Page 1 of 49

ILLINOIS
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 2 of 49

Table of Contents

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................... 2

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

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

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 5

Program Structure ................................................................................................................................................... 5

Program Administration...................................................................................................................................... 5

Program Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 8

Project Implementation ......................................................................................................................................... 13

Funds Programmed ........................................................................................................................................... 13

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

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................................... 20

General Highway Safety Trends ....................................................................................................................... 20

Safety Performance Targets .............................................................................................................................. 34

Applicability of Special Rules .......................................................................................................................... 35

Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. 37

Program Effectiveness ...................................................................................................................................... 37

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements ...................................................................... 37

Project Effectiveness ......................................................................................................................................... 43

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 44
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 3 of 49

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.” 
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 4 of 49

Executive Summary 

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a data-driven, performance based, strategic approach 

targeted to infrastructure improvements administered by Federal Highways Administration (FHWA). Illinois 

has set its target to reduce the frequency of fatalities and serious injuries, as well as the exposure rates of 

fatalities and serious injuries per million vehicle miles traveled. In addition to these rates, Illinois Department of 

Transportation (IDOT) has identified and prioritized safety emphasis areas where performance measures are 

also narrowed down by functional class of roadways to understand the safety problems and implement 

appropriate countermeasures to curb the preventable fatalities and serious injuries with federal support. 

The collaborative working efforts between the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP, FHWA approved on 

7/28/2017) with Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), Highway Safety Plan (HSP), Commercial 

Vehicle Safety Plan (CVSP), Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) is envisioned to provide 

consistency of data collection and management, integrated safety initiatives, and identification of data-driven 

performance measures with safety performance assessment. This coordination of safety programs helps IDOT 

prioritize safety in the planning and programming stages, to utilize limited funding for maximum safety 

improvement potential, and to set effective goals and targets within a safety performance matrix.

HSIP is administered and monitored by the Illinois Department of Transportation Bureau of Safety Programs 

and Engineering (BSPE). IDOT works with safety partners to direct limited program dollars to areas with the 

greatest potential for safety improvement on the transportation system. IDOT uses safety performance functions 

and the systemic approach for identifying areas of improvement. Projects are selected based on their potential to 

reduce fatal and severe crashes economically using the IDOT benefit-cost evaluation tool. 

Overall the program has seen a plateau in fatalities over the last few years. In 2016, Illinois lost 1,078 lives to 

transportation crashes. As of August 30, 2017, there are 3 fewer fatalities in 2017 relative to this time last year 

(2016) - 709 and 712 fatalities respectively. While the current provisional data can provide for insights, this 

report reflects analysis of complete and finalized crash data from years 2008 to 2015. Between 2014 (crash data 

from the last submitted HSIP report) and 2015, detailed crash data analysis has shown that fatalities and severe 

injuries on the state route system increased by less than 9%, and the local system fatalities and severe injuries 

increased by more than 9%.

The funding split between state and local routes remains the same as last year, 80/20, and IDOT continues to 

work with local agencies to increase obligation rates for HSIP projects approved. Illinois continues to monitor 

progress, evaluate programs and modify the screening, project identification and project approval approach to 

achieve Zero Fatalities on Illinois roadways.
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 5 of 49

Introduction

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose of achieving 

a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 

924.15, States are required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP implementation and 

evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent with the HSIP Reporting Guidance dated December 

29, 2016 and consists of five sections: program structure, progress in implementing highway safety 

improvement projects, progress in achieving safety outcomes and performance targets, effectiveness of the 

improvements and compliance assessment.

Program Structure

Program Administration

Describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State. 

 

The Illinois HSIP policy identifies the process for data analysis, project application, project review and 

approval. See the IDOT website for details. http://www.idot.illinois.gov/transportation-system/localtransportation-partners/county-engineers-and-local-public-agencies/funding-opportunities/highway-safetyimprovement-program

 

The policy is being updated and will include analysis tools and resources as well as improved guidance to direct 

the program to projects that will have the greatest opportunity to reduce fatalities and serious injuries. The 

update will be implemented by December 31, 2017. 

 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-Central Office - Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The HSIP program is managed within IDOT Central Office, Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering. The 

Bureau is under the Office of Program Development. 

http://www.idot.illinois.gov/Assets/uploads/files/About-IDOT/Maps-&-Charts/IDOT%20Org%20Chart.pdf 

 

BSPE is responsible for management of transportation safety planning and engineering as well as behavioral 

programs. IDOT Districts support implementation of the transportation safety program, including programming, 

detailed design, construction, operations and maintenance. District engineers and planners develop the HSIP 

projects for application and review by BSPE and the Central Office Traffic Safety Committee. To address local 

road safety, local agencies work with District engineers and planners to develop HSIP applications for review 

by BSPE and the Central Office Traffic Safety Committee. 

