Roadway Safety Data – What Is It and Why Should It Be Important to My State? Name Date

Overview Safety Data Background Overview of the MIRE FDE for Safety Why Collect More Safety Data – Case Study: Using Safety Data Results in Ohio How to Collect Safety Data The Value of Safety Data Safety Data in INSERT STATE NAME Q&A 2

Safety Data Background 3

FHWA Roadway Safety Data Initiatives 4

Safety Data 101 Good data helps you make better decisions Better decisions help you make more effective use of limited funds More effective use of funds, more improvements, more lives saved! 5

How Data Are Used in Safety Collecting additional roadway data and integrating into analysis processes will improve safety by: Improving an agency’s ability to locate problem areas Improving ability to apply countermeasures Improving ability to more accurately evaluate  Reducing injuries and fatalities 6

How Data Are Used in Safety (cont.) Analysis: – Network screening – Where are the issues? – Prioritization – In what order do you address the issues? – Countermeasure selection – What can we do to address the issues? – Evaluation – How effective were the countermeasures? – Cost/benefit – Do the benefits justify the costs? Safety Plans (e.g. SHSPs) Safety investment decisions 7

What Data Are Used? Crash data alone isn’t enough Comprehensive data system includes: – Crash, Roadway/Traffic, Vehicle, Driver, Citation, EMS, etc For engineering – focus on roadway, traffic, and crash 8

What Data to Collect? Existing regulations (e.g. HSIP) do not provide specific elements FHWA Model Inventory of Roadway Elements (MIRE) comprehensive list of 200+ elements FHWA recommends 37 fundamental data elements (FDEs), roadway and traffic Data Elements to support a State’s data-driven safety program 9

Overview of MIRE FDE for Safety 10

MIRE FDEs: The Basics MIRE FDE: Fundamental roadway and traffic Data Elements to support a State’s data-driven safety program 37 Elements – Roadway segment data: route number, median type, functional class, etc. – Intersection data: intersection/junction geometry, unique junction Identifier, intersection/junction traffic control, etc. – Interchange/ramp data: : ramp length, interchange type, ramp AADT, functional class, etc. Prerequisite: a location referencing system on all public roads (GIS, LRS, etc.) 11

MIRE FDEs: The Guidance MAP-21 Guidance on State Safety Data Systems (December 2012) Recommended, not mandatory 12 Available online: ta.cfm ta.cfm

MIRE FDE: The Guidance (cont.) Developed through FHWA Working Group Many elements collected through Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) on Federal-aid roads Support safety programs (e.g. HSIP) Goal: Collect on all public roads, prioritized based on existing resources 13

Why Collect More Safety Data? 14

Why Collect More Data? Do more than what your agency is already doing Do a better job of what your agency is already doing Ultimately: – Make better, more informed safety decisions – Get more safety improvement for dollars spent - “more bang for your buck!” 15

Why MIRE FDE Data Collection? Establish minimum amount of data to collect Develop consistent data practice Better, more accurate cost estimating 16 Better data Better decisions Saves lives!

Benefits Beyond Safety Decision Makers Asset Management Infrastructure Operations Maintenance Planning GIS 17

OPTIONAL Case Study: Using Safety Data Results in Ohio 18

Total fatalities dropped 28% from 2002 to 2011 Improved statewide coordination through partnerships formed by Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) Ohio DOT’s Safety Program Dedicates $75 million annually for safety improvements Spot/corridor locations Systematic improvements 19

Ohio’s Data Improvement Program Address-based spatial data system on all public roads Intersection inventory Refined GIS tools to improve crash location at intersections Expanded data collection on local roads Expanded traffic counts on segments and intersections Implementation of SafetyAnalyst 20

Benefits of Data Improvement – Safety Improved HSIP Transparency Reports Increased identification of sites with highest potential for safety improvement 21 Improved safety performance functions (SPFs) and crash modification factors (CMFs) Reduced number of manual safety studies from 600 to % Increase 67% Increase

Benefits – Beyond Safety Improvements for EMS Improved data collection practices Increased collaboration with districts and local agencies Data utilized by other offices: pavement, traffic, planning, etc Retire legacy tools and improve enterprise tools 22

Integrate safety into all aspects of DOT Ensure collection efforts are prioritized and input obtained from all affected stakeholders Quantify safety benefits and implement identified best practices Implement improvements through an incremental and iterative process – with goal of continuous improvement Summary Thoughts 23

