactive projects - Established a new practice to set and reach Fatal and Serious 

Injury collision reduction targets through SHOPP projects and developed a Safety Effectiveness Tool to 

estimate a safety project's collision reduction output. 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 42

Doubling Down on What Works - Established a web site with one-stop-shop library of Proven Safety 

Countermeasure (PSC) tools and guidance. Established a new pilot district performance measurement tool to 

track the number of PSCs implemented in SHOPP and Maintenance projects.

New Proven Safety Countermeasure Guidance - Issued PSC Guidance for Leading Pedestrian Intervals 

and Rumble Strips.

Easy Centralized access to data - A graphical crash data dashboard was developed to provide the SHSP 

implementers direct access to crash data and support data-driven SHSP implementation.

Equity - Formally incorporated Equity in the implementation of strategies and partnering across multiple 

divisions to develop an area-based Equity Index. The index will be used for equity considerations in safety 

needs and project identification and selection process. 

Established methods to implement safety features quickly through Highway Maintenance projects -

Established a$21.5 Million/year, two-year HM-4 Safety Pilot Program to utilize Highway Maintenance (HM) 

program in delivering pedestrian safety improvements, curve warning sign installations, and wrong way driving 

prevention PSCs at 2,510 locations in FY 21-22. Developed new HM safety guidance to include safety 

improvements in pavement and bridge HM projects.

Focus on Speed Reduction Strategies - Established stakeholder engagement to implement the initial speed 

limit reduction provisions introduced with the passage of AB-43 (Friedman) by February 2022, adopted 13 new 

SHSP Actions to implement specific Zero Traffic Fatalities Task force recommendations. 

Pivoted the Strategic Highway Safety Plan - Published SHSP 2020-2024 Update, which includes adopting 

Safe System Approach and Equity as guiding principles. Moved to a more aggressive goal of "Zero Fatalities 

and Serious Injuries." Targeted 25 actions in five high priority challenge areas.
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 42

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. 

Caltrans’ Division of Safety Programs administers the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) for the 

State Highway System (SHS) and the Division of Local Assistance administers the HSIP funds for local and 

tribal roads. 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-Headquarters and District Division of Safety Programs and Division of Local Assistance

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process 

• SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

• Other-Funds Set Aside 

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

The Caltrans Division of Local Assistance (DLA) uses an in-house HSIP application benefit-cost tool, called 

HSIP Analyzer, to provide a consistent, data-driven methodology for ranking local roadway (non-State owned 

and operated) project applications on a statewide basis. DLA also provides the Local Roadway Safety Manual 

for California local road owners and directly incorporates information from UC Berkeley’s Transportation Injury 

Mapping System web site to assist applicants applying for local HSIP funds. These tools and resources 

encourage local agencies to proactively analyze their roadway networks for the highest crash locations to 

develop and submit applications with the greatest chance of reducing fatalities and serious injuries using low 

cost proven systemic countermeasures. The DLA HSIP application process is also open and available to the 

tribes that would like to submit an application for HSIP funds. DLA also provides set aside funding for low-cost 

systemic countermeasures where collisions are not required as part of the application. Funding is limited for 

each set aside and one application for each set aside per agency. For Cycle 11, the set aside 

countermeasures were, installing edge lines, guardrail upgrades, pedestrian crossing enhancements and 

bicycle safety improvements and tribal governments had their own funding set aside. For the tribal government 

set aside, they were able to select any of the set asides to install on their tribal roads. 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 42

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning. 

• Design 

• Districts/Regions 

• Maintenance 

• Planning 

• Other-Division of Research, Innovation, and System Performance 

Describe coordination with internal partners. 

We continually coordinate with our internal partners continually prioritizing safety, reflecting the pivot in safety 

culture with the adoption of the 4 Pillars of Traffic Safety. This coordination and 4 Pillars of Traffic Safety is a 

new approach to traffic safety and aims to reduce risk by accommodating predictable human error, rather than 

focusing on improving driver behavior. Through strong internal coordination, Caltrans looks to accomplish zero 

fatalities and serious injuries by 2050 using the guiding principles of the 4 Pillars of Traffic Safety. 

The HSIP team aligns with the 2020-2024 Caltrans Strategic Plan, through supporting activities for the 4 Pillars 

of Traffic Safety. By leveraging proven practices, accelerating advanced technology, leading safety culture 

change, and advancing delivery of safety enhancements, the plans have a common goal to reduce fatalities 

and serious injuries. 

