Tribal Transportation

Program Safety Fund

Grant Writing Training

Adam Larsen

Adam.Larsen@dot.gov

360-619-2601
• Review Safety Funding Opportunities

• Tribal Transportation Program Safety Fund Overview

• Observations from the FY22 Applications

• Application Process & Grant Writing Tips

• Selection Criteria Sample Responses

Overview
Other Transportation 

Funding Opportunities

State-managed

• Highway Safety Improvement Program

• Transportation Alternatives

• Safe Routes to School

• Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Program

Federal Discretionary Grants

• Safe Streets and Roads for All

• Rural Surface Transportation Grants

• Wildlife Crossing Pilot Program

• BIA Indian Highway Safety Program

https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-tribal

www.TribalSafety.org/Funding
4

NHTSA/BIA Grant Funding

• USC Title 23, Section 402 grant program for 

federally recognized tribes

• Annual expenditures of $6.2 million for 30-45 

tribal projects

• Approximately $17 million available for new 

projects

https://www.bia.gov/bia/ojs/dhs

Lawrence Robertson

IHSP Program Director

505-563-3814

lawrence.robertson@bia.gov

Sam Sinclair

NHTSA Program Manager

682-265-7196

Samuel.Sinclair@dot.gov
5

NHTSA/BIA Grant Funding

• Traffic Safety Enforcement Activity Hours 

• Highway Safety Specialist & Administrative Support 

• Vehicles and Equipment for Traffic Safety Law 

Enforcement Training 

• Lifesavers Conference Attendance 

• Child Safety Seat Distribution Programs 

• Other activities eligible for 23 USC 402 
6

Road to Zero Community Traffic Safety Grants

Application Now Open

Deadline 1/6/23! 

WWW.NSC.ORG
• $1-billion per year

• 20% match required

• Tribes, local governments

• Comprehensive Safety Action Plans

• Implementation Grants

• Next Round: Spring 2023

Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A)
Tribal Transportation Program 

Safety Fund Purpose

• Transportation fatalities and injuries severely 

impact the quality of life in Indian country.

• Reduce fatal and serious injuries in 

transportation related incidents, such as motor 

vehicle crashes.

• Allocated based on an identification and analysis 

of highway safety issues and opportunities to 

correct or improve a hazardous road location or 

feature or address a highway safety problem. -

23 USC 202(e), 23 USC 148(a)(4)
• ~$21-million per year (2022-2026)

• Competitive grant

• Tribes are the only eligible applicants

• Strategic safety plans encouraged

• Multi-year NOFO

• Prior year awards listed at 

https://highways.dot.gov/federallands/programs-tribal/safety/funds

• Join the Mailing List at TribalSafety.org

Tribal Transportation Program 

Safety Fund Overview
TTPSF Important Dates

2022 Application Period CLOSED: September 

15, 2022

2023 Application Period Open Now until 

deadline of

January 15, 2023

2024-2026 Application Period October 1

- Jan 15, 

each year

Muscogee (Creek) Nation

Mission Road Intersection

Source: Cross Timbers Consulting

Award selection announced about 5 months after deadline.
FY22 applications will automatically be 

reconsidered in FY23. There is no need to apply 

again for FY23.

Applicants may choose to update their previous 

application to add additional information.

FHWA may not be able to make formal notification 

of FY22 awards before the FY23 deadline.

Contact FHWA for reviewer comments if you 

intend to update an application. TTPSF@dot.gov

Re-apply?
TTPSF Categories
$96-million requested

• 146 applications

• 121 Tribes

$21-million available

FY22 award announcements expected in 

February 2023

FY22 Funding Cycle

Available

Requested
$16-million in qualified applications were not 

recommended for funding in FY22 will be reconsidered 

in FY23

$35-million in qualified applications are for funding 

amounts that greatly exceed typical award amounts for 

this program.

Some Tribes submitted large requests or multiple 

applications that total to a large request

FY22 Funding Cycle

Requested
Start Here: https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-tribal/safety/funds

1.Review the FY2022-2026 TTP Safety Fund NOFO.

