Missouri

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2016 Annual Report

Prepared by: MO
ii

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. 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.”
iii

Table of Contents

Disclaimer...................................................................................................................................................... ii

2. Executive Summary................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2

Program Structure ........................................................................................................................................ 2

Program Administration ........................................................................................................................... 2

Program Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 4

Progress in Implementing Projects............................................................................................................... 9

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................... 9

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

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets .................................................................................... 20

Overview of General Safety Trends........................................................................................................ 20

Application of Special Rules.................................................................................................................... 35

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................36

SHSP Emphasis Areas.............................................................................................................................. 38

Groups of similar project types............................................................................................................... 42

Systemic Treatments............................................................................................................................... 47

Project Evaluation....................................................................................................................................... 54

Glossary....................................................................................................................................................... 65
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

2. Executive Summary

The Missouri Coalition for Roadway Safety and the Missouri Department of Transportation 

(MoDOT) are dedicated to improving safety of the motoring public through education, 

engineering, enforcement and emergency medical services initiatives. Safety is one of the 

Department’s core values: “Be Safe.” This message is also reinforced in the Department’s 

Practical Design Guide that states, “Safety will not be compromised. Every project we do will 

make the facility safer after its completion." Additionally, "keeping our customers and ourselves 

safe" is a MoDOT Tangible Result.

In October 2012, Missouri introduced its third edition of a Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

(SHSP) and established a highway safety goal of 700 or fewer fatalities by 2016. Missouri’s 

Blueprint to Save More Lives guides the State’s safety initiatives and addresses safety from a 

comprehensive standpoint including engineering, enforcement, education, emergency medical 

services, technology and public policy solutions. The Blueprint focuses on implementing 

strategies that will reduce both fatal and serious injuries on Missouri roadways. The Blueprint 

and the statewide fatality goal are considered in the development and implementation of each of 

the Department’s highway safety plans. The state's fourth edition of an SHSP will be introduced 

in October 2016 and will follow a similar format.

Evidenced-based decision-making is paramount to a sound safety program. Data analysis is a 

critical part of identifying overrepresented crash types, locations, driver age, driver gender, and 

driver behaviors. These findings guide the deployment of effective and appropriate strategies to 

improve safety on the entire system. Efforts are made to analyze fatal and serious injury crashes 

to help discern where limited safety funding should be applied so that maximum safety 

improvements and benefits are attained.

From 2005-2014, Missouri experienced a steady decline in both fatalities and serious injuries. 

During that time, fatalities decreased by 40 percent (1,257 in 2005 to 766 in 2014) and serious 

injuries decreased by 46 percent (8,621 in 2005 to 4,657 in 2014). In 2015, preliminary data 

indicates 870 fatalities (14% increase) and 4,451 serious injuries (4% decrease) in Missouri. The 

2015 fatality rate in Missouri was 1.21. The 5-year average for fatalities increased in 2015 (from 

791 to 801), while the 5-year average for serious injuries decreased (5,039) for the 10th year in a 

row.
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

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 MAP21 Reporting Guidance dated February 13, 2013 and consists of four sections: program structure, 

progress in implementing HSIP projects, progress in achieving safety performance targets, and 

assessment of the effectiveness of the improvements. 

Program Structure

Program Administration

3. How are Highway Safety Improvement Program funds administered in the State? 

District

If District, how are the HSIP funds allocated?

Formula

4. Describe how local roads are addressed as part of Highway Safety Improvement Program.

Our local roads are included in the crash data system analysis. We evaluate all roadways in the state and 

place emphasis on severe crashes. This analysis is performed for both intersections and non-intersection 

locations. To date we have used an analysis method, which places weight on the severe crashes and 

locations that have experienced a higher frequency of severe crashes and are often those that will find 

their way on our top priority lists. While most of the locations to date have been on the state system 

roadways, we have recently seen a few of the local roads locations make these high priority lists. While 

we continue to believe that the majority of the problem locations will be state system locations, we 

have evaluated non-state system severe crash locations and have determined that 55% of our non-state 

system fatalities are in seven counties. Local strategic highway safety plans (SHSP) have been developed 

for these seven counties (Jackson, Jefferson, St. Louis City, Greene County, St. Louis County, Franklin, 

and St. Charles). The local SHSPs identify systemic countermeasures and high priority projects. To date 

we have communicated the problem locations to the planning entities like our Metropolitan Planning 

Organizations and Regional Planning Commissions. We also work with our LTAP center to continue to 

move safety forward in our state. Additionally, we have used the RSA process to better address local 

road issues on occasion, we have a Transportation Engineering Assistance Program (TEAP) to assist 

locals, and we also have a subcommittee from our SHSP that focuses on infrastructure improvement 

opportunities for local roads.