Caltrans Division of Local Assistance also reports on HSIP improvement projects with standardized PSCs used 

by local agencies. 

Caltrans Headquarters analyzes collision data and produces annual reports for multiple collision monitoring 

programs along the SHS. These monitoring programs screen the network to identify locations to be 

investigated by the districts. 

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

• Academia/University 

• FHWA 

• Governors Highway Safety Office 

• Law Enforcement Agency 

• Local Government Agency 

• Local Technical Assistance Program 

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

• Tribal Agency 

• Other-Emergency Response Team 

Describe coordination with external partners. 

Meeting over the summer of 2022, State transportation leaders decided that achieving zero deaths and serious 

injuries on public roadways required a bold pivot with more focused efforts. The group agreed to institutionalize 

the following guiding principles into a revised SHSP to make the SHSP more reflective of new thought and 

safety strategies: Integrate Equity, Implement Safe System Approach, Double Down on What Works, and 

Accelerate Advanced Technology. Following the “Integrate Equity” principle, the SHSP increased participation 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 42

from persons or agencies that represent traditionally underserved populations or stakeholders to ensure input 

and outreach is more inclusive. 

As part of developing HSIP Implementation Plans for 2022 and 2023, the State has identified an opportunity to 

develop a strategic stakeholder engagement and communications strategy for the implementation of the 

SHSP, HSIP, and target setting to increase local and regional collaboration and participation in the process. 

This strategy will be developed through the collaborative process of the oversight structure of the SHSP and 

will be used to ensure that local and regional input is received at key decision points in the process related to 

target setting, HSIP and SHSP implementation. 

Describe HSIP program administration practices that have changed since the last 

reporting period.

To further advance Caltrans commitment to adopt the Safe System Approach, a director’s policy titled “Road 

Safety,” also known as DP-36, was implemented on February 15, 2022. The purpose of the policy is to set the 

expectation and prioritize safety. 

HM-4 Safety Pilot Program for utilizing Highway Maintenance to quickly implement pedestrian safety 

improvements, curve warning, and wrong way driving prevention countermeasures at 2,510 locations FY21-22. 

Program Methodology 

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

implementation and evaluation processes? 

Yes 

Caltrans to release updated California HSIP Guidelines in the 22/23 reporting year. 

https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/safety-programs/documents/hsip/f0017926-ca-hsip-2017.pdf 

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• Bicycle Safety 

• HSIP (no subprograms) 

• Local Safety 

• Roadway Departure 

• Wrong Way Driving 

• Other-Systemic Wrong Way 

• Other-Crossover Collision Monitoring Program 

• Other-Systemic Pedestrian State Highway System 

• Other-Pedestrian HCCL State Highway System 

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology:4/20/2018

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• FHWA focused approach to safety
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 42

• Other-High Collision Concentration Location

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Funding set-aside within HSIP funds

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Other-Fatal and injury crashes 

only

• Volume

• Lane miles • 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?

• Other-Bicyclist Safety Improvement Monitoring Report

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

Other-meet minimum criteria:100

Program: HSIP (no subprograms)

Date of Program Methodology:4/20/2017

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? 

Other-Funding set-aside within HSIP funds
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 42

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes • Volume

• Lane miles • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Probability of specific crash types

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?

• Other-Meets HSIP Data and Criteria

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:1

Cost Effectiveness:1

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology:1/1/2015

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? 

Other-Competes with all other safety projects and set-aside funding

What data types were used in the program methodology? 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 42

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Other-Systemic approach

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?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

Local Agencies take the lead in identifying projects within their own jurisdictions based on Local HSIP 

guidance

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Competitive application process

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:1

Available funding:2

Other-set asides:1

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology:11/15/2004

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? 

Other-Funding set-aside within HSIP funds
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 42

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Other-Fatal and Injury crashes 

only

• Volume

• Lane miles

• Other-Fatal and injury crashes 

on Wet Pavement 

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

• Other-Fatal and injury crashes 

resulting in Overturned Vehicle 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Other-see the optional description for this question

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?

• Other-Locations to be incorporated into existing SHOPP projects

• Other-Run of Road Safety Improvement Monitoring Report 

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

Other-top 25% of run-off-road concentration locations with higher scores +100% of identified long 

segments selected based on collision frequency, roadway type, geometric characteristics and traffic 

volume. :100

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Wrong Way Driving

Date of Program Methodology:1/15/1985

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 42

Other-Funding set-aside within HSIP funds

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes • Volume

• Lane miles • 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?