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 6 of 49

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Local agencies and state agencies have separate allocations and do not compete against each other for funds 

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

Twenty percent of the HSIP roadway funding is allocated to local roadways. Prior to SAFETEA-LU, local 

agencies received less than $1 million annually; in recent years, that amount has been increased to between $12 

- $15 million annually. Each Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) District has a traffic safety 

committee that coordinates with the IDOT Bureau of Local Roads and local agencies to provide technical 

support. Illinois leads regular meetings with the MPOs to discuss safety performance targets and county SHSP 

development and implementation. The IDOT Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering (BSPE) is an active 

participant of the Illinois Association of County Engineers Traffic and Safety Committee to discuss the SHSP, 

HSIP, data issues, and ways to advance transportation safety in Illinois on local roadways. 

 

Since 2012, the Local Road Safety Initiative has provided tools, data, program training and facilitation to 

support the organization and implementation of local transportation safety committees. Each county is provided 

with County Strategic Highway Safety Plans (SHSP) Elements that include crash data trees, Emphasis Area 

tables, heat maps and effective countermeasures and strategies to make decisions based on the potential for 

safety improvements. The county SHSPs for major metropolitan areas were updated to reflect 2015 data. These 

counties represent the majority of the fatalities and serious injuries on Illinois roadways. IDOT developed local 

road safety performance functions for network screening that have been used to develop the Safer Road Index 

(SRI) and Safety Tiers that are used for project planning and programming of high priority and system-wide 

initiatives. 

 

HSIP specialists provided technical support to review all HSIP applications. Specialists are experts in data 

analysis, benefit-cost analysis, the Highway Safety Manual (HSM), and countermeasure selections. Road Safety 

Assessments (RSAs) are provided to local agencies free-of-charge at the request of local agencies. IDOT 

Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering (BSPE) coordinates team members and facilities, provides 

technical analysis, presents initial information and team findings at meetings, and prepares the RSA reports. 

 

The DOT coordinates safety 4E workshops that encourage coordination and training local agencies on HSIP 

best practices. Based on the technical support provided, local agencies apply for HSIP funds for 

implementation. The HSIP applications are reviewed by the IDOT Central Office Traffic Safety Committee to 

approve projects, recommend changes or refinements, and consult with the local agencies to ensure safety 

investments address program goals.

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

are involved with HSIP planning.

Traffic Engineering/Safety

Design

Planning 

Maintenance

Operations 

Districts/Regions

Local Aid Programs Office/Division

Governors Highway Safety Office 
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 7 of 49

Other-Local agencies

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe coordination with internal partners.

The Central Office Traffic Safety Committee is responsible for reviewing, recommending changes and / or approving or 

declining HSIP applications. The Central Office Traffic Safety Committee includes members from BSPE, 

Design, Planning, Local Aid, and FHWA Division Office. 

The Local Aid office works with each of the District Local Aid offices and local agencies to develop, review and submit 

HSIP applications to BSPE. 

District traffic engineering and safety develop state route HSIP applications by using BSPE safety analysis tools to 

evaluate the roadway network, identify priority locations, assess crash data and contributing factors, determine 

recommended proven strategies, and prepare the HSIP application including benefit - cost assessment. District 

design, operations and maintenance are responsible for HSIP implementation. District traffic engineering and safety 

staff conduct basic evaluation assessments for HSIP projects.

District staff work closely with local agencies to develop their safety program and the District Local Aid office submits 

the applications to Central Office Local Aid. 

Local agencies conduct analysis and utilize BSPE provided tools to support HSIP project development and applications. 

Local HSIP applications are submitted to the Local Aid District office for submittal to Central Office. In some cases the 

MPO supports local agency data analysis, application development and evaluation after implementation. 

BSPE manages the HSIP program and leads the coordination with all partners.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

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

Governors Highway Safety Office 

Local Technical Assistance Program

Local Government Agency 

Law Enforcement Agency 

FHWA

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe coordination with external partners.