2.Complete an application form.

3.Prepare a project narrative using the template. 

1. For the Safety Plans category, a completed application form may be your project narrative.

4. Upload a completed application form, project narrative, and supporting documentation.

Application Process
Presentation Title

Application Process –

1. Notice of Funding Opportunity

NOFO Contains:

• Eligibility Info

• Deadlines

• Selection Criteria

• Application Requirements

• Contact Information

Step 1 of application process: 

https://highways.dot.gov/federallands/programstribal/safety/funds
Start Here: https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-tribal/safety/funds

Choose the application form for the appropriate category. 

Read the “Important Note” and save the form to your computer. Do not fill it out in a web browser or you may lose 

your work.

Application Process – 2. Application Form
Application Process – 3. Project Narrative

Start Here: https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-tribal/safety/funds

Use the project narrative template found in the 2022 TTPSF Application Information and Selection Criteria Guide

The purpose of the project narrative is to describe your project and convince reviewers that it algins with the 

selection criteria. 

Basic Outline (see detail in Application Information and Selection Criteria Guide)

• Applicant information

• Project description 

• Selection criteria 

• Cost estimate

• Schedule

• Contributing resources

• Supporting documentation
Grant Writing Tips

Read the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)

Coordinate with funding agency, ask questions

Write a project narrative that thoroughly describes needs

Use visual aids to help describe needs/challenges
Grant Writing Tips

Clearly identify how you expect 

your project will be rated and why

Use page numbers

Use a legible font

Don’t assume the reviewers will 

“see attachments”

Follow up after awards are 

announced to get advice for the 

next opportunity.
Start Here: https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-tribal/safety/funds

Applicants should address 

selection criteria with both:

• Summary in the application 

form

• Detailed response in the 

project narrative.

• Rating Guide in the project 

narrative template will help 

you determine how each 

selection criteria is 

evaluated.

Project Narrative Tips
Focus on the primary selection criteria first. (Section E of NOFO)

“After considering all other selection criteria, the FHWA Administrator may take into 

account the following key Departmental objectives” 

• Using innovative approaches to improve safety and to expedite project delivery; 

• Supporting economic vitality at the national and regional level; 

• Strengthening local economies; 

• Utilizing alternative funding sources and innovative financing models to attract non-Federal sources of 

infrastructure investment; 

• Proactively addressing racial equity and barriers to opportunity; 

• Considering climate change and environmental justice; 

• Promoting an equitable distribution of funds; 

• Accounting for the life-cycle costs of the project to promote the state of good repair; and 

• Beginning projects in a timely manner after award of program funding. 

• Addressing the deteriorating conditions and disproportionately high fatality rates on our rural transportation 

infrastructure. 

Departmental Objectives
• No match is required.

• Leveraging a TTPSF request with other funding 

sources and in-kind match is encouraged. 

• FHWA may give priority consideration to those 

projects that show a commitment of other 

allowable funding sources to complement a 

TTPSF funding request. 

• Allowable complementary funding sources are 

described in 2 CFR § 200.306 and 25 CFR §

170.133

Matching Resources
TTP Safety Fund Categories

2021-2022 Funding Distribution by Category

3.5% Data Improvement, Analysis

3% Safety Plans 

6% 

Systemic Roadway Departure 

Countermeasures

87.5%

Infrastructure Safety Improvements
Evaluation Criteria

• Highest priority category

• Development of new transportation safety 

plans ($15,000) 

• Update transportation safety plans that are 

more than 3 years old ($10,000)

Safety Plans
Safety Plans

Safety Planning Resources at

https://www.tribalsafety.org/safety-planning-resources

• Template safety plan

• Do-it-yourself website with videos and tools 

• Safety Plans Library

• SS4A establishes criteria for “safety action plans”

• See “Resources” at www.Transportation.gov/SS4A
Evaluation Criteria

• A complete application for safety plan 

development or update includes:

• Application form

• Copy of existing safety plan (for updates) 

• Selection Criteria

• Funding requested

• For Updates: plans that are at least 3 years old 

by the application deadline

Safety Plans
Evaluation Criteria

38 / 39 requests funded

Reasons for not funded or partially funded

• Request exceeded cap ($15,000 for new 

plans; $10,000 for safety plan updates)

• Existing plan is not yet 3 years old

• New transportation staff at Tribe were 

unaware of existing safety plan.

