National Academies Press: OpenBook

A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks (2004)

Chapter: Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan

« Previous: Section V - Descriptions of Strategies
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 82
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 83
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 84
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 85
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 86
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 87
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 88
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 89
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 90
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 91
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 92
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 93
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 94
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 95
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 96
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 97
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 98
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 99
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 100
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 101
Page 102
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 102
Page 103
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 103
Page 104
Suggested Citation:"Section VI - Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23424.
×
Page 104

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

VI-1 SECTION VI Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan Outline for a Model Implementation Process Exhibit VI-1 gives an overview of an 11-step model process for implementing a program of strategies for any given emphasis area of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan. After a short introduction, each of the steps is outlined in further detail. EXHIBIT VI-1 AAS HT O Strategic High wa y Sa fety Plan Mo de l Implem entation Process 1. Identify and Define the Problem 2. Recruit Appropriate Participants for the Program 4. Develop Program Policies, Guidelines and Specifications 5. Develop Alternative Approaches to Addressing the Problem 6. Evaluate the Alternatives and Select a Plan 8. Develop a Plan of Action 9. Establish the Foundations for Implementing the Program 10. Carry Out the Action Plan 11. Assess and Transition the Program 7. Submit Recommendations for Action by Top Management 3. Establish Crash Reduction Goals

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-2 Purpose of the Model Process The process described in this section is provided as a model rather than a standard. Many users of this guide will already be working within a process established by their agency or working group. It is not suggested that their process be modified to conform to this one. However, the model process may provide a useful checklist. For those not having a standard process to follow, it is recommended that the model process be used to help establish an appropriate one for their initiative. Not all steps in the model process need to be performed at the level of detail indicated in the outlines below. The degree of detail and the amount of work required to complete some of these steps will vary widely, depending upon the situation. It is important to understand that the process being presented here is assumed to be conducted only as a part of a broader, strategic-level safety management process. The details of that process, and its relation to this one, may be found in a companion guide. (The companion guide is a work in progress at this writing. When it is available, it will be posted online at http://transportation1.org/safetyplan.) Overview of the Model Process The process (see Exhibit VI-1, above) must be started at top levels in the lead agency’s organization. This would, for example, include the CEO, DOT secretary, or chief engineer, as appropriate. Here, decisions will have been made to focus the agency’s attention and resources on specific safety problems based upon the particular conditions and characteristics of the organization’s roadway system. This is usually, but not always, documented as a result of the strategic-level process mentioned above. It often is publicized in the form of a “highway safety plan.” Examples of what states produce include Wisconsin DOT’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan (see Appendix A) and Iowa’s Safety Plan (available at http://www. iowasms.org/toolbox.htm). Once a “high-level” decision has been made to proceed with a particular emphasis area, the first step is to describe, in as much detail as possible, the problem that has been identified in the high-level analysis. The additional detail helps confirm to management that the problem identified in the strategic-level analysis is real and significant and that it is possible to do something about it. The added detail that this step provides to the understanding of the problem will also play an important part in identifying alternative approaches for dealing with it. Step 1 should produce endorsement and commitments from management to proceed, at least through a planning process. With such an endorsement, it is then necessary to identify the stakeholders and define their role in the effort (Step 2). It is important at this step to identify a range of participants in the process who will be able to help formulate a comprehensive approach to the problem. The group will want to consider how it can draw upon potential actions directed at • Driver behavior (legislation, enforcement, education, and licensing), • Engineering,

