1. 1 Evaluation of Low-Cost Safety Improvements (ELCSI) Pooled Fund Study Roya Amjadi, Highway Research Engineer FHWA, Turner-Fairbank Research Center 10/24/08

2. 2 Why Evaluate Low-Cost Safety Improvements? State DOTs need to reduce crashes effectively and cost efficiently within their constraints (funding, time, labor, available technology, etc.) When State DOTs are considering a certain safety improvement for statewide implementation, they need objective measures for; Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) Benefit/Cost (B/C) Ratio ELCSI will provide the above as decision making tools (~feasibility study)

3. 3 What?. The goal of this research is to develop reliable estimates of the effectiveness of the safety improvements (and their B/C Ratio) that are identified as strategies in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 500 Guides. These estimates are determined by conducting scientifically rigorous before-after evaluations at sites in the U.S. where these strategies are being (or will be) implemented.

4. 4 Resources? The scope of the ELCSI-PFS is to conduct a research project of the priority strategies in the NCHRP Report 500 Guides. A target of 20 strategies totaling $4.38 for 6 years is planned for ELCSI-PFS studies (4 phases.) NCHRP Report 500 Guides The data for this study will be gathered from States that either have already implemented the selected strategies, or will implement the strategies over the course of a few years for the purpose of evaluation by this study.

5. 5 How and who? Methodology: The methodology utilized will typically be an Empirical Bayes evaluation, using before-after data to determine the effectiveness of the selected strategies in reducing the number and severity of crashes. Participating States: AZ, CA, CT, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, MN, MS, MT, NC, ND, NY, OK, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, and VA.

6. 6 Phase I - Retrospective Evaluation Strategies: 1.STOP Signs with Increased Retroreflectivity, 2.Flashing Beacons, 3.STOP AHEAD Pavement Markings, and 4.Two-Way Left-Turn Lanes. Status: The Phase I evaluations are complete. All four studies were published by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in April 2008.

7. 7 Phase II - Retrospective Evaluation Strategies: 1.Offset Left-Turn Lanes, 2.Advance Street Name Signs, 3.Combinations of Shoulder and Centerline Rumble Strips/Stripes, and 4.Lane Width/Shoulder Width Combinations. Status: Final papers are expected by December 2008. These evaluations are expected to be published by March 2009.

8. 8 Phase III – Prospective Evaluations A set of strategies was selected by the TAC members at the annual TAC Meeting in June 2007. The selected strategies were chosen based on the feasibility of “implementation & evaluation” of the individual strategies. Possible Phase III strategies: Alternative Passing Lanes or Four-Lane Sections Install Interactive Truck Rollover Signs Road Departure Countermeasures (sets of strategies) Advanced Warning Flashers (signalized intersections)

9. 9 Why? Roadway departure crashes are the most severe type of crashes in the United States. According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), over 25,000 people die annually in RD crashes and this amounts to 59 percent of total traffic deaths in the United States (1). Consequently, most states have identified RD crashes as one of the major focus areas in their Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) to achieve their goals of reducing deaths and injuries due to motor vehicle crashes (2).

10. 10 what? Objective for safety improvements; Keep vehicles from encroaching on the roadside. Minimize the likelihood of crashing into an object or overturning if the vehicle travel beyond the shoulder of the road. Reduce the severity of crashes.

11. 11 Who? and updates Iowa, Kansas, Florida, Virginia, and Kentucky volunteered to build these ROR countermeasures Volunteer States have reviewed and approved the general concept for this phase. Volunteer States are in the process of data collection and data analysis for selection of sites and their corresponding sets of ROR countermeasures (uniform sets of strategy per State.) All volunteer States have provided 5 to 7 years worth of crash data to FHWA for independent analysis.

12. 12 How? FHWA will independently organize and analyze crash data for each volunteer States and determine outstanding crash types with their corresponding locations (state wide.) Volunteer states will analyze state crash data to determine outstanding crash types and corresponding locations (state wide.) Results of FHWA and Volunteer states evaluations will be compared for accuracy. FHWA has completed statistical analysis of crash data for KS, and VA. Analysis for KY will be completed in November 2008. FL and IA are scheduled for early 2009.

13. 13 How… States will select; 1) crash types 2) locations for improvements, 3) uniform set/sets of multi-strategy safety projects Contractor (VHB) will; 1)perform feasibility study on state selections 2)determine B/C ratio 3)provide technical feedback to volunteer states for best results

14. 14 When ? Phase III started Sept. 2008 and will end early 2011. There will be three years of data collections after selected strategies are built by volunteer states. States may start building their safety projects as early as spring 2009

15. 15 It is not Late! Your State can join the Phase III evaluation

16. 16 Phase IV - Driving Simulations The simulation phase evaluations are conducted in the Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center's Human Centered Systems Laboratories, and it has two parts.Human Centered Systems Laboratories

17. 17 Phase IV – Driving Simulation (continued) Part1- The low cost safety improvements for curves The following safety countermeasures are all designed to enhance the visibility of curves at night. 1)Edge lines and center lines, 2) Chevrons, 3) Post- mounted delineators, and 4) Light-emitting-diode- (LED) mounted delineators Part 2- The low cost safety improvements for small towns The following safety countermeasures are all designed to slow traffic down while driving through small towns. 1) Bulb-outs, 2) Chicanes, 3) Medians

18. 18 Phase IV – Driving Simulation (continued) Status: The Phase IV evaluations are completed for; 1)simulations 2)data collections At present study is in the data analysis stage. Results are expected to be published in summer of 2009.

19. 19 Evaluation of Low-Cost Safety Improvements PFS Website See Publication Links, Progress Reports, and more at: http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/evaluations/

20. 20 THANK YOU Roya Amjadi, FHWA roya.amjadi@fhwa.dot.gov