Summer 2020, Volume 14, Issue 2

 Message from the Associate Administrator for Safety, Cheryl Walker

Building a Safety Culture Together

The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) defines a safety culture as the shared 

values, actions, and behaviors that demonstrate a commitment to safety over competing goals and 

demands. How do we build a safety culture in our organizations, families, and society? 

We do it by truly making safety our top priority. Consensus among safety experts is that a safety 

culture exists in different forms in the transportation industry. Two forms that resonate the most 

with transportation organizations are an organizational safety culture and a public safety culture.

The strength of an organization’s safety culture is reflected by the extent to which safety is valued 

and pursued by the organization. The organization is aware of potential hazards in its work

environment and is prepared to react to incidents as needed. And importantly, agency staff have 

safety in mind when planning, scoping, designing, and constructing a roadway. In these types of 

organizations, employees regularly communicate the importance of safety with colleagues, 

customers, and contractors – and executive leaders are vocal supporters of safety. 

States or communities with a strong public safety culture have citizens who understand the risks associated with transportation 

and who choose to make safe choices when using their transportation system. Drivers in a community with a strong safety 

culture are likely to wear their seat belts and safety gear voluntarily, obey traffic laws, limit distractions, and refrain from 

operating a vehicle when impaired; cyclists wear helmets and reflective gear; and pedestrians stay alert to their surroundings

These actions are reflective of a safety culture, and a strong safety culture saves lives. 

When I am driving north on I–395 into Washington, DC, on my usual commute to USDOT, I think of everyone traveling 

northbound toward the district as one big team traveling together—a team with the common goal of getting to our destination 

safely. Ideally, none of our “teammates” would make bad decisions such as speeding or sudden lane changes that endanger 

other team members. But if I do witness this kind of behavior, I understand that honking at that other driver, or otherwise 

expressing frustration, won’t keep the team safer and might even cause more of a danger to everyone.

This team-based approach is a key part of developing an effective safety culture. I encourage you to be an advocate for effective 

safety culture in your organization and community. Communicate regularly on safety with your staff and other stakeholders. 

Even if safety is not explicitly part of everyone’s job title, empower all employees to improve safety. Encourage your friends, 

neighbors, and family members to drive, bike, and walk with care. Because we are all in this together.

Cheryl Walker

Associate Administrator 

for Safety

Associate Administrator for 

Safety, Cheryl Walker. 

(Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 2 –

in this issue...

 What’s New?........................................................................................................................................................................ 3

State Departments of Transportation Put Pedestrian Safety into Context ....................................................................................................... 3

Considerations for Developing a Local Safety Policy or Program ........................................................................................................................ 4

Roadway Safety Analysis Training Videos: From Basic to Advanced Application of the Predictive Method and Crash 

Modification Factors ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 5

2019 Safety Discipline Award Winners............................................................................................................................................................................. 6

 Data and Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................... 7

Update of Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Analysis Tools............................................................................................................................................ 7

Data Visualization in Safety Transportation Planning................................................................................................................................................ 8

Model Inventory of Roadway Elements Fundamental Data Elements...the Clock Is Ticking ...................................................................10

 Safety-Driven Changes and Improvements................................................................................................................12

Funding Tribal Road Safety with the Transportation Program Safety Fund...................................................................................................12

Safety Data Business Plans: Technical Assistance to Enhance Safety Data .....................................................................................................13

Fremont’s Successful Midsize City Vision Zero Approach .....................................................................................................................................15

Making Roads Safer for First Responders.....................................................................................................................................................................17

Median Cable Rails Preventing Cross-Median Crashes in Montana..................................................................................................................17

 Learning Together.............................................................................................................................................................18

A Bonner County Participant Shares His Perspective on the Rural Road Departure Peer Exchange ...................................................18

Moving FoRRRwD Together...............................................................................................................................................................................................18

2019 Montana Department of Transportation Annual Transportation Safety Meeting............................................................................19

Stakeholder Workshop Results on Automated Vehicles, Safety, and Human Factors ...............................................................................20

 Announcements................................................................................................................................................................22

New Railway Safety Noteworthy Practices Available!..............................................................................................................................................22

New Lane Departure Countermeasure Outreach Resources Available! ...........................................................................................................23
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 3 –

WHAT’S NEW?

State Departments of 

Transportation Put 

Pedestrian Safety into 

Context

By Rebecca Crowe, FHWA Office of Safety

Maryland Department of 

Transportation’s Context-Driven 

Guide

When the Maryland Department of 

Transportation (MDOT) State 

Highway Administration (SHA) 

released its new roadway design 

guide, Context Driven Access & 

Mobility for All Users, in 2019, 

MDOT Secretary Gregory Slater 

said, “The issue of pedestrian safety 

requires bold action.” The guide 

begins by summarizing the 

increasing pedestrian fatalities in the 

State (which have risen more than 

46 percent of total fatalities between 

2009 and 2018) and the relationship 

between roadway speed and 

severity of pedestrian crashes. 

The MDOT SHA guide describes six 

new context zones and how each 

relates to multimodal travel, such as 

pedestrian activity. The context 

zones are based, in part, on national 

guidance such as the most-recent 

edition of the American Association 

of State Highway Transportation 

Officials (AASHTO) Green Book, 

including zone categories for urban 

core, suburban activity center, and 

rural. 

The guide also shows, using strong 

visuals, how the FHWA Safe 

Transportation for Every Pedestrian 

(STEP) countermeasures can be 

integrated into each design context. 

For example, the suburban activity 

center zone shows how the 

pedestrian hybrid beacon (or HAWK 

beacon) can improve safety at

midblock crossings along busy 

arterials. The guide also references 

STEP countermeasure tech sheets 

and other FHWA resources for 

designing multimodal transportation 

systems. 

MDOT SHA Design Engineer-Cost 

Estimator Jeff Davis said, 

“Addressing pedestrian safety 

through the lens of context provides 

a means to proactively implement 

treatments in areas that have 

traditionally shown a higher 

propensity for pedestrian crashes.

This allows us to get out ahead of 

the problems, rather than solely 

reacting to issues as they arise.”

Georgia Department of 

Transportation’s Pedestrian and 

Streetscape Guide

The Georgia Department of 

Transportation (GDOT) updated its 

Pedestrian and Streetscape Guide to 

better integrate pedestrian safety 

into street design, specifically 

highlighting STEP countermeasures. 

Compared with previous versions, 

the updated guide includes several 

new graphics to illustrate how 

streetscape design and pedestrian 

crossings apply beyond the urban 

Atlanta context. 

The guide also includes a midblock 

pedestrian crossing evaluation 

process to help engineers and 

planners consider crosswalk 

placement and additional safety 

countermeasures. The crossing 

evaluation references FHWA’s 

Guide for Improving Pedestrian 

Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing 

Locations and provides screening 

questions to help the decision maker 

collect relevant data. 

Illustration of the suburban activity center context zone from MDOT SHA’s 

Context-Driven Access & Mobility for All Users, 2019. (Source: MDOT)

“The issue of pedestrian safety 

requires bold action.”

– Gregory Slater, MDOT secretary
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 4 –

Oregon Department of 

Transportation’s Blueprint for 

Urban Design

Similar to Maryland and Georgia, the 

Oregon Department of 

Transportation (ODOT) created new 

guidance based on more diverse 

sets of roadway contexts reflecting 

land use and the relationship 

between speed and safety. Oregon’s 

Blueprint for Urban Design explains 

and compares trade-offs between 

operations, safety, and design for 

urban roadway projects. 

The blueprint also provides target 

spacing for crosswalks per each of 

the six urban contexts. The spacing 

targets consider roadway elements 

such as intersection spacing and 

transit stops. For example, it 

suggests crosswalks should be 

spaced 500–1,000 feet apart along 

commercial corridors. The blueprint 

also promotes using design speed 

when selecting STEP pedestrian 

safety treatments, such as raised 

medians, curb extensions, and road 

diets. 

If you would like to learn how your 

agency can improve pedestrian 

safety with STEP, contact Becky 

Crowe with FHWA’s Office of Safety

at Rebecca.Crowe@dot.gov or Peter 

Eun with the FHWA Resource 

Center at Peter.Eun@dot.gov.

Considerations for 

Developing a Local Safety 

Policy or Program 

By Karen Scurry and Rosemarie Anderson, 

FHWA Office of Safety

More States are partnering with local 

agencies to address local road 

safety, which is critical to achieving 

our vision of zero fatalities on the 

nation’s roads. We can get to zero 

fatalities, one community at a time, 

through partnership with strategic 

stakeholders. 