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN • Emergency medical systems, and • System management. With the establishment of a working group, it is then possible to finalize an understanding of the nature and limitations of what needs to be done in the form of a set of program policies, guidelines, and specifications (Steps 3 and 4). An important aspect of this is establishing targets for crash reduction in the particular emphasis area (Step 3). Identifying stakeholders, defining their roles, and forming guidelines and policies are all elements of what is often referred to as “chartering the team.” In many cases, and in particular where only one or two agencies are to be involved and the issues are not complex, it may be possible to complete Steps 1 through 4 concurrently. Having received management endorsement and chartered a project team—the foundation for the work—it is now possible to proceed with project planning. The first step in this phase (Step 5 in the overall process) is to identify alternative strategies for addressing the safety problems that have been identified while remaining faithful to the conditions established in Steps 2 through 4. With the alternative strategies sufficiently defined, they must be evaluated against one another (Step 6) and as groups of compatible strategies (i.e., a total program). The results of the evaluation will form the recommended plan. The plan is normally submitted to the appropriate levels of management for review and input, resulting ultimately in a decision on whether and how to proceed (Step 7). Once the working group has been given approval to proceed, along with any further guidelines that may have come from management, the group can develop a detailed plan of action (Step 8). This is sometimes referred to as an “implementation” or “business” plan. Plan implementation is covered in Steps 9 and 10. There often are underlying activities that must take place prior to implementing the action plan to form a foundation for what needs to be done (Step 9). This usually involves creating the organizational, operational, and physical infrastructure needed to succeed. The major step (Step 10) in this process involves doing what was planned. This step will in most cases require the greatest resource commitment of the agency. An important aspect of implementation involves maintaining appropriate records of costs and effectiveness to allow the plan to be evaluated after-the-fact. Evaluating the program, after it is underway, is an important activity that is often overlooked. Management has the right to require information about costs, resources, and effectiveness. It is also likely that management will request that the development team provide recommendations about whether the program should be continued and, if so, what revisions should be made. Note that management will be deciding on the future for any single emphasis area in the context of the entire range of possible uses of the agency’s resources. Step 11 involves activities that will give the desired information to management for each emphasis area. To summarize, the implementation of a program of strategies for an emphasis area can be characterized as an 11-step process. The steps in the process correspond closely to a 4-phase approach commonly followed by many transportation agencies: VI-3

• Endorsement and chartering of the team and project (Steps 1 through 4), • Project planning (Steps 5 through 8), • Plan implementation (Steps 9 and 10), and • Plan evaluation (Step 11). Details about each step follow. The Web-based version of this description is accompanied by a set of supplementary material to enhance and illustrate the points. The model process is intended to provide a framework for those who need it. It is not intended to be a how-to manual. There are other documents that provide extensive detail regarding how to conduct this type of process. Some general ones are covered in Appendix B and Appendix C. Others, which relate to specific aspects of the process, are referenced within the specific sections to which they apply. SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-4

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN Implementation Step 1: Identify and Define the Problem General Description Program development begins with gathering data and creating and analyzing information. The implementation process being described in this guide is one that will be done in the context of a larger strategic process. It is expected that this guide will be used when the strategic process, or a project-level analysis, has identified a potentially significant problem in this emphasis area. Data analyses done at the strategic level normally are done with a limited amount of detail. They are usually the top layer in a “drill-down” process. Therefore, while those previous analyses should be reviewed and used as appropriate, it will often be the case that further studies are needed to completely define the issues. It is also often the case that a core technical working group will have been formed by the lead agency to direct and carry out the process. This group can conduct the analyses required in this step, but should seek, as soon as possible, to involve any other stakeholders who may desire to provide input to this process. Step 2 deals further with the organization of the working group. The objectives of this first step are as follows: 1. Confirm that a problem exists in this emphasis area. 2. Detail the characteristics of the problem to allow identification of likely approaches for eliminating or reducing it. 3. Confirm with management, given the new information, that the planning and implementation process should proceed. The objectives will entail locating the best available data and analyzing them to highlight either geographic concentrations of the problem or over-representation of the problem within the population being studied. Identification of existing problems is a responsive approach. This can be complemented by a proactive approach that seeks to identify potentially hazardous conditions or populations. For the responsive type of analyses, one generally begins with basic crash records that are maintained by agencies within the jurisdiction. This is usually combined, where feasible, with other safety data maintained by one or more agencies. The other data could include • Roadway inventory, • Driver records (enforcement, licensing, courts), or • Emergency medical service and trauma center data. To have the desired level of impact on highway safety, it is important to consider the highway system as a whole. Where multiple jurisdictions are responsible for various parts of the system, they should all be included in the analysis, wherever possible. The best example of this is a state plan for highway safety that includes consideration of the extensive VI-5

