Comprehensive Analysis Framework for Safety Investment Decisions

The diverse safety community in the United States continues to make substantial, incremental progress in developing and implementing cost-effective approaches to highway safety. AASHTO and FHWA have provided national leadership in developing tools such as Model Minimum Inventory of Roadway Elements, the Digital Highway Measurement System, the Interactive Highway Safety Design Model, and SafetyAnalyst, and upcoming milestone products such as the Highway Safety Manual and Strategic Highway Research Program 2 (SHRP 2) safety results (especially the crash causation database that will be created). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), working with AASHTO, FHWA and other partners, have advanced similar improvements focusing on behavioral and heavy vehicle issues. While the range of current efforts is impressive, the transportation industry is on the cusp of creating a truly comprehensive analysis and decision-support system with the capability to compare the effectiveness of investment and policy opportunities across the 4 Es (engineering, education, enforcement, and emergency medical services) of safety. There is a need to integrate efforts like those noted above into a comprehensive safety analysis framework. This framework is envisioned as a ‘blue print’ that will encompass the full safety community and provide for objective, data driven evaluations of safety programs, policies, and investments across federal, state, and local levels. The objectives of this research are to (1) develop a comprehensive analysis framework for safety investment decisions across engineering, education, enforcement, and emergency medical services that are transferable across federal, state, and local governments and (2) evaluate the relative effectiveness of the framework. Phase 2 is to finalize a training module for incorporation in to academia instruction, produce a handbook to support safety benefit cost analysis across countermeasure types, incorporate the various countermeasure rating schemes in to a revised uniform rating scheme, and design a strategy for incorporating the revised scheme in to major safety publications. The project's original tasks were to: (1) Identify and review programs, policies, and investment strategies pertaining to the 4 Es that support comprehensive decision making for safety investments. Develop recommendations for those strategies to be evaluated in Task 2. Prepare a working paper documenting the findings and Task 2 recommendations. (2) Conduct an in-depth evaluation of the approved recommendations in the Task 1 report to determine those strategies that should be included in the framework. The evaluation shall identify, as a minimum, effectiveness, capabilities, deficiencies, data requirements, level of implementation, and program elements. (3) Develop a preliminary framework that integrates the 4 Es to successfully assist in making safety investment decisions. (4) Conduct focus group meetings of federal, state, and local representatives (including enforcement, education, engineering, and emergency response) to review the preliminary framework and provide feedback. Incorporate the feedback from the focus groups to refine the preliminary framework. (5) Submit an interim report that summarizes Tasks 1 through 4 including a revised work plan for developing the final framework. Approximately 1 month after submittal of the interim report meet with the NCHRP panel to review the report and proposed work plan. Work on Task 6 shall not begin without prior approval of NCHRP. (6) Develop the draft final framework. (7) Select sample states and local government agencies that include the 4 Es and test the framework. Revise the framework based on results. (8) Submit a final report that summarizes the entire research effort and includes the framework in a stand-alone appendix. The tasks of the continuation phase are to: (1) Prepare a list of primary countermeasures. (2) Prepare a handbook of information to support safety benefit-cost analysis across countermeasure types, PowerPoint presentation, and marketing plan. (3) Create a uniform rating scheme. (4) Conduct at least three workshops (two states and one region) to test the scheme, and prepare a report of report of results from the workshops. (5) Construct an addendum for each of the safety planning and programming guidelines identified in the EWG workshop. (6) Develop a dissemination strategy. (7) Prepare a final report of the project's results.

Language

  • English

Project

  • Status: Active
  • Funding: $912884
  • Contract Numbers:

    Project 17-46

  • Sponsor Organizations:

    Federal Highway Administration

    1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
    Washington, DC  United States  20590

    American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)

    444 North Capitol Street, NW
    Washington, DC  United States  20001

    National Cooperative Highway Research Program

    Transportation Research Board
    500 Fifth Street, NW
    Washington, DC  United States  20001
  • Project Managers:

    Bush, Mark

  • Performing Organizations:

    Cambridge Systematics, Incorporated

    150 Cambridge Park Drive, Suite 4000
    Cambridge, MA  United States  02140-2369
  • Principal Investigators:

    Herbel, Susan

  • Start Date: 20100414
  • Expected Completion Date: 20171130
  • Actual Completion Date: 0
  • Source Data: RiP Project 22365

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 01464188
  • Record Type: Research project
  • Source Agency: Transportation Research Board
  • Contract Numbers: Project 17-46
  • Files: TRB, RiP
  • Created Date: Jan 3 2013 2:37PM