• Other-Wrong Way Safety Improvement Monitoring Report 

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

Other-crash frequency and crash rate:100

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Other-Systemic Wrong Way

Date of Program Methodology:3/16/2021

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Funding set-aside within HSIP funds

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 42

• All crashes • Volume

• Lane miles • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Wrong Way Notification

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?

• Other-All projects meeting established criteria can be programmed.

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

Other-All Projects meeting established criteria:100

Program: Other-Crossover Collision Monitoring Program

Date of Program Methodology:1/15/2019

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Funding set-aside within HSIP funds

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Fatal crashes only • Volume

• Lane miles • Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 42

• 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?

• Other-All projects meeting established criteria can be programmed

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

Other-All Projects meeting established criteria:100

Program: Other-Systemic Pedestrian State Highway System

Date of Program Methodology:9/11/2020

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? 

Other-Funding set aside within HSIP funds

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Other-Fatal and Injury crashes 

only

• Volume

• Population

• Other-Disadvantaged 

Community

• Other-Employment Data

• Other-Intersections on the State 

Highway System

• Other-Number of Lanes on 

Mainline and Cross Street

• Other-Control Features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Probability of specific crash types
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 42

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?

• Other-Systemic Locations to be incorporated into existing SHOPP projects

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

Other-See Below:100

Total Relative Weight:100

Using ArcGIS software, the identified systemic locations were then prioritized using a point-scoring system with 

the following factors and weights: 

• Number of collisions (fatalities plus injuries) (55%) 

• Estimated pedestrian volume based on UC Berkeley SafeTREC study results and American 

Community Survey population and employment data (25%) 

• Disadvantaged community status based on CalEnviroScreen 3.0 (10%) 

• Vulnerable populations (10%) consisting of: 

o Senior (age 65 and older) population density based on the American Community Survey (2.5%) 

o Youth (under age 15) population density based on the American Community Survey (2.5%) 

o School proximity from the California School Campus Database (5%) 

Program: Other-Pedestrian HCCL State Highway System

Date of Program Methodology:7/31/2020

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? 

Other-Funding set aside within HSIP funds

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 42

• Other-Fatal and Injury crashes 

only

• Population

• Other-Disadvantaged 

Community

• Other-Employment Data

• Other-Pedestrian - Related 

High Collision Concentration 

Locations (HCCLs)

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Other-Pedestrian Related HCCL 

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?

• Other-Pedestrian Safety Improvement Monitoring Program

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

Other-See Below:100

Total Relative Weight:100

In collaboration with the Division of Research Innovation and System Information, the Identified HCCLs were 

then prioritized using a point-scoring system with the following factors and weights: 

• Number of collisions (fatalities plus injuries) (50%) 

• Estimated pedestrian volume based on UC Berkeley SafeTREC study results and American 

Community Survey population and employment data (25%) 

• Disadvantaged community status based on CalEnviroScreen 3.0 (10%) 

• Vulnerable populations (10%) consisting of: 

o Senior (age 65 and older) population density based on the American Community Survey (2.5%) 

o Youth (under age 15) population density based on the American Community Survey (2.5%) 

o School proximity from the California School Campus Database (5%) 

• Repeated crash characteristics based on identical primary collision factor (5%) 

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements? 

 60
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 42

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal 

• Clear Zone Improvements 

• Horizontal curve signs 

• Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation 

• Install/Improve Signing 

• Other-Pedestrian 

• Rumble Strips 

• Safety Edge 

• Wrong way driving treatments 

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 

• Stakeholder input 

• Other-Benefit Cost Ratio 

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes 

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

Caltrans is currently researching and reviewing connected d vehicles and ITS technologies This includes 

existing studies at Caltrans as well as participating in the SHSP Emerging Technologies Challenge Area team, 

which is a new challenge area in the 2020-2024 California SHSP, for which Caltrans has designated a 

challenge area co-lead. Some examples of Caltrans’ ongoing efforts are the establishment of a Smart 

Infrastructure Office to work on the Caltrans Statewide Connected and Automated Vehicle Implementation 

Plan, research on using near-miss technology to collect and evaluate traffic safety and research on the use of 

LIDAR to assess sight distance on highways. When the State HSIP has data on the application of emerging 

technologies, the state will incorporate these technologies into the HSIP. 

