Idaho

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2013 Annual Report

Prepared by: ID
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

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

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

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

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

Program Methodology..............................................................................................................................6

Progress in Implementing Projects.............................................................................................................10

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

General Listing of Projects.................................................................................................................. 15

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Overview of General Safety Trends....................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Application of Special Rules................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................37

SHSP Emphasis Areas............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Groups of similar project types.............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Systemic Treatments ............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Glossary.......................................................................................................................................................62
iv
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

Executive Summary

The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) continues to work on enhancing the Highway 

Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) for all public roadways in Idaho. ITD recently developed a 

planning and prioritization tool that examines and prioritizes safety on a corridor approach.

This work recently received an award from FHWA and the Roadway Safety foundation as an 

innovative practice. This planning and prioritization process also incorporates the methodology 

outlined in the Highway Safety Manual. In essence this planning process prioritizes corridors by 

utilizing a data driven approach based on how those sections of roads compared to other 

similar sections from the standpoint of crash rates and other measures. Once the corridors are 

prioritized, those that have a higher safety risk will then be evaluated and countermeasures 

assigned. Once that is done, cost/benefit rations are determined and projects are selected to 

populate the Statewide Transportation Improvement program. At the local level work 

continues by the Idaho Local Highway Technical Advisory Council (LHTAC) to plan and prioritize 

highway safety projects at the local level. LHTAC has developed a process based on the fatal 

and serious injuries to determine what jurisdiction have priority for HSIP funding.

Finally, ITD continues the use of flex funds for the behavior programs. This is an effective use of 

the money as Idaho continues to balance the safety program by utilizing the contributes of 

engineering, education, enforcement and emergency response.
2013 Idaho 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 MAP-21 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

How are Highway Safety Improvement Program funds allocated in a State? 

Central

District

Other

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

A recent resolution was implemented by ITD to insure that local roads as well as road on the 

state system, receive funding necessary to improve all roadways. Below is Resolution ITB10-36 

passed by the Idaho Transportation Board on August 19, 2010. WHEREAS, on August 10, 2005 

the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act – a Legacy for Users 

(SAFETEA-LU) created the core Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) for utilization by 

the states; and WHEREAS, Idaho shall develop, implement, and evaluate on an annual basis a 

HSIP that has the overall objective of significantly reducing the occurrence of and the potential 
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

for fatalities and serious injuries resulting from crashes on all public roads; and WHEREAS, 

discussions have been held with the Local Highway Technical Assistance Council (LHTAC) 

regarding the application of the HSIP to the local roads level in order to meet the intent of 

SAFETEA-LU; and WHEREAS, it is recognized that the majority of the local highway system does 

not have the exposure (volumetric) data in order to perform an equitable analysis to determine 

appropriate safety project selection on a statewide basis. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, 

that the Idaho Transportation Department supports the allocation of a portion of HSIP funding 

to LHTAC in order to fulfill the intent of SAFETEA-LU; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the 

Department shall accomplish the expansion of the HSIP to the local level by: 1) Working with 

LHTAC to analyze existing crash data to determine the top crash locations based on frequency 

and severity recognizing this methodology is acceptable to the Federal Highway Administration. 

2) Not limiting HSIP funding only to the state highway system. 3) Establishment of the Safe 

Highway and Facilities Team to evaluate and balance the HSIP. LHTAC would be Granted a seat 

on this team and the Districts and LHTAC would be responsible for individual project selection 

and management of their projects and associated funds within the HSIP. 4) Requiring LHTAC to 

follow all the HSIP criteria as established by FHWA. This would include the instruction given in 

the Capital Investment Program update for the latest Statewide Transportation Improvement 

Program. 5) Supporting and assisting where possible LHTAC in the establishment of a program 

for the collection of exposure (volumetric) data to support this program and to further meet 

the requirements of SAFETEA-LU. This includes a local road base map. Once local exposure data 

can be determined and collected and the local road base map is complete, proportional 

distribution of funding can be better refined and incorporated into the HSIP. In accordance with 

the resolution, a formula was created to determine the proportion of the HSIP funding that will 

be distributed for the state highway system and for the local system. This formula is based on 

road lane mileage, average daily traffic counts and the percentage of fatalities and serious 

injuries on each system. The distributionof funding is reflected in the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program approved by the ITD board. Funding will begin with the Federal Fiscal 

Year 2014.

