By the end of Lesson 7, you should be able to:
Lesson 7 will take 1 week to complete. Please refer to Canvas for specific time frames, submission instructions, and due dates.
To finish this lesson, you must complete the assignments listed below. The details for each assignment is provided in the referenced section and in Canvas.
Assignment No. | Assignment Description | Section | Grade Component / Points |
---|---|---|---|
7-1 | Read FHWA’s August 2013 publication titled “Assessment of the Geographic Information Systems’ (GIS) Needs and Obstacles in Traffic Safety” and respond to some questions. | 7.1 | Lesson Topic / 15 |
7-2 | Complete some exercises using both Federal and state crash data. | 7.1 | Lesson Topic / 20 |
7-3 | Explore the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) [1] and address some specific questions. | 7.2 | Transportation Organizations / 15 |
7-4 | Participate in a One-on-One video conference with a classmate and submit a summary of the conversation. | 7.3 | Class Participation / 15 |
7-5 | Participate in this week’s webinar and submit a summary of what you learned. | 7.4 | Guest Webinar / 15 |
7-6 | Review the background material for next week’s webinar and respond to some questions. | 7.5 | Guest Webinar / 10 |
7-7 | Submit 3 - 5 questions for next week’s speaker. | 7.5 | Guest Webinar / 5 |
Highway safety is an important area of focus for state DOTs and the USDOT. There are few groups within the USDOT who are focused on improving highway safety. The first is the Office of Safety. The Office of Safety is comprised of two units. The Technologies Unit deals with safety-related highway design considerations and technologies which can be used to improve highway safety performance. The Programs Unit oversees federal and state safety programs. One of the key programs they administer is the Highway Safety Improvement Programs (HSIP). HSIP is a federal-aid program designed to provide funding to states for projects aimed at reducing fatalities and serious injuries on qualifying roadways. In 2016, the program will provide about 2.2 billion dollars to the states for safety projects.
Fiscal Year | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Estimated Funding* | $2.226 B | $2.275 B | $2.318 B | $2.360 B | $2.407 B |
Reference: FHWA Website [2] accessed 12/31/2016
To qualify for HSIP funds, a state is required to develop and maintain a Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). An SHSP is designed to guide the investment of funds to projects which have the greatest potential to reduce fatalities and serious injuries. To qualify for HSIP funds, states are also required to identify their priorities using a Data-Driven Safety Analysis (DDSA).
The second group within USDOT which is responsible for highway safety is the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). NHTSA is an administration within USDOT whose mission is to reduce crash fatalities and injuries. We’ll take a close look at NHTSA later in this lesson.
At the end of Lesson 6, we learned how state DOTs collect and use crash data to identify areas of their roadway networks where there are unusually high crash rates. However, looking at crash data alone can be misleading and result in a less than optimal use of available state and federal dollars. To address this problem, AASHTO, in conjunction with the FHWA, developed the Highway Safety Manual (HSM), a document which many consider the definitive reference on highway safety. The HSM offers a comprehensive and balanced approach and set of tools which consider operations, the environment, and the cost of construction alongside safety considerations. A good overview of the HSM can be found here. [3] The approaches provided in the HSM go beyond traditional approaches to identifying priority locations for safety improvements which rely solely on crash history data.
There are two fundamental problems associated with using crash data alone. First, crashes are statistical events and as such don’t occur at regular predictable intervals. Consequently, crash data alone can sometimes lead an agency to falsely identify sections of a roadway as high risk and, conversely, sometimes overlook a risky section. The second problem of looking solely at historic crash data is that it disregards the dependence of crash frequency on traffic. As traffic levels increase on a section of roadway due to changing travel patterns, crash rates can increase. To overcome these limitations, it is necessary to look not only at historic crash frequencies, but also at expected crash frequencies based on roadway characteristics and traffic data.