The state is committed to achieving a safer transportation system for the public. Stakeholder involvement and 

commitment is crucial. Stakeholders represent the 4E areas - engineering, enforcement, education, and 

emergency medical services and include multi-modal federal and state agencies, MPOs, regional safety 

coalitions, and local agencies. Working sessions with coalition stakeholders at executive meetings, forums, and 

workshops have captured the impacts of emerging technologies, the role of state and local agencies, and several 

safety issues. Stakeholders have provided input on the crash trends and strategies based on their knowledge and 

current initiatives. The FHWA Illinois Division office partners with Illinois on various safety initiatives, 

including review of HSIP applications for funding approval. The Illinois DOT meets with MPOs on a regular 

basis to support the safety program and the MPOs work with local agencies to provide leadership and technical 

expertise. 
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 8 of 49

Have any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

No

Are there any other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

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

The Districts submit HSIP applications through the HSIP SharePoint site and the local agencies submit paper 

copies for review and approval by a Central Office Traffic Safety Committee. Since 2013, the IDOT Districts 

have taken an active role in supporting the local roadway safety program. If there are large HSIP funding 

requests or longer term projects, the committee may recommend that a Road Safety Assessment be conducted to 

identify low cost safety improvements that could be implemented quickly along with verification of the longer 

term, high cost projects to ensure appropriate use of HSIP funds. The HSIP policy is being updated to improve 

project submittals and to encourage the use of highway safety tools such as Safety Tiers, the Highway Safety 

Manual and the Illinois State and Local Strategic Highway Safety Plans. Additional emphasis has been placed 

on project and program evaluation. The HSIP program database includes project letting, locations, project type 

and cost along with before and after crash data to be used for evaluation. Additional data is now required to 

develop project and program level evaluation assessments to maximize the program and achieve the greatest 

results. 

Program Methodology

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

and evaluation processes?

Yes

To upload a copy of the State processes, attach files below.

File Name:

SAFETY 1.06 - Safety Engineering Policy Memorandum.pdf

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

Horizontal Curve 

Pedestrian Safety

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Both HRRR and local safety road index are under development and they will influence the next round reporting. 

Program: Horizontal Curve 

Date of Program Methodology: 8/1/2016 
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 9 of 49

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

FHWA focused approach to safety 

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Traffic 

Volume 

Median width 

Horizontal curvature 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Crash rate

Other-Weighted crash rate

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

Yes

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

Yes

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

selection committee

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).

Available funding : 2 

Cost Effectiveness : 1
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 49

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Program: Pedestrian Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 8/1/2017 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Other-Pedestrian fatalities and 

serious injuries 

Traffic 

Volume 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Probability of specific crash types

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

Yes

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

Yes

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

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 
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 49

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Other-BC : 1

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 40

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? Please check all that 

apply.

Cable Median Barriers

Rumble Strips

Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation

Pavement/Shoulder Widening

Install/Improve Signing

Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails

Clear Zone Improvements

Install/Improve Lighting

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

Horizontal curve signs

High friction surface treatment

Wrong way driving treatments

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? [Check all that apply]

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Crash data analysis

SHSP/Local road safety plan

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

Stakeholder input

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 49

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

ITS strategies are considered for safety improvements. These may include changeable message signs, Smart 

Work Zones, improved communication to reduce secondary incidents among other proven and effective 

strategies. Connected vehicles and their safety impact are being considered throughout the Department, but 

much of the focus has been on addressing current needs through low cost proven effective safety treatments.

Does the State use the Highway Safety Manual to support HSIP efforts?

Yes

Please describe how the State uses the HSM to support HSIP efforts.

HSM safety performance functions are used to develop safety tiers for planning and programming of projects. 

Districts utilize the HSM to diagnose and analyze crash data to identify potential 

countermeasures. Countermeasure effectiveness is determined using the CMF Clearinghouse and projects are 

assessed using benefit cost approaches outlined in the HSM. Many of the projects are evaluated after 

implementation using HSM analysis approaches. 

Have any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

No

Are there any other aspects of the HSIP methodology on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

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

Within the HSIP Policy Memorandum is reference to a safety analysis process for HSIP candidate projects that 

should be similar to the RSA/RSR process. An RSA/RSR is a data-driven systematic process that applies crash 

data and identified contributing factors in tying the target severe crashes to each countermeasure. The RSA/RSR 

safety analysis process has become a more prominent aspect for many HSIP submittals when larger dollar 

amounts would be involved. IDOT has a draft RSA Policy Memorandum in place that supports HSIP.
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 49

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $92,979,000 $64,135,684 68.98%

HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

$148,000 $28,348 19.15%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154) $0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 164) $0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP purposes) (23 

U.S.C. 130(e)(2))

$12,852,000 $312,016 2.43%

Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $15,948,830 0%

Totals $105,979,000 $80,424,878 75.89%

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

$15,600,000

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

$2,560,000

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The available amount for State FY 2017 was $15.6 million to local public agencies.
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 49

In State FY 2017 we awarded $23.76 million towards local public agency safety projects (includes carry over from 

previous years). Of those projects, we have obligated $2.56 million towards individual projects (engineering and 

construction). 

