Fill and Sign the Certificate Doing Form

TEXAS HIGHWAY SAFETY   PERFORMANCE PLAN     FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010     PREPARED BY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS DIVISION 125 E. 11TH STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701-2483 https://www.txdot.gov/apps/eGrants/eGrantsHelp/index.html (512) 416-3175 9/30/2010 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Section One: INTRODUCTION Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section One INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................5 The Texas Traffic Safety Program .......................................................................................................................................7 The Traffic Safety Grant Process .......................................................................................................................................11 FY2010 HSPP Planning Calendar .....................................................................................................................................21 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................23 Legislative Issues.................................................................................................................................................................24 Section Two PERFORMANCE PLAN ......................................................................................27 Overview..............................................................................................................................................................................29 Step 1: Problem Identification ...........................................................................................................................................29 Step 2: Set Performance Goals ...........................................................................................................................................33 Step 3: Prioritize Programs and Strategies.......................................................................................................................65 Data Sources & Glossary for Performance Measures.....................................................................................................67 Section Three HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN ..................................................................................73 Planning and Administration (PA–01).............................................................................................................................75 Alcohol and Other Drug Countermeasures (AL–02) .....................................................................................................79 Emergency Medical Services (EM–03) ...........................................................................................................................103 Motorcycle Safety (MC–04)..............................................................................................................................................107 Occupant Protection (OP–05) ..........................................................................................................................................111 Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety (PS–06)..........................................................................................................................125 Police Traffic Services (PT–07).........................................................................................................................................131 Speed Control (SC–08)......................................................................................................................................................137 Traffic Records (TR–09) ...................................................................................................................................................141 Driver Education and Behavior (DE–10) .......................................................................................................................147 Railroad / Highway Crossing (RH–11) .........................................................................................................................155 Roadway Safety (RS–12)..................................................................................................................................................157 Safe Communities (SA–13) ..............................................................................................................................................163 School Bus (SB–14) ............................................................................................................................................................169 Highway Safety Plan - Project Cross Reference...........................................................................................................171 Section Four CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES ..........................................................183 Section Five PROGRAM COST SUMMARY..........................................................................193 Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Section One: INTRODUCTION Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Section One INTRODUCTION Section One: INTRODUCTION Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Section One: INTRODUCTION Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 THE TEXAS TRAFFIC SAFETY PROGRAM The Texas Traffic Safety