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

Design

Planning

Maintenance

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

Other: Other-Office of Highway Safety

Other: Other-Local Highway Technical Assistance Council

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

The Districts and Local Highway Technical Assistance Council (LHTAC) select highway 

safety improvement projects for submission into the Program in each District. The Highway 

Safety Review Team will review and confirm the final selection of the combined program 

projects to go into the HSIP portion of the Idaho Transportation Investment Program. This 

will verify the projects selected meet the MAP-21criteria of the HSIP program and that these 

projects align with the SHSP and are safety data-driven.

After the Districts and LHTAC have submitted the proposed projects into the program 

update, the projects will be combined by OTI and given to the HSIP Review Team for

review prior to final acceptance.

 

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

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Other: Other-Local Highway Technical Assistance Council-representing all local highway districts

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

the last reporting period.
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

Multi-disciplinary HSIP steering committee

Other: Other-The inclusion of the Local Highway Transportation Assistance Council on the committee

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

would like to elaborate.

Below is an excerpt from Idaho's FY 15 Program Update Document. It shows the emphasis on a 

data driven approach and alignment with the SHSP.

A “Highway Safety Improvement Project” includes strategies, activities, and projects on a public 

road that are consistent with a SHSP and

• Correct or improve a hazardous road location or feature; or

• Address a highway safety problem.

Data-driven process: 

Highway safety improvement projects must be identified on the basis of crash experience, crash 

potential, crash rate, or other data-supported means. (23 USC 148(c)(2)(B)). The general 

framework for the identification and analysis of highway safety problems and counter-measure 

opportunities is defined in 23 U.S.C. 148(c)(2). This framework is consistent with general 

roadway safety management practices in that States should:

• Identify safety problems either through a site analysis or systemic approach;

• Identify countermeasures to address those problems;

• Prioritize projects for implementation; and

• Evaluate projects to determine their effectiveness.
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

The Idaho Transportation Department’s use of the Highway Safety Corridor planning and 

prioritization process should be utilized to identify locations for highway safety projects.

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

Median Barrier Intersection Safe Corridor

Horizontal Curve Bicycle Safety Rural State Highways

Skid Hazard Crash Data Red Light Running Prevention

Roadway Departure Low-Cost Spot Improvements Sign Replacement And 

Improvement

Local Safety Pedestrian Safety Right Angle Crash

Left Turn Crash Shoulder Improvement Segments

Other: Other-Highway Safety 

Corridor

Program: Other-Highway Safety Corridor

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury Population Functional classification
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

crashes only

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

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

35

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

improvments?

Cable Median Barriers Rumble Strips

Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation Pavement/Shoulder Widening
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

Install/Improve Signing Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or 

Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails Clear Zone Improvements

Safety Edge Install/Improve Lighting

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal Other 

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Other: 

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

last reporting period.

Highway Safety Manual

Road Safety audits

Systemic Approach

Other: Other-use of the Highway Safety Corridor Analysis procedures developed by DKS and ITD
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

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

would like to elaborate. 

As mentioned in the Executive Summary, Idaho has completed a Highway Safety Corridor 

Analysis process utilizing the Highway Safety Manual. We are working toward enhancing 

this project further by looking toward automating parts of the process.

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Calendar Year

State Fiscal Year

Federal Fiscal Year

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

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) 29417000 83 % 29417000 87 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU)

HRRR Special Rule

Penalty Transfer -

Section 154

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

6000000 17 % 4586538 13 %
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

Incentive Grants - 

Section 163

Incentive Grants (Section 

406)

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STP, NHPP)

State and Local Funds

Totals 35417000 100% 34003538 100%

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

0 %

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

0 %

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

$1,000,000.00

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

$900,000.00
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

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? 

7,956,706 %

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

overcome this in the future.

The cost of safety projects can be an impediment to implementing projects. Lower cost 

systemic projects are becoming more prominent to counter this problem.

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

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

Additional information on Idaho's HSIP.