How to Collect Safety Data 24

What to Collect: MIRE FDE MIRE Fundamental data elements to support the HSIP – Segment, Intersection, and Interchange/Ramps Based on – Elements needed to network screening analytical tools – Subset of MIRE – Duplicate many of Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) elements already collected for a few sample sections 25

Where to Collect MIRE FDE Goal: All public roads Prioritize collection – Federal-aid roads/Non-Federal-aid roads – State-maintained/Non-State maintained – Functional Classification – Urban/Rural – High crash locations 26

How to Collect MIRE FDE Traditional and innovative methods Resources: – FHWA Explore MIRE Element Collection Mechanisms Report (pending publication) – MIRE Guidebook (in development) – Summary of Roadway Safety Data Partnership (RSDP) – Capability Assessment (all 50 States) 27

How to Pay for MIRE FDE Data Collection Federal Funding Sources for Traffic Safety Data Activities Collaborate with other divisions/agencies within DOT (they might even already have it!) Collaborate with your neighbor States - do they need the same things? 28

The Value vs. Cost of Safety Data 29

Understanding the Cost of Safety Data Resources: – FHWA Market Analysis – FHWA project - Methodologies to Determine the Benefits of Investing in Data Systems and Processes for Data-Driven Safety Programs – being developed 30

Methodologies to Determine Benefits Investments for data compete with infrastructure improvements Infrastructure improvements have CMFs to help develop C/B Build upon Market Analysis Project goal: Develop methodologies/tools to make informed decisions on data investments 31

Market Analysis: Implications for States Can use results to estimate costs of similar data collection in States Determine if fatality and injury reductions are reasonable to expect in the State 32

Safety Data in INSERT STATE 33

Safety Data in [INSERT STATE] INSERT state specific information regarding the current state of things locally, i.e. what data is collected? 34

Next Steps 35

Potential Next Steps A 1)Have safety engineers review MIRE FDE and determine safety data priorities for INSERT STATE NAME 2)Bring all roadway data partners to the table: a)What do we already have? b)What do we need? c)Who else needs it too? d)Determine potential funding sources. 36

Potential Next Steps B 1)Assess needs 2)Determine priorities 3)Identify and reach out to stakeholders/partners 4)Determine collection methodologies 5)Assess system capabilities 6)Identify funding 7)Obtain approval 37

Additional Resources The Model Inventory of Roadway Elements (MIRE) Version 1.0 Report (October 2010) MAP-21 Guidance on State Safety Data Systems (December 2012) etydata.cfm etydata.cfm MIRE FDE Cost Benefit Estimation (March 2013) %20cbe_finalrpt_ pdf %20cbe_finalrpt_ pdf 38

Questions/Feedback? 39

Thank you! 40 Name, address

Additional/Replacement Case Study* 41

Case Study: Getting Data Collection Started in Utah 42

Utah Roadway Imaging/ Inventory Project Purpose: Obtain data for use in making safety, pavement, and roadway asset management decisions Data types include: – Pavement condition – Roadway asset/inventory – Roadside features Scope: 5,845 centerline miles, with data collected in both directions, and 310 miles of ramps & collectors on state maintained roads 43

Project Development Initiated by the UDOT Asset Management Engineer in Planning & Programming Champions: Planning & Programming, Central Maintenance, Central Traffic & Safety Attempting to institutionalize use of data to sustain a long-term program 44

Project Timeline October 2011: Out to RFP Nov-Dec 2011: Two-step selection process January 2012: Contractor selected (Mandli) Feb-Mar 2012: Refined data elements collected April 2012: Contract signed – collection begins September 2012: Collection complete December 2012: Data delivery complete 45

Data Collection Contractor is providing: – Data collection, including LiDAR point cloud – Data extraction services – Integrated software solution 46

Project Funding Cost is being shared across UDOT Divisions; majority of funding from: – Planning & Programming – Central Maintenance – Central Traffic & Safety Justification: one-time data collection effort that will be used across multiple UDOT Divisions 47

Data Uses and Benefits Data will be shared across the UDOT enterprise from central databases and the GIS data warehouse: – Safety analysis (combine with crashes) – Asset management (roadway, pavement & structures) – Maintenance operations (feature inventory) – Web viewer, workstations Flexibility to extract additional data elements in the future 48