mileage administered by local agencies. To accomplish problem identification in this manner will require a cooperative, coordinated process. For further discussion on the problem identification process, see Appendix D and the further references contained therein. In some cases, very limited data are available for a portion of the roads in the jurisdiction. This can occur for a local road maintained by a state or with a local agency that has very limited resources for maintaining major databases. Lack of data is a serious limitation to this process, but must be dealt with. It may be that for a specific study, special data collection efforts can be included as part of the project funding. While crash records may be maintained for most of the roads in the system, the level of detail, such as good location information, may be quite limited. It is useful to draw upon local knowledge to supplement data, including • Local law enforcement, • State district and maintenance engineers, • Local engineering staff, and • Local residents and road users. These sources of information may provide useful insights for identifying hazardous locations. In addition, local transportation agencies may be able to provide supplementary data from their archives. Finally, some of the proactive approaches mentioned below may be used where good records are not available. Maximum effectiveness often calls for going beyond data in the files to include special supplemental data collected on crashes, behavioral data, site inventories, and citizen input. Analyses should reflect the use of statistical methods that are currently recognized as valid within the profession. Proactive elements could include • Changes to policies, design guides, design criteria, and specifications based upon research and experience; • Retrofitting existing sites or highway elements to conform to updated criteria (perhaps with an appropriate priority scheme); • Taking advantage of lessons learned from previous projects; • Road safety audits, including on-site visits; • Safety management based on roadway inventories; • Input from police officers and road users; and • Input from experts through such programs as the NHTSA traffic records assessment team. The result of this step is normally a report that includes tables and graphs that clearly demonstrate the types of problems and detail some of their key characteristics. Such reports SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-6

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-7 should be presented in a manner to allow top management to quickly grasp the key findings and help them decide which of the emphasis areas should be pursued further, and at what level of funding. However, the report must also document the detailed work that has been done, so that those who do the later stages of work will have the necessary background. Specific Elements 1. Define the scope of the analysis 1.1. All crashes in the entire jurisdiction 1.2. A subset of crash types (whose characteristics suggest they are treatable, using strategies from the emphasis area) 1.3. A portion of the jurisdiction 1.4. A portion of the population (whose attributes suggest they are treatable using strategies from the emphasis area) 2. Define safety measures to be used for responsive analyses 2.1. Crash measures 2.1.1. Frequency (all crashes or by crash type) 2.1.2. Measures of exposure 2.1.3. Decide on role of frequency versus rates 2.2. Behavioral measures 2.2.1. Conflicts 2.2.2. Erratic maneuvers 2.2.3. Illegal maneuvers 2.2.4. Aggressive actions 2.2.5. Speed 2.3. Other measures 2.3.1. Citizen complaints 2.3.2. Marks or damage on roadway and appurtenances, as well as crash debris 3. Define measures for proactive analyses 3.1. Comparison with updated and changed policies, design guides, design criteria, and specifications 3.2. Conditions related to lessons learned from previous projects 3.3. Hazard indices or risk analyses calculated using data from roadway inventories to input to risk-based models 3.4. Input from police officers and road users 4. Collect data 4.1. Data on record (e.g., crash records, roadway inventory, medical data, driver- licensing data, citations, other) 4.2. Field data (e.g., supplementary crash and inventory data, behavioral observations, operational data) 4.3. Use of road safety audits, or adaptations 5. Analyze data 5.1. Data plots (charts, tables, and maps) to identify possible patterns, and concentrations (See Appendixes Y, Z and AA for examples of what some states are doing)

5.2. Statistical analysis (high-hazard locations, over-representation of contributing circumstances, crash types, conditions, and populations) 5.3. Use expertise, through road safety audits or program assessment teams 5.4. Focus upon key attributes for which action is feasible: 5.4.1. Factors potentially contributing to the problems 5.4.2. Specific populations contributing to, and affected by, the problems 5.4.3. Those parts of the system contributing to a large portion of the problem 6. Report results and receive approval to pursue solutions to identified problems (approvals being sought here are primarily a confirmation of the need to proceed and likely levels of resources required) 6.1. Sort problems by type 6.1.1. Portion of the total problem 6.1.2. Vehicle, highway/environment, enforcement, education, other driver actions, emergency medical system, legislation, and system management 6.1.3. According to applicable funding programs 6.1.4. According to political jurisdictions 6.2. Preliminary listing of the types of strategies that might be applicable 6.3. Order-of-magnitude estimates of time and cost to prepare implementation plan 6.4. Listing of agencies that should be involved, and their potential roles (including an outline of the organizational framework intended for the working group). Go to Step 2 for more on this. SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-8