To help achieve this vision, the 

FHWA developed the Framework for 

Local Safety Policies and Programs, 

a guide States can use to establish a 

framework for developing or 

updating their local road safety 

programs or policies. The guide 

includes examples of policies and 

programs that can be adapted from 

other States to improve local road 

safety. The guide also provides 

considerations and examples in 

each the following areas: program 

administration, project identification

and selection, local safety program 

and project funding, project delivery, 

and outreach and technical support.

Successful local road safety 

programs and policies require strong 

leadership support from State 

partners. State departments of 

transportation (DOT) are in a 

position to provide relevant 

guidance, training, and technical 

assistance to local agencies to 

ensure they are developing and 

delivering the best projects to save 

lives and prevent serious injuries on 

local roads. The Framework for 

Local Road Safety Programs and 

Policies demonstrates opportunities 

to update your local safety policies 

or programs. If you are just getting 

started, the guide outlines various 

approaches to consider as you 

develop your local road safety 

policies or programs. The guide also 

presents an array of approaches 

States have taken to incorporate 

local road safety in an overall State 

safety program. A single approach 

will not fit all situations, so find an 

approach that might work best in 

your State, discuss it among State 

and local partners, and adapt it to 

best meet your needs. Local 

agencies must also be willing to put 

in the work to identify local safety 

champions; coordinate with relevant 

safety stakeholders; and plan, 

develop, and implement local safety 

programs and projects.

We encourage you to review the 

framework for local road safety 

programs and policies and consider 

implementing the appropriate 

approaches that will improve safety 

Areas for guide considerations and examples. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 5 –

on your local roads. Together, we 

can achieve our vision of zero 

fatalities on our nation’s roads—one 

community at a time.

For additional information about local 

road safety programs or policies, 

contact Karen Scurry, Highway 

Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)

program manager, at (202) 897–

7168, Karen.scurry@dot.gov, or 

Rosemarie Anderson, local and rural 

roads program manager, at (202) 

366–5007, 

Rosemarie.anderson@dot.gov.

Roadway Safety Analysis 

Training Videos: From Basic 

to Advanced Application of 

the Predictive Method and 

Crash Modification Factors

By Esther Strawder, FHWA Office of Safety, 

and Frank Gross, VHB

The AASHTO Highway Safety 

Manual (HSM) describes a method 

for predicting crashes among road 

users on various facility types. While 

the premise of the predictive method 

is relatively straightforward (i.e., 

input traffic volume and roadway 

characteristics in an equation to 

estimate crashes by type and 

severity), practitioners must educate 

themselves regarding the 

terminology and nuances to properly 

apply the predictive method. For 

example, the following are common 

questions posed by highway safety 

professionals:

• What is the predictive method 

and how is it applied?

• What is the difference between 

observed, predicted, and 

expected crashes, and when is it 

appropriate to use each 

measure? 

• What are crash modification 

factors (CMF) and how are they 

applied?

• How are CMFs best applied in 

the predictive method?

• How is the combined effect of 

multiple countermeasures 

estimated?

To answer these, and other safety 

analysis questions, FHWA

developed a series of brief (10–15 

minute) safety data and analysis 

training videos:

1. The Predictive Method.

2. Observed, Predicted, and 

Expected Crashes.

3. Application of CMFs.

4. Selecting a Method to Analyze 

Multiple CMFs.

5. Applying a Method to Analyze 

Multiple CMFs.

The following is an overview of each 

video. 

The Predictive Method

This video describes the use of the 

predictive method in quantifying the 

safety performance of existing and 

proposed designs. The video 

explains how to define the study 

location and period of interest; what 

data are needed to apply the 

method; how to select and apply 

safety performance functions (SPF), 

adjustment factors, and calibration 

factors; and how to use the Empirical 

Bayes (EB) method.

Observed, Predicted, and 

Expected Crashes

This video covers three approaches 

for quantifying safety performance. 

The video defines the three 

approaches, describes the strengths 

and limitations, explains how to 

select an appropriate approach, and 

illustrates the use of the approaches 

in estimating safety performance for 

a given facility.

Application of CMFs

This video describes the process of 

applying CMFs to estimate 

countermeasure effectiveness, 

Screenshot of the Application of CMFs video. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 6 –

assuming the viewer is familiar with 

selecting an appropriate CMF and 

estimating the safety performance of 

the base condition. As shown in the 

image above, the video explains how 

to define the base condition, how to 

apply CMFs, and how to compute

and interpret the confidence interval.

Selecting a Method to Analyze 

Multiple CMFs

This video is the first of a two-part 

series on estimating the combined 

effect of multiple countermeasures. 

The video explains how to select an 

appropriate method based on the 

scenario of interest, the limits of the 

combined effect, the potential for 

overlapping effects among 

countermeasures, and the 

magnitude of countermeasure 

effects.

Applying a Method to Analyze 

Multiple CMFs

This video is the second of a twopart series on estimating the 

combined effect of multiple 

countermeasures. The video 

explains how to apply the additive, 

multiplicative, dominant effect, and 

dominant common residuals 

methods. It also explains how to 

address scenarios where the CMFs 

apply to the same or different crash 

types and severities.

The self-paced videos allow you to 

learn at your own speed. You can 

pause the videos to work through 

example problems and skip ahead to 

specific sections of interest. You can 

also return at any time for a 

refresher. Each video concludes with 

a link to an HSM resource web page

for further details and readings on 

the topics. Given the focused 

content and flexibility in reviewing 

the content, it’s not surprising that 

these videos have received more 

than 1,700 views. 

For more information on the 

technical content in the training 

videos, contact Esther Strawder at 

Esther.strawder@dot.gov or Karen 

Scurry at karen.scurry@dot.gov.

2019 Safety Discipline 

Award Winners

By Patrick Hasson and Adam Larsen, FHWA

The safety discipline award is an 

annual award recognizing individuals 

for their leadership and 

accomplishments. In 2019, three 

individuals were awarded two Field 

Safety Leadership Peer Awards and 

the Howard Anderson Lifetime 

Achievement Award.

Field Safety Leadership Peer 

Awards

Peter Eun and Rick Drumm were 

recognized with FHWA Field Safety 

Leadership Peer Awards for 

demonstrating leadership and 

accomplishments in highway safety. 

These leaders were nominated by 

their peers for contributions to 

FHWA and its partners, and, 

ultimately, for reducing fatalities and 

serious injuries on our roads.

Peter Eun is a member of the safety 

and design team of the FHWA 

Resource Center. He uses creative 

tactics to inspire people throughout 

the country to take action to reduce 

pedestrian fatalities and serious 

injuries. Peter has mentored many of 

his peers to become better 

presenters and advocates for nonmotorized transportation safety, and 

has provided outstanding instruction, 

leadership, and partnership above 

and beyond the requirements of his 

position.

Rick Drumm from FHWA’s Indiana 

division is a longtime safety 

champion, engaging both State and 

local safety stakeholders. Recently, 

Rick began assisting local agencies 

in the development of local road 

safety plans. Several national efforts 

have benefitted from Rick’s active 

participation and leadership, 

including the HSIP steering 

committee. Rick hosted the first-ever 

traffic safety bowl at the 2019 

national safety engineer peer 

exchange. Rick is passionate about 

safety and well respected by both his 

safety partners in Indiana and his 

peers across FHWA.

Peter Eun, Field Safety Leadership 

Award winner. (Source: FHWA)

Rick Drumm, Field Safety Leadership 

Award winner. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 7 –

Howard Anderson Lifetime 

Achievement Award 

In 1974, Howard Anderson was 

named the first FHWA associate 

administrator for safety. In honor of 

his contributions to our agency, the 

Howard Anderson Lifetime 

Achievement Award was established 

in 2014 to recognize current FHWA 

employees who exemplify 

outstanding and significant service to 

the safety discipline over their 

careers. Nominees are evaluated for 

continuous efforts to champion 

safety both internally and externally 

to FHWA. 

Greg Schertz was awarded the 

Howard Anderson Lifetime 

Achievement Award for his 

leadership in advancing FHWA’s 

safety mission and for his efforts 

over the years to save lives across 

the country. His career at FHWA is a 

remarkable testament to dedication 

and commitment to safety. His 

accomplishments continue to be 

reflected in many of our current 

programs and initiatives. Road 

safety audits, roadway departure 

countermeasures, and 

retroreflectivity have all benefited 

from his involvement. Many current 

leaders in these areas have been 

influenced by his previous work, as 

well as his current support and 

advice. His commitment to the 

success of others is exhibited in 

many ways, most notably through 

his mentoring activities. As a master 

instructor for the National Highway 

Institute, he has shared his 

commitment to excellence with 

professionals in and out of the safety 

discipline. Likewise, in his current 

role as the Federal Lands safety 

functional discipline leader, his 

passion for safety is infectious, as 

evidenced in the great work being 

accomplished by those he works 

with and leads. We cannot thank him 

enough for this support.