5. Identify which internal partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Design
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

Planning

Maintenance

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office

6. Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

MoDOT has focused for some time on system-wide safety solutions. We have worked with our Design 

Division to address our Engineering Policy, we have worked with our Operations and Maintenance staff 

to improve the roadsides, and we have worked with the Planning staff to better evaluate and select 

safety needs for improvements. We have also worked with the previously mentioned internal partners 

on the training and use of the Highway Safety Manual (HSM). Additionally, we work daily with the 

Highway Safety office to evaluate and monitor the crash types. It is vital that all areas in our department 

work together and focus on safety improvements. We have begun efforts to improve our safety 

situation on the local roads and have developed local SHSPs for our top counties. We are also working 

with our Planning and Design Divisions to consider how we might best administer safety projects on 

local roads.

7. Identify which external partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Other-Law Enforcement

Other-Emergency services, Department of Revenue, Universities, etc.

Other-Federal Highway Administration

Other-National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Other-Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

8. Identify any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since 

the last reporting period.

Other-The total distribution of HSIP funds to the districts will increase by $7 million beginning in state 

fiscal year 2017 (starts July 1, 2016). Another $3 million in HSIP will be administered by Central Office 

during state fiscal year 2017.
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

9. Describe any other aspects of Highway Safety Improvement Program Administration on which you 

would like to elaborate.

Safety initiatives continue to be driven by the State SHSP. The State SHSP includes numerous safety 

initiatives that are data driven. Each district develops a regional district safety plan for their available 

HSIP funds. These district plans must support the overarching goals of the statewide SHSP at the district 

level.

Program Methodology

10. Select the programs that are administered under HSIP. 

Median Barrier Intersection Horizontal Curve

Skid Hazard Roadway Departure Local Safety

11. Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology: 9/27/2002

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Volume Horizontal curvature

Functional classification

Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Systemic evaluation

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 
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

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

Systemic safety initiative 1

11. Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology: 1/21/2009

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Volume Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Systemic evaluation

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

Systemic safety initiative 1

11. Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology: 2/8/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Volume Horizontal curvature
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Systemic evaluation

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

Systemic safety initiative 1

11. Program: Skid Hazard

Date of Program Methodology: 2/8/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Other-Wet pavement crashes

Horizontal curvature

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

Other-Systemic evaluation

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

Systemic safety initiative 1

11. Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology: 10/1/2004

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Volume Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Systemic evaluation

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

Systemic safety initiative 1

11. Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 2/8/2013
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Volume Horizontal curvature

Functional classification

Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Systemic evaluation

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

Systemic safety initiatives 1

12. What proportion of highway safety improvement program funds address systemic improvements? 

80%

Highway safety improvement program funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements?

Cable Median Barriers

Rumble Strips

Pavement/Shoulder Widening

Install/Improve Signing

Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

Safety Edge

Other-Intersection improvments, wrong-way driving countermeasures, high 

friction surface treatments, and local safety initiatives. Other initiatives 

implemented due to policy change.
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

13. What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Other-Enforcement and other stakeholders input.

Other-Peer Exchange - lessons learned

14. Identify any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since 

the last reporting period.

Other-Utilization of district safety plans to identify needs and improvments at the district level.

15. Describe any other aspects of the Highway Safety Improvement Program methodology on which 

you would like to elaborate. 

MoDOT uses a systemic approach to safety project implementation. The top crash types have been 

determined and focus strategies have been identified for implementation for each district. The 

strategies are listed in MoDOT's Engineering Policy Guide at 

http://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=907.1_Safety_Program_Guidelines.

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

16. Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

State Fiscal Year

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

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

Amount Percentage Amount Percentage

HSIP (Section 148) $36,561,000.00 85 % $38,439,734.00 78 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) $0.00 0 % $30,865.00 0 %
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

18. How much funding is programmed to local (non-state owned and operated) safety projects? 

0 %

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

0 %

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

0 %

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

0 %

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

reporting period?

0 %

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

period?