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-9 Implementation Step 2: Recruit Appropriate Participants for the Program General Description A critical early step in the implementation process is to engage all the stakeholders that may be encompassed within the scope of the planned program. The stakeholders may be from outside agencies (e.g., state patrol, county governments, or citizen groups). One criterion for participation is if the agency or individual will help ensure a comprehensive view of the problem and potential strategies for its resolution. If there is an existing structure (e.g., a State Safety Management System Committee) of stakeholders for conducting strategic planning, it is important to relate to this, and build on it, for addressing the detailed considerations of the particular emphasis area. There may be some situations within the emphasis area for which no other stakeholders may be involved other than the lead agency and the road users. However, in most cases, careful consideration of the issues will reveal a number of potential stakeholders to possibly be involved. Furthermore, it is usually the case that a potential program will proceed better in the organizational and institutional setting if a high-level “champion” is found in the lead agency to support the effort and act as a key liaison with other stakeholders. Stakeholders should already have been identified in the previous step, at least at a level to allow decision makers to know whose cooperation is needed, and what their potential level of involvement might be. During this step, the lead agency should contact the key individuals in each of the external agencies to elicit their participation and cooperation. This will require identifying the right office or organizational unit, and the appropriate people in each case. It will include providing them with a brief overview document and outlining for them the type of involvement envisioned. This may typically involve developing interagency agreements. The participation and cooperation of each agency should be secured to ensure program success. Lists of appropriate candidates for the stakeholder groups are recorded in Appendix K. In addition, reference may be made to the NHTSA document at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ safecommunities/SAFE%20COMM%20Html/index.html, which provides guidance on building coalitions. Specific Elements 1. Identify internal “champions” for the program 2. Identify the suitable contact in each of the agencies or private organizations who is appropriate to participate in the program 3. Develop a brief document that helps sell the program and the contact’s role in it by 3.1. Defining the problem 3.2. Outlining possible solutions 3.3. Aligning the agency or group mission by resolving the problem 3.4. Emphasizing the importance the agency has to the success of the effort

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-10 3.5. Outlining the organizational framework for the working group and other stakeholders cooperating on this effort 3.6. Outlining the rest of the process in which agency staff or group members are being asked to participate 3.7. Outlining the nature of commitments desired from the agency or group for the program 3.8. Establishing program management responsibilities, including communication protocols, agency roles, and responsibilities 3.9. Listing the purpose for an initial meeting 4. Meet with the appropriate representative 4.1. Identify the key individual(s) in the agency or group whose approval is needed to get the desired cooperation 4.2. Clarify any questions or concepts 4.3. Outline the next steps to get the agency or group onboard and participating 5. Establish an organizational framework for the group 5.1. Roles 5.2. Responsibilities

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN Implementation Step 3: Establish Crash Reduction Goals General Description The AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan established a national goal of saving 5,000 to 7,000 lives annually by the year 2005. Some states have established statewide goals for the reduction of fatalities or crashes of a certain degree of severity. Establishing an explicit goal for crash reduction can place an agency “on the spot,” but it usually provides an impetus to action and builds a support for funding programs for its achievement. Therefore, it is desirable to establish, within each emphasis area, one or more crash reduction targets. These may be dictated by strategic-level planning for the agency, or it may be left to the stakeholders to determine. (The summary of the Wisconsin DOT Highway Safety Plan in Appendix A has more information.) For example, Pennsylvania adopted a goal of 10 percent reduction in fatalities by 2002,1 while California established a goal of 40 percent reduction in fatalities and 15 percent reduction in injury crashes, as well as a 10 percent reduction in work zone crashes, in 1 year.2 At the municipal level, Toledo, Ohio, is cited by the U.S. Conference of Mayors as having an exemplary program. This included establishing specific crash reduction goals (http://www.usmayors.org/uscm/uscm projects_services/health/ traffic/best_traffic initiative_toledo.htm). When working within an emphasis area, it may be desirable to specify certain types of crashes, as well as the severity level, being targeted. There are a few key considerations for establishing a quantitative goal. The stakeholders should achieve consensus on this issue. The goal should be challenging, but achievable. Its feasibility depends in part on available funding, the timeframe in which the goal is to be achieved, the degree of complexity of the program, and the degree of controversy the program may experience. To a certain extent, the quantification of the goal will be an iterative process. If the effort is directed at a particular location, then this becomes a relatively straightforward action. Specific Elements 1. Identify the type of crashes to be targeted 1.1. Subset of all crash types 1.2. Level of severity 2. Identify existing statewide or other potentially related crash reduction goals 3. Conduct a process with stakeholders to arrive at a consensus on a crash reduction goal 3.1. Identify key considerations 3.2. Identify past goals used in the jurisdiction 3.3. Identify what other jurisdictions are using as crash reduction goals 3.4. Use consensus-seeking methods, as needed VI-11 1 Draft State Highway Safety Plan, State of Pennsylvania, July 22, 1999 2 Operations Program Business Plan, FY 1999/2000, State of California, Caltrans, July 1999