For more information about the 

awards, contact Patrick Hasson at 

patrick.hasson@dot.gov.

DATA AND ANALYSIS

Update of Pedestrian and 

Bicycle Crash Analysis Tools

By Tamara Redmon, FHWA Office of Safety

FHWA is in the process of updating 

the Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash 

Analysis Tool (PBCAT) for the first 

time in more than a decade. PBCAT 

is crash-typing software that assists 

practitioners with improving 

pedestrian and bicycle safety 

through a database that contains 

details of crashes between motor 

vehicles and pedestrians or 

bicyclists. The original version of 

PBCAT was made available in 1999 

and was last updated in 2006. 

Traditional crash data provide the 

where, when, and who facts about 

pedestrian and bicyclist crashes. 

However, crash data often lack 

information about the sequence of 

events and causes leading up to a 

crash, which is important for 

selecting safety countermeasures to 

prevent future crashes. PBCAT 

provides this information through 

crash typing, which describes the 

pre-crash actions of the parties 

involved. The current software can 

be used to type crashes and append 

the information to an agency’s 

existing database, or develop a 

stand-alone pedestrian and bicyclist 

crash database. With the database, 

analysts can identify crash types that 

are prevalent systemwide or at 

specific locations and use the 

information to select the most 

effective countermeasures to 

address the problems. Crash types 

in the current PBCAT can also be 

linked to crash types in PEDSAFE

and BIKESAFE. 

As part of the PBCAT update, the 

contract team contacted State and 

local agencies to discover how 

PBCAT is currently used and how it 

might be used in the future. Below is 

a summary of current uses identified 

in that feedback process. 

Greg Schertz, recipient of the Howard 

Anderson Lifetime Achievement 

Award. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 8 –

Arizona

Arizona Department of 

Transportation sponsored statewide 

pedestrian and bicycle safety action 

plans that identified prevalent crash 

types by location to help prioritize 

appropriate safety improvements on 

the State-owned network.

Florida

The University of Florida used 

PBCAT-derived crash-type logic to 

develop a crash analysis tool to type 

and analyze pedestrian and bicyclist 

crashes. The tool is embedded in the 

State’s data system, Signal Four 

Analytics. Authorized users can 

easily access the crash report for 

typing their jurisdiction’s pedestrian 

and bicyclist crashes, and crash-type 

variables are automatically linked to 

other variables in the database. 

Broward County, Florida; St. 

Petersburg, Florida; and the Orlando 

metropolitan region are among 

jurisdictions that have used the tool. 

A demonstration can be viewed in a 

webinar that FHWA hosted in April 

2018.

Delaware

The Delaware Valley Regional 

Planning Commission conducted a 

large pedestrian crash study on a 4-

mile stretch of Philadelphia’s North 

Broad Street, the pedestrian crash 

epicenter of Pennsylvania. Using the 

tool, the study identified a type of 

crash and a time of day that were 

highly over-represented, which led to 

identifying a very specific 

countermeasure for those crashes.

Colorado

The City of Boulder exports PBCAT 

data into a geographic information 

system (GIS) accident database to 

link crash typing, traffic control, and 

facility type data with standardized 

data captured on Colorado State 

accident reports. After data are 

linked, the records are exported to a 

spreadsheet and then imported into 

a statistical software platform to 

conduct cross-tabulations. Key 

findings are produced in a technical 

memorandum or final report. 

Jurisdictions use the findings to 

support site-specific safety 

improvements as well as policy 

changes that can be applied, 

systemwide, to locations that share 

similar issues.

North Carolina 

The University of North Carolina 

Highway Safety Research Center 

developed multiyear, crash-typed,

geocoded pedestrian and bicycle 

crash databases. The data are used 

to analyze local and statewide safety 

problems, including through online 

query tools and model analysis 

reports, and aid in the State’s 

process of prioritizing safety 

projects. An interactive map with 

downloadable spatial pedestrian and 

bicycle crash data can be viewed 

online.

What’s Next?

To gather deeper insights about how 

to make the tool most useful to 

States and local jurisdictions, an inperson stakeholder meeting was 

convened in December 2019. The 

meeting included State, local, and 

Federal experts on crash typing, as 

well as crash data collection and 

analysis to solve safety problems. 

The contract team is currently 

updating the crash-typing decision 

logic and variable definitions 

according to stakeholder input. 

Planned improvements include 

enabling users to develop crash-type 

variables for crashes involving 

micromobility modes and motor 

vehicles. Other goals are to reduce 

confusion about crash types by 

creating a coding framework that will 

develop a unique crash type for each 

crash, and to reduce the number of 

distinct crash types to make it easier 

to identify treatable patterns. As part 

of the strategy, a related goal is to 

align crash type inputs with the crash 

reporting elements recommended by 

the Model Minimum Uniform Crash 

Criteria (MMUCC), to the extent 

possible. This strategy should make 

it easier for more States to develop 

crash types for vulnerable road 

users. 

A draft version of the new logic will 

be produced by the project end date 

of May 2020. It is envisioned that 

States will test the crash-typing logic 

before it is finalized. Stakeholders 

have advocated for a browser-based 

tool that will not be limited by users’ 

computer operating systems. 

Subsequent efforts will consider 

updating the software by 

implementing the revised logic and 

graphic updates.

For more information, contact 

Tamara Redmon at 

tamara.redmon@dot.gov. 

Data Visualization in Safety 

Transportation Planning

By Chimai Ngo, FHWA, Subasish Das, TTI, 

and Eric Tang, VHB

If you work in planning processes, 

you understand the significant role of 
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 9 –

data in these processes. Data allow 

planners to develop goals, 

objectives, performance measures, 

and targets, and to prioritize 

programs and projects. Collecting 

and analyzing accurate data are the 

initial steps in the right direction. But 

how do we communicate the data to 

identify where and what the needs 

are? Visualizing through mapping 

opens a door to a host of 

possibilities, as it tells stories more 

effectively than other types of 

communication. This article presents 

several examples of transportation 

agencies using mapping to 

communicate information for 

transportation safety planning 

purposes. 

Mapping for Public Involvement 

Process in Idaho

In an effort to communicate with 

transportation stakeholders and the 

public, the Idaho Transportation 

Department (ITD) uses StoryMaps. 

This tool allows ITD to combine 

project maps with narrative text, 

images, and multimedia to 

communicate with stakeholders and 

the public about project planning 

activities. 

ITD uses StoryMaps for long-range, 

corridor, and modal project outreach 

efforts. These maps can display 

safety issues along a corridor and 

allow users to understand issues in 

relation to other transportation needs 

in a specific corridor. 

ITD created a series of interactive 

web-based applications using 

StoryMaps to support data 

visualization. For example, the 

Highway Safety Corridor Analysis 

app incorporated several drop-down 

panels and hovering and zooming 

options. The app allowed users to 

weigh in on proposed safety 

improvements. Other ITD web-based 

StoryMap apps focused on many 

aspects such as crashes, 

transportation investments, roadway 

characteristics, intelligent 

transportation system devices, and 

construction locations.

A key advantage of these online GIS 

tools is that users do not need to 

have any GIS or coding experience. 

StoryMaps are available on the IPlan 

site, a collaborative site used by ITD 

to collect and distribute information 

on the system network.

For more information, contact Sonna 

Lynn Fernandez at 

Sonnalynn.fernandez@itd.idaho.gov

or (208) 334–8209.

Quick and Easy Crash Data 

Visualization in New Jersey 

The New Jersey Department of 

Transportation’s (NJDOT) datadriven software tool, Safety Voyager, 

provides a quick and easy visual 

perspective of crash data in a mapbased interface. Safety Voyager can 

quickly show a comparative 2D or 

3D view of crashes in a defined 

area, municipality, or county. 

Safety Voyager updates crash data 

biweekly and ensures that users 

have access to the most current data 

available. The tool’s interactive 

visualization platform provides end 

users a reactive impression to help 

them cut through the clutter of 

complex data dynamics. This tool 

has the following functions:

• Crash Cluster selection tool: this 

tool isolates the selected crashes 

in the Detailed Crash Information 

window and highlights them on 

the map.