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 HSM guidance goal is to support the integration of predicted roadway safety performance considerations 

throughout the highway transportation planning and project development process. The HSM guidance is 

intended to supplement the information on which project decisions are currently based and is not intended to 

act as the only factor driving project decisions nor does it include every situation. 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 42

Describe program methodology practices that have changed since the last reporting 

period.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Director Signed Director's Policy- 36 - Road Safety: 

Caltrans has a vision to eliminate fatalities and serious injuries on California's roadways by 2050 and provide 

safer outcomes for all communities. In 2022 the division of safety programs introduced changes to quantifying 

the benefits of safety projects in term of annual fatal and serious injury collisions reduced. This change focuses 

investments on the SHS that lead to the greatest reduction in fatalities and serious injuries. The division has 

developed the safety Performance Estimation Tool to facilitate district evaluation of the annual benefits 

resulting from safety projects and their overall contribution in achieving the ultimate target of zero fatal and 

serious injury crashes on the SHS. Some other program methodology practices that are specific to PSCs are 

as follows:

Issued PSC guidance for leading Pedestrian Intervals, Rumble Strips, and Fixed Objects in Roadway 

Departure Crashes.

Launched a new website with one-stop-shop library of Proven Safety Countermeasure tools and guidance.

Developed a new district performance measurement tool to track the number of PSCs implemented in SHOPP 

and Maintenance projects.

The Division of Maintenance and Safety Programs have launched a collaborative initiative to implement safety 

enhancements through the Highway Maintenance (HM) Project Delivery Program. Bridge and pavement 

projects are now required to consider safety enhancement opportunities starting with fiscal year 2022/23.

For the Local HSIP, for Cycle 11, a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) or equivalent was required for a local 

agency to be eligible to apply for federal HSIP funds for this year’s call for projects.

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

elaborate.

Local HSIP and State highway HSIP use the cost/benefit methodology as a qualifying criterion for HSIP funds 

with some differences. For State highway HSIP, the benefit/cost tool is called the traffic safety index. It is used 

for projects at spot locations. Local HSIP utilizes the benefit/cost methodology for both spot and systemic type 

of projects. The Local HSIP also utilizes set-asides for low-cost countermeasures. These set-asides do not 

require crash data to receive HSIP funding but are limited to a maximum dollar amount per agency and are 

limited to specific low-cost countermeasures. For cycle 11, which is the current call for Local HSIP projects, 

pedestrian crossing enhancements at non-signalized locations, bicycle safety improvements, edge line striping, 

guardrail upgrades, and tribal roads are set-aside categories that local agencies can select from.
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 42

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed 

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

State Fiscal Year is: July 01, 2021 to June 30, 2022 

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $568,468,000 $255,228,908 44.9%

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $0 $0 0%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $34,976,781 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $155,234,769 0%

State and Local Funds $60,000,000 $60,000,000 100%

HSIP Local (23 U.S.C. 

148)

$52,102,906 $116,233,483 223.08%

Totals $680,570,906 $621,673,941 91.35%

In April, 2022, California was notified that HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C 148(g)(1)) was triggered so 

$17,563,128 is required to be obligated on high risk rural roads in FFY 23 which will be noted in 2023 Annual 

Report. Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154) has ended, The Obligated amount reported above was left over 

amounts that was reported from the Office of Federal Resources. 

Other Federal-aid Funds such as (i.e. STBG, NSPP) have no programmed amount. The obligated amount of 

$155,234,769 shown under other Federal-aid Funds Obligated was reported from the Office of Federal 

Resources. 

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

safety projects? 

$52,102,906
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 42

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

$116,233,483

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

0%

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

0%

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

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

$155,234,769

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

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

$0

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

the future.

No impediments to discuss. In previous annual reports, strategies were noted to improve delivery for Local 

HSIP and continue to be the standard practice to keep the on-time delivery at greater than 90%.

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

which the State would like to elaborate. 

In FFY 20/21, Local HSIP utilized the option of transferring federal HSIP funds back to the state HSIP in return 

for state highway funds on a dollar-for-dollar basis as described under California Senate Bill 137. The funds 

exchanged will not change the purpose for which the funds were for under federal legislation requirements. A 

total of $40 Million was exchanged in FY 20/21 and $60 Million was exchanged in FY 21/22 and will be used to 

fund preliminary engineering and construction activities - This change will help local agencies deliver their 

safety projects more efficiently, with less support costs and improved project delivery. Only a portion of the 

Obligated Amount (OA) was exchanged since there are other projects within the project delivery pipeline that 

will need the remaining federal funds for construction and closeout.