Eligibility of Projects: The HSIP emphasizes a safety data-driven, strategic approach to 

improving highway safety that focuses on eliminating deaths and serious injuries resulting 

from traffic crashes. To be eligible, projects must be consistent with the strategies in Idaho’s 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan, align with the project criteria outlined in MAP-21, and must 

be safety data driven. Projects must correct or improve a location, corridor, or address a 

highway safety problem using a systemic approach. Projects will be included in an annual 

evaluation which will be prepared by the Office of Highway Safety and will require project 

start and completion dates.

Projects already in the program will not be removed from the program if they comply with the 

strategies in the SHSP completed in 2010. However, all new projects must comply with the 

current SHSP.
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

Other Projects - Other projects will be consistent with the emphasis areas and strategies in 

the most current version of Idaho’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan. Below are examples but 

not an exhaustive list. This list is not a prioritized.

a) Behavioral Safety - The Office of Highway Safety will utilize flex funds to 

conduct projects that affect the safety behavior of the public. In order for a State to 

be eligible to use the 10 percent flexibility provision in a fiscal year the State must 

have an approved SHSP.

b) Rumble Strips and Rumble Stripes - This program has been established to 

install centerline and/or shoulder rumble strips/stripes on the State highway 

system.

Funding under this program is not intended to be combined with other construction 

projects where rumble strips/stripes could be installed as part of the other

construction projects. Rumble strip/stripe locations must conform to shoulder

width requirements, specifically, to allow the required width outside of the rumble 

strip for bicyclists. Rumble strip projects that require fogging to seal the pavement 

and associated re- marking the roadway are not an efficient use of funding and may 

be considered a lower priority.
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

 

c) Improved Pavement Markings - This program has been established to provide 

visible pavement markings at the most difficult time of the year, late in the winter 

before weather is good enough to refresh the markings; and in accordance with the 

agreements with FHWA based on the 2003 Joint Review of CONDITION OF 

PAVEMENT MARKINGS ON THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM IN IDAHO

and the follow up review in 2008. Markings installed under this program must be 

warranted to meet retro-reflective and presence standards for at least two years without 

additional maintenance. Funding under this program is not intended to be combined 

with other construction projects that require re-marking the road. Locating durable 

pavement marking projects requires identifying sections of roadway that have cured 

sufficiently after new construction, are not scheduled to be reconstructed or seal coated 

before the warrantee is fulfilled.

d) Sign Upgrades - This program has been established to replace signs than do not 

meet the increased retro reflectivity requirements of 23 CFR Part 655 through MUTCD 

Revision 2 and will not be replaced under typical construction projects in the area. 

Overhead signs are of the highest priority in this program because of equipment and 

labor requirements for installation. All replaced signs must conform to the current 

MUTCD as approved by the State, and may include updating the fonts and sign 

layouts. These changes may increase the sign size and require the support structure to 

be replaced to handle the increased wind loadings from larger signs.

e) Shoulder Widening or Eliminating Edge Drop-Offs - Must encompass an HQidentified deficiency. This improves the driver’s ability to recover should they start 

to run off the road.

f) Intersection improvements - This includes left and right turn lanes at stopcontrolled intersections, yellow change intervals, medians and pedestrian refuge areas 

in urban and suburban areas, roundabouts.

g) Hazard elimination - as defined under 23 USC 104(b)(3), 130, 133, 152

h) High accident (or spot) locations For questions regarding the use of the 

High Accident Location (HAL) report, please contact Kelly Campbell in the

Office of Highway Safety at 334-8105.
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

General Listing of Projects

List each highway safety improvement project obligated during the reporting period. 