Implementation Step 4: Develop Program Policies, Guidelines, and Specifications General Description A foundation and framework are needed for solving the identified safety problems. The implementation process will need to be guided and evaluated according to a set of goals, objectives, and related performance measures. These will formalize what the intended result is and how success will be measured. The overlying crash reduction goal, established in Step 3, will provide the context for the more specific goals established in this step. The goals, objectives, and performance measures will be used much later to evaluate what is implemented. Therefore, they should be jointly outlined at this point and agreed to by all program stakeholders. It is important to recognize that evaluating any actions is an important part of the process. Even though evaluation is not finished until some time after the strategies have been implemented, it begins at this step. The elements of this step may be simpler for a specific project or location than for a comprehensive program. However, even in the simpler case, policies, guidelines, and specifications are usually needed. Furthermore, some programs or projects may require that some guidelines or specifications be in the form of limits on directions taken and types of strategies considered acceptable. Specific Elements 1. Identify high-level policy actions required and implement them (legislative and administrative) 2. Develop goals, objectives, and performance measures to guide the program and use for assessing its effect 2.1. Hold joint meetings of stakeholders 2.2. Use consensus-seeking methods 2.3. Carefully define terms and measures 2.4. Develop report documenting results and validate them 3. Identify specifications or constraints to be used throughout the project 3.1. Budget constraints 3.2. Time constraints 3.3. Personnel training 3.4. Capacity to install or construct 3.5. Types of strategies not to be considered or that must be included 3.6. Other SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-12

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN Implementation Step 5: Develop Alternative Approaches to Addressing the Problem General Description Having defined the problem and established a foundation, the next step is to find ways to address the identified problems. If the problem identification stage has been done effectively (see Appendix D for further details on identifying road safety problems), the characteristics of the problems should suggest one or more alternative ways for dealing with the problem. It is important that a full range of options be considered, drawing from areas dealing with enforcement, engineering, education, emergency medical services, and system management actions. Alternative strategies should be sought for both location-specific and systemic problems that have been identified. Location-specific strategies should pertain equally well to addressing high-hazard locations and to solving safety problems identified within projects that are being studied for reasons other than safety. Where site-specific strategies are being considered, visits to selected sites may be in order if detailed data and pictures are not available. In some cases, the emphasis area guides will provide tables that help connect the attributes of the problem with one or more appropriate strategies to use as countermeasures. Strategies should also be considered for application on a systemic basis. Examples include 1. Low-cost improvements targeted at problems that have been identified as significant in the overall highway safety picture, but not concentrated in a given location. 2. Action focused upon a specific driver population, but carried out throughout the jurisdiction. 3. Response to a change in policy, including modified design standards. 4. Response to a change in law, such as adoption of a new definition for DUI. In some cases, a strategy may be considered that is relatively untried or is an innovative variation from past approaches to treatment of a similar problem. Special care is needed to ensure that such strategies are found to be sound enough to implement on a wide-scale basis. Rather than ignoring this type of candidate strategy in favor of the more “tried-and- proven” approaches, consideration should be given to including a pilot-test component to the strategy. The primary purpose of this guide is to provide a set of strategies to consider for eliminating or lessening the particular road safety problem upon which the user is focusing. As pointed out in the first step of this process, the identification of the problem, and the selection of strategies, is a complex step that will be different for each case. Therefore, it is not feasible to provide a “formula” to follow. However, guidelines are available. There are a number of texts to which the reader can refer. Some of these are listed in Appendix B and Appendix D. VI-13

In addition, the tables referenced in Appendix G provide examples for linking identified problems with candidate strategies. The second part of this step is to assemble sets of strategies into alternative “program packages.” Some strategies are complementary to others, while some are more effective when combined with others. In addition, some strategies are mutually exclusive. Finally, strategies may be needed to address roads across multiple jurisdictions. For instance, a package of strategies may need to address both the state and local highway system to have the desired level of impact. The result of this part of the activity will be a set of alternative “program packages” for the emphasis area. It may be desirable to prepare a technical memorandum at the end of this step. It would document the results, both for input into the next step and for internal reviews. The latter is likely to occur, since this is the point at which specific actions are being seriously considered. Specific Elements 1. Review problem characteristics and compare them with individual strategies, considering both their objectives and their attributes 1.1. Road-user behavior (law enforcement, licensing, adjudication) 1.2. Engineering 1.3. Emergency medical services 1.4. System management elements 2. Select individual strategies that do the following: 2.1. Address the problem 2.2. Are within the policies and constraints established 2.3. Are likely to help achieve the goals and objectives established for the program 3. Assemble individual strategies into alternative program packages expected to optimize achievement of goals and objectives 3.1. Cumulative effect to achieve crash reduction goal 3.2. Eliminate strategies that can be identified as inappropriate, or likely to be ineffective, even at this early stage of planning 4. Summarize the plan in a technical memorandum, describing attributes of individual strategies, how they will be combined, and why they are likely to meet the established goals and objectives SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-14