Local HSIP is moving ahead with requiring local agencies to have an approved Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) 

or equivalent to be eligible to receive HSIP grant funds which started this year's call for Cycle 11 projects.

Safety projects are funded under the State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) reservation 

resources entitling eligible projects for continuous programming at every California Transportation Commission 

(CTC) meeting that is held approximately every other month. The state has established Safe System Approach 

and a goal of zero fatalities and serious injuries, as well as increasing potential for proactive safety projects.
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 42

General Listing of Projects 

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

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

01 HUM 299 

PM 

30.7/33.4

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

3 Miles $0 $39764000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther Freeways & 

Expressways

0 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

A full listing of State and Local Projects are included as attachments.
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 42

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends 

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Fatalities 3,107 3,102 3,387 3,837 3,884 3,798 3,719 3,847 4,084

Serious Injuries 10,664 10,995 11,942 13,701 14,201 16,158 16,443 15,392 17,920

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

0.900 0.930 1.010 1.130 1.130 1.090 1.090 1.280 1.310

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

3.240 3.290 3.560 4.030 4.130 4.630 4.680 5.140 5.760

Number nonmotorized fatalities881 838 955 1,088 1,085 1,143 1,154 1,115 1,157

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

2,710 2,795 2,803 3,017 3,175 3,399 3,503 2,995 3,456
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 42

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 42

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 42

Describe fatality data source. 

FARS

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) is the fatality 

data source for years 2013-2020. The California Highway Patrol’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System 

(SWITRS) is the preliminary fatality data source for 2021. FARS will not report 2021 fatality data until the first 

quarter of 2023. 

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

ownership. 

Year 2018

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 42

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 Minor Arterial

Rural Minor Collector

Rural Major Collector

Rural Local Road or 

Street

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

Urban Minor Arterial

Urban Minor Collector

Urban Major Collector

Urban Local Road or 

Street

0 0 0 0
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 42

Year 2020

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway 

Agency

1,631.2 5,857.4 0.87 3.13

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

Data not available through Caltrans or CHP. 

Provide additional discussion related to general highway safety trends.

The annual trend in fatalities and serious injuries in 2021 is increasing. With the annual trend moving in the 

wrong direction, Caltrans continues to shift our safety paradigm by changing the organization, conversation, 

and the way we work. Safety is a shared responsibility, and we look to reverse the trend and move toward the 

long-term goal of zero fatalities and serious injuries by 2050. 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 42

Caltrans is working to implement the Safe System Approach (SSA) through implementing a new Director’s 

Policy on Road Safety. The SSA to road safety is a fundamental shift in how we define the safety challenges, 

implement safety interventions, and evaluate progress. These include reframing core principles of our 

traditional safety approach in several ways. The SSA aims to eliminate fatal and serious injuries for all road 

users through a holistic view of the roadway system by affirming that fatal and serious injuries on the roadways 

can be prevented when safety is prioritized across all components of the road system. Caltrans’ Division of 

Safety Programs has undertaken several initiatives to address several components of SSA: safe roads, safe 

speeds, and safe road use. For example, the ongoing Proactive Safety programs (Pedestrian Safety, Bicyclist 

Safety, and Wrong Way Driver) have embraced and implemented the principles of SSA.

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2023 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:3808.2

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

The FARS data points for calendar years 2017-2020 were used to determine the projected trend and annual 

count for 2021-2023. The relative percentage change from 2017-2018, 2018-2019, and 2019-2020 were 

averaged to determine the annual decreasing trend of 0.30% for the number of fatalities. The 2023 target is 

based on the five-year rolling average of the annual counts. The decrease in the number of fatalities aligns with 

the goal of the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) to move toward zero fatalities and serious 

injuries. In December of 2021, the Federal Highway Administration apportioned $262 million dollars to 