0 %

21. Discuss impediments to obligating Highway Safety Improvement Program funds and plans to 

overcome this in the future.

The largest impediment to fully obligating HSIP funding in recent years relates to overall transportation 

funding. Due to limited state funding, this created an issue with fully programming the HSIP funding on 

safety projects. With a shrinking construction budget, MoDOT has been limited on the number of 

systemic safety improvements that can be implemented (an example is the adding of a paved shoulder 

with rumble strips - less paving projects also means fewer shoulder improvements). This resulted in a 

growth of unobligated HSIP funding.

Penalty Transfer -

Section 154

$2,836,000.00 7 % $7,991,571.00 16 %

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STP, NHPP)

$3,575,000.00 8 % $2,674,000.00 5 %

Totals $42,972,000.00 100% $49,136,170.00 100%
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

Beginning in state fiscal year 2017, (started July 1, 2016) MoDOT's overall construction program has 

increased to near normal levels. MoDOT's leadership also increased the amount of safety funds 

available for programming by $10 million for FY2017. Together, these changes will enhance MoDOT's 

ability to fully obligate and program HSIP funds.

22. Describe any other aspects of the general Highway Safety Improvement Program implementation 

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

MoDOT has implemented numerous safety initiatives to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes on statemaintained highways. MoDOT is also looking at opportunities to fund necessary safety efforts at the 

local level. With the completion of our local strategic highway safety plans, we are now seeing some 

local safety initiatives in regards to identified needs (an example is curve improvements related to curve 

warning signs).
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

General Listing of Projects

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

Project Improvement Category Output HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Fundin

g 

Catego

ry

Functional 

Classificat

ion

AAD

T

Spee

d

Roadwa

y 

Owners

hip

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strategy

High 

friction 

surface 

treatment 

on the 

westbound 

l

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

0.36 

Miles

11700

0

143000 Other 

Federa

l-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expresswa

ys

125

99

60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Improve 

curve 

safety

High 

friction 

surface 

treatment 

on 

southboun

d lane

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

0.189 

Miles

57000 87000 Other 

Federa

l-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expresswa

ys

872

5

60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Improve 

curve 

safety

Pavement 

and 

intersectio

n 

improveme

nts at 

various 

Intersection traffic control 

Intersection traffic control 

- other

0.801 

Miles

68200

0

748000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

198

12

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

Pavement 

and 

intersectio

n 

improveme

nts at 

various 

Intersection traffic control 

Intersection traffic control 

- other

0.489 

Miles

74300

0

811000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

760

6

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety

Bridge 

improveme

nts at Front 

Street, Rte. 

24 and R

Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, terminals)

0.35 

Miles

22700

0

373800

0

Penalt

y 

Transf

er -

Sectio

n 154

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

415

50

60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Remove, 

shield, 

and/or 

delineate 

roadside 

obstacle

Intersectio

n and 

pavement 

improveme

nts at Rte. 