• Crash reports: users can 

download crash reports in PDF 

format from the crash map 

application. The tool redacts 

personal identifying information 

to protect an individual’s privacy.

NJDOT regularly updates and 

enhances Safety Voyager with new 

features based on user feedback. 

The application was recently 

updated with a pedestrian and cyclist 

heat map. Tutorials (e.g., crash map 

tutorial, emphasis areas tutorial) are 

StoryMaps screenshot. (Source: ITD)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 10 –

also regularly uploaded to improve 

usability.

For more information, contact Chris 

Zajac at chris.zajac@dot.nj.gov or 

(609) 963–1893.

Metro Map for Equity 

Oregon Metro (Metro), the 

metropolitan planning organization 

(MPO) for the greater Portland area 

in Oregon, focused on ways to 

address disparities and improve 

racial and social equity in the 

implementation of Vision Zero 

projects in the region. Metro 

identified equity focus areas within 

the region to provide a framework for 

evaluating where transportation 

safety projects could be prioritized to 

reduce disparities for three 

demographic groups (which are not 

mutually exclusive): people of color, 

people with lower income, and 

people with limited English 

proficiency.

Metro found that a majority of highinjury corridors are in communities 

with higher concentrations of these 

three demographic groups, and 

mapped this overlap as part of its 

regional transportation plan update. 

Regional high-injury corridors are 

stretches of roadways in the 

Portland metropolitan area where 

the highest concentrations of serious 

crashes involving a motor vehicle 

occur on the regional transportation 

network. Regional high-injury 

intersections are roadway 

intersections with the highest

concentration of fatal and serious 

crashes. The regional high-injury 

corridors and intersections are 

identified to help prioritize near-term 

safety investments. Metro will update 

these corridors and intersections 

approximately every 5 years. In the 

interim, other safety investments 

may be identified that warrant priority 

based on other data and analysis.

For more information, contact Lake 

Strongheart McTighe at 

Lake.McTighe@oregonmetro.gov or 

(503) 797–1660.

Model Inventory of 

Roadway Elements 

Fundamental Data 

Elements...the Clock Is 

Ticking

By Robert Pollack, FHWA Office of Safety

The clock is ticking for States to 

meet the Fixing America's Surface 

Transportation (FAST) Act 

requirement to have access to the 

Model Inventory of Roadway 

Elements (MIRE) Fundamental Data 

Elements (FDE) for all public roads. 

On March 5, 2020, FHWA Office of 

Safety conducted a public webinar to 

convey information about MIRE 

FDEs, States’ progress in acquiring 

New Jersey data visualization. (Source: NJDOT)

Metro Map for Equity. (Source: Metro)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 11 –

MIRE FDEs, and outreach activities 

to help the States.

Background

The two most recent transportation 

reauthorization acts (Moving Ahead 

for Progress in the 21st Century Act 

and FAST Act) identified required 

capabilities State data systems must 

have to support States’ HSIPs. The 

acts specify the type of roadways 

covered, the type of data to be 

collected, the ability to geolocate 

data to a common basemap, and 

that State data systems adopt and 

use a subset of MIRE data 

elements—referred to as FDEs—to 

improve data collection and ensure a 

data-driven safety management 

process for States’ HSIPs. Through 

a rulemaking process, FHWA 

identified 37 MIRE FDEs that States 

are required to have access to, for 

all public roads, by September 30, 

2026.

MIRE FDEs

The overriding focus in establishing 

MIRE FDEs is to provide States with 

roadway characteristic and traffic 

volume data elements that, when 

integrated with crash data, enable 

sufficient data analysis to identify 

safety problems and make effective 

safety investment decisions. The 

MIRE FDE data set enables States 

to analyze crash experience on their 

roads and identify the expected 

average crash frequency, given the 

roadway and traffic characteristics at 

each location.

MIRE FDEs are organized into three 

categories: non-local paved roads, 

local paved roads, and unpaved 

roads. Non-local paved road 

elements are further subcategorized 

by data elements for road segments, 

intersections, and interchanges. A 

list of MIRE FDEs by category can 

be found in tables 1–3 in FHWA’s 

Guidance on State Safety Data

Systems.

To help State DOTs and other safety 

data practitioners (e.g., cities, 

counties, MPOs, Tribes, and 

researchers) better understand the 

structure and measurement of MIRE 

FDEs, the Office of Safety created 

an interactive MIRE FDE graphic. 

The graphic provides an interactive 

display of each MIRE FDE’s 

definition, attributes, and sample 

data likely be collected. 

MIRE FDE Status within States

In 2017, States were required to 

develop and submit by September 

2026 strategies for how they would 

access MIRE FDEs on all public 

roads. These strategies are to be 

incorporated into the State’s Traffic 

Records Strategic Plan, such as:

• MIRE FDE data collection status, 

including MIRE FDEs currently 

maintained (or not maintained) in 

the State’s roadway inventory 

and for which public roads.

• MIRE FDE data collection 

methods. 

• Coordination with other agencies 

(e.g., cities, counties, MPOs, 

Tribes) to obtain missing MIRE 

FDEs.

• Criteria for prioritizing MIRE FDE 

data collection on all public 

roads.

• MIRE FDE data collection 

schedules and estimated costs.

The quality of these strategies varied 

greatly among States’ Traffic 

Records Strategic Plans. Submitting 

this information was a one-time 

effort, with no requirement for followup or updates. 

Another measurement of MIRE FDE 

status is through annual reporting of 

MIRE FDE completion percentages. 

States are required to include their 

estimated completion rates for each 

MIRE FDE as part of their annual 

HSIP evaluation report. FHWA’s 

Office of Safety has shared a 

Illustration of MIRE FDE graphic. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 12 –

template with States to assist in this 

reporting.

States have been reporting their 

MIRE FDE completion status since 

2017, and the Office of Safety now 

has 3 years of compiled reporting. In 

addition, the Office of Safety has 

added a graphic that displays the 

change in MIRE FDE collection 

between the two most recent 

reporting years (e.g., 2018 and 

2019). 

The Office of Safety is currently 

participating in a joint project with the 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration’s (NHTSA) National 

Driver Register and Traffic Records 

Division to map the MIRE FDEs. The 

MIRE FDE mapping process is 

similar to a MMUCC mapping 

process that NHTSA has previously 

performed with the MMUCC crash 

data elements.

In the MIRE FDE mapping process, 

a database format is created for 

each MIRE FDE element in the 

NHTSA Traffic Records 

Improvement Program Reporting 

System 2 (TRIPRS2) database. 

Using the MIRE FDE format, State 

roadway data dictionaries determine 

if the State database contains the 

MIRE FDE element and attributes in 

the exact MIRE format, or if the 

element and attributes could be 

derived from other elements in the 

State’s roadway inventory database. 

This process enables the Office of 

Safety to develop a report indicating 

if the State’s roadway inventory 

database contains all required MIRE 

FDEs and attributes. FHWA expects 

to complete the MIRE FDE mapping 

process for all States by April 2020.

MIRE FDE Outreach

The Office of Safety will distribute its 

findings from both the MIRE FDE 

completion status report and the 

mapping results to State FHWA 

division offices, and ask division 

offices to share the information with 

State DOT points of contact for 

MIRE FDE collection/maintenance.

We ask that State DOTs assess the 

information and let the Office of 

Safety know if they concur with the 

findings. States are encouraged to 

discuss the findings with the Office 

of Safety, their progress in acquiring 

the MIRE FDEs for all public roads,

and what successes or difficulties 

they are encountering. The Office of 

Safety is committing future 

resources to help States meet the 

MIRE FDE requirement, and the 

information obtained through this 

outreach process will help direct 

those resources in the most 

beneficial and effective manner 

possible. 

For more information, contact Robert 

Pollack at Robert.pollack@dot.gov

or (202) 366–5019.

SAFETY-DRIVEN CHANGES AND IMPROVEMENTS

Funding Tribal Road Safety 

with the Transportation 

Program Safety Fund

By Adam Larsen, FHWA Office of Safety

On Tuesday, February 11, 2020, 

U.S. Secretary of Transportation 

Elaine L. Chao announced during 

remarks at the National Congress of 

American Indians that more than 

$8.9 million in grants will be awarded 

to 80 Federally recognized American 

Indian Tribal Nations. These grants 

come from the Tribal Transportation 

Program Safety Fund (TTPSF), 

which received 159 applications 

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Elaine L. Chao speaking at the National Congress 

of American Indians. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 13 –

totaling $38.5 million in fiscal year 

2019. The 91 projects awarded 

represent the sixth round of TTPSF, 

which started in 2013 and, so far, 

has distributed more than $60 million 

to Tribal governments.