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

$0

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

$0

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

$0

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

period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

$0

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

Local agencies have a variety of challenges that delay obligating federal funds, such as scoping and design and 

the overall federal aid process. The engineering agreement and joint funding agreement processes, when 

federal funds are involved, severely hamper the timeline for federal HSIP projects. Also, depending on the 

complexity of the project, the federal NEPA process for environmental review can impact the project 

timeline. Again, depending on the complexity of the project, obtaining some required permits can impact the 

project timeline. The Department is experimenting with a revised signature process for approval of project 

agreements, which should simplify and expedite this process. We are always looking for ways to expedite the 

environmental review process, when required.

Does the State want to elaborate on any other aspects of it’s progress in implementing HSIP projects?

No
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 49

General Listing of Projects

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

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

201202004 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

1.5 Miles $3206000 $3800000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

9,700 50 State Highway 

Agency

Other Driver Behavior &

Awareness, 

Intersections, 

roadway 

departure

15-Pavement 

Treatments, 15-

Pavement 

Treatments, 7-

Pavement 

Marking, 9-

Roadside

201202004 Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

1.5 Miles $3206000 $3800000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

9,700 50 State Highway 

Agency

Other Driver Behavior & 

Awareness, 

Intersections, 

roadway 

departure

15-Pavement 

Treatments, 15-

Pavement 

Treatments, 7-

Pavement 

Marking, 9-

Roadside

201203010 Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes -

add left-turn lane

1 Intersections $1800000 $2000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

34,000 45 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections 11-Signalization, 

6-Pavement, 6-

Pavement

201203014 Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic 

control - other

1 Intersections $1530000 $1700000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

37,400 35 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections Signalization, 

Pavement, Misc, 

Intersection 

Geometry

201203017 Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic 

control - other

1 Intersections $7740000 $8600000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

50,200 45 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections Signalization, 

Pavement, Misc, 

Intersection 

Geometry

201203018 Roadway Rumble strips -

unspecified or 

other

3.63 Miles $2745000 $3050000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

89,500 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

7-Pavement 

Marking, 7-

Pavement 

Marking, 11-

Signalization, 11-

Signalization, 6-

Pavement, 11-

Signalization

201203018 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control -

other

3.63 Miles $2745000 $3050000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

89,500 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

7-Pavement 

Marking, 7-

Pavement 

Marking, 11-

Signalization, 11-

Signalization, 6-

Pavement, 11-

Signalization

201212022 Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic 

control - other

1 Intersections $967500 $1075000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

26,300 45 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections 4-Intersection 

Geometry, 11-

Signalization, 11-

Signalization 

201311001 Roadside Removal of 

roadside objects 

(trees, poles, etc.)

2.08 Miles $91000 $91000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

2,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

9-Roadside

201502006 Lighting Lighting - other $250000 $250000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban 66 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections 11-Signalization
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 49

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

201502008 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

0.5 Miles $550000 $550000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

5,400 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

13-Curves, 15-

Pavement 

Treatments

201502012 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

12.72 Miles $3325500 $3695000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

11,800 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

Pavement, 

Pavement Marking

201502012 Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

12.72 Miles $3325500 $3695000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

11,800 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

Pavement, 

Pavement Marking

201502013 Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometrics -

modify skew angle

3 Intersections $2160000 $4300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 45 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections Pavement, 

Intersection 

Geometry, 

Signalization

201502013 Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

$2160000 $4300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 45 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections Pavement, 

Intersection 

Geometry, 

Signalization

201503001 Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

5.11 Miles $562500 $625000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

90,500 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

Roadside, 

Pavement 

Marking, Roadway

201505007 Roadway Roadway - other 0.59 Miles $4230000 $4700000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

52,700 40 State Highway 

Agency

Other Driver Behavior & 

Awareness

10-Roadway, 0-

Misc

201505021 Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

10.03 Miles $432000 $480000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

141,600 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Large Trucks, 

Roadway 

Departures

9-Roadside, 9-

Roadside, 9-

Roadside

201506011 Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes -

add right-turn lane

1 Intersections $562000 $562000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

26,350 40 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections, 

Roadway 

Departures

6-Pavement, 11-

Signalization, 11-

Signalization

201506022 Roadside Removal of 

roadside objects 

(trees, poles, etc.)

$267000 $267000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 0 0 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

9-Roadside

201507048 Speed 

management

Radar speed signs $396000 $440000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban 0 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

Curves, Signing, 

Pavement Marking

201507049 Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

$49000 $49000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

6,740 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

0-Misc

201507054 Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder 

treatments - other

$9000000 $9000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

42,500 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

15-Pavement 

Treatments

201509001 Roadside Removal of 

roadside objects 

(trees, poles, etc.)