F, 

Intersection traffic control 

Intersection traffic control 

- other

0.692 

Miles

63500

0

701000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expresswa

ys

108

26

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety

High 

friction 

surface 

treatment 

to both 

lanes of t

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

0.217 

Miles

77000 94000 Other 

Federa

l-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

123

83

60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Improve 

pavement 

friction

On-call 

work zone 

enforceme

nt at 

various 

locations

Work Zone 1 

Numb

ers

22676

1

252000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Various 

Routes

1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency

Work 

Zones

Increase 

enforcem

ent 

efforts
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

Pavement, 

shoulder 

and signal 

improveme

nts from Rt

Intersection traffic control 

Intersection signing -

miscellaneous/other/unsp

ecified

1 

Numb

ers

88700

0

185300

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

677 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety

Pavement 

improveme

nts on the 

eastbound 

and 

westbou

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes -

miscellaneous/other/unsp

ecified

22.1 

Miles

29800

0

603500

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expresswa

ys

200

00

70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety

Pavement, 

shoulders 

and curve 

improveme

nts from 

we

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

2.242 

Miles

19760

00

232900

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

148

8

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Install 

center 

and 

edgeline 

rumble 

strips

Construct 

left turn 

lane and 

shoulder 

additions fr

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

1 

Numb

ers

12480

00

421700

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

959

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety

Signal, 

lighting 

and ADA 

facilities 

improveme

nts a

Intersection traffic control 

Intersection traffic control 

- other

1 

Numb

ers

64900

0

675000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

108

33

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety

Signal, 

lighting 

and ADA 

facilities 

Intersection traffic control 

Intersection traffic control 

- other

1 

Numb

ers

57300

0

597000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

742

2

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

improveme

nts a

On-call 

work zone 

enforceme

nt at 

various 

locations

Work Zone 1 

Numb

ers

51800

0

576000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Various 

Routes

1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency

Work 

Zones

Increase 

enforcem

ent 

efforts

Pavement 

and safety 

improveme

nts from 

Rte. 76 to R

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

14.14 

Miles

59300

0

144600

0

Penalt

y 

Transf

er -

Sectio

n 154

Rural 

Major 

Collector

227

3

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Install 

center 

and 

edgeline 

rumble 

strips

Pavement 

and safety 

improveme

nts from 

Bus. 37 to 

R

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

1.39 

Miles

44000 345000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

124

6

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Install 

center 

and 

edgeline 

rumble 

strips

Pavement 

and safety 

improveme

nts from 

Rte. 97 to R

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

4.677 

Miles

12900

0

473000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

186

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Install 

center 

and 

edgeline 

rumble 

strips

Pavement 

and safety 

improveme

nts from 

Rte. BB 

west

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

24.985 

Miles

63100

0

236800

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

100

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Install 

center 

and 

edgeline 

rumble 

strips

Pavement Shoulder treatments 4.29 13170 248400 HSIP Rural 247 65 State Lane Add and 
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

and safety 

improveme

nts from 

Rte. 52 

west

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

Miles 00 0 (Sectio

n 148)

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expresswa

ys

2 Highway 

Agency

Departure improve 

shoulders

High 

friction 

surface 

treatment 

on curves 

near Ric

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

0.097 

Miles

55000 61000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

132

82

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Improve 

curve 

safety

Pavement 

improveme

nts from 

west of 

Rte. 266 

(Chest

Roadside Barrier- metal 17.79 

Miles

47270

00

552000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

350

00

60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Remove, 

shield, 

and/or 

delineate 

roadside 

obstacle

Safety 

improveme

nts on 

various 

sections of 

Glensto

Intersection traffic control 

Intersection signing - add 

enhanced advance 

warning (double-up 

and/or oversize)

6.419 

Miles

60300

0

658000 Penalt

y 

Transf

er -

Sectio

n 154

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

981

4

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety

Operationa

l and 

roadway 

improveme

nts from 

north of

Roadside Barrier -

concrete

2.79 

Miles

10890

00

122490

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expresswa

ys

238

6

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Install 

median 

barrier
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

Pavement 

and safety 

improveme

nts from I44 to Rte.