With Secretary Chao’s recent 

announcement, more than 61 

percent of the 573 Federally 

recognized Tribes in the United 

States have received funding to 

develop a transportation safety plan. 

Many of the transportation safety 

plans have been completed and are 

more than 3 years old with updates 

underway. These data-driven plans 

are a major part of the safety 

decision-making process used to 

identify safety projects and 

communicate the Tribes’ 

transportation safety priorities with 

other governments, including the 

FHWA’s TTPSF. In addition to 

driving TTPSF investments, these 

safety plans have led Tribal 

governments to work with States to 

build safety improvements using 

funds from the HSIP. 

Tribes are using the TTPSF, the 

overall transportation program 

shares, and partnerships with States 

and others to improve transportation 

safety and reduce the more than 500 

fatal crashes reported in Tribal areas 

every year. Projects funded by 

TTPSF fall into four categories: 

safety planning, data collection and 

analysis, behavioral safety projects, 

and infrastructure funding. 

Data collection and analysis projects 

have included road safety audits, 

systemic safety studies, and 

improvements to crash data 

collection systems. FHWA and 

NHTSA have partnered on a project 

to develop a Tribal crash reporting 

toolkit. Currently in a pilot phase, the 

project is expected to be completed 

by fall 2020 and will include a selfassessment tool, a fillable PDF 

crash report, a database to compile 

crash reports, quality control 

guidance, documentation on 

common misconceptions related to 

crash data collection, and a guide 

introducing concepts in safety data 

analysis. 

Behavioral grants for projects related 

to emergency medical services, 

enforcement, and education were 

eligible under the MAP–21 Act. This 

eligibility did not continue under the 

FAST Act. Behavioral grants issued 

under MAP–21 comprise 9 percent 

of the total awards issued from 

TTPSF. A related effort funded by 

the Indian Health Services (IHS) is 

the Tribal Injury Prevention 

Resource Center to assist and train 

Tribal employees in deploying car 

seat checkpoints, data surveillance, 

and other injury prevention topics. 

Funding is available to address 

some behavioral safety topics 

through the Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Indian Highway Safety Program, 

which distributes funding from 

NHTSA under 23 U.S.C. § 402.

A wide variety of infrastructure 

improvement projects have been 

funded by the largest category (75 

percent) of TTPSF funding. In 

addition to intersection 

improvements, pedestrian facilities, 

and roadway departure strategies, 

TTPSF has also addressed some 

unique challenges such as 

monitoring the safety of ice roads in 

Alaska. 

The Tribal Transportation Program 

Coordinating Committee (TTPCC) 

recently met with FHWA to discuss 

progress with TTPSF to address 

transportation safety in Tribal areas. 

Comparing the priorities of the Tribal 

Transportation Strategic Safety Plan

to TTPSF expenditures led TTPCC 

to approve a resolution supporting 

FHWA’s initiative to create a 25 

percent set-aside goal to address 

systemic deployment of roadway 

departure countermeasures. This will 

help increase funding of roadway 

departure countermeasures, which 

have only comprised 12 percent of 

TTPSF expenditures, while roadway 

departure is involved in about 63 

percent of fatalities in Tribal areas. 

For more information, contact Adam 

Larsen at adam.larsen@dot.gov. 

Safety Data Business Plans: 

Technical Assistance to 

Enhance Safety Data

By Rosemarie Anderson, FHWA, Bob Scopatz, 

VHB, and Catherine Chestnutt, VHB 

Safety data and data-driven safety 

analysis can improve decisionmaking and resource allocation, 

which aid in reducing fatalities and 

serious injuries on public roads. 

Safety data business plans (SDBP) 

help State DOTs and their partner 

agencies meet Federal requirements 

for State safety data systems in 

support of safety data collection, 

integration, and analysis. A data 

governance program addresses data

collection, storage, security, 

inventory, analysis, quality control, 

reporting, and visualization. 

The SDBP synthesizes information 

to propose high-priority, 
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 14 –

implementable actions for safety 

data stakeholders to enhance safety 

data collection, management, 

integration, governance, analysis, 

and performance measurement. 

Improvements in these areas will 

result in more efficient business 

practices, progress toward meeting 

Federal data requirements, and 

better highway safety analysis.

The SDBP is structured to represent 

key data components of a successful 

State safety data system, as shown 

in the schematic graphic. 

• Centerlines and learning record 

store (LRS) data provide the 

foundation for road, rail, and 

traffic inventory as well as 

geocoding and crash data 

management. 

• Crash and traffic data and road 

and rail inventory are inputs to 

analysis tools for performing both 

network- and project-level safety 

analysis.

• Safety analysis tools identify and 

help prioritize safety 

countermeasures for 

consideration in safety plans and 

programs. 

• Crash data and analysis tools are 

needed to develop safety 

performance measures and 

targets. 

Technology and data infrastructure 

and data governance are 

represented as loops encompassing

all other data management areas, 

with governance the outermost loop. 

This schematic view reflects the 

relationships among all areas of a 

State safety data system.

The FHWA Office of Safety offers 

technical assistance to agencies 

working to implement an SDBP. The 

technical assistance includes:

• Developing draft and final SDBPs 

using the key aspects of safety 

data.

• Documenting the results to help 

interested safety practitioners 

improve decision-making and 

resource allocation.

Developing an SDBP has the 

following benefits: 

• Assists safety data managers 

and technical staff with 

understanding and documenting 

data management and 

governance processes. 

• Helps State DOT business areas 

understand how they can 

leverage data to deliver their 

programs, supporting the overall 

needs of the agency.

• Promotes collaboration with 

information technology (IT) staff.

• Identifies how each employee’s 

responsibilities link to the 

agency’s mission and goals.

The graphic below shows the focus 

on three core safety data systems—

crash, roadway, and traffic volume—

and how their integration is essential 

to the HSIP. 

Seeking Agency Participation

FHWA seeks opportunities to work 

closely with State, planning, Tribal, 

and local agencies to improve safety 

data management and governance. 

Direct technical assistance is offered 

to help States create the data 

resources and data management 

processes required by the FAST Act 

and State safety data systems 

guidance. The SDBP technical 

assistance program will help 

agencies produce a fully 

implementable plan by integrating 

the areas in a coordinated fashion. 

States are invited to request 

technical assistance in developing 

their own SDBP. To request 

assistance, State DOTs and 

partnering agencies should:

• Decide which agencies will be a 

part of the project.

• Select a lead agency and point of 

contact.

Core safety data systems. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 15 –

• Request assistance through the 

FHWA division office.

• Commit resources toward 

completing and implementing the 

SDBP.

If interested, contact Rosemarie 

Anderson at 

rosemarie.anderson@dot.gov or 

(202) 366–5007.

Fremont’s Successful 

Midsize City Vision Zero 

Approach 

By Matthew Bomberg, City of Fremont

Fremont, California, with a

population of 235,000, is at the 

northern end of the land of early 

adopters, Silicon Valley. Matching 

the ambition of Silicon Valley, this 

midsized suburban city in the San 

Francisco Bay Area adopted a 

Vision Zero traffic safety policy in 

2015 and developed an action plan 

in early 2016, making it the seventh 

city nationwide (and first midsize 

city) with a Vision Zero action plan. 

Fremont’s approach to Vision Zero 

has been opportunistic and 

proactive, building on ambitious 

general plan policies to create 

complete streets and reduce vehicle 

miles traveled. Implementation 

includes systemic deployment of 

proven countermeasures and 

leveraging partnerships to extend 

the impact of city staff and funding 

resources. Fremont’s approach to 

Vision Zero has enabled it to 

successfully reduce major crashes 

(severe injuries and fatalities) by 

more than 30 percent since adopting 

its Vision Zero policy, even as major 

crashes have increased in the Bay 

Area, the State, and nationwide.

Systemic Deployment of Proven 

Countermeasures

Rather than consider 

countermeasures after sufficient 

collision history has accrued, 

Fremont has sought to proactively 

implement a series of proven 

countermeasures. Proactive 

implementation involves targeting 

citywide locations where 

infrastructure characteristics suggest 

there is risk of a crash that the 

countermeasure is designed to 

mitigate, or where collision data 

suggest a crash type is 

overrepresented. 