$2500000 $2500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 0 0 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

9-Roadside, 9-

Roadside

201509001 Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

$2500000 $2500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 0 0 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

9-Roadside, 9-

Roadside

201511001 Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder 

treatments - other

6.82 Miles $1530000 $4589000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,800 0 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway

Departure

7-Pavement 

Marking

201512001 Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

7.1 Miles $1000000 $13104571 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

32,900 0 State Highway 

Agency

Other Work Zones 9-Roadside
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 49

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

cushions, 

terminals)

201512002 Roadside Removal of 

roadside objects 

(trees, poles, etc.)

1.88 Miles $390000 $390000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

7,350 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

9-Roadside

201512003 Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Dynamic message 

signs

$600000 $600000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban 0 70 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Driver Behavior 0-Misc

201512004 Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Dynamic message 

signs

$510000 $510000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban 0 70 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Work Zones 0-Misc

201601001 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

1.55 Miles $401000 $456000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 5,300 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

6-Pavement, 7-

Pavement Marking

201601001 Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

1.55 Miles $401000 $456000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 5,300 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

6-Pavement, 7-

Pavement Marking

201602002 Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Dynamic message 

signs

$78300 $87000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

8,680 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Large Trucks, 

Roadway 

Departures

0-Misc

201602003 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

2.78 Miles $295000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 2,700 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other NA/UNK 0

201602004 Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

2 Intersections $1200000 $1200000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

2,200 70 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

4-Intersection 

Geometry

201603001 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

$1316000 $1316000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,200 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

6-Pavement, 9-

Roadside

201603001 Roadway Rumble strips -

transverse

$1316000 $1316000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,200 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

6-Pavement, 9-

Roadside

201603001 Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

$1316000 $1316000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,200 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

6-Pavement, 9-

Roadside

201604001 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

7.43 Miles $975000 $975000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

5,200 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

15-Pavement 

Treatments

201605001 Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

1 Intersections $1500000 $1500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

15,375 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections 4-Intersection 

Geometry

201605006 Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes -

add left-turn lane

1 Intersections $450000 $450000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

5,525 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections 4-Intersection 

Geometry

201605007 Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

0.6 Miles $950000 $950000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Other

11,600 45 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

6-Pavement

201605009 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

6.3 Miles $1500000 $1500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

6,925 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

6-Pavement, 0-

Misc

201605010 Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

7 Miles $500000 $500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

18,675 70 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

13-Curves
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 49

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

201605012 Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Congestion 

detection / traffic 

monitoring system

$500000 $500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

0 70 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Work Zones 2-Advanced 

Technology and 

ITS

201606001 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

6.5 Miles $1675000 $1675000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,100 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway

Departure

6-Pavement

201606002 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

4.18 Miles $580000 $580000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,400 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other NA/UNK 15-Pavement 

Treatments

201606003 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

7.07 Miles $980000 $980000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,150 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

15-Pavement 

Treatments

201606004 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

2.29 Miles $400000 $400000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,200 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

15-Pavement 

Treatments

201607001 Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes -

add left-turn lane

2 Intersections $1500000 $1500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

13,000 45 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections 4-Intersection 

Geometry

201607002 Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

3.79 Miles $1708000 $1708000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,290 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

Misc

201607002 Roadway Rumble strips -

center

3.79 Miles $1708000 $1708000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,290 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

Misc

201607003 Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

4.55 Miles $1977000 $1977000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 3,115 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

Misc

201607003 Roadway Rumble strips -

center

4.55 Miles $1977000 $1977000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 3,115 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

Misc

201607004 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

5.6 Miles $1400000 $1400000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,650 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

6-Pavement, 0-

Misc

201607005 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

4.35 Miles $1000000 $1000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

6-Pavement, 0-

Misc

201607006 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

8 Miles $2000000 $2000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

2,900 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

6-Pavement, 0-

Misc

201607007 Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Dynamic message 

signs

$500000 $500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

0 0 State Highway 

Agency

Other Work Zones 0-Misc

201607008 Roadway 

delineation

Raised pavement 

markers

$110000 $110000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 3,500 0 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

7-Pavement 

Marking

201608003 Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

$1000000 $1000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 0 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

9-Roadside

201608004 Advanced 

technology and 

ITS

Advanced 

technology and 

ITS - other

$500000 $500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 20,000 65 State Highway 