Safety Plans
Safety Plan Communicates Needs

Road Safety Audits

Safety Implementation Plans

& Other Studies

Infrastructure Improvement

Behavioral Programs

Policies
Data Assessment, Improvement, and 

Analysis Category

Analysis

• Road Safety Audits for a specific location

• Systemic Safety Study - Study of an issue across road 

network to identify high risk locations

• Safety risk assessment (usRAP)

• Crash data mapping

• Examples: https://www.tribalsafety.org/data-analysis
Data Assessment, Improvement, and 

Analysis Category

Assessment

• Determine safety data needs and plan improvements

Improvement

• Electronic crash data collection equipment, software

• Traffic count equipment for safety purposes 

Tribal Crash Reporting Toolkit

• Self-Assessment Tool

• Facts & Fiction Tool

• Data Analysis Tool

• Crash Reporting Tool

• Officer’s Instruction Tool

• Quality Control Tool

• Database Tool

https://www.tribalsafety.org/tribal-crash-reporting-toolkit
Evaluation Criteria

• Selection Criteria

• Strategic safety planning

• Supporting safety data

• Facility ownership (when applicable)

• 13 of 21 applications proposed for funding

• Reasons for disqualification:

• Unclear what routes were being studied, inventory status

• Route not owned by BIA/Tribe and no letter from owner

• Data did not support the project

Data Assessment, Improvement, and Analysis
Category: DATA ASSESSMENT, IMPROVEMENT, AND ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES

For this category, all criteria will be evaluated but greater consideration will be given to criteria 1 and 2.

Selection Criteria Description Rating Guide

What strategic safety planning document(s) identify this project?

Please provide a page number or describe where this project is 

identified in the supporting strategic document(s).

For this category, the supporting strategic safety planning document 

must be a transportation safety plan developed by a Tribe or a 

state’s strategic highway safety plan.

HQ: Requests that are in a current State SHSP or a Tribe’s 

transportation safety plan that is five years old or newer.

Q: Requests that are in the most recent State SHSP or a Tribe’s 

transportation safety plan (the supporting plan is more than five 

years old).

NQ: The application did not provide documentation that would 

demonstrate that the project is supported by a safety plan.
Category: DATA ASSESSMENT, IMPROVEMENT, AND ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES

For this category, all criteria will be evaluated but greater consideration will be given to criteria 1 and 2.

Selection Criteria Description Rating Guide

Summarize data that demonstrates the need for the project.

• For traffic records assessments and improvements:

an estimate of the data to be collected (such as approximate number 

of crashes per year) and a description of any process currently used to 

collect that data. Also describe how the data will be used.

• For Road Safety Audits (RSA):

Site specific data should be submitted which demonstrates an 

incident history or propensity on the specific roadway to be analyzed.

• For Systemic Safety Studies:

Data should be provided which demonstrates an incident history 

associated with the risk factor to be studied.

HQ: Submission of data, as specified for the specific project type, that 

clearly demonstrate the need for the activities. 

Q: Submission of some data, as specified for the specific project type, 

that demonstrate the need for the activity.

NQ: No applicable supporting data was provided to demonstrate the 

need for the activity.

For traffic data collection, do this: 

Speeding has been identified as a major cause of crashes on the reservation. The Speed Radar Trailers will provide 

additional information on the incidents of speeding and the potential impact of speeding on crashes. This data will 

be useful both to transportation program and law enforcement for safety planning.