One example of systemic 

implementation of a proven 

countermeasure is a citywide LED 

streetlighting upgrade project. The 

city’s review of major crash data 

suggested that low lighting 

contributed to more than half of 

crashes. Based on this finding, the 

city accelerated an initiative to 

convert all 16,000 streetlights from 

yellow sodium vapor to white LED. 

The citywide retrofit was expedited 

by bonding against future operating 

expense savings from more energyefficient lighting. Another example is 

a citywide traffic signal upgrade to 

include pedestrian countdown 

signals. The city’s review of police 

reports from the 3 years prior to 

adopting a Vision Zero policy 

identified several crashes involving 

seniors struck and killed in 

signalized crosswalks on major 

arterials, possibly because they were 

unaware of available crossing time. 

In response, the city installed 

pedestrian countdown signals at all 

traffic signals citywide, an increase 

from 50 to 220 locations. 

Fremont has also changed its 

roadway striping standards to a safe 

and complete street design 

standard, based on guidance from 

the National Association of City 

Transportation Officials (NACTO). A 

key feature of Fremont’s new striping 

standard is adopting travel lane 

widths of 10 feet on major arterials to 

manage speeds, create additional 

width for buffering, and protect 

vulnerable road users. The city now 

implements this standard as part of 

all roadway restriping after pavement 

maintenance. In addition, the city 

completed a project to remove 

existing striping and restripe 9 miles 

of arterial roadways identified as 

safety priority streets. Because these 

streets would not be resurfaced for 

more than 5 years, they were 

upgraded to safe and complete 

striping standards in advance of 

normal pavement maintenance. The 

city has now restriped with 10-foot 

travel lanes more than 50 miles of 

arterial roadways and buffered bike 

lanes. Recent speed surveys 

indicate the city will be able to 

City of Fremont roadway 

enhancements. (Source: City of 

Fremont)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 16 –

reduce the posted speed limit on 

more than 30 street segments due to 

lower 85th percentile operating 

speeds.

Finally, Fremont has worked to 

enhance all marked, uncontrolled 

crosswalks of major arterials with 

high-visibility crosswalks, advance 

yield lines, and in-pavement yield to 

pedestrian signs. To realize 

immediate benefit, the city has 

sought quick striping upgrades in 

advance of more permanent 

upgrades, such as additional 

lighting, rectangular rapid flashing 

beacons (RRFB), and pedestrian 

hybrid beacons (PHB). With 

promising results, the city has also 

experimented with flexible 

delineators and in-pavement yield 

markers on lane lines between 

through lanes approaching 

uncontrolled crosswalks to increase 

conspicuity of crossings and 

physically prohibit multiple threat 

crashes.

Leveraging Partnerships

Fremont leverages partnerships 

between city departments and with 

external organizations to extend the 

impact of city funding and staff 

resources. Fremont’s Vision Zero 

program has primarily been 

implemented by the city’s Public 

Works Department, but has also 

been supported through a strong 

partnership with the police 

department and city manager’s 

office. The city manager’s office has 

supported Vision Zero by 

contributing to communications 

efforts such as citywide newsletters 

mailed to residents, social media 

communications, and outreach at 

community events. Similarly, the 

police department has been an 

invaluable partner in data sharing 

and enforcement, including: 

• Providing access to its collision 

database, which gives city 

engineers near real-time crash 

data used to identify priorities 

and evaluate results. 

• Sharing detailed collision reports 

for all major crashes, including 

narratives describing the crash. 

• Aligning its traffic enforcement 

priorities with data-driven safety 

risks by focusing on excessive 

speeding and driving under the 

influence (DUI). 

• Increasing enforcement 

resources by cross-training nontraffic enforcement officers to 

perform traffic enforcement and 

outfitting them with necessary 

equipment. 

Fremont’s ability to rapidly 

implement traffic safety 

improvements has been significantly 

expanded by the support of street 

maintenance crews that implement 

quick-build projects. Street 

maintenance crews have quickly 

implemented numerous safety 

projects consisting of signage, 

striping, and flexible delineator 

improvements. They also provide 

valuable suggestions on emerging 

materials and products that enhance 

project designs.

A strong nexus exists between 

public health and traffic safety, and 

Fremont has successfully pursued a 

partnership with Kaiser Permanente, 

which operates one of two large 

hospitals in the city. Kaiser’s support 

for Vision Zero in Fremont includes 

installing a new midblock crossing 

with an RRFB and funding a Vision 

Zero street banner campaign with 

educational messaging. 

Fremont has also engaged the city’s 

Youth Service Corps—high school 

student summer volunteers—in 

supporting Vision Zero efforts. Youth 

Service Corps volunteers have 

painted “Look for Safety” markings at 

crosswalks in high-pedestrian 

activity areas, providing a teaching 

opportunity for both students and the 

larger community. 

Finally, the city has enjoyed a strong 

partnership with the Fremont Unified 

School District. The city and district 

jointly funded school safety audits at 

all 42 schools in the city, completed 

over 2 years. The audits have 

generated numerous quick-build 

safety improvements that have also 

been implemented at all schools 

over a 2-year period.

Results

Fremont is now 4 years into Vision 

Zero program implementation. The 

Vision Zero street banner campaign. 

(Source: City of Fremont)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 17 –

number of severe and fatal crashes 

has dropped more than 30 percent—

from an average of 35 per year 

during the 3 years prior to Vision 

Zero to an average of 23 per year 

during the 4 years after. The city has 

seen a drop in major crashes for all 

travel modes, as well as a decline in 

major crashes after dark and major 

crashes involving DUI.

For more information on Fremont’s 

Vision Zero program, contact 

Matthew Bomberg at

mbomberg@fremont.gov. 

Making Roads Safer for First 

Responders

By Paul Jodoin and James Austrich, FHWA

Traffic incidents such as crashes, 

debris, and stalled vehicles can 

cause 50 percent, or more, of 

regional delays. But most 

importantly, they put motorist and 

responder lives at risk. 

Thousands of motorists are killed or 

injured each year in the wake of a

primary crash. In 2019, 44 

responders were killed while working 

roadway incidents—up from 17 in 

2018. Since January 2020, 11 

responders have been struck and 

killed by errant motorists.

In response, FHWA offers traffic 

incident management (TIM) training 

for responders and municipal and 

State stakeholders, with cooperation 

from partners in all States, 

Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico. 

TIM training is available and

recommended for the first-responder 

community to improve safe, efficient, 

and quick clearance of incidents and 

to reduce secondary crashes. At a 

local level, TIM education and 

strategies are key to improving 

safety for all first responders 

essential to road response, 

including:

• Law enforcement.

• Fire and rescue.

• Emergency medical services.

• Transportation/public works.

• Public safety communications.

• Emergency management.

• Towing and recovery.

• Hazardous materials contractors.

• Traffic information media.

For more information, contact Paul 

Jodoin at paul.jodoin@dot.gov or 

James Austrich at 

james.austrich@dot.gov.

Median Cable Rails 

Preventing Cross-Median 

Crashes in Montana

By Gabe Priebe, Montana Department of 

Transportation

If you’ve driven between Laurel and 

Billings, or west of Missoula, in the 

last few years, you may have noticed 

a series of cables supported by 

metal posts in the median of 

Interstate 90. These cables and 

posts are known as median cable 

rails and are becoming a costeffective way to prevent crossmedian crashes on high-speed 

divided highways. A cross-median 

crash occurs when a vehicle leaves 

the roadway to the left and 

completely traverses the median, 

ending up in the opposing lanes of 

traffic. This type of crash often 

results in fatal or serious injuries.

Montana Department of 

Transportation (MDT) recently 

completed a cable median barrier 

study to explore further use of this 

treatment on Montana’s interstate 

system. The study explored other 

national and State studies and 

practices. The study found that 

median cable rail is a cost-effective 

way to greatly reduce cross-median 

crashes. The crash data for the run 

of rail between Billings and Laurel 

also pointed to a significant 

reduction (almost 90 percent) in this 

type of crash. This treatment isn’t 

without limitations; proper median 

widths, adequate slopes, and 

sufficient space for the cable to 

deflect after being struck are all 

important considerations. The 

study’s recommendations helped 

MDT initiate several project 

nominations in the Butte, Bozeman, 

Missoula, and Helena areas.

For more information, contact Gabe 

Priebe at (406) 444–9252 or 

gpriebe@mt.gov.
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 18 –

LEARNING TOGETHER

A Bonner County Participant 

Shares His Perspective on 

the Rural Road Departure 

Peer Exchange

By Steve Klatt, Bonner County

I recently returned from a FHWAsponsored peer exchange on 

reducing rural road departures in 

Phoenix, where I represented 

Idaho’s local jurisdictions. I was 

flattered by the invitation to attend, 

and I felt a responsibility to present a 

perspective for the many locals with 

far less funding than Bonner County. 