Agency

Other NA/UNK 2-Advanced 

Technology and 

ITS

201608006 Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

$2500000 $2500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

18,000 70 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

9-Roadside
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 49

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

201608007 Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

$1500000 $1500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

0 70 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

9-Roadside

201609001 Alignment Vertical alignment 

or elevation 

change

2 Miles $1238000 $1238000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

27,400 70 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

13-Curves, 9-

Roadside

201609002 Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

$1000000 $1000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 0 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

9-Roadside

201609003 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder -

paved or other

2.42 Miles $2800000 $2800000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

4,452 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Intersections, 

Roadway 

Departures

15-Pavement 

Treatments, 4-

Intersection 

Geometry

201609006 Speed 

management

Speed detection 

system / truck 

warning

0.84 Miles $320000 $400000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

52,200 0 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

15-Pavement 

Treatments, 13-

Curves, 7-

Pavement Marking

201609006 Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

$320000 $400000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial - Interstate

52,200 0 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

15-Pavement 

Treatments, 13-

Curves, 7-

Pavement Marking

201610005 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic 

signal - add 

backplates with 

retroreflective 

borders

460 Intersections $1050000 $1050000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban 0 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections 0

201611003 Roadway Rumble strips -

center

2.94 Miles $294000 $294000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial - Other

12,250 55 State Highway 

Agency

Other Roadway 

Departure

7-Pavement 

Marking

201611004 Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

$1497000 $1497000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural 0 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic NA/UNK 9-Roadside

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 49

Safety Performance

General Highway 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 2013 2014 2015 2016

Fatalities 1,043 911 927 918 956 991 924 998 0

Serious Injuries 13,401 13,006 12,631 11,939 12,398 12,300 11,748 12,844 0

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 0.987 0.862 0.877 0.888 0.915 0.940 0.880 0.947 0.000

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

12.686 12.301 11.945 11.550 11.869 11.661 11.185 12.190 0.000

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

162 131 139 162 168 155 154 176 0

Number of non-motorized 

serious injuries

1,421 1,437 1,374 1,304 1,329 1,281 1,284 1,568 0
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 49

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 22 of 49

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 23 of 49

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe fatality data source.

FARS

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

Year 2015

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal Arterial -

Interstate

126 1,183.6 0.4 3.76

Rural Principal Arterial -

Other Freeways and 

Expressways

0 0 0 0

Rural Principal Arterial -

Other

0 0 0 0

Rural Minor Arterial 99 705.4 2.22 15.79
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 24 of 49

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Minor Collector 11.2 83 2.74 20.26

Rural Major Collector 102.8 843 2.19 17.96

Rural Local Road or Street 77.4 617.8 2.15 17.05

Urban Principal Arterial -

Interstate

257.2 3,712 1.06 15.35

Urban Principal Arterial -

Other Freeways and 

Expressways

3.8 57.6 0.33 5.03

Urban Principal Arterial -

Other

0 0 0 0

Urban Minor Arterial 136.2 2,485.6 0.88 16.13

Urban Minor Collector 0 0 0 0

Urban Major Collector 0 0 0 0

Urban Local Road or Street 61.2 984.2 0.55 8.86

Urban Collector 78 1,276.4 0.97 15.84

Interstate

Urban Collector 65.2 975.2 0.82 12.21
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 25 of 49

Year 2015

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

County Highway Agency

Illinois Division of 

Highways

273.2 1,990.6 0.49 3.56

State Highway Agency

County Highway Agency

Other State Agency 0.6 3.8 0.77 4.88

County 71.4 542.4 0.65 4.94

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City of Municipal Highway 

Agency

Municipality 34.8 361.8 0.13 1.4

Federal Agency 0.8 1.8 2.91 6.58

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Adjacent County 0.2 1.8 0.89 8.06

Private (Including Toll 

Authorities)

16.6 157.6 0.2 1.88

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Adjacent Township or 

Road District

3.6 33.4 0.93 8.62

Township or Road District 68.8 506.2 1.11 8.17

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, University)
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 26 of 49

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Indian Tribe Nation

Adjacent County 0.2 1.2 0.89 5.38

Adjacent Township or 

Road District

2.4 26.2 0.62 6.77
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 27 of 49

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Functional Classification 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 28 of 49

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 29 of 49

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 30 of 49

0

5

10

15

20

25

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 31 of 49

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Roadway Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 32 of 49

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 33 of 49

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 34 of 49

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which the State would like to 

elaborate?

Yes

Provide additional discussion related to general highway safety trends.

From 2011 to 2015, there is an 8.7% increase in fatalities (918 in 2011 to 998 in 2015). Similarly, there is a 

7.6% increase in serious injuries (11,939 in 2011 to 12,844 in 2015) from 2011 to 2015.