Tools have been developed which implement the approaches defined in the HSM. These include AASSHTO’s Safety Analyst and FHWA’s Interactive Highway Safety Design Model (IHSDM). However, states often lack much of the data required to effectively use these tools, such as horizontal and vertical curve data. Horizontal curves are roadway curves that turn to the left or right, and vertical curves are roadway peaks/hills and valleys. For my Capstone Project, I used roadway centerline data to extract horizontal curvature data from Pennsylvania’s roadways. I gave a lightning talk on the project at Penn State in November 2016 for GIS day. A link to the presentation is here [4] (my presentation was just under 10 minutes in length and begins about 37 minutes into the recorded session).
Two model frameworks have been developed to help states structure the crash and roadway data needed for highway safety analyses in a standard format. The first is the Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria (MMUCC [5]). MMUCC is a list of standard crash data elements and associated definitions developed by NHSTA. While the implementation of this model is voluntary, states are encouraged to adhere to the standard in collecting and compiling crash data. Similar in concept to the MMUCC, the Model Inventory of Roadway Elements MIRE [6] is a list of over 200 roadway and traffic data elements critical to safety management developed by the FHWA.
I. Roadway Segment Descriptors
I.a. Segment Location/Linkage Elements
I.b. Segment Roadway Classification
I.c. Segment Cross Section
I.c.1. Surface Descriptors
I.c.2. Lane Descriptors
I.c.3. Shoulder Descriptors
I.c.4. Median Descriptors
I.d. Roadside Descriptors
I.e. Other Segment Descriptions
I.f. Segment Traffic Flow Data
I.g. Segment Traffic Operations/Control Data
I.h. Other Supplemental Segment Descriptors
II. Roadway Alignment Descriptors
II.a. Horizontal Curve Data
II.b. Vertical Grade Data
III. Roadway Junction Descriptors
III.a. At-Grade Intersections/Junctions
III.a.1. At-Grade Intersection/Junction General Descriptors
III.a.2. At-Grade Intersection/Junction Descriptors (Each Approach)
III.b. Interchange and Ramp Descriptors
III.b.1. General Interchange Descriptors
III.b.2. Interchange Ramp Descriptors
Credit: FHWA Website [7] (Accessed 12/31/2016)
Collecting roadway data according to the MIRE model will not only benefit the state DOT in regards to traffic safety efforts, it will also help other core areas of transportation such as operations, asset management, and maintenance.
Once a section of roadway has been identified for needed safety improvements, an agency needs to decide which types of countermeasures would be the most effective. There are many types of safety countermeasures that could be implemented. Here’s a list of 9 proven countermeasures [8] published by FHWA’s Office of Safety.
An interesting cost-benefit analysis of high-friction surface treatment was done by PennDOT in 2016. It found that the Benefit/Cost ratio was over 20:1. The report can be found here [9].
Read FHWA’s August 2013 publication titled Assessment of the Geographic Information Systems’ (GIS) Needs and Obstacles in Traffic Safety [10]. Submit an M.S. Word document to Assignment 7-1 in Canvas which addresses the following items:
FARS [11] is a system used to collect, store and analyze fatalities on U.S. roadways. The system is administered by the National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) which is part of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The system includes data from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The primary purpose of the system is to monitor the effectiveness of vehicle safety standards and highway safety programs which are implemented at the state level. Only crashes which result in at least one fatality and occur on a roadway which is open to the public are included in FARS.
Some states make crash data available to the public and other interested parties via a web portal. As an example, Pennsylvania makes crash information available via the Pennsylvania Crash Information Tool (PCIT) [12].
Many of the reports on this site are similar to those in FARS. PennDOT is in the process of adding mapping capabilities to the next version of PCIT scheduled for release in the spring of 2017. Similar to FARS, PennDOT also makes raw crash data available. The PCIT site simply guides users to the PennDOT’s GIS Data Portal [13] for this data.
Pennsylvania crash data is available from 1997 to 2015. Differences between the FARS crash data and PennDOT’s crash data include:
In this assignment, you’ll have an opportunity to work with crash data from FARS and PennDOT’s GIS Data Portal. Submit an M.S. Word document to Assignment 7-2 in Canvas which addresses the following items:
As we learned in Lesson 6, spatial technologies are used to locate crashes and perform crash analysis to locate crash hotspots, otherwise known as crash clusters. Spatial technologies also play a critical role in expanding network screening to include roadway characteristics and traffic data in addition to historic crash data as called for in the HSM. Spatial analyses not only help in identifying priority sections of roadway for safety improvements, but they can also be used to determine the countermeasures which are most likely to be effective and to assess their impact once they have been in place for a period of time. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, GIS plays a huge role in vehicle to vehicle communications and autonomous car technologies. These initiatives promise to have revolutionary impacts on highway safety and make the goal of 0 fatalities seem not so far-fetched.