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

23.139 

Miles

75300

0

200000

0

Penalt

y 

Transf

er -

Sectio

n 154

Rural 

Major 

Collector

616 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Install 

center 

and 

edgeline 

rumble 

strips

Safety 

improveme

nts at the 

intersectio

n of Rte. 43

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unsp

ecified

1 

Numb

ers

17840

00

178400

0

Penalt

y 

Transf

er -

Sectio

n 154

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expresswa

ys

179

9

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety

High 

friction 

surface 

treatment 

0.9 mile 

south of 

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

0.338 

Miles

67000 111000 Penalt

y 

Transf

er -

Sectio

n 154

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

404

4

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Improve 

curve 

safety

On-call 

work zone 

enforceme

nt at 

various 

locations

Work Zone 1 

Numb

ers

4691 5212 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Various 

Routes

1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency

Work 

Zones

Increase 

enforcem

ent 

efforts

On-call 

work zone 

enforceme

nt at 

various 

locations

Work Zone 1 

Numb

ers

25000 27000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Various 

Routes

1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency

Work 

Zones

Increase 

enforcem

ent 

efforts

Replace 

nonstandar

Roadside Barrier - other 1 

Numb

63000 69000 HSIP 

(Sectio

Various 

Routes

1 1 State 

Highway 

Lane 

Departure

Remove, 

shield, 
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

d guardrail, 

installation 

of gua

ers n 148) Agency and/or 

delineate 

roadside 

obstacle

Relocate 

and new 

grade 

separation 

from near 

Hamilt

Railroad grade crossings 

Grade separation

1 

Numb

ers

22500

00

634300

0

Other 

Federa

l-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

255

4

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Improve 

intersecti

on safety

High 

friction 

surface 

treatment 

on curves 

east of 

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

0.249 

Miles

94000 123000 Other 

Federa

l-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expresswa

ys

123

99

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Improve 

curve 

safety

High 

friction 

surface 

treatment 

on ramp 

curves at 

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

1 

Numb

ers

79000 95000 Other 

Federa

l-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

362

8

70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Improve 

curve 

safety

Guardrail 

improveme

nts at 

various 

locations 

along 

Roadside Barrier- metal 222.30

3 Miles

68300

0

703000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Various 

Routes

1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Remove, 

shield, 

and/or 

delineate 

roadside 

obstacle

Pavement 

improveme

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

11.91 

Miles

13980

00

175300

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

Urban 

Major 

745 55 State 

Highway 

Lane 

Departure

Add and 

improve 
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

nts and 

adding two 

foot 

shoulder

or other n 148) Collector Agency shoulders

Pavement 

improveme

nts and 

widening 

for 

shoulders a

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

4.129 

Miles

30600

0

845000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

243

2

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Install 

center 

and 

edgeline 

rumble 

strips

Striping of 

various 

routes 

across the 

state

Roadway delineation 

Improve retroreflectivity

1 

Numb

ers

19347 19347 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Various 1 1 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Maintain 

roadway 

visibility 

features
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

24. Present data showing the general highway safety trends in the state for the past five years. 

Performance Measures* 2011

(5-yr avg)

2012

(5-yr avg)

2013

(5-yr avg)

2014

(5-yr avg)

2015

(5-yr avg)

Number of fatalities 887 854 814 791 801

Number of serious injuries 6591 6143 5744 5368 5059

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.28 1.24 1.18 1.14 1.15

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 9.54 8.91 8.29 7.71 7.25

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

21
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

22
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

25. To the maximum extent possible, present performance measure data by functional classification and ownership.

Year - 2015

Function 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 - INTERSTATE

40 183 0.06 0.26

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

37.2 171.2 0.05 0.25

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

59.6 298.4 0.09 0.43

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

91.2 438.8 0.13 0.63

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

20.4 115.8 0.03 0.17

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

146.2 759 0.21 1.09

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

10.6 43.2 0.02 0.06

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

65.6 403.8 0.09 0.58

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

41.8 250 0.06 0.36

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

78.6 667.4 0.11 0.96

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

68 620.8 0.1 0.89
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0.8 5.6 0.01

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

34.2 280.4 0.05 0.4

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

10.8 85.6 0.02 0.12

RURAL UNKNOWN 65.2 428.4 0.09 0.62

URBAN UNKNOWN 30.6 307.6 0.04 0.44
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

25
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

26
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

27
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

28
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

Year - 2015

Roadway Ownership Number of 

fatalities

Number of serious 

injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 588 3376 0.84 4.83

CITY AND COUNTY HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

213 1683 0.3 2.41
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

30
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

31
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

32
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

33
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

34
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

35

26. Describe any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which you would like to 

elaborate.

MoDOT has placed a large safety emphasis on the major roads in the state (both urban and rural).

These major roads are considered the interstate, freeways & expressways, and principal arterials. These 

roads also carry the largest traffic volumes in our state. Over time, the focus has shifted to provide 

safety improvements on additional miles of higher traveled minor roads, primarily through the addition 

of 2-foot shoulders with rumble strips. While overall fatalities were up in Missouri for 2015, the number 

of fatalities on state-maintained minor roads decreased by about 7%. Intersection and pedestrian 

fatalities both increased by about 50% in 2015.

Application of Special Rules

27. Present the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians 65 

years of age and older.

Older Driver

Performance Measures

2010

(5-yr avg)

2011

(5-yr avg)

2012

(5-yr avg)

2013

(5-yr avg)

2014

(5-yr avg)

Fatality rate (per capita) 0.186 0.176 0.164 0.154 0.152

Serious injury rate (per 

capita)

0.746 0.694 0.646 0.588 0.544

Fatality and serious injury 

rate (per capita)

0.932 0.87 0.81 0.742 0.696

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.

Example: 5-Yr Rate Ending in 2014: (F+SI 2014 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2014 

Population Figure) + (F+SI 2013 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older /2013 Population 

Figure) + (F+SI 2012 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2012 Population Figure) + (F+SI 

2011 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2011 Population Figure) + (F+SI 2010 Drivers and 

Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2010 Population Figure) / 5
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

36

28. Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

37

29. What indicators of success can you use to demonstrate effectiveness and success in the Highway 

Safety Improvement Program?