California to fund safety projects that focus on reducing fatalities and serious injuries on California's roads 

under the Highway Safety Improvement Program. If the Vision Zero by 2050 was used as the projected trend, 

the 2023 target based on the five-year rolling average of the annual counts would have been 3667.5. NHTSA 

recommends a trend-based approach, so the target based on past data points has been reported. Caltrans 

notes that, if the Vision Zero by 2050 was used as the projected trend the 2023 Fatality target based on the 

five-year rolling average of the annual counts would have been 3667.5

Number of Serious Injuries:15156.2

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

The SWITRS data points for calendar years 2018-2020 were used to determine the projected trend and annual 

count for 2021-2023. In the middle of 2017, the serious injury definition to include suspected serious injuries 

was implemented, so 2017 data was not included in determining the projected trend. The relative percentage 

change from 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 were averaged to determine the annual decreasing trend of 2.40% for 

the number of serious injuries. The 2023 target is based on the five-year rolling average of the annual counts. 

The decrease in the number of serious injuries aligns with the goal of the California Strategic Highway Safety 

Plan (SHSP) to move toward zero fatalities and serious injuries. In December of 2021, the Federal Highway 

Administration apportioned $262 million dollars to California to fund safety projects that focus on reducing 

fatalities and serious injuries on California's roads under the Highway Safety Improvement Program. NHTSA 

recommends a trend-based approach, so the target based on past data points has been reported. Caltrans 

notes that, If the Vision Zero by 2050 was used as the projected trend, the 2023 target based on the five-year 

rolling average of the annual counts would have been 14976.6.

Fatality Rate:1.216

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals.
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 42

The FARS data points for calendar years 2017-2019 were used to determine the projected trend and annual 

count for 2021-2023. The relative percentage change from 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 were averaged to 

determine the annual decreasing trend of 1.77% for the rate of fatalities while assuming the vehicle-milestraveled will remain constant. The 2023 target is based on the five-year rolling average of the annual counts. 

The decrease in the number of fatalities aligns with the goal of the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

(SHSP) to move toward zero fatalities and serious injuries. In December of 2021, the Federal Highway 

Administration apportioned $262 million dollars to California to fund safety projects that focus on reducing 

fatalities and serious injuries on California's roads under the Highway Safety Improvement Program.

Serious Injury Rate:4.940

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

The SWITRS data points for calendar years 2018-2020 were used to determine the projected trend and annual 

count for 2021-2023. In the middle of 2017, the serious injury definition to include suspected serious injuries 

was implemented, so 2017 data was not included in determining the projected trend. The relative percentage 

change from 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 were averaged to determine the annual decreasing trend of 2.40% for 

the number of serious injuries while assuming the vehicle-miles-traveled will remain constant. The 2023 target 

is based on the five-year rolling average of the annual counts. The decrease in the number of serious injuries 

aligns with the goal of the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) to move toward zero fatalities and 

serious injuries. In December of 2021, the Federal Highway Administration apportioned $262 million dollars to 

California to fund safety projects that focus on reducing fatalities and serious injuries on California's roads 

under the Highway Safety Improvement Program.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:4131.7

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

The FARS data points for calendar years 2017-2020 were used to determine the projected trend and annual 

count for 2021-2023. The relative percentage change from 2017-2018, 2018-2019, and 2019-2020 were 

averaged to determine the annual decreasing trend of 0.30% for the number of non-motorized fatalities. The 

SWITRS data points for calendar years 2018-2020 were used to determine the projected trend and annual 

count for 2021-2023. The relative percentage change from 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 were averaged to 

determine the annual decreasing trend of 2.40% for the number of non-motorized serious injuries. The 2023 

target is based on the five-year rolling average of the annual counts. The decrease in the number of serious 

injuries aligns with the goal of the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) to move toward zero 

fatalities and serious injuries. In December of 2021, the Federal Highway Administration apportioned $262 

million dollars to California to fund safety projects that focus on reducing fatalities and serious injuries on 

California's roads under the Highway Safety Improvement Program.

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

safety performance targets. 

Since safety targets are applicable to all public roads in the California, regional and local jurisdictions should be 

collaboratively involved in the safety target setting process. In line with this, on July 20, 2022, a virtual 

workshop was held to discuss the 2023 SPMTs with the MPOs and other vested stakeholders. A survey 

soliciting feedback on future stakeholder coordination was shared with workshop invitees. The survey results 

will be shared with the new consultant, who will provide a stakeholder engagement plan, to assist with future 

stakeholder coordination efforts. 