This week, you’ll take some time to get to know the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA - pronounced "NITS-uh”). NHTSA is an agency within the USDOT responsible for reducing deaths, injuries, and economic losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes. The agency was created by the Highway Safety Act of 1970 to administer programs that had previously been the responsibility of the National Highway Safety Bureau.
The current administrator of NHTSA is Dr. Mark Rosekind. Dr. Rosekind engages in many public speaking events to educate others about traffic safety and NHTSA’s goals and objectives. Take a look at a 37-minute presentation [14] he gave recently at the Original Equipment Suppliers Association (OESA) 2016 annual meeting. Also, spend some time reviewing NHTSA’s 2016-2020 strategic plan titled “The Road Ahead [15]”.
Strategic Goal | Strategic Objectives |
---|---|
Safety |
|
Proactive Vehicle Safety |
|
Automated Vehicles |
|
Human Choices |
|
Organizational Excellence |
|
Credit: THE ROAD AHEAD, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Strategic Plan 2016—2020 (USDOT, NHTSA October 2016)
A few of NHTSA’s areas of focus are briefly described below:
NHTSA plays a large role in accepting and tracking vehicle safety complaints which can ultimately lead to safety recalls. They also administer the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) which assesses and scores vehicle models using a 5-star safety rating. Safety rating and recall information [16] is compiled and made available to consumers. Using this information, consumers can quickly determine how specific vehicles perform in front-end, side, and rear end collisions in addition to rollovers. NHTSA also compiles safety information on car seats, tires, and other equipment.
DDACTS is a model which NHTSA developed in association with the Department of Justice (DOJ). It uses the temporal and spatial analysis of crash and crime data to identify the optimal deployment of highly visible law enforcement personnel and vehicles. Detailed information about the model is available in the DDACTS Operational Guidelines [17].
The purpose of the National 911 Program [18] is to promote and coordinate 911 services across the U.S. NHTSA is currently promoting and rolling out the Next Generation of 911 (NG911) which will modernize 911 systems based on advances in technology which have occurred since 911 was first put in place 50 years ago.
The Office of Vehicle Safety Research is a NHTSA Office that develops and implements research programs designed to reduce crashes, fatalities, and injuries. Some of their research activities can be found here [19].
The NCSA [20] is an office within NHTSA which provides analytical and statistical support to the agency through data collection, crash investigations, and data analysis. One of NCSA’s responsibilities is to maintain and enhance FARS. They also produce many useful and interesting publications summarizing information gathered by NHTSA [21].
Spend some time reviewing NHTSA’s strategic plan (no need to read it cover to cover!) and watching the presentation Dr. Rosekind gave to the OESA at their 2016 annual meeting. Submit an M.S. Word document to Assignment 7-3 in Canvas which addresses the following items:
This week, you’ll have a one-on-one chat with one of your classmates (or me) as per the schedule you were provided in Week 1. The discussion should be at least 30 minutes in length. If it’s the first time you’ve chatted with each other, spend the majority of time getting to know each other. Otherwise, focus on discussing the lesson content.
Submit a brief summary of the conversation (no more than 300 words) to Assignment 7-4 in Canvas. The summary you’ll submit is an individual assignment and is not intended to be a joint activity. If it’s the first time you’ve spoken with each other, your summary should primarily address what you learned about each other (e.g., what do you have in common?). Otherwise, your summary should focus on ideas and insights about the lesson content which came out of the conversation.