Other-Evaluation of individual HSIP projects and programs

30. What significant programmatic changes have occurred since the last reporting period? 

None

31. Briefly describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period. 

There have been no significant program changes since the last reporting period. MoDOT is researching 

opportunities to use HSIP funds on local roads.
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

38

SHSP Emphasis Areas

32. Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year - 2015

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target 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)

Other1

(5-yr 

avg)

Other2

(5-yr 

avg)

Other3

(5-yr 

avg)

Roadway Departure Lane Departure 644.8 3333 0.9 4.64

Intersections Intersection 

Related

126.8 1284.6 0.18 1.79

Pedestrians Vehicle/pedestrian 81.8 258.8 0.11 0.36

Bicyclists Vehicle/bicycle 4.8 63.8 0.01 0.09

Older Drivers All 157.2 752.6 0.22 1.05

Motorcyclists Motorcycle 

Related

86.6 598.4 0.12 0.83

Work Zones Work Zone Related 9 57.6 0.01 0.08
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

39
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

40
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

41
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

42

Groups of similar project types
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

43

33. Present the overall effectiveness of HSIP subprograms.

Year - 2015

HSIP Subprogram TypesTarget 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)

Other-1

(5-yr 

avg)

Other-2

(5-yr 

avg)

Other-3

(5-yr 

avg)

Intersection All 126.8 1284.6 0.18 1.79

Roadway 

Departure

Lane 

Departure

644.8 3333 0.9 4.64

Local Safety All 213 1683 0.3 2.42

Median Barrier Cross median 18.6 66.4 0.03 0.09

Skid Hazard Wet road 99.6 666 0.14 0.93

Horizontal Curve Curve 

Related

262 1332.6 0.36 1.85
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

44
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

45
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

46
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

47

Systemic Treatments
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

34. Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Year - 2015

Systemic improvement Target 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)

Other1

(5-yr 

avg)

Other2

(5-yr 

avg)

Other3

(5-yr 

avg)

Innovative 

Intersections

Unsignalized 

Intersections

96.4 865 0.13 1.2 19 36 11

Cable Median Barriers Cross median 18.6 66.4 0.03 0.09 850

Pavement/Shoulder 

Widening

Run-off-road 376 2068 0.52 2.88

Rumble Strips Lane Departure 644.8 3333 0.9 4.64 13500
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

49
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

50
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

51
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

52
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

53

35. Describe any other aspects of the overall Highway Safety Improvement Program effectiveness on 

which you would like to elaborate. 

MoDOT is in early stages of beginning to implement safety countermeasures on the local road system.

County SHSPs have been developed for several of the high need counties in the state and MoDOT plans 

to host a peer exchange in November 2016 to learn best practices for using HSIP on local roads. Overall, 

Missouri has seen a very good reduction in the roadway fatalities and serious injuries with much of the 

success due to the systemic approach used in the state. Engineering safety policy will allow Missouri to 

continue to see success on many of the high need roads in the state.
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

Project Evaluation

36. Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvemen

t Category

Improvement Type BefFata

l

BefSeriou

s 

Injury

Bef-All 

Injurie

s

BefPD

O

BefTota

l

AftFata

l

AftSeriou

s 

Injury

Aft-All 

Injurie

s

AftPD

O

AftTota

l

Evaluatio

n Results 

(Benefit/ 

Cost 

Ratio)

I-29 from 

Gene Field 

Road to MO 

92

Rural 

Principal 

Arteria -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier - cable 3 163 766 932 2 136 679 817 4

US 61 and 

West 

Ely/Pleasan

t in 

Hannibal

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

2 12 59 73 10 46 56 5
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

55

MO 19 

south from 

MO 8 to 

MO 49

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway Roadway widening - travel 

lanes

4 6 8 18 1 1 8 12 22 1

IS 170 from 

IS 270 to 

Page Ave.

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier - cable 1 4 7 12 1 2 3 13

MO 79 at 

RT Y, 

Hackman 

Rd, 

Vomund 

Rd., and 

Dyer Rd.