For crash data collection, do this: 

Plan, purchase & implement an electronic records system for law enforcement to produce timely, accurate, 

integrated and accessible data for targeting resources and implementing countermeasures to decrease traffic 

fatalities and serious injuries. The project's goal is to establish collection procedures, process, and storage to be 

used in project decision-making. This data is not currently collected.
Category: DATA ASSESSMENT, IMPROVEMENT, AND ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES

For this category, all criteria will be evaluated but greater consideration will be given to criteria 1 and 2.

Selection Criteria Description Rating Guide

Summarize data that demonstrates the need for the project.

• For traffic records assessments and improvements:

an estimate of the data to be collected (such as approximate number 

of crashes per year) and a description of any process currently used to 

collect that data. Also describe how the data will be used.

• For Road Safety Audits (RSA):

Site specific data should be submitted which demonstrates an 

incident history or propensity on the specific roadway to be analyzed.

• For Systemic Safety Studies:

Data should be provided which demonstrates an incident history 

associated with the risk factor to be studied.

HQ: Submission of data, as specified for the specific project type, that 

clearly demonstrate the need for the activities. 

Q: Submission of some data, as specified for the specific project type, 

that demonstrate the need for the activity.

NQ: No applicable supporting data was provided to demonstrate the 

need for the activity.

For a Road Safety Audit, do this: 

With several injury crashes at this intersection, there is a need to add safety countermeasures at this 

intersection. The crash data and roadway geometry features at this intersection show the need for study and 

improvement. The intersection of state route 7 & Tribal Road has been identified in the Tribe’s 2021 strategic 

transportations safety plan. A Road Safety Audit is needed to identify the best countermeasures for this location.

The crash data comes from data shared by the state DOT to the Tribe and its safety project team. 

According to the collision data, 109 crashes occurred at intersections within the reservation. 41% of these 

collisions resulted in incapacitating injuries or fatalities reservation wide. 10 injury crashes were at the 

intersection to be studied.
Category: DATA ASSESSMENT, IMPROVEMENT, AND ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES

For this category, all criteria will be evaluated but greater consideration will be given to criteria 1 and 2.

Selection Criteria Description Rating Guide

Summarize data that demonstrates the need for the project.

• For traffic records assessments and improvements:

an estimate of the data to be collected (such as approximate number 

of crashes per year) and a description of any process currently used to 

collect that data. Also describe how the data will be used.

• For Road Safety Audits (RSA):

Site specific data should be submitted which demonstrates an 

incident history or propensity on the specific roadway to be analyzed.

• For Systemic Safety Studies:

Data should be provided which demonstrates an incident history 

associated with the risk factor to be studied.

HQ: Submission of data, as specified for the specific project type, that 

clearly demonstrate the need for the activities. 

Q: Submission of some data, as specified for the specific project type, 

that demonstrate the need for the activity.

NQ: No applicable supporting data was provided to demonstrate the 

need for the activity.

For a Systemic Safety Study, do this: 

61.2% of crashes over the most recent 5 years (2017-2021) occurred at or near an intersection and accounted for 

12.3% of the total severe crashes. These crashes resulted in 18 fatalities. The prevalence and number of severe 

collisions associated with intersections indicate that safety countermeasures are needed to reduce intersectionrelated collisions. The crash data clearly shows that intersection collisions are a major roadway safety concern. 

The purpose of the systemic intersection study is to prioritize need and apply the most appropriate safety 

countermeasures for the highest risk intersections. 
Category: DATA ASSESSMENT, IMPROVEMENT, AND ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES

For this category, all criteria will be evaluated but greater consideration will be given to criteria 1 and 2.

Selection Criteria Description Rating Guide

What entity owns the facility(s)?

When applicable to the project (such as a Road Safety Audit or other 

study), the road owner must provide a letter acknowledging the 

project unless the road is owned by the BIA or a Tribe.

HQ: Project addresses safety needs on a facility owned by a Tribe or 

BIA, including where a route owned by a Tribe or BIA intersects with 

a facility not owned by BIA or a Tribe and the road owner has 

provided a letter acknowledging the project.

Q: Project addresses safety needs on a facility not owned by a Tribe 

or BIA and the road owner has provided a letter acknowledging the 

project.