Criteria | Ratings | Pts | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Followed Instructions | Excellent: Student carefully followed all instructions for the assignment. 4.0 pts |
Satisfactory: Student's submission exhibited some minor deviations from the instructions for the assignment. 2.5 pts |
Poor: Student's submission exhibited major deviations from the instructions for the assignment. 1.0 pts |
4.0 pts |
Content Quality | Excellent: Student's submittal reflected a conversation which was highly thoughtful and productive and provided substantial benefit in getting to know each other better and/or exploring lesson topics. 7.0 pts |
Satisfactory: Student's submittal reflected a conversation which was somewhat thoughtful and productive and provided some limited benefit in getting to know each other better and/or exploring lesson topics. 5.0 pts |
Poor: Student's submittal reflected a conversation which had little value in getting to know each other better and/or exploring lesson topics. 1.0 pts |
7.0 pts |
Writing Quality | Excellent: Student’s writing was organized, clear, and concise and was free from spelling and grammatical errors. 4.0 pts |
Satisfactory: Student’s writing exhibited some deficiencies in the area of organization, clarity, and conciseness and/or contained a few spelling or grammatical errors. 2.5 pts |
Poor: Student’s writing exhibited major deficiencies in the area of organization, clarity, and conciseness and/or contained many spelling or grammatical errors. 1.0 pts |
4.0 pts |
Total Points: 15.0 |
This week’s speaker is Jeff Roecker. For details about Jeff’s current role and background refer to Lesson 6. For the specific date and time of the webinar, please refer to Canvas. While you are expected to attend the webinar live if at all possible, it is understood that, in some cases, work schedules and other conflicts may make it impossible to do so. If you will not be able to attend, please send me an e-mail ahead of time. I will make the recorded webinar available for you to review.
After attending the webinar, prepare a brief write-up (300 – 500 words) summarizing the session and submit it in M.S. Word format to Assignment 7-5 in Canvas. In your summary, address the following:
Criteria | Ratings | Pts | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Followed Instructions | Excellent: Student carefully followed all instructions for the assignment. 4.0 pts |
Satisfactory: Student's submission exhibited some minor deviations from the instructions for the assignment. 2.5 pts |
Poor: Student's submission exhibited major deviations from the instructions for the assignment. 1.0 pts |
4.0 pts |
Content Quality | Excellent: The student's submittal demonstrated that the student paid close attention during the webinar and carefully reflected on the key topics which were covered. 7.0 pts |
Satisfactory: The student's submittal demonstrated that the student was somewhat attentive during the webinar and engaged in limited reflection on the key topics which were covered. 4.0 pts |
Poor: The student's submittal provided little or no evidence that the student paid careful attention during the webinar or reflected on the topics which were covered. 1.0 pts |
7.0 pts |
Writing Quality | Excellent: Student’s writing was organized, clear, and concise and was free from spelling and grammatical errors. 4.0 pts |
Satisfactory: Student’s writing exhibited some deficiencies in the area of organization, clarity, and conciseness and/or contained a few spelling or grammatical errors. 2.5 pts |
Poor: Student’s writing exhibited major deficiencies in the area of organization, clarity, and conciseness and/or contained many spelling or grammatical errors. 1.0 pts |
4.0 pts |
Total Points: 15.0 |
Next week, our guest speaker will be Mr. Jeremy Freeland. Jeremy is a Transportation Planning Manager in the Transportation Planning Division of PennDOT’s Bureau of Planning and Research. He is responsible for coordinating and overseeing all of PennDOT’s traffic collection efforts, both manual and automated. He is also responsible for assembling PennDOT’s annual Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) submittal to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Jeremy has been with PennDOT for 13 years. He earned a geography degree from Shippensburg University in 2003.
FHWA is responsible for collecting sufficient highway characteristics and performance data in order to support their own needs as well as those of the USDOT and Congress. HPMS is a national information system which was created to fulfill this need. Initially developed in 1978 as a replacement of biennial roadway condition studies which began in 1965, one of the primary purposes of HPMS is still to provide Congress with a biennial assessment of U.S. roads for use in estimating future highway investment needs. Here is a link to the 2013 Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions & Performance [22]. HPMS is also used for a multitude of other purposes, not the least of which is apportioning federal-aid highway monies to the states.