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN Implementation Step 6: Evaluate Alternatives and Select a Plan General Description This step is needed to arrive at a logical basis for prioritizing and selecting among the alternative strategies or program packages that have been developed. There are several activities that need to be performed. One proposed list is shown in Appendix P. The process involves making estimates for each of the established performance measures for the program and comparing them, both individually and in total. To do this in a quantitative manner requires some basis for estimating the effectiveness of each strategy. Where solid evidence has been found on effectiveness, it has been presented for each strategy in the guide. In some cases, agencies have a set of crash reduction factors that are used to arrive at effectiveness estimates. Where a high degree of uncertainty exists, it is wise to use sensitivity analyses to test the validity of any conclusions that may be made regarding which is the best strategy or set of strategies to use. Further discussion of this may be found in Appendix O. Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses are usually used to help identify inefficient or inappropriate strategies, as well as to establish priorities. For further definition of the two terms, see Appendix Q. For a comparison of the two techniques, see Appendix S. Aspects of feasibility, other than economic, must also be considered at this point. An excellent set of references is provided within online benefit-cost guides: • One is under development at the following site, maintained by the American Society of Civil Engineers: http://ceenve.calpoly.edu/sullivan/cutep/cutep_bc_outline_main.htm • The other is Guide to Benefit-Cost Analysis in Transport Canada, September 1994, http://www.tc.gc.ca/finance/bca/en/TOC_e.htm. An overall summary of this document is given in Appendix V. In some cases, a strategy or program may look promising, but no evidence may be available as to its likely effectiveness. This would be especially true for innovative methods or use of emerging technologies. In such cases, it may be advisable to plan a pilot study to arrive at a minimum level of confidence in its effectiveness, before large-scale investment is made or a large segment of the public is involved in something untested. It is at this stage of detailed analysis that the crash reduction goals, set in Step 3, may be revisited, with the possibility of modification. It is important that this step be conducted with the full participation of the stakeholders. If the previous steps were followed, the working group will have the appropriate representation. Technical assistance from more than one discipline may be necessary to go through more complex issues. Group consensus will be important on areas such as estimates of effectiveness, as well as the rating and ranking of alternatives. Techniques are available to assist in arriving at consensus. For example, see the following Web site for an overview: http://web.mit.edu/publicdisputes/practice/cbh ch1.html. VI-15

Specific Elements 1. Assess feasibility 1.1. Human resources 1.2. Special constraints 1.3. Legislative requirements 1.4. Other 1.5. This is often done in a qualitative way, to narrow the list of choices to be studied in more detail (see, for example, Appendix BB) 2. Estimate values for each of the performance measures for each strategy and plan 2.1. Estimate costs and impacts 2.1.1. Consider guidelines provided in the detailed description of strategies in this material 2.1.2. Adjust as necessary to reflect local knowledge or practice 2.1.3. Where a plan or program is being considered that includes more than one strategy, combine individual estimates 2.2. Prepare results for cost-benefit and/or cost-effectiveness analyses 2.3. Summarize the estimates in both disaggregate (by individual strategy) and aggregate (total for the program) form 3. Conduct a cost-benefit and/or cost-effectiveness analysis to identify inefficient, as well as dominant, strategies and programs and to establish a priority for the alternatives 3.1. Test for dominance (both lower cost and higher effectiveness than others) 3.2. Estimate relative cost-benefit and/or cost-effectiveness 3.3. Test productivity 4. Develop a report that documents the effort, summarizing the alternatives considered and presenting a preferred program, as devised by the working group (for suggestions on a report of a benefit-cost analysis, see Appendix U). 4.1. Designed for high-level decision makers, as well as technical personnel who would be involved in the implementation 4.2. Extensive use of graphics and layout techniques to facilitate understanding and capture interest 4.3. Recommendations regarding meeting or altering the crash reduction goals established in Step 3. SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-16