Project Improvement Category Outp

ut 

HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Fundin

g 

Catego

ry

Functional 

Classificati

on

AAD

T

Spee

d

Roadway 

Ownersh

ip

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strate

gy

D3 Sign 

Upgrades

Roadway signs and traffic 

control Sign sheeting -

upgrade or replacement

0 11930

00

11930

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

I84 D3 

Pavement 

Striping

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

0 38000

0

38000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

D3 Signal 

Equipmen

t Upgrade

Intersection traffic control 

Modify traffic signal -

miscellaneous/other/unspe

cified

0 10700

0

10700

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Improving 

the design 

and 

operation 

of highway 

intersection

s

Dynamic 

Message 

sign 

McCall

Advanced technology and 

ITS Dynamic message signs

0 11500

0

11500

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Increasing 

driver 

safety 

awareness
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

D4 District 

wide 

Guardrail 

Upgrades

Roadside Barrier - other 0 61600

0

61600

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Minimizing 

the 

consequenc

es of 

leaving the 

road

D4 Sign 

Upgrades

Roadway signs and traffic 

control Sign sheeting -

upgrade or replacement

0 15400

0

15400

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

D4 

Pavement 

Striping

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

0 45800

0

45800

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

SH 75 

Stanley to 

Clayton 

Guardrail 

Study

Roadside Barrier - other 0 26400

0

26400

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Minimizing 

the 

consequenc

es of 

leaving the 

road

US 20 

Bellin Rd 

to 

Yellowsto

ne Hwy

Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction surface

0 30000

0

30000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

D6 

Controlle

d Access 

Fencing

Access management Access 

management - other

0 81000

0

81000

0

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Minimizing 

the 

consequenc

es of 

leaving the 

road

I15 B S. 

Broadway 

and 

Walker

Intersection traffic control 

Intersection traffic control -

other

0 60000 60000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Improving 

the design 

and 

operation 

of highway 

intersection

s

US 93 400 

S Road

Roadway Roadway - other 0 60297

7

65074

0

Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

D1 SIGN 

UPGRADE

S

Roadway signs and traffic 

control Sign sheeting -

upgrade or replacement

0 12077

66

13034

37

Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

D3 SIGN 

UPGRADE

S

Roadway signs and traffic 

control Sign sheeting -

upgrade or replacement

0 54847

7

59189

1

Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

164 roadway

D3 

Pavement 

Striping

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - remarking

0 10994 10994 Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Keeping 

vehicles in 

the 

roadway

SH 75 

Stanley to 

Clayton 

Guardrail 

Study

Roadside Barrier - other 0 41745

9

45052

8

Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Minimizing 

the 

consequenc

es of 

leaving the 

road

Commerci

al 

WGT/Safe

ty 

Complianc

e Station 

PH 2

Miscellaneous 0 31356

1

33840

0

Penalty 

Transfe

r –

Section 

164

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Making 

truck travel 

safer

Behavoria

l Safety

Non-infrastructure 10000

00

10000

00

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

all 

ownershi

ps

Increasing 

driver 

safety 

awareness

Cotterell 

Rest Area 

Roadway 98533

4

10633

86

Penalty 

Transfe

r –

State 

Highway 

Keeping 

drivers 
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

Ramps Section 

164

Agency alert
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

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

Performance Measures* 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Number of fatalities 257 250 237 217 204

Number of serious injuries 1695 1642 1559 1479 1376

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.69 1.63 1.53 1.4 1.31

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 11.16 10.72 10.09 9.55 8.88

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

21
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

22
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

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

Year - 2012

Function Classification Number of fatalities Number of serious injuries Fatality rate (per HMVMT) Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

24 110 1.1 5.06

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

46 203 2.15 9.45

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

21 106 2.3 11.66

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

8 34 3.38 13.91

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

35 141 2.78 11.07

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

26 120 1.17 5.33

URBAN PRINCIPAL 9 57 0.68 4.47
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

18 310 0.82 14.02

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

9 169 0.58 11.44

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

4 54 0.6 8.46

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

4 74 0.43 8.48

OTHER 0 0 0 0

OTHER 0 0 0 0
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

25
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

26
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

27
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

28
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

Year - 2012

Roadway Ownership Number of fatalities Number of serious injuries Fatality rate (per HMVMT) Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

STATE HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

122 695 1.47 8.37

COUNTY HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

0 0 0 0

TOWN OR TOWNSHIP 

HIGHWAY AGENCY

0 0 0 0

CITY OF MUNICIPAL 

HIGHWAY AGENCY

0 0 0 0

STATE PARK, FOREST, 

OR RESERVATION 

AGENCY

0 0 0 0

LOCAL PARK, FOREST 

OR RESERVATION 

AGENCY

0 0 0 0

OTHER STATE AGENCY 0 0 0 0

OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 82 683 1.13 9.49

PRIVATE (OTHER 

THAN RAILROAD)

0 0 0 0
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

30

RAILROAD 0 0 0 0

STATE TOLL 

AUTHORITY

0 0 0 0

LOCAL TOLL 

AUTHORITY

0 0 0 0

OTHER PUBLIC 

INSTRUMENTALITY 

(E.G. AIRPORT, 

SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY)

0 0 0 0

INDIAN TRIBE NATION 0 0 0 0

OTHER 0 0 0 0

OTHER 0 0 0 0
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

31
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

32
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

33
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

34
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

35

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

Idaho's five year rolling average for fatalities and serious injuries continues to decrease. We 

feel that better uses of HSIP money for infrastructure and behavior projects that are data 

driven is probably contributing to this decrease.