NQ: Project is located on a route that is not owned by BIA or a Tribe 

and the road owner did not provide documentation acknowledging 

the project.

Routes must be official and existing on the National Tribal Transportation Facility Inventory. 

Projects that study or impact routes not owned by BIA or a Tribe must have a letter acknowledging the project.
Source: Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate

Systemic Roadway Departure Countermeasures 

Category

• Established to more strategically address Roadway Departure which is 

involved in 2 out of every 3 fatal crashes in Tribal areas

• 25% funding goal (about $5-million)

• Reduced application burden

• Only specific countermeasures eligible

• Can submit multiple applications
Tribal Transportation Program Safety Fund

Addressing Roadway Departure

1. Install low-cost countermeasures on highest risk routes

2. Develop Systemic Roadway Departure Implementation Plan
County H

• Road info

• 12.2 miles

• 2 – 11’ Asphalt Lanes

• Gravel Shoulders

• 45 mph

• Horizontal Curves at 45mph 

minimum radius

• Centerline and Edgeline Paint

• Countermeasures Implemented

• Chevron Signs

• Advanced Curve Signs

• 4” Centerline Epoxy

• 4” Edgeline Epoxy

• Other Countermeasures Considered

• Paved Shoulders

• Shoulder rumble strips

• Centerline rumble strips

• Safety Edge

• Project Completed in 2021

• Tribal Transportation Program 

Safety Fund (FY19)

• Forest County provided labor and 

equipment for sign installation

• Pavement Marking was 

competitively bid
County H

BEFORE->

<-AFTER
Source: Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate

Systemic Roadway Departure Countermeasures

Risk Assessment Form

Required Data

Risk Data

Countermeasures

Where?

Why is this location high 

risk for roadway 

departure?

Which eligible 

countermeasures do you 

want to apply at this 

location?
Systemic Roadway Departure Countermeasures Category

Eligible Improvements

Curve Warning Signs

Delineators

First/Upgraded 

Center/Edge Striping

Edge Rumbles

Center Rumbles

Clear Zones

Native Village of Minto

Navajo Nation

Lake Traverse Reservation, SD

Ohkay Owingeh Coeur d'Alene Tribe
• 3 of the 7 applications to the 

Systemic Roadway Departure 

category contained ineligible 

items for the category

• Evaluated these application in 

the infrastructure 

improvement category or for 

partial funding under the 

systemic roadway departures 

category.

• Make sure to write for the 

correct category because selection criteria are different

Systemic Roadway Departure Countermeasures Category
SYSTEMIC ROADWAY DEPARTURE COUNTERMEASURES CATEGORY

An application in this category may propose to improve multiple locations. Each location will be evaluated individually which may result in partial

funding of an application. For this category all criteria will be evaluated with equal importance.

Criteria Description Rating Guide

What strategic safety planning document(s) identify this 

project?

HQ: The need to address roadway departure is identified in a Tribe’s current 

transportation safety plan that is five years old or newer.

Q: The need to address roadway departure is identified in the 2017 Tribal 

Transportation Strategic Safety Plan (www.TribalSafety.org/reports), a current State 

SHSP, or a Tribe’s transportation safety plan that is more than five years old.

Supporting Safety Data

For this category both crash experience and other risk factors 

will be evaluated for each horizontal curve or tangent segment 

submitted. 

Document crash experience or other risk considerations for 

each horizontal curve or tangent location. This may be done 

using the risk assessment form for the systemic roadway 

departure countermeasures category

HQ: Submission of data that directly demonstrate high risk at the location to be 

improved by the project. 

Q: Submission of some data that demonstrate risk at the location to be improved by 

the project.

NQ: Insufficient supporting data were provided to demonstrate the need for the 

activity.

Systemic Prioritization Improvements to horizontal curves will generally be prioritized over improvements 

in tangent sections.

What entity owns the facility(s)? HQ: Improvements to a facility owned by a Tribe or BIA that is an official and 

existing route in the NTTFI.