Caltrans and the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) met on April 21, 2022 and May 19, 2022 to discuss target 

setting methodology options and then to agree on which methodology to use for target setting. The three core 
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 42

safety performance targets (C1 – C3) that Caltrans and OTS must agree upon are included in the HSIP and 

HSP respectively.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2021 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 3624.8 3866.4

Number of Serious Injuries 15419.4 16022.8

Fatality Rate 1.044 1.180

Serious Injury Rate 4.423 4.868

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

4340.8 4436.4

The 2021 targets were determined with a trend line approach, which extrapolated the existing changes in 

fatalities and serious injuries into the future. The data-driven process estimated the impact of external factors 

and safety improvements based on crash history. These annual targets are progress indicators for reaching 

our long-term goal of zero fatalities and serious injuries by 2050. Based on the data available at the time of 

reporting, Caltrans will not meet any of the targets set for 2021. Caltrans is committed to safety and an 

aggressive implementation effort is needed to improve performance, so we can meet our long-term goal.

Applicability of Special Rules

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

No

The HRRR special rule does not apply to the State, however, California was notified in April the HRRR rule 

was triggered so California will be required to obligate $17, 563,128 in FY 2023 on high risk rural roads which 

will be highlighted in next year's annual report.

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

years of age and older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

416 434 540 487 517 522 454

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

695 799 927 1,011 1,179 1,319 1,042
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 42

The 2020-2024 California SHSP has challenge areas to focus on reducing fatalities and serious injuries in 

aging drivers and pedestrians.
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 42

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness 

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

• Benefit/Cost Ratio 

• Change in fatalities and serious injuries 

• Other-3 - year before and after 

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

the State's program level evaluations. 

There are three levels of evaluation to determine the effectiveness of overall HSIP Program: (1) Evaluation of 

Approved Countermeasures, (2) Evaluation of Approved Projects, and (3) Evaluation of various Safety and 

Monitoring Programs within the HSIP Program. California State DOT, normally, performs at least one level of 

evaluations annually by comparing fatal and serious injury collision data for 3-year before and 3-year after 

study. 

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

• HSIP Obligations 

• Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process 

• Increased focus on local road safety 

• More systemic programs 

• Other-SHSP Crash Data Dashboard 

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements 

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures. 

Year 2020

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

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)

Aggressive Driving/ 

Speed Management

All 1,102.2 4,353.8 0.32 1.27

Aging Drivers All 571.6 1,879.4 0.17 0.55

Bicyclists All 165.2 1,017.6 0.05 0.3

Commercial Vehicles All 387.8 859.8 0.11 0.25

Distracting Driving All 157.6 690.6 0.05 0.2

Impaired Driving All 1,289.8 3,417 0.37 0.99

Intersections All 755 3,608.6 0.22 1.05
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 42

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 Departures All 1,699.8 6,218.6 0.5 1.81

Motorcyclists All 526.8 2,933.4 0.15 0.85

Occupant Protection All 719 1,694.2 0.21 0.49

Pedestrians All 963.2 2,194.4 0.28 0.64

Work Zones All 62 192.4 0.02 0.06

Young Drivers All 448 1,901 0.13 0.55
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 42

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 42

The 2021 numbers for the SHSP emphasis areas are not available at this time, the fatalities and serious injury 

numbers are expected to be available for the 2023 Annual Report.

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021

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

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 42

Project Effectiveness 

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

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

IMPROVEMENT 

TYPE

PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

Please see the 

attached 

before/after list 

of projects for 

both the SHS 

and Local 

Programs

A full listing of Local and State previously implemented projects are attached.
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 42

Compliance Assessment

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

 03/15/2021

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2020 To: 2024

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

 2025

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

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

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100

Median Type (54) 

[55]

100
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 42

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

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100 100

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

100

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

100

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

100

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 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 42

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

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201) [191]

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

100

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

100

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

100

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 100.00 83.33 75.00 25.00 63.64 0.00 0.00 77.78 0.00 0.00

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

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. 

California has contracted out with UCB Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) to continue to make progress on completing MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads by September 30, 2026
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 42

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

HSIP-2017-Final.pdf

Project Implementation:

#29 2122 FY SHOPP Progrmmed Projects.pdf

Local HSIP Programmed Projects FY 21-22.xlsx

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Local HSIP Authorized Projects FY 21-22.xlsx

Local Roads HSIP_BCR_2022.xlsx

#46 Final 2022 HSIP 2018 before after.pdf

Compliance Assessment:
2022 California Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 42

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.