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2018 Targets * 

Number of Fatalities 951.0 

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

Targets were set at a two percent annual reduction. 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 35 of 49

Number of Serious Injuries 11231.1 

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

Targets were set using ordinary Least Square Projections. 

Fatality Rate 0.900 

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

Targets were set at a two percent annual reduction. 

Serious Injury Rate 10.830 

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

Targets were set using ordinary Least Square Projections. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 1508.6 

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

Targets were set at a two percent annual reduction. 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

targets. 

Executive meetings and coordination sessions were held in December 2016, February, March and May 2017 

with the stakeholders to discuss the safety performance and set targets for the measures. 

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Applicability of Special Rules

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

Yes
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 36 of 49

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Provide the number of older driver and pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Fatalities

119 109 125 126 139 145 158

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Serious Injuries

907 905 854 892 932 905 1,016

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

# of Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Years

Number of Older Driver and Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries by 

Year.

Fatalities Serious Injuries
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 49

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

Other-naive before-after studies for specific projects

Other-Statewide fatal and serious injuries, local route fatal and serious injuries and performance measures by 

emphasis area 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Based on the measures of effectiveness selected previously, describe the results of the State's program 

level evaluations.

The results include: 1) The number of fatalities and serious injuries, the percent change of fatalities and 

serious injuries. 2) Naive before-after studies for HSIP program investment. 3) Crash Modification Factor (CMF) 

for specific treatment. 

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

Highway Safety Improvement Program?

Other-Improving and coordinating infrastructure and behavior strategies to maximize benefits

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any significant programmatic changes that have occurred since the last reporting period? 

No

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2016

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted 

Crash Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality 

Rate

(per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious 

Injury Rate

(per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Other 1 Other 2 Other 3

Roadway Departure 408 3,035.8 0.39 2.89
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 49

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted 

Crash Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality 

Rate

(per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious 

Injury Rate

(per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Other 1 Other 2 Other 3

Intersections 188.4 4,262.6 0.18 4.06

Pedestrians 108.2 750.2 0.1 0.71

Bicyclists 22.4 342.2 0.02 0.32

Older Drivers 147.4 1,605.4 0.14 1.53

Motorcyclists 113 801.2 0.11 0.76

Work Zones 24.6 154.2 0.02 0.15
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 39 of 49

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcyclists Work Zones

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcyclists Work Zones

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 40 of 49

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the reporting period?

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcyclists Work Zones

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Roadway

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcyclists Work Zones

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 49

Yes

Please provide the following summary information for each countermeasure effectiveness evaluation. 

CounterMeasures: Flashing Yellow Arrow 

Description: 

Central Illinois District 4 had systemically replaced all state 

jurisdiction left turn signal heads with a flashing yellow arrow 

during the permissive left turn phase of the signal cycle. 

Target Crash 

Type: Left-turn 

Number of 

Installations: 

Number of 

Installations: 

Miles Treated: 

Years Before: 3 

Years After: 3 

Methodology: Before/after using empirical Bayes or Full Bayes 

Results: 

CMF=.857 for left turns 

Safety Effects of Traffic Signing for Left Turn Flashing Yellow 

Arrow Signals Schattler et al.

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457514003467 

Safety effects of traffic signing for left turn flashing 

www.sciencedirect.com

Safety effects of traffic signing for left turn flashing yellow arrow 

signals 

File Name: Hyperlink

CounterMeasures: Modify Approach Angle 

Description: 

Intersections islands and or right turn radius was 

modified to adjust the drivers angle to the 

intersection to improve line of sight when making a 

right turn. 

Target Crash Type: Other (define) 

Number of 

Installations: 9 in District 4 

Number of 

Installations: 9 in District 4 

Miles Treated: 

Years Before: 5 

Years After: 3 and more 
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 49

Methodology: Before/after using empirical Bayes or Full Bayes 

Results: 

CMF=0.397 for right turn crashes

Safety Impacts of a Modified Right Turn Lane 

Design at Intersections

https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/handle/2142/90226 

IDEALS @ Illinois: Effectiveness Evaluation of a 

Modified ...

www.ideals.illinois.edu

Title: Effectiveness Evaluation of a Modified RightTurn Lane Design at Intersections: Author(s): 

Schattler, Kerrie L.; Hanson, Trevor; Maillacheruvu, 

Krishnanand

File Name: Hyperlink
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 49

Project Effectiveness

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

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Crash data is currently being collected for HSIP projects tracking and evaluation. Before and after evaluations were performed for projects implemented in 2011 and 2012 using crash data from 2008 to 2015. The number of fatal and serious 

injury crashes decreased by nearly 9 percent for projects on all routes, and it decreased by 15 percent for projects on state routes only. On all routes, the number of fatal and serious injury crashes showed a reduction of over 21 percent for 

roadway departure projects.