Q: Facility not owned by a Tribe or BIA but road owner provides a letter 

acknowledging the proposed project.
Evaluation Criteria

• Eligible items from 4 of 5 applications fully funded.

• 1 of 5 was not funded due to concerns about multiple 

inactive TTPSF awards

• 25% set aside is underutilized 

Systemic Roadway Departure Countermeasures Category
Questions so far?

Adam Larsen

Safety Engineer

FHWA

TTPSF@dot.gov 

360-619-2601
Infrastructure Improvement Category

Other Eligible Activities as listed in 23 USC 148(a)(4)

(xxviii) A physical infrastructure safety project...
Proven Safety Countermeasures

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/
Infrastructure Improvement Category

91 Infrastructure Applications

• $93.4-million requested

⃝ 27 projects recommended for full funding

• $13.5-million

⃝ 15 Recommended for partial funding

• $4.9-million funded; $16.4-million requested

⃝ 17 Qualified, not recommended

• $41.2-million not recommended

⃝ 32 Not qualified, not recommended

• $22.2-million

• 3 not eligible
Infrastructure Improvement Category

⃝ 27 projects recommended for full funding

⃝ 15 recommended for partial funding

Recommended Projects

• 13 Pedestrian Infrastructure

• 12 Roadway departure countermeasures

• 6 Intersection Safety

• 2 Weather-related Hazards

• 3 Visibility

• 1 Traffic Calming
Infrastructure Improvement Category

⃝ 15 Recommended for partial funding

• $4.9-million funded

• $16.4-million requested

Reasons for Partial Funding

• Funding Design only; Will consider construction in 

FY23

• Funding components of project that address the 

problem identified in the application

• Some items were ineligible
Pedestrian Scale Pathway Lighting

Separated pathways eliminate pedestrianvehicle conflicts.

Lighting the length of the pathway is an 

enhancement of aesthetics, functionality, and 

personal security.

Lighting crosswalks does address a crash risk.

Lighting is eligible but focus is on establishing 

infrastructure that reduces crashes.

Infrastructure Improvement 

Partial Funding
Infrastructure Improvement Category

⃝ 17 Qualified, not recommended

• $41.2-million not recommended

Reasons for Not Recommended

• Large Requests

• Multiple applications from the same Tribe total to a large 

request

• Safety features of large projects not safety focused

• Resurfacing projects

• Minimal alignment with selection criteria

• Did not address effectiveness of proposed safety project
Largest awards expected to be $1.6-million.

Some large requests may be partially funded for independent 

components most likely to address documented crash risks.

Some applications that requested both design and construction 

funds may be funded for design in FY22. Construction funding for 

these projects will be reconsidered in FY23.

FY22 Funding Cycle – Large Requests
Large Project Example

• Application needs to identify how independent components of a large project meet the 

selection criteria. 

• Several applicants bundled safety improvements in a large project without relating 

improvements to the justification. Example project:

• Turn lanes

• Widen shoulders

• Clear zone improvements

• Roundabout

• Walking path

• Pedestrian Crosswalks

• Resurfacing
Large Requests

• Safety is part of everything a transportation department does. 

• TTPSF Projects should be targeted to the Tribe’s best opportunity to reduce the risk of 

fatal and serious injury crashes. 

• Projects should be identified through safety analysis process. (Data analysis, problem 

identification, projects)

• TTPSF not intended to fund components of a project that are necessary to meet current 

standards.

• TTPSF could fund enhancements that would otherwise not be built.
• Historically awards are $1-

million or less per Tribe. 

• Applicants should present 

funding packages showing 

what independent project 

components can be 

accomplished with awards of 

various sizes, especially for 

requests approaching 

$1,000,000 or more. See 

example.

Large Requests - Cost Estimate
Large requests with independent components

Applications that address the selection criteria for part of the proposed 

improvements.

Example: 

• Crash data demonstrates problems with roadway departure and speed

• Application proposes pedestrian pathways, traffic calming, horizontal curve 

countermeasures.

• Award recommended to fund traffic calming and horizontal curve 

countermeasures.

