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

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

2. 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

3. Safety Data Background

4. FHWA Roadway Safety Data Initiatives DATA TOOLS & ANALYSIS TRAINING & MARKETING DATA MANAGEMENT CHAMPION POLICY & PROCESS MANAGEMENT

5. 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!

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. Overview of MIRE FDE for Safety

11. 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.)

12. MIRE FDEs: The Guidance • MAP-21 Guidance on State Safety Data Systems (December 2012) • Recommended, not mandatory • Available online: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/guidance/guidesafetydata.cfm

13. 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

14. Why Collect More Safety Data?

15. 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, moreinformed safety decisions • Get more safety improvement for dollars spent - “more bang for your buck!”

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

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

18. OPTIONAL Case Study: Using Safety Data Results in Ohio

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

20. 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

21. Benefits of Data Improvement – Safety • Improved HSIP Transparency Reports • Increased identification of sites with highest potential for safety improvement 105% Increase 67% Increase • Improved safety performance functions (SPFs) and crash modification factors (CMFs) • Reduced number of manual safety studies from 600 to 350

22. 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

23. Summary Thoughts • 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

24. How to Collect Safety Data

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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)

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

29. The Value vs. Cost of Safety Data

30. 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

31. 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

32. 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

33. Safety Data in INSERT STATE

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

35. Next Steps

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

37. Potential Next Steps B • Assess needs • Determine priorities • Identify and reach out to stakeholders/partners • Determine collection methodologies • Assess system capabilities • Identify funding • Obtain approval

38. Additional Resources The Model Inventory of Roadway Elements (MIRE) Version 1.0 Report (October 2010) • http://www.mireinfo.org/index.html MAP-21 Guidance on State Safety Data Systems (December 2012) • http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/guidance/guidesafetydata.cfm MIRE FDE Cost Benefit Estimation (March 2013) • http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsdp/downloads/mire_fde_%20cbe_finalrpt_032913.pdf

39. Questions/Feedback?

40. Thank you! Name, email address Name, email address

41. Additional/Replacement Case Study*

42. Case Study: Getting Data Collection Started in Utah

43. 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

44. 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

45. 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

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

47. 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

48. 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