Are there any other aspects of the overall HSIP effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate?

No
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 49

Compliance Assessment

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

 07/28/2017

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2017 To: 2022

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

 2022

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

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

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT

Segment Identifier (12) 100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 100 100

Route/Street Name (9) 100 100

Federal Aid/Route Type 

(21)

100 100

Rural/Urban Designation 

(20)

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 100 100 100 100

Begin Point Segment 

Descriptor (10)

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length (13) 100 100

Direction of Inventory (18) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100 100 100 100 100

Median Type (54) 100 100
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 45 of 49

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Access Control (22) 100 100

One/Two Way Operations 

(91)

100 100

Number of Through Lanes 

(31)

100 100 100 100

Average Annual Daily 

Traffic (79)

100 100 100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION

Unique Junction Identifier 

(120)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Road 1 Crossing Point 

(122)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Road 2 Crossing Point 

(123)

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

100 100

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road (79)

100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

100 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP

Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Beginning of 

Ramp Terminal (197)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

100 100
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 46 of 49

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Roadway Type at End 

Ramp Terminal (199)

100 100

Interchange Type (182) 100 100

Ramp AADT (191) 100 100

Year of Ramp AADT (192) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100

Totals (Average Percent 

Complete):

100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe actions the State will take moving forward to meet the requirement to have complete access to the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads by September 30, 2026.

We do all required MIRE FDEs, therefore do not need to develop a plan to meet the requirement by 2026. 

Provide the suspected serious injury identifier, definition and attributes used by the State for both the crash report form and the crash database using the table below. Please also indicate whether or not these elements are 

compliant with the MMUCC 4th edition criteria for data element P5. Injury Status, suspected serious injury. 

CRITERIA SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY 

IDENTIFIER(NAME) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY DEFINITION MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY ATTRIBUTES(DESCRIPTORS) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * 

Crash Report Form A Incapacitating injury No N/A No N/A No

Crash Report Form Instruction Manual A Incapacitating injury No Any injury, other than a fatal injury, which

prevents the injured person from walking, 

driving, or normally continuing the activities 

he/she was capable of performing before 

the injury occurred. 

No This includes severe lacerations, 

broken/distorted limbs, skull injuries, chest 

injuries, abdominal injuries.

No

Crash Database A_Injuries No N/A No N/A No

Crash Database Data Dictionary AInjuries No Total of incapacitating injuries in the crash No Any injury other than fatal injury, which 

prevents the injured person from walking, 

driving, or normally continuing the activities 

he/she was capable of performing before 

the injury occurred. Includes severe 

lacerations, broken limbs, skull or chest 

injuries, and abdominal injuries.

No

Please describe the actions the State is taking to become compliant by April 15, 2019.

Illinois is working with the Secretary of State and traffic safety partners to update the SR 1050 (Illinois State Crash Report) to be compliant with the revised serious injury definition and add additional fields as necessary. 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 47 of 49

Did the State conduct an HSIP program assessment during the reporting period?

Yes

Describe the purpose and outcomes of the State’s HSIP program assessment.

The purpose of the review is to evaluate the procedures and process currently utilized to identify local public agency HSIP projects. The overall objective is to optimize the use of HSIP funding and streamline the application process to 

increase the number and quality of local public agency applications. 
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 48 of 49

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

SAFETY 1.06 - Safety Engineering Policy Memorandum.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation: 

Compliance Assessment:
2017 Illinois Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Page 49 of 49

Glossary

5 year rolling means the average of five individuals, consecutive annual points of data (e.g. annual 

average fatality rate). 

Emphasis area means a highway safety 

collaborative process. 

priority in a State’s SHSP, identified through a data-driven, 

Highway safety means strategies, activities and projects on a public road that are consistent with a State 

improvement strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous road location or 

project 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 non-infrastructure projects 

include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities, improvements in the 

collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement activities. 

applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over 

Older driver special the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2-year period for which data are 

rule available, as defined in the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Interim Guidance 

dated February 13, 2013. 

Performance means indicators that enable decision-makers and other stakeholders to monitor changes 

measure 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 means a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary plan, based on safety data developed by a 

Safety Plan (SHSP) State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148.

Systematic refers to an approach 

system. 

where an agency deploys countermeasures at all locations across a 

Systemic safety means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high risk roadway features 

improvement that are correlated with specific severe crash types. 

means, in accordance with provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, a State may transfer from an 

Transfer 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.