Infrastructure Improvement 

Partial Funding
Infrastructure Improvement Category

⃝ 29 Not Qualified, 3 Not Eligible

• $22.2-million

Reasons for Not Qualified

• Did not clearly address selection criteria

• No safety plan

• Not clear how project would address crash history 

contributing factors

• No crash history at the site or similar facilities was 

presented

• No letter from road owner 

• Inventory not official or proposed road
• Included in a Safety Plan, RSA, or other transportation safety study

• Supporting Safety Data - Describe the type, severity, and quantity of 

incidents that directly demonstrate the need for the project.

• Expected Crash Reduction – Research, publications, or other 

evidence that project will reduce crash severity and/or frequency. 

• Time elapsed since last TTPSF infrastructure award.

• Road Ownership (BIA and Tribal roads get some priority; Other 

ownership requires letter of acknowledgement from road owner.)

Selection Criteria

Infrastructure Improvement 
TTPSF

Infrastructure Improvement

Selection Criteria

1. Strategic Safety Planning

2. Supporting Safety Data

3. Expected Crash Reduction

4. Facility Ownership

5. Prior TTPSF Construction Awards
Sample Responses:

• Highly Qualified: The Project is identified in a Tribal Safety Plan that is less than 5 years old; the 2022 Windy 

Canyon Tribe Transportation Safety Plan, page 12. 

• Qualified: The project is identified in the Tribe’s 2014 Transportation Safety Plan.

• Qualified: The project addresses an issue in the 2016 State Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

• Not Qualified: The Tribe doesn’t yet have a transportation safety plan but will hopefully compile one next year.
State Strategic Highway Safety Plans

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/shsp/other_resources.cfm
Sample Responses:

Criterion 2

The crash data analysis demonstrates the need for this project.

Criterion 2-Supporting Safety Data: Highly Qualified 

The crash data analysis in Appendix B demonstrates that 75% of the crashes on River Road involve Roadway 

Departure. From 2017-2022, River Road experienced 20 crashes that lead to 3 injuries. The proposed project 

will widen shoulders to decrease the risk of roadway departure crashes.

Don’t do this. 

Instead, do this. 
Sample Responses:

Criterion 2-Supporting Safety Data:

The Nation has supplied collision data to support this application. See attachments.

Criterion 2-Supporting Safety Data: Highly Qualified 

Over the last 5 years, this intersection has sustained 8 accidents (37.5% injury rate) along with frequent nearmisses. Furthermore, Lower Road serves as the exit from the high school where the traffic backs up 

considerably while school is in session.

In addition, the Nation is taking a systematic approach for addressing intersection safety hazards and has 

made Intersections a priority in the transportation safety plan. Across our road network, intersections are 

involved in 38% of all crashes.

Don’t do this.

Instead, do this. 

Reviewers might not find it
Sample Responses:

Criterion 2-Supporting Safety Data:

A survey showed that 90% of the 40 participants identified this project as a top priority.

Criterion 2-Supporting Safety Data: Qualified 

A survey identified 23 crashes that occurred in the village over the past 10 years. Among these 

crashes are two pedestrian injuries and a fatality that occurred during hours of darkness. All 

pedestrians were walking along the road rather than crossing. By adding streetlights pedestrians 

walking along the road will be more visible to drivers and reduce these crashes in the future. 

Not Qualified. 

Instead, do this. 
Sample Responses:

Formal safety data is limited in many Tribal areas; applicants should 

support their application with documentation summarizing the 

best available data that demonstrates a history or risk of 

transportation incidents that are expected to be reduced by the 

proposed activity. 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

Section 14008

BIA Law Enforcement Crash Reporting

(c) Use of IMARS.--The Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs shall require all law 

enforcement offices of the Bureau, for the purpose of reporting motor vehicle crash 

data for crashes occurring on Indian reservations and in Alaska Native communities--

(1) to use the crash report form of the applicable State; and 

(2) to upload the information on that form to the Incident Management Analysis and 

Reporting System (IMARS) of the Department of the Interior.
Sample Responses:

This application does not reference evidence quantifying these 

reductions as there is insufficient crash data to calculate a reduction.