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN Implementation Step 7: Submit Recommendations for Action by Top Management General Description The working group has completed the important planning tasks and must now submit the results and conclusions to those who will make the decision on whether to proceed further. Top management, at this step, will primarily be determining if an investment will be made in this area. As a result, the plan will not only be considered on the basis of its merits for solving the particular problems identified in this emphasis area (say, vis-à-vis other approaches that could be taken to deal with the specific problems identified), but also its relative value in relation to investments in other aspects of the road safety program. This aspect of the process involves using the best available communication skills to adequately inform top management. The degree of effort and extent of use of media should be proportionate to the size and complexity of the problem being addressed, as well as the degree to which there is competition for funds. The material that is submitted should receive careful review by those with knowledge in report design and layout. In addition, today’s technology allows for the development of automated presentations, using animation and multimedia in a cost-effective manner. Therefore, programs involving significant investments that are competing strongly for implementation resources should be backed by such supplementary means for communicating efficiently and effectively with top management. Specific Elements 1. Submit recommendations for action by management 1.1. “Go/no-go” decision 1.2. Reconsideration of policies, guidelines, and specifications (see Step 3) 1.3. Modification of the plan to accommodate any revisions to the program framework made by the decision makers 2. Working group to make presentations to decision makers and other groups, as needed and requested 3. Working group to provide technical assistance with the review of the plan, as requested 3.1. Availability to answer questions and provide further detail 3.2. Assistance in conducting formal assessments VI-17

Implementation Step 8: Develop a Plan of Action General Description At this stage, the working group will usually detail the program that has been selected for implementation. This step translates the program into an action plan, with all the details needed by both decision makers, who will have to commit to the investment of resources, and those charged with carrying it out. The effort involves defining resource requirements, organizational and institutional arrangements needed, schedules, etc. This is usually done in the form of a business plan, or plan of action. An example of a plan developed by a local community is shown in Appendix X. An evaluation plan should be designed at this point. It is an important part of the plan. This is something that should be in place before Step 9 is finished. It is not acceptable to wait until after the program is completed to begin designing an evaluation of it. This is because data are needed about conditions before the program starts, to allow comparison with conditions during its operation and after its completion. It also should be designed at this point, to achieve consensus among the stakeholders on what constitutes “success.” The evaluation is used to determine just how well things were carried out and what effect the program had. Knowing this helps maintain the validity of what is being done, encourages future support from management, and provides good intelligence on how to proceed after the program is completed. For further details on performing evaluations, see Appendix L, Appendix M, and Appendix W. The plan of action should be developed jointly with the involvement of all desired participants in the program. It should be completed to the detail necessary to receive formal approval of each agency during the next step. The degree of detail and complexity required for this step will be a function of the size and scope of the program, as well as the number of independent agencies involved. Specific Elements 1. Translation of the selected program into key resource requirements 1.1. Agencies from which cooperation and coordination is required 1.2. Funding 1.3. Personnel 1.4. Data and information 1.5. Time 1.6. Equipment 1.7. Materials 1.8. Training 1.9. Legislation 2. Define organizational and institutional framework for implementing the program 2.1. Include high-level oversight group 2.2. Provide for involvement in planning at working levels 2.3. Provide mechanisms for resolution of issues that may arise and disagreements that may occur 2.4. Secure human and financial resources required SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-18

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN 3. Detail a program evaluation plan 3.1. Goals and objectives 3.2. Process measures 3.3. Performance measures 3.3.1. Short-term, including surrogates, to allow early reporting of results 3.3.2. Long-term 3.4. Type of evaluation 3.5. Data needed 3.6. Personnel needed 3.7. Budget and time estimates 4. Definition of tasks to conduct the work 4.1. Develop diagram of tasks (e.g., PERT chart) 4.2. Develop schedule (e.g., Gantt chart) 4.3. For each task, define 4.3.1. Inputs 4.3.2. Outputs 4.3.3. Resource requirements 4.3.4. Agency roles 4.3.5. Sequence and dependency of tasks 5. Develop detailed budget 5.1. By task 5.2. Separate by source and agency/office (i.e., cost center) 6. Produce program action plan, or business plan document VI-19