The specific data collection and reporting requirements state DOTs need to comply with are defined in the HPMS Field Manual [23]. FHWA also provides software to submit, validate, and analyze state HPMS data. This software is web-based and is only available to authorized users (typically those staff at a state DOT with responsibilities for reporting HPMS data). The guide for the latest version of this software (i.e., version 8.0) is provided here. [24]
One of the most important types of data collected for HPMS is traffic data. Of the 70 or so HPMS data elements states are required to report, about a dozen are traffic elements. FHWA’s 2016 Traffic Monitoring Guide [25] is a document designed to help states put together a traffic monitoring program.
Read Chapter 1 and Section 5.3 of the HPMS Field Manual. Submit an M.S. Word document to Assignment 7-6 in Canvas which addresses the following items:
After reviewing the background material for next week’s webinar and the biography for next week’s speaker, come up with 3-5 questions which are clearly stated and are relevant to the webinar topics. Submit the questions to Assignment 7-7 in Canvas.
Criteria | Ratings | Points | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Question Quality |
Excellent: Questions were clearly worded, demonstrated a thorough review of the background material and thoughtful reflection and insight on the part of the student.
5.0 pts
|
Satisfactory: Questions were somewhat clear, demonstrated some review of the background material and some reflection and insight on the part of the student.
3.0 pts
|
Poor: Questions were unclear and/or demonstrated little or no review of the background material and/or demonstrated little or no reflection and insight on the part of the student.
1.0 pts
|
5.0 pts |
Total Points: 5.0 |
In this lesson, you learned about traffic safety and the efforts of state DOTs to make our highways safer. You also took a close look at federally reported crash data (i.e., FARS) in addition to an example of crash data which is collected at the state level.
Our transportation organization of the week was NHTSA, an administration with USDOT focused on reducing fatalities and serious injuries on America’s roadways. You had the opportunity to explore some of their specific activities and programs.
In our weekly webinar, you had the chance to interact with Mr. Jeff Roecker and hear about some of the tools and approaches PennDOT uses to improve highway safety.
In preparation for next week’s webinar, you learned a little about HPMS and about the types of traffic data states need to collect in addition to the methods and tools they use to collect it.
Finally, you had the opportunity to get to know one of your classmates a little better and share some of your ideas and questions about this week’s lesson materials.
If there is anything in the Lesson 7 materials about which you would like to ask a question or provide a comment, submit a posting to the Lesson 7 Questions and Comments discussion in Canvas. Also, review others’ postings to this discussion and respond if you have something to offer or if you are able to help.
Links
[1] http://www.nhtsa.gov/
[2] http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/hsipfs.cfm
[3] http://www.highwaysafetymanual.org/Documents/HSMP-1.pdf
[4] http://live.libraries.psu.edu/Mediasite/Play/95aa3ef7c3564302ae053644885b83801d?catalog=8376d4b2-4dd1-457e-a3bf-e4cf9163feda
[5] https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/811631
[6] http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/tools/data_tools/mirereport/
[7] http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/tools/data_tools/mirereport/introduction.cfm#background
[8] http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/
[9] http://scohts.transportation.org/Documents/9b-PennDOT%20Draft%20HFST%20Benefit%20Cost%20Report.pdf
[10] http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/13096/13096.pdf
[11] https://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
[12] https://www.dotcrashinfo.pa.gov/PCIT/welcome.html
[13] http://data.pennshare.opendata.arcgis.com/
[14] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPaTK2L8Nj4
[15] https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog497c/sites/www.e-education.psu.edu.geog497c/files/Files/12532-NHTSA-StrategicPlan-2016-2020.pdf
[16] https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle
[17] https://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/ddacts/811185_DDACTS_OpGuidelines.pdf
[18] https://www.911.gov/about_national_911program.html
[19] http://www.nhtsa.gov/research-data
[20] https://www.nhtsa.gov/research-data/national-center-statistics-and-analysis-ncsa
[21] http://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/#/
[22] http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/2013cpr/
[23] http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/hpms/fieldmanual/
[24] http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/hpms/softwareguide/hpms_software_guide.pdf
[25] http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/tmguide/