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

1 4 11 16 1 5 6 1

MO 43 at 

MO 96

Rural Major 

Collector

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

2 2 1 6 11 2 6 8 57
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

56

US 65 at 

Rochester 

Road in 

Taney 

County

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

4 4 2 10 1 1 1

MO 13 at 

RT U / Y in 

Polk County

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

1 1 4 8 14 1 3 7 8 19 1

US 67 from 

Declue Lane 

to RT JJ in 

St. Francois 

County

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

1

RT O from 

US 61 to 

MO 32 in 

Ste. 

Genevieve 

County

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

1 4 8 13 1 2 3 31
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

57

MO 47 from 

MO 21 to 

US 67 in St. 

Francois 

County

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

3 13 28 44 1 4 23 30 58 1

RT C from 

MO 25 to 

MO 51 in 

Bollinger 

County

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

3 1 4 1 1 1

MO 86 from 

2.9 miles 

East of RT H 

in Barry Co. 

to MO 13 in 

Stone Co.

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

2 4 24 34 64 1 8 20 29 71

MO 248 

from Barry 

Co. to MO 

265/413 in 

Stone Co.

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

1 5 19 35 60 1 6 3 11 21 1
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

58

MO 39 from 

RT H to 

Arkansas St 

Line

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

1 3 4 6

MO 176 

from MO 

265/413 to 

MO 13 in 

Stone Co.

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

1 6 19 20 46 2 7 27 36 53

MO 173 

from MO 

413 to MO 

76 in Stone 

County

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

1 6 4 11 1 3 5 6 15 1

RT Z from 

RT F to MO 

25 in Cape 

Girardeau 

County

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

1 3 2 6 1 2 2 5 1
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

59

RT OO from 

MO 34 to 

RT Z in Cape 

Girardeau 

County

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

4 8 6 18 2 9 5 16 3

RT N from 

MO 21 

North to 

MO 21 

South in 

Iron County

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

6 16 16 38 1 3 5 9 6

MO 30 @ 

Main St. / 

Redwood 

Dr.

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressway

s

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

2 9 17 37 65 3 3 6 95

MO 30 @ 

multiple 

intersection

s

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

20 49 202 271 3 13 17 57 90 1
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

60

IS 55 from 

RT E in Cape 

Girardeau 

County to 

US 67

Rural 

Principal 

Arteria -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier - cable 1 7 9 17 2 3 5 1

MO 413 

from US 60 

West of 

Billings to 

0.3 mile 

South of 

Crane

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

1 5 16 20 42 1 10 26 37 27

MO 265 

from 0.3 

mile South 

of Crane to 

MO 13 in 

Branson 

West

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

1 11 34 104 150 5 21 63 89 25

MO 19 from 

MO 8 to 

MO 49 in 

Crawford 

County

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

4 6 8 18 1 1 8 12 22 1
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

61

MO 10 from 

RT C to MO 

13 in Ray 

County

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

2 2 2 2 1

I-29 from 

south of 

Route O to 

Platte 

County Line

Rural 

Principal 

Arteria -

Interstate

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

1 50 216 267 1 1 31 197 230 1

US 59 at 

MO 45 near 

Winthrop

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Lighting Intersection lighting 10 13 23 1 2 3 1

US 24 

Intersection

s in City of 

Palmyra

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

1 1 5 17 24 1 4 6 11 1
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

62

US 24 from 

Randolph 

Co line to 

1.1 miles 

West of RT 

U near Paris

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

2 3 13 50 68 3 10 28 41 27

US 67 at 

MO 221 and 

RT W in 

Farmington

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecifi

ed

2 3 11 16 1 11 12 1

US 63 from 

Maries 

County line 

to north of 

I-44

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

2 4 6 1 4 5 10 1

US 50 from 

0.1 mile 

west of 

Lisletown 

Rd to the 

concrete 

pavement 

just west of 

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Shoulder 

treatments

Pave existing shoulders 4 10 14 1 5 6 1
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

63

Big 

Meadows 

Rd

IS 70 W 

from 0.3 

miles east 

of US 54 to 

the Boone 

County line

Rural 

Principal 

Arteria -

Interstate

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

1 6 23 153 183 1 1 7 72 81 12

US 63 from 

0.5 miles 

south of US 

54 to Rt. P 

in Freeburg

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Shoulder 

treatments

Pave existing shoulders 6 9 23 49 87 1 1 9 26 37 104
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

64

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached
2016 Missouri Highway Safety Improvement Program

65

Glossary

5 year rolling average means the average of five individual, 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.