Turned out I was the only local 

among seven western States and 

Federal highway safety 

administrators—somewhat a fish out 

of water.

The grim nationwide statistics for 

rural road departures are eye 

opening—30 people die each day on 

rural roads, and 14 of those die on a 

local rural road. These numbers are 

so disconcerting that FHWA has 

made efforts to initiate Local Road 

Safety Plans (LRSP) in all 50 States, 

and Idaho’s turn is coming very 

soon. Bonner County has been 

offered the opportunity to help 

develop a pilot project model safety 

plan for reference to other Idaho 

local jurisdictions. FHWA and the 

Local Highway Technical Assistance 

Council (LHTAC) are teaming up to 

present workshops on the nuts, 

bolts, and benefits for local 

jurisdictions to consider when 

developing our own local plans. I 

encourage us all to consider making 

the effort.

Recently I began to ask myself if we 

could identify similarities in areas 

and types of crashes in Bonner 

County where safety can be 

improved with simple, cost-effective 

treatments. As crash data and road 

structure similarities are compiled, 

the framework of an LRSP is 

consequently created. After 

spending a day and a half with 

highway safety pros, I recognize I 

had begun to think of initiating a 

systemic approach to 

countermeasures that could be 

wrapped into a cost-effective bundle.

It was a genuinely interesting 

challenge to get the State and 

FHWA safety professionals to 

understand how difficult it is to 

secure basic funding for our local 

roads—let alone find time and 

money for safety countermeasures. 

Without continually sounding like an 

old curmudgeon, I strove to convey 

the need to create new funding 

mechanisms that reach locals more 

directly, without all the Federal 

strings and guidelines attached. I 

came away from the peer exchange 

convinced there are 

countermeasures we can initiate 

locally to improve our rural road 

safety.

For more information, contact Steve 

Klatt at 

steve.klatt@bonnercountyid.gov.

Moving FoRRRwD Together

By Cathy Satterfield and Dick Albin, FHWA 

Office of Safety

No program embraces small 

innovative steps to manage 

America’s highway infrastructure 

with more vigor than the FHWA’s

Every Day Counts (EDC) initiative. 

EDC is the front line of innovation in 

project delivery, operation, 

stewardship, and safety of the 

nation’s highway system. In the fifth 

round of EDC, the Focus on 

Reducing Rural Roadway 

Departures (FoRRRwD) initiative 

challenges State and local agencies 

to save lives. 

Nearly 12,000 people die every year 

in a roadway departure crash on a 

rural highway. That’s 30 people 

today, and every day. These account 

for one-third of all crashes, even 

though less than one-fifth of the U.S. 

population lives in rural areas. We 

can do more to save the people 

behind those numbers!

FoRRRwD is built on four pillars:

• Using proven roadway departure 

countermeasures.

• Applying a systemic approach.

• Developing data-driven safety 

action plans.

Bonner County, Idaho. (Source: 

Bonner County)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 19 –

• Addressing lane departures on all 

public rural roads.

To assist States and other 

transportation agencies in deploying 

these strategies, FHWA is hosting a 

series of peer exchanges that 

provide a forum for State and local 

transportation professionals, along 

with partners from the Local 

Technical Assistance Program 

(LTAP) Centers, to share ideas and 

noteworthy practices. So far, in 

2020, three exchanges have taken 

place: one in New Orleans, 

Louisiana; Phoenix, Arizona; and 

Concord, New Hampshire. In each 

case, agency decision makers spent 

a day and a half discussing their 

experiences and innovations, asking 

questions, and troubleshooting 

challenges together. 

Each peer exchange included 

discussions on each of the four 

pillars, and led the agencies in 

attendance to walk away with some 

action items. Key takeaways from 

these exchanges include:

• Project bundling and job-order 

contract mechanisms are 

promising opportunities to 

efficiently deploy lane departure 

countermeasures.

• State DOTs helping local 

partners seems to be a key to 

success. This assistance comes 

in many forms. In project 

development, some States 

provide or analyze data, help 

identify risk factors or locations, 

compile project information, or 

navigate the funding process. In 

project delivery, some States

provide funding opportunities, 

procure materials for local 

agencies, or promote projects 

that do not require matching 

funds from the local agency. 

• An LRSP gives agencies the 

framework needed to identify and 

prioritize issues and strategies. 

More States are beginning to 

require an LRSP to allocate 

safety funds. It is important that 

plans are scalable and updated 

on a regular basis. 

• To guide their strategies, 

agencies should use whatever 

data are available—even if they 

are qualitative (e.g., from police 

or maintenance staff, or from 

mapping). More data are usually 

better, but agencies should not 

let the absence of perfect data 

stop them from acting.

• More education is needed to help 

practitioners and decision makers 

understand the systemic 

approach and determine benefits 

and costs to compare systemic 

projects to hot-spot projects. 

• Many agencies are installing lowcost lane departure 

countermeasures. More training 

on some of the technical issues 

would be helpful. 

• Tracking and reporting results—

especially the number of lives 

saved—can help document the 

benefits of the investments.

Decreasing roadway departure 

crashes is a team effort, and peer 

exchanges such as these bring 

people together to collaboratively 

ensure we are moving forward 

together. 

To learn more about FoRRRwD, 

check out our informational video

released late last year. For more 

information, contact Cathy Satterfield 

at cathy.satterfield@dot.gov.

2019 Montana Department 

of Transportation Annual 

Transportation Safety 

Meeting

By Pam Langve-Davis, Montana Department 

of Transportation

More than 100 people attended the 

12th annual Transportation Safety 

meeting, held October 30–31, in 

Helena. Attendees included 

representatives of the 4E’s of 

transportation: education, 

enforcement, emergency response, 

and engineering. 

MDT Director Mike Tooley opened 

the meeting by talking about 

breaking down barriers, solutions to 

overcoming hurdles, and MDT’s 

progress on reducing fatalities and 

suspected serious injuries on 

Montana roadways. The 

Comprehensive Highway Safety 

Plan (CHSP) interim goal is to halve 

fatalities and suspected serious 

injuries from 1,704, in 2007, to 852 

by 2030. In 2018, Montana 

FoRRRwD pillars. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 20 –

experienced 951 fatalities and 

serious injuries on its roadways. 

Director Tooley also called for 

Montana’s support for the AASHTO

aggressive goal to reach zero deaths 

by 2040.

Guest speaker Professor Nicholas J. 

Ward, director of the Center for 

Health and Safety Culture at 

Montana State University, spoke on 

psychological reactance and moral 

disengagement. He explained how 

psychological resistance to being 

told what to do triggers defense 

mechanisms and leads to 

disregarded normal reasoning. This

often results in assigning blame to 

others and creating negative 

outcomes for others. By 

understanding these influences, 

communications can be developed 

to reach those who have previously 

been resistant to traffic safety 

messaging.

Three emphasis areas reported on 

successes and challenges. The 

roadway departure and intersection 

crashes emphasis area champion 

provided a NHTSA program update, 

and highlighted the increase of 

certified child passenger seat 

technicians as a result of statewide 

training efforts by coordinators of 

Buckle Up Montana. The 2019 

annual seat belt observation survey 

also showed increased use, with 89 

percent seat belt use on all roads.

The impaired-driving emphasis area 

champion facilitated a panel 

discussion regarding the challenges 

of DUIs and the criminal justice 

system. The panel included Traffic 

Safety Resource Prosecutor Chad 

Parker, Traffic Safety Resource 

Officer Doug Samuelson, and Judge 

Greg Mohr. Panel discussion 

included an overview of law 

enforcement training programs to 

identify alcohol- and drug-impaired 

drivers, and training for judges and 

prosecutors on DUI law and 

impaired-driver detection.

The consensus among participants 

was that enhancing public education 

and awareness is crucial in 

promoting change and shifting how 

people perceive appropriate driving 

behavior. Always wearing seat belts, 

understanding what constitutes 

impairment and deciding not to drive, 

following traffic control, and not 

speeding are the most important 

behavioral changes to help us reach 

zero deaths and serious injuries.

For more information, contact Pam 

Langve-Davis at (406) 444–7646 or 

plangvedavis@mt.gov, or visit the 

Vision Zero CHSP website at 

https://www.mdt.mt.gov/visionzero/pl

ans/chsp.shtml. 