Application of Special Rules

Present the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over the 

age of 65. 

Older Driver

Performance Measures

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Fatality rate (per capita) 26.91 23.32 24.05 22.51 21.09

Serious injury rate (per 

capita)

137.35 130.45 125.77 117.25 109.23

Fatality and serious injury 

rate (per capita)

164.25 156.77 149.83 139.76 130.32

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

The fatality rate is the number of drivers, pedestrians and bicyclists 65 or older divided by the 

number of people 65 or older in Idaho times 100000. Each year is a five year rolling average 

rate using that year plus the four previous years rate. The same methodology is used for 

serious injury and fatal and serious injury.
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

36

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

37

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)

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

Safety Improvement Program?

None

Benefit/cost

Policy change

Other: 
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

38

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

Shift Focus to Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Include Local Roads in Highway Safety Improvement Program

Organizational Changes

None

Other: Other-even more use of data driven approaches
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

39

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

Change in policy for the use of the Highway Safety Corridor Analysis (HSCA) was implemented.

The HSCA is a procedure that uses a data driven approach to the selection of projects 

implemented using HSIP money. The process was developed over the past 18 months and is 

now completed. The process should be in use for the next fiscal year.
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

40

SHSP Emphasis Areas
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

41

For each SHSP emphasis area that relates to the HSIP, present trends in emphasis area performance measures. 

Year - 2012

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Instituting graduated 

licensing for younger 

drivers

32.2 269.6 0.21 1.74 0 0 0

Sustaining proficiency 

in older drivers

33.8 143.4 0.216 1.168 0 0 0

Curbing aggressive 

driving

84.8 645 0.55 4.162 0 0 0

Reducing impaired 

driving

82 270 0.528 1.742 0 0 0

Keeping drivers alert 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Increasing seat belt 

use and improving 

airbag effectiveness

82.4 301.4 0.532 1.946 0 0 0

Making walking and 

street crossing easier

11.2 52.2 0.07 0.334 0 0 0

Ensuring safer bicycle 

travel

3 50 0.02 0.324 0 0 0
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

42

Improving motorcycle 

safety and increasing 

motorcycle awareness

26.4 161.6 0.172 1.134 0 0 0

Making truck travel 

safer

22.6 86.8 0.148 0.558 0 0 0

Keeping vehicles in the 

roadway

103.2 453.8 0.666 2.93 0 0 0

Improving the design 

and operation of 

highway intersections

36.8 501.6 0.238 3.24 0 0 0

Reducing head-on and 

across-median crashes

39.4 201 0.256 1.298 0 0 0
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

43
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

44
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

45
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

46
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

47

Groups of similar project types
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

Present the overall effectiveness of groups of similar types of projects.

Year - 2012

HSIP Sub-program 

Types

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

The program was 

just implemented 

and there is no 

data available yet.

0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

49
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

50
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

51
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

52
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

53

Systemic Treatments
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.. 

Year - 2012

Systemic improvement Target 

Crash 

Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious 

injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury 

rate (per 

HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Install/Improve Pavement 

Marking and/or Delineation

203.6 1375.6 1.324 9.034 0 0 0

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove 

Traffic Signal

36.8 501.6 0.238 3.24 0 0 0

Install/Improve Signing 203.6 1375.6 1.324 9.034 0 0 0

Upgrade Guard Rails 203.6 1375.6 1.324 9.034 0 0 0
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

55
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

56
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

57
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

58
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

59

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

which you would like to elaborate. 
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

60

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

BefOther 

Injury

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

AftOther 

Injury

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ 

Cost Ratio)

Statewide 670 3899 23271 48360 76200 506 3168 19998 41416 65088
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

61

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached
2013 Idaho Highway Safety Improvement Program

62

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. 

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.