Connecticut Department of Transportation safety techniques enhancement plan.

Scopatz, Robert A.; Gross, Francis; Himes, Scott; Anderson, Steven; Jackson, Eric · 2015 · ROSA P / Connecticut. Dept. of Transportation

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This report presents the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) Safety Techniques Enhancement Plan, a strategic framework designed to align the agency’s highway safety analysis capabilities with the state-of-the-practice methods defined in the Highway Safety Manual (HSM). The project, conducted jointly by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin Inc., the University of Connecticut, and ConnDOT, addresses the need to improve data-driven decision-making across the transportation network. The primary motivation is to establish a rigorous, efficient, and automated safety management process that meets Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) requirements and enhances decision-making in planning, design, operations, and maintenance. The methodology involves a comprehensive evaluation of ConnDOT’s current capabilities against the HSM’s six-step safety management cycle: network screening, diagnosis, countermeasure selection, economic appraisal, project prioritization, and safety effectiveness evaluation. The authors also assessed the agency’s readiness to adopt HSM Part C predictive methods and Part D crash modification factors (CMFs). The analysis identified specific gaps in data governance, staffing skills, and analytic tools, leading to the development of a detailed Action Plan with defined goals, objectives, and tasks for implementation. Key findings indicate that while ConnDOT’s network screening and diagnosis processes largely align with HSM guidelines, significant improvements are required in other areas. The countermeasure selection process relies on external resources but lacks CMFs calibrated to Connecticut’s specific crash experience. The project prioritization process requires revision to explicitly include safety engineering staff and stakeholders. Most critically, the safety effectiveness evaluation process needs major revision, as current methods lack the skills and analytic tools recommended by the HSM. The report concludes that ConnDOT must acquire additional training and external resources to implement these advanced methods effectively. The significance of this plan lies in its provision of a structured roadmap for modernizing ConnDOT’s safety infrastructure. It recommends adopting predictive methods for alternatives analysis and design exceptions, utilizing calibrated CMFs for economic appraisal, and implementing a unified network screening process using Safety Performance Functions. The resulting Strategic Plan aims to create an automated system supported by expert staff, enabling the agency to quantify safety effects, improve cost-effectiveness analyses, and systematically reduce crash frequency and severity across the state’s transportation network.

Key finding

The Connecticut Department of Transportation's safety management processes require significant revision in project prioritization and safety effectiveness evaluation, and must adopt predictive methods and locally calibrated crash modification factors to align with Highway Safety Manual standards.

Methodology

review

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• regulatory evaluation
• incidence prevalence
• naturalistic crash near crash
• causation analyses
• induced exposure

Information type

What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).

• Applied Guidance: countermeasure evaluation
• Empirical Findings: crash risk outcomes
• Methodological Resource: dataset resource