Crash reduction factors and other research can demonstrate the effectiveness of a strategy at 

reducing risk of crashes, even future crashes. 

Don’t leave this one blank

Don’t do this.
FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/
Sample Responses:

The project will implement the following countermeasures identified in the FHWA Proven Safety 

Countermeasures (PSC, https://safetyfhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/):

• Walkways – FHWA PSC indicates installing sidewalk is at least 68% effectiveness in reducing crashes involving pedestrians walking 

along roadways.

• Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) – FHWA PSC indicates that RRFB’s can reduce crashes up to 47% for pedestrian 

crashes, and the devices increase motorist yielding rates up to 98%.

• Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements – FHWA PSC describes the effectiveness of such treatments at 

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasues/crosswalk-visability.cfm

Do this. 
Sample Responses:

The routes improved by this project are official in the NTTFI and are not a proposed road: 

• US Highway 6: Route 3006, Section 10

• Forest Road: Route 1090, Section 30

Do this. 

Clearly list the routes and sections where the project will be built.

Contact BIA if you need assistance identifying a route number.
Application Process – Owner’s Letter

• Projects to study or improve roads not owned by the BIA or a 

Tribe require a letter of acknowledgement from the road 

owner.
• Route must be official and existing on the National Tribal 

Transportation Facility Inventory to be eligible.

• Include documentation of route’s status on the National Tribal 

Transportation Facility Inventory

• One source of inventory data is the “Regional NTTFI Reports” on: 

https://itims.bia.gov/

Inventory Requirement

Infrastructure Improvement 
Provide an update on any past awards.

Past TTPSF awards are listed at 

https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-tribal/safety/ttpsf-grant-awards-history
Safety Enhancements 

and Upgrades are eligible

Cannot supplant routine maintenance

Infrastructure Improvement 

(23 USC 148)
TTPSF is currently NOT able to fund: 

• Building evacuation routes

• Proposed Roads

• Routine Maintenance Activities

• Most Emergency Services and Law Enforcement Equipment

• Crash data collection and speed trailers are possible exceptions

Not Eligible 

• Safety Funding Opportunities

• Grant Writing Tips

• January 15, 2023 Deadline for the 

Tribal Transportation Program 

Safety Fund

• Contact FHWA for individual 

feedback or questions

Review / Questions

Adam Larsen

Safety Program Manager

Office of Tribal Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

Adam.Larsen@dot.gov

cell: 360-619-2601

https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs- tribal/safety/funds

http://www.TribalSafety.org/
Adam Larsen

Safety Engineer & Safety Program Manager

Office of Tribal Transportation, FHWA

Adam.Larsen@dot.gov

cell: 360-619-2601

https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs- tribal/safety/funds

http://www.TribalSafety.org/
Q: 

Is a Tribal Council 

resolution required to 

authorize an application?

No. FHWA does not require a resolution to accompany your application. 

However, the application must be signed by an authorized representative. 
Q: 

Is there a funding cap?

New Safety Plans are capped at $15,000 and safety plan updates at $10,000. 

Other categories do not have a formal cap. Due to limited funding applicants should 

consider presenting funding packages for independent project components. 
Q: 

Can I apply to TTPSF for 

both design and 

construction of a project?

Yes. Both design and construction of projects can be included in the same application. 

Depending on funds availability in the competitive selection process, FHWA may opt to fund 

design only and ask the applicant to reapply for construction funding under a future funding 

cycle or other funding sources. 
Q: 

Can multiple projects be 

combined in one 

application?

FHWA generally recommends that TTPSF applications be specific to one project.

If multiple locations share the same justification and type of work, they can be 

considered one project.
Adam Larsen

Safety Engineer & Safety Program Manager

Office of Tribal Transportation, FHWA

Adam.Larsen@dot.gov

office: 360-619-7751

cell: 360-619-2601

fax: 360-619-7846

https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs- tribal/safety/funds

http://www.TribalSafety.org/