Implementation Step 9: Establish Foundations for Implementing the Program General Description Once approved, some “groundwork” is often necessary to establish a foundation for carrying out the selected program. This is somewhat similar to what was done in Step 4. It must now be done in greater detail and scope for the specific program being implemented. As in Step 4, specific policies and guidelines must be developed, organizational and institutional arrangements must be initiated, and an infrastructure must be created for the program. The business plan or action plan provides the basis (Step 7) for this. Once again, the degree of complexity required will vary with the scope and size of the program, as well as the number of agencies involved. Specific Elements 1. Refine policies and guidelines (from Step 4) 2. Effect required legislation or regulations 3. Allocate budget 4. Reorganize implementation working group 5. Develop program infrastructure 5.1. Facilities and equipment for program staff 5.2. Information systems 5.3. Communications 5.4. Assignment of personnel 5.5. Administrative systems (monitoring and reporting) 6. Set up program assessment system 6.1. Define/refine/revise performance and process measures 6.2. Establish data collection and reporting protocols 6.3. Develop data collection and reporting instruments 6.4. Measure baseline conditions SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-20

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN Implementation Step 10: Carry Out the Action Plan General Description Conditions have been established to allow the program to be started. The activities of implementation may be divided into activities associated with field preparation for whatever actions are planned and the actual field implementation of the plan. The activities can involve design and development of program actions, actual construction or installation of program elements, training, and the actual operation of the program. This step also includes monitoring for the purpose of maintaining control and carrying out mid- and post-program evaluation of the effort. Specific Elements 1. Conduct detailed design of program elements 1.1. Physical design elements 1.2. PI&E materials 1.3. Enforcement protocols 1.4. Etc. 2. Conduct program training 3. Develop and acquire program materials 4. Develop and acquire program equipment 5. Conduct pilot tests of untested strategies, as needed 6. Program operation 6.1. Conduct program “kickoff” 6.2. Carry out monitoring and management of ongoing operation 6.2.1 Periodic measurement (process and performance measures) 6.2.2 Adjustments as required 6.3. Perform interim and final reporting VI-21

Implementation Step 11: Assess and Transition the Program General Description The AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan includes improvement in highway safety management. A key element of that is the conduct of properly designed program evaluations. The program evaluation will have been first designed in Step 8, which occurs prior to any field implementation. For details on designing an evaluation, please refer to Step 8. For an example of how the New Zealand Transport Authority takes this step as an important part of the process, see Appendix N. The program will usually have a specified operational period. An evaluation of both the process and performance will have begun prior to the start of implementation. It may also continue during the course of the implementation, and it will be completed after the operational period of the program. The overall effectiveness of the effort should be measured to determine if the investment was worthwhile and to guide top management on how to proceed into the post-program period. This often means that there is a need to quickly measure program effectiveness in order to provide a preliminary idea of the success or need for immediate modification. This will be particularly important early in development of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan, as agencies learn what works best. Therefore, surrogates for safety impact may have to be used to arrive at early/interim conclusions. These usually include behavioral measures. This particular need for interim surrogate measures should be dealt with when the evaluation is designed, back in Step 8. However, a certain period, usually a minimum of a couple of years, will be required to properly measure the effectiveness and draw valid conclusions about programs designed to reduce highway fatalities when using direct safety performance measures. The results of the work is usually reported back to those who authorized it and the stakeholders, as well as any others in management who will be involved in determining the future of the program. Decisions must be made on how to continue or expand the effort, if at all. If a program is to be continued or expanded (as in the case of a pilot study), the results of its assessment may suggest modifications. In some cases, a decision may be needed to remove what has been placed in the highway environment as part of the program because of a negative impact being measured. Even a “permanent” installation (e.g., rumble strips) requires a decision regarding investment for future maintenance if it is to continue to be effective. Finally, the results of the evaluation using performance measures should be fed back into a knowledge base to improve future estimates of effectiveness. Specific Elements 1. Analysis 1.1. Summarize assessment data reported during the course of the program 1.2. Analyze both process and performance measures (both quantitative and qualitative) SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN VI-22

SECTION VI—GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AASHTO STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN 1.3. Evaluate the degree to which goals and objectives were achieved (using performance measures) 1.4. Estimate costs (especially vis-à-vis pre-implementation estimates) 1.5. Document anecdotal material that may provide insight for improving future programs and implementation efforts 1.6. Conduct and document debriefing sessions with persons involved in the program (including anecdotal evidence of effectiveness and recommended revisions) 2. Report results 3. Decide how to transition the program 3.1. Stop 3.2. Continue as is 3.3. Continue with revisions 3.4. Expand as is 3.5. Expand with revisions 3.6. Reverse some actions 4. Document data for creating or updating database of effectiveness estimates VI-23

Next: Section VII - Key References »
A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks Get This Book
×
 A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks
Buy Paperback | $22.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 500 Volume 13: Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan -- A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Heavy Trucks provides strategies that can be employed to reduce the number of collisions involving heavy trucks.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!