Stakeholder Workshop 

Results on Automated 

Vehicles, Safety, and Human 

Factors

By Laura Mero, FHWA Office of Safety

FHWA is funding a project that 

investigates issues with automated 

vehicles (AV), human factors, and 

infrastructure. The objectives of the 

project, Investigate Key Automated 

Vehicle Human Factors Safety 

Issues Related to Infrastructure, 

include:

• Identify key human factors 

regarding the safe operation of 

AVs as a function of roadway 

infrastructure.

• Conduct research to support 

design of infrastructure elements 

that better inform the operation of 

AVs, standards development, 

and potential performance 

requirements activities. 

After completing a literature review 

and gap analysis, the research team 

conducted an in-person stakeholder 

workshop to develop a list of 

prioritized research topics. The 

workshop was designed to facilitate 

discussion of major issues and 

challenges facing Level 2 and Level 

3 AVs operating on and with 

roadway infrastructure. The research 

CHSP interim safety goal. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 21 –

team maximized participation by 

strategically holding the workshop on 

the morning of January 16, 2020—

the last day of the annual American 

meeting of the Transportation 

Research Board (TRB)—at the 

Marriott Marquis in Washington, DC, 

which was convenient for 

stakeholder attendees. Project funds 

were allocated to assist some 

participants in traveling to the 

workshop. Additionally, the research 

team created a list of questions to 

facilitate a small group activity during 

the workshop to encourage 

participants to share ideas.

Eighteen stakeholders with relevant 

expertise representing State DOTs, 

universities, national organizations, 

private consultants, and FHWA 

attended. The agenda began with a 

brief welcome from FHWA, 

introductions, a presentation from 

the research team, and an 

opportunity for participants to share 

information on related projects. 

Participants then engaged in the 

small group activity. 

During the 55-minute activity, 

attendees were encouraged to 

consider three major challenge 

areas identified in the literature 

review and gap analysis, physical 

infrastructure, traffic control devices, 

and transportation systems. 

Following the small group activity, 

each group reported out, then 

participated in a large group 

discussion involving all attendees. 

Participants then agreed on a 

consolidated list of 13 research 

topics and voted on the three they 

thought were most important to 

address. Topics that received fewer, 

or zero, votes were not considered 

unimportant; rather, they were 

already being researched or 

considered less urgent for near-term 

study. The results generated the 

following prioritized list that will guide 

the design of four project 

experiments: 

• Mixed-fleet acceptance and 

traffic behavior (8 votes): How 

will the behaviors of AVs and 

conventional vehicles interact to 

influence roadway capacity, 

travel time and reliability, and 

throughput? For example, will 

longer following gap distances or 

deceleration distances disrupt 

traffic flow or negatively influence 

public acceptance and trust?

• Pedestrian/bike interaction with 

AVs (7 votes): How will an AV 

navigate situations that often rely 

on social cues or expectations, 

such as yielding, right-turn 

conflicts with bicyclists, and 

providing appropriate buffer 

space when overtaking? How will 

vulnerable road users and AVs 

understand each other’s intended 

behaviors? 

• Modification of work zones for 

AVs (6 votes): How will AVs 

handle the temporary and 

variable environments of work 

zones, which bring a different set 

of operational rules and 

expectations? While humans can 

easily adapt to narrowed lanes 

and sign clutter, how will a Level 

2 or Level 3 respond to these 

environments?

• AVs have different information 

than external environment (6 

votes): Connected vehicles might 

have access to information 

before drivers do, or AVs might 

have information that does not 

match the environment (e.g., a 

different speed limit based on an 

outdated map). How might these 

situations affect driver trust and 

system use?

• AV understanding of specific 

infrastructure (4 votes): What is 

the capability of an AV to 

respond to very specific types of 

infrastructure intended for 

different situations, such as bike 

lanes, marked trail crossings, or 

unconventional interchanges?

• Speed differentials between AVs 

and non-AVs (4 votes): If AVs 

follow speed limits more closely 

than humans do, how will this 

affect other drivers’ choices to 

follow or overtake AVs? What are 

the network effects of these 

interactions and behaviors?

• Human comfort with changes in 

geometric design for AVs (3 

votes): Will conventional drivers 

or AV passengers find roadways 

specifically designed to maximize 

AV operation uncomfortable 

(e.g., narrower lanes)? 

• AV-specific lanes (1 vote): How 

will traveling only within a 

homogenous group of AVs affect 

driver use or trust of AV 

Workshop activity. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 22 –

systems? Will lanes specifically 

designed for AVs be needed to 

avoid a mixed-fleet environment?

• AVs communicating with human 

drivers (1 vote): How will AV 

drivers and surrounding road 

users understand the behaviors 

to expect from an AV? How much 

and in what ways should AVs 

communicate their awareness of 

the environment and intended 

actions to their drivers?

• AV behavior off public/regulated 

roads (e.g., schools, malls, 

parking lots) (1 vote): How will 

AVs navigate areas where road 

regulations or traffic control 

devices (TCD) are arbitrary or 

nonstandard? How will AVs 

operate in areas with minimal 

signing or road markings?

• Jurisdictional responsibility for 

standardization (government/third 

party) (1 vote): Who is 

responsible for pioneering and 

enforcing improved 

standardization? Variation in 

TCDs, road geometry, and 

regulations might make it difficult 

for AVs to operate safely and 

effectively across localities. 

• AV negotiation behavior (0 

votes): How will AVs negotiate 

behaviors, such as merges or 

cut-ins, with conventional 

vehicles? How will AVs respond 

to a four-way stop when multiple 

vehicles arrive at the same time? 

Participants indicated this relates 

to mixed-fleet acceptance and 

traffic behavior.

• Human understanding of and 

reaction to TCDs designed 

specifically for AVs (0 votes): Will 

human drivers understand or be 

confused by signs or lane 

markings modified to be more 

visible to computer vision 

systems? For example, will 

drivers interpret extended lane 

markings at gores to be 

prohibitive?

For more information, contact Laura 

Mero at (202) 493–3377 or 

laura.mero@dot.gov. 

ANNOUNCEMENTS

New Railway Safety 

Noteworthy Practices 

Available!

A new suite of railway safety 

Noteworthy Practices is now 

available! Everything from innovative 

treatments to creative outreach 

strategies is presented, and each 

practice has been entered into the 

Noteworthy Practices database. 

Learn more about how partnerships 

and collaboration can lead to project 

success, why out-of-the-box thinking 

can lead to increased funding, and 

how targeted outreach can reduce 

railway fatalities. The four new 

Noteworthy Practices include:

• Collaboration to Effectively 

Implement Railroad Crossing 

Safety Projects: Success Stories 

from Nevada and Louisiana.

• Education Efforts to Reduce 

Railway Fatalities: An Abundance 

of Innovative Resources and 

Ideas.

• State Programs Fund RailCrossing Safety Improvements.

• Improving Pedestrian RailCrossing Safety with Hinged 

Pedestrian Gate Skirts.

Visit the FHWA Office of Safety’s 

Railway-Highway Crossings 

Program website at 

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/xings

for more information and resources, 

including FHWA and Federal 

Railroad Administration (FRA) joint 

webinars and the Highway-Rail 

Crossing Handbook, Third Edition.

New railway safety Noteworthy Practices. (Source: FHWA)
SAFETY COMPASS NEWSLETTER · Summer 2020: Volume 14 Issue 2

– 23 –

The Safety Compass Newsletter is a publication of the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

FHWA publishes the Safety Compass Newsletter three times a year. We can be reached at:

FHWA Office of Safety

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Room E71-320

Washington, DC 20590

The Safety Compass Newsletter is available online at the FHWA Office of Safety website at: 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/newsletter/safetycompass/. 

We welcome your comments and highway safety-related articles. The purpose of this newsletter is to increase highway safety awareness and 

information and to provide resources to help save lives.

We encourage readers to submit highway safety articles that might be of value to the highway safety community. Send your comments, 

questions, and articles for review electronically to Tara McLoughlin at tara.mcloughlin@dot.gov. 

New Lane Departure Countermeasure Outreach Resources Available!

Are you looking for resources to help you explain the value of lane departure countermeasures to your leadership or 

the public? If so, check out these two new resources: Rumble Strips: The Sweet Sound of Safety and Curve Warning 

Signs Save Lives. 

Contact Cathy Satterfield at cathy.satterfield@dot.gov for more information! 

Screenshot from the video, Rumble Strips: The Sweet Sound of 

Safety. (Source: FHWA)