Program is managed by the Traffic Safety Section (TRFTS) within the Traffic Operations Division of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). The following table describes the primary mission, goal and strategy of the program. Mission Statement Goal Strategy The mission of the Texas Traffic Safety Program is to operate in a manner that saves lives and prevents injuries. The goal of the program is to identify traffic safety problem areas and programs to reduce the number and severity of traffic-related crashes, injuries, and fatalities. The strategy employed by TRF-TS includes the use of information, technology, resources and skills to identify priority traffic safety issues, plan initiatives, generate coordinated action, and evaluate & communicate results. This directly supports the Texas Department of Transportation’s mission “to work cooperatively to provide safe, effective, and efficient movement of people and goods” . Program Funding Funding is from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), a division of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Over 350 traffic safety grants are awarded annually to state, local and nonprofit agencies across Texas equaling approximately 79 million dollars per year. Traffic Safety Program Areas 01 - Planning and Administration (PA) 08 - Speed Control (SC) 02 - Alcohol and Other Drug Countermeasures (AL) 09 - Traffic Records (TR) 03 - Emergency Medical Services (EM) 10 - Driver Education and Behavior (DE) 04 - Motorcycle Safety (MC) 11 - Railroad / Highway Crossing (RH) 05 - Occupant Protection (OP) 12 - Roadway Safety (RS) 06 - Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety (PS) 13 - Safe Communities (SA) 07 - Police Traffic Services (PT) 14 - School Bus Safety (SB) Eligibility In order to be eligible for a Traffic Safety Grant, an organization must be one of the following: • A state or local government agency • An educational institution • A non-profit organization Grants are awarded based on the merits of the specific proposed project, relevancy to the current traffic safety issues as identified by the state, and the approval of the Texas Transportation Commission. Organization The Texas Traffic Safety Program is managed by the Traffic Safety Section of TxDOT’s Traffic Operations Division, and supported by Traffic Safety Specialists (TSS) in each of the 25 TxDOT Districts across the state. The following organization charts show the details of these two groups respectively. Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E Section One: P L A N F O R INTRODUCTION F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E Section One: P L A N F O R INTRODUCTION F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Section One: INTRODUCTION Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 THE TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANT PROCESS The following section includes a definition of the processes used by Texas to identify its highway safety problems, establish its proposed measurable performance goals, and develop the programs/projects in the FY 2010 Texas Highway Safety Performance Plan (HSPP) that are designed to address highway safety problems in Texas. The highway safety goals established through these processes, including target dates for attaining the goals and the performance measures used to track progress toward each goal relative to the baseline status of each measure. In addition, the Performance Plan lists other program goals for each of the Texas Traffic Safety Program's Program Areas, specifies the strategies employed to accomplish the goals, and reports the status of the performance measures based on the most current data. Grant Lifecycle Comparison The first diagram shows the grant lifecycle and a comparison of the current year’s lifecycle to the previous and next year’s lifecycle. This is intended to both show a high-level definition of the lifecycle, and to show that at any given time, the Traffic Safety Grant Program is involved with at least two, and at some points 3 different yearly lifecycles. Grant Process Model The second diagram shows each major process or activity within the grant lifecycle, and an indication of what organization is responsible for each process. These processes correspond directly with the activities on the grant lifecycle comparison diagram. Grant Process Definitions The next section organizes the processes by their process area (Planning, Grant Development, etc.) and defines each process in more detail. Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E Section One: P L A N F O R INTRODUCTION F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E Section One: P L A N F O R INTRODUCTION F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Planning Conduct Strategic Planning The TRF-TS Planner coordinates the strategic planning process for the Traffic Safety Program. This involves the development of an informal Six Year Strategic Plan. It provides the general mission of the Traffic Safety Program and is created through a process that includes input from the program managers, District Traffic Safety Specialists, TRFTS, and other program partners. Develop Performance Plan The TRF-TS Planner coordinates the performance planning processes for the Traffic Safety Program. This involves an annual Performance Plan that details the priority traffic safety performance goals for the coming year. This plan is created through a process that includes input from the program managers, District Traffic Safety Specialists, and TRF-TS and is based on the informal Strategic Plan. Approve Performance Plan The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reviews the Texas Highway Safety Performance Plan, and if in agreement, approves it. Develop Policies & Procedures The TRF-TS Policy & Procedures Coordinator manages the development, modification and distribution of all policies, procedures and training materials for the Traffic Safety Program. This is an ongoing process, with defined updates or “releases” to the policies and procedures. Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Grant Development Request Proposals TRF-TS develops the Requests for Proposal and associated documents each fiscal year based on the priority traffic safety performance goals detailed in the Performance Plan for that year. Apply for Grant State agencies and other organizations interested in traffic safety issues submit project proposals when requested by the Traffic Operations Division based on the Request for Proposals (RFP). These project proposals constitute the organizations’ traffic safety intentions and are submitted for every program area, depending on the interests of the particular organization. Score Proposals The proposal score sheet, defined during the creation of the RFP is used to score each project against a number of selected criteria that are based on each element of the project proposal. The STEP grant proposals are scored automatically based on the data entered on the proposal. The scoring criteria will award a point range based on the data entered compared to the statewide performance average, or STEP indicator, for each enforcement element selected. The STEP proposals are reviewed to ensure the budget’s reasonableness, ability to support the described problem solution, proposed STEP indicator, eligibility for funding, and match contribution. For the General Traffic Safety Grants, scoring teams comprised of District traffic safety specialists (TSSs) and Traffic Operations Division (TRF) traffic safety program managers review and score the proposals for applicability to Texas’ traffic safety problems. After scoring all the projects, the scores are automatically generated by eGrants based on the individual scores for the given proposal. Priorities are assigned based on point scores, rankings, and the estimated amount of federal dollars that will be available for the HSP for the coming fiscal year. Develop the Highway Safety Performance Plan The HSPP is developed and updated annually by the Traffic Operations Division’s Traffic Safety Section (TRF-TS) to describe how federal highway safety funds will be apportioned. The HSPP is intergovernmental in nature, functioning, either directly or indirectly, through grant agreements, contracts, service purchase orders, requisitions, and work orders. Funding for he HSPP, as the state’s formal planning document, is approved by the Texas Transportation Commission. The Certification Statement provides formal assurances regarding the state’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations and with financial and programmatic requirements pertaining to the Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 federal grant. The Certification Statement is signed by the Governor’s Highway Safety Representative and submitted to NHTSA. Develop Grant Agreement After the Transportation Commission approves the funding for the Highway Safety Performance Plan (HSPP), the Traffic Operations Division’s Traffic Safety Section (TRF-TS) issues a list of projects authorized for funding in each district (the “approved project list”). The grant agreements for approved projects are generated automatically by eGrants. Proposers of selected projects are now “subgrantees”. The subgrantees print out and sign the agreements, then send them back to TxDOT for signature of the TRF Division Director for all statewide projects and for local grants $100,000 or greater. Local projects less than $100,000 are signed by the District Engineer. Award Grants After the authorized TxDOT person signs the agreement, it is considered executed if the subgrantee signed first. The process ends with an executed grant agreement or contract (signed by both TxDOT and the subgrantee). Coordination Implement Grant Project After grants have been awarded, the subgrantee (previously the “proposer”) begins implementing their grant project. This process begins with a Grant Delivery Meeting and continues through the life of the grant. Coordinate Local Grant Projects The District TSSs (Project Managers) manage local grants within their respective districts. Coordinate Grant Programs & Statewide Grant Projects The TRF Program Managers manage the statewide grant programs. Coordinate Traffic Safety Program TRF-TS is responsible for coordinating and administering the Traffic Safety Program by managing traffic safety projects in federally designated priority program areas and in other areas as may be assigned or as determined by problem identification processes. They also provide oversight to districts and assist them in the development and implementation of traffic safety projects at the local level. Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Financial Processing Manage Financial Accounts TRF-Administration sets up, maintains, and closes the financial accounts in both the internal financial system, TxDOT’s Financial Information Management System (FIMS) and the Federal financial system, NHTSA’s Grant Tracking System (GTS). Apportion Federal Funds The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) apportions the traffic safety funds to the Texas Department of Transportation. Review & Approve Reimbursement The Program Manager (statewide grant) or the Traffic Safety Specialist (local grant) reviews incoming Requests for Reimbursement (RFRs) to determine accuracy, eligibility, and completeness. If an RFR is incomplete or inaccurate, it is sent back to the subgrantee for corrections, and then resubmitted.) If they are complete and accurate, they are approved and automatically sent from eGrants to FIMS, which in turn sends a transaction to the state comptroller’s system for payment. Reimburse Subgrantee RFR Payments are sent to FIMS automatically from eGrants. Within FIMS, a transaction is created and sent to the Comptroller Office to send a warrant or direct deposit to the subgrantee to pay them. Reimburse Subgrantee Finance Division receives RFRs and approvals from the Program Manager or Traffic Safety Specialist. After reviewing the information for completeness and accuracy, they then enter the information in FIMS and create a transaction to the Comptroller Office to send a warrant or direct deposit to the subgrantee. Request Federal Reimbursement The Finance Division requests reimbursements from NHTSA via the Grants Tracking System based on the grant program created during the setup phase. Reimburse State NHTSA reimburses TxDOT via the Grants Tracking System (GTS) for approved expenditures. Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Monitoring Report on Performance The subgrantee provides regular reports on performance, based on the agreed-upon performance measures, in order to receive reimbursement of expenses. At the end of the year, the subgrantee provides an Administrative Evaluation Report (AER) specifying how they accomplished their goals. Review & Approve Performance Report The TSSs and Program Managers review the Performance Reports to determine accuracy and completeness before accepting them. They work with the subgrantee to correct errors or to add additional information. Monitor Grant Projects The Program Managers and Traffic Safety Specialists (TSS) monitor each grant project assigned to them in order to ensure that they are being properly and efficiently implemented. Monitoring is both a state and federal requirement of the Uniform Grant Management Standards (UGMS). Monitoring is required in order to assure compliance with state and federal requirements, and to assure that objectives and performance measures are being achieved. Conduct Compliance Monitoring The Traffic Safety Section performs periodic reviews of the grant programs, the program managers, and the Traffic Safety Specialists, to ensure that the procedures are being followed, to help provide operational consistency, and to ensure compliance with laws and regulations. Oversee Traffic Safety Program The U.S. Department of Transportation – National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) monitors TxDOT’s Traffic Safety Program to ensure the proper allocation and application of its grant funds. Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Closeout Closeout Grant Projects The subgrantees are responsible for completing any outstanding work and closing out their grant projects. Closeout Grant Programs / Projects The TSSs are responsible for closing out the local grant projects and the TRF-PMs are responsible for closing out the statewide grant projects and the grant programs once the subgrantees have closed it from their end. Develop Annual Report The grant projects are evaluated by the Program Managers, Traffic Safety Specialists, and TRF-TS in order to assess project or program effectiveness, improve countermeasures, and allocate scarce resources more efficiently. This helps the subgrantees, project directors, Program Managers and TSSs to make adjustments to countermeasures development or implementation. It also shows whether or not programs and individual projects are accomplishing their intended results and if one program is more or less effective than another. Section One: INTRODUCTION Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 eGrants: Using Technology to Support the Grant Process Traffic Safety Grant Management FY 2008 Initial Implementation In order to streamline the grant management process, TRF-TS procured a automated grants management solution. The Traffic Safety Electronic Grants Management System (eGrants) went live in January of 2007 at the beginning of the FY 2008 Grant Lifecycle. The original implementation included modules for the completion, submission, and scoring of traffic safety grant proposals. It also included modules for the completion, submission and approval of performance reports and requests for reimbursement (RFR). It also included an automated interface with TxDOT’s financial management system (FIMS) for payments to subgrantees. TRF-TS continues to enhance eGrants, as described below: FY 2009 Enhancements • Multi-Year Grant option FY 2010 Enhancements • Implement Project Grading • Enhance the 3-year grant process (formerly Multi-Year grants) • Incorporate All “Buckle Up Texas” Functionality • Enhance the FIMS interface to allow for the automatic updating of payment status of each RFR FY 2011 Enhancements • Implement a new eGrants User Interface Traffic Safety Planning Process In the Spring of 2009, the Traffic Safety Section began an initiative to revise, standardize and document the planning process, and determine ways to streamline and automate the functions within it. This initiative is comprised of the following phases & activities: Phase 1: Proof-of-Concept (FY 2010) • Formalize the Traffic Safety Lifecycle • Develop a Traffic Safety Planner Guide • Streamline & Automate the Project Approval / HSPP Process • Analyze and Design a Traffic Safety Repository and Portal • Revise/Refine the Strategic and Performance Planning Processes • Streamline & Automate the Annual Report Process Phase 2: Integration with eGrants (FY 2011) • Incorporate Proof-of-Concept Automation into eGrants • Enhance & Further Automate the Proposal Scoring process • Develop and Implement a Traffic Safety Repository and Portal • Integrate Planner Processes, etc. into the Traffic Safety Manual Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 FY2010 HSPP PLANNING CALENDAR The following schedule shows the major activities, tasks, delivery dates, deliverables and responsible parties for the Planning and Grant Development phases of the Traffic Safety Grant Lifecycle. Delivery Date Deliverable Responsible Party # Activity / Task 1 Conduct Performance Planning 12/15/08 • FY 2010 Performance Plan Planner 2 Develop Request(s) for Proposals 01/16/09 • FY 2010 RFP(s) Policy & Procedures Coordinator / Planner Create RFP Document(s) & Instructions 12/01/2008 Create Proposal Templates in eGrants 01/01/2009 Post RFP (on Texas Register) 01/16/2009 Open Proposals on eGrants ¾ RFP Document(s) & Instructions eGrants Team ¾ Posted RFP Announcement ¾ RFP & Instructions Planner; TxDOT General Counsel (OGC) 01/16/2009 ¾ eGrants 2010 Proposal Forms eGrants Team 06/15/09 • Completed Proposals Planner 02/20/09 ¾ FY 2010 Completed Proposals Potential Subgrantees 04/17/09 ¾ FY 2010 Proposal Score Results TxDOT TS Scoring Team Conduct Proposal Negotiations 06/15/09 ¾ Modified Proposals Potential Subgrantees 07/31/09 • Approved Project List & Funding Planner Develop Project List 07/01/09 ¾ Approved Project List Planner Develop Funding List and Minute Order 07/10/09 Approve Funding 5 ¾ eGrants Proposal Templates Score Proposals 4 Policy & Procedures Coordinator Apply for Grants 3 ¾ RFP Texas Registry Announcement 07/31/09 Conduct Request for Proposals Approve Funding Develop the HSPP 10/01/09 ¾ Funding List and Minute Order for Commission ¾ Approved Funding List • FY 2010 Texas Highway Safety Performance Plan Planner TRF Division Director; Texas Transportation Commission Planner Draft HSPP Document ¾ HSPP Draft Planner Review HSPP 08/31/09 ¾ HSPP Comments & Revisions TRF-TS; TSSs; TRF Division Director; NHTSA Submit HSPP to NHTSA 09/01/09 ¾ Final HSPP TRF Division Director Approve HSPP 09/18/09 ¾ Approved HSPP NHTSA Publish HSPP 6 08/01/09 10/01/09 ¾ Published HSPP Planner 10/01/09 • Executed Grant Agreements TRF-TS Section Director Create Grant Agreements 10/01/09 ¾ Grant Agreements eGrants Team Sign & Submit Grant Agreements 10/01/09 ¾ Signed/Submitted Grant Agreements Selected Subgrantees Execute Grant Agreements 10/01/09 ¾ Executed Grant Agreements TRF Division Director; District Engineers Activate Grants in eGrants 10/01/09 ¾ Activated Grants eGrants Team Award Grants Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Section One: INTRODUCTION Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Texas Department of Transportation’s FY 2010 budget of approximately $79 million will fund 358 projects during the year. Several program highlights include: • Texas will implement activities in support of national highway safety goals to reduce motor vehicle related fatalities that also reflect the primary data-related crash factors within the State as identified by the State highway safety planning process, including: National law enforcement mobilizations and sustained enforcement of statutes addressing impaired driving, occupant protection, and driving in excess of posted speed limits. • Texas will continue to focus on alcohol-related fatalities which continue to be a problem in Texas. FARS (Fatality Analysis Reporting System) of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports 1,333 Alcohol-Impaired Driving Fatalities in Texas during 2007. • Texas will host the annual Save a Life Summit for an estimated 300 attendees from state and local law enforcement agencies, and other traffic safety partners. • Statewide surveys show that safety belt use by drivers and front seat passengers was a record high 92.94% in 2009. Texas children ages 0-4 years were restrained 84% in 2008. Texas will continue efforts to increase occupant restraint use in all passenger vehicle and trucks for driver and front seat passengers to 93.2%, for children ages 5-16 to 75.0%, and to achieve occupant restraint use for children ages 0-4 at 85% or higher in 2010. • Motorcycle fatalities continue to rise in Texas and nationally at significant levels. Texas will continue to focus on motorcycle safety through motorcycle safety training, public awareness, public service announcements, and other outreach programs to enhance driver awareness of motorcyclist, such as the “share-the-road” safety messages developed using Share-the Road model language. • Texas will continue to develop and implement the statewide data system CRIS (Crash Records Information System) which will provide timely and effective data analysis to support allocation of highway safety resources. This includes the development a Crash Reporting and Analysis for Safer Highways (CRASH) component of CRIS which will allow the local law enforcement community to submit crash reports electronically via the public internet. CRASH has built in real-time data checks and business rules to increase the accuracy. CRASH simplifies the data entry process by prompting the user through a series of menus and options. • TxDOT will continue to enhance the web-based Electronic Grants System (eGrants) to simplify the grant process for potential and current subgrantees. Texas has also begun an initiative to formalize the traffic safety planning process, adding automation where practical, and integrating these functions into the eGrants system. Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 LEGISLATIVE ISSUES The 81st Texas Legislature convened in January 2009. Following is a description of the bills related to traffic safety that passed. The text, history and status of all bills is available at: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/ Prohibition on Wireless Communications House Bill 55 • Creates a statewide traffic offense for the use of a wireless communication devices in a school zone unless the vehicle is stopped or a hands-free device is used. Cities, counties of any other political subdivision wishing to enforce this prohibition must post a sign at the beginning of each school zone to inform drivers that use of a wireless communications device is prohibited and the operator is subject to a fine. • Requires TxDOT to develop standards for the sign. The bill invalidates local ordinances inconsistent with the terms of the legislation. The bill notes that it is a defense to prosecution if the operator was making an emergency call. Effective Date: September 1, 2009 Driver’s Education House Bill 339 • Requires each school district to consider offering a driver education course for a fee, increases the total hours of behind-the-wheel driving instruction a teen receives to 34, makes the qualifications for driving instructors more stringent, requires DPS to conduct a driving test for each applicant under the age of 18, and for DPS to collect and publish statistics related to the effectiveness of different methods of driver education. • Creates an adult drivers education requirement for applicants older than 18 and younger than 21. The bill expands the current Graduated Driver’s License prohibitions for new drivers from six to 12 months. The bill provides that the use of a wireless device by a teen while operating a vehicle during the first twelve months is allowable in cases of emergency. Effective Date: September 1, 2009 House Bill 2730 • (Sunset Legislation for the Department of Public Safety) has similar provisions as HB 339. Effective Date: September 1, 2009 Senate Bill 1317 • Has similar provisions as HB 339. Effective Date: March 1, 2010 Safety Belts Senate Bill 61 • Amends the existing statute regarding child passenger safety seats. The bill requires an operator to keep any child younger than eight years of age restrained in a child passenger safety seat unless the child is taller than 4 feet, 9 inches in height. Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 • Amends the existing fine structure to be not more than $25 for a first offense and $250 for a subsequent of second offense. • Creates a new court cost for conviction of an offense under this section to be collected and used by TxDOT for the purchase of safety seats for low income families. Effective Date: September 1, 2009. Note that citations may only begin to be issued on June 1, 2010. Prior to that date, an officer may issue a warning. House Bill 537: • Removes the current exemption for third party Medicaid transportation provisions regarding the use of child passenger safety seats; • Defines a passenger vehicle to include a passenger van designed to transport 15 or fewer passengers including the driver; • Makes it an offense for a person who is at least 15 to not be secured by a safety belt in any seating position of the vehicle (current offense limited to front seat passengers); • Creates an offense for a person that allows a child who is younger than 17 to ride in a passenger van designed to transport 15 or fewer passengers without securing the child in a child safety seat or safety belt; • Prohibits a motorcycle operator from carrying a passenger under the age of 5 unless the child is seated in a sidecar attached to the motorcycle. Effective Date: September 1, 2009 House Bill 3638 • Creates an exception to the state safety belt law for the solid waste handlers. Effective Date: September 1, 2009. Local Preference for Media Purchases House Bill 2521 • Requires the Comptroller of Public Accounts and each state agency conducting an advertising campaign that includes a commercial to give preference to a company located in Texas if the services meet state requirements regarding service and quality, and if the cost does not exceed the cost of similar services from outside the State. Effective Date: September 1, 2009 Municipal Authority to Alter Speed Limits House Bill 2628 • Removes certain restrictions currently in place as to where a municipality has the authority to declare a lower speed limit of not less than 25 miles per hour on certain types of highways in an urban district if the governing body determines that the prima facie speed limit on the highway in the municipality is unreasonable or unsafe. This authority does not apply to a portion of the state highway system. The bill requires a municipality that declares such a lower speed limit to provide a report to TxDOT. Effective Date: June 19, 2009. Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Safe Routes to School License Plate Funds Senate Bill 161 • Diverts the revenue from God Bless Texas and God Bless America license plates from the Safe Routes to School Program to the Texas Education Agency for use by a statewide bicycle advocacy organization. Effective Date: May 27, 2009. Operating a Motor Vehicle or Watercraft While Intoxicated Senate Bill 328 • Amends the Alcoholic Beverage Code, Chapter 106 and Transportation Code, Chapter 524 to include the operation of a watercraft while intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol to the driver license suspension statutes related to driving under the influence by a minor. The bill would also amend the Transportation Code to add to the circumstances under which a peace officer would be authorized to take a specimen of a person's breath or blood. Additionally, the bill would amend the Transportation Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding procedures for drawing a blood specimen from a vehicle operator to test for alcohol concentration or other intoxicating substances as those procedures affect law enforcement and certain medical personnel. The bill would amend the Code of Criminal Procedure to increase the reinstatement fee for a license suspended under sections 49.0449.08, Penal Code from $50 to $100. Effective Date: September 1, 2009 Safe Operation of Motorcycles and other Vehicles Senate Bill 1967 • Requires TxDOT to conduct a continuing public awareness campaign to promote motorcyclist safety and the concept of sharing the road with motorcyclists. Additionally, the bill would require that applicants for an original class M license or class A, B, or C driver's license (including commercial driver licenses and permits), with authorization to operate a motorcycle, provide evidence of completion of an approved motorcycle operator training course. • Increases penalties for failure to yield the right-of-way if there is a crash that results in injury to a person other than the operator. Effective Date: September 1, 2009 Section One: INTRODUCTION T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R Section Two PERFORMANCE PLAN Section Two: PERFORMANCE PLAN 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Section Two: PERFORMANCE PLAN Y E A R 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 OVERVIEW This Performance Plan contains the goals, strategies, performance measures and objectives Texas has set for fiscal year 2010. It is provided as part of the State of Texas' application for FY 2010 federal highway safety funds. Consistent with the requirements for the application for these funds, the FY 2010 Performance Plan contains: STEP 1: PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION TxDOT plans with multiple agencies in identifying Texas Traffic Safety problems. Agencies that assist in problem identification include the following: AAA-Texas, AARP, MADD-Texas, Texas Department of Public Safety (TxDPS), Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS), Texas Transportation Institute (TTI), Texas Cooperative Extension (TCE), Texas Engineering Extension Service (TEEX), Texas Bicycle Coalition (TBC), Texas Transportation Institute and the NHTSA Region 6. These agencies helped to establish the goals, strategies, and objectives for the program. In addition, the following agencies and organizations assisted TxDOT in completing an alcohol self assessment that identified strategies needed to address impaired driving problems in Texas. These agencies included the following: Texas District and County Attorney's Association, Texas Center for the Judiciary, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, TxDPS, NHTSA Region 6, Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, DSHS-Community Mental Health and Substance Abuse and Environmental Epidemiology and Injury, Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Drug Prevention, MADD, Texas Army National Guard, Brazos County, Sam Houston State University, TTI, Sherry Matthews Advocacy Marketing, Texas Education Agency, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Texas A&M University-Center for Alcohol/Drug Education, Texas Municipal Police Association, Texans Standing Tall, and Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education (TCLEOSE). Problems Needing Special Emphasis The bulleted list below includes the problems identified by Texas as areas needing special emphasis in order to improve traffic safety and decrease injuries and fatalities. Following this list is a description of the process used to identify the traffic safety problems Texas faces on the roadways. Additional Texas data can be found on the charts included in this plan. • Overall – In 2007, there were 3,466 traffic fatalities (FARS) and 89,476 serious injuries in traffic crashes (CRIS). • Impaired Driving – There were 1,333 alcohol fatalities involving a driver or motorcycle operator with .08+ BAC in 2007 (FARS) in Texas. • Safety Belts – Safety belt usage reached 92.94% in 2009 (TTI statewide survey) for front seat drivers and passengers. Children are restrained at a much lower rate than adults. Usage for children ages 0-4 was 84% in 2008 (TTI Survey of Child Restraint Use in Fourteen Texas Cities). The lowest usage rate was for children ages 5-16, with a 70.7% usage rate in 2008 (TTI School age Children Survey in eighteen Texas Cities). • Motorcycles – Of the 407 motorcyclist fatalities in 2007 (FARS), 239 (58.7%) were not wearing a helmet. • Speeding – Of the 3,466 crash fatalities in 2007, 1,380 were speeding-related (FARS). Section Two: PERFORMANCE PLAN T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Using Data A variety of data originating from multiple sources is used to assist in problem identification and project and program evaluation. The majority of the data used for problem identification originates from the Texas Department of Transportation’s state crash data files, rash File, which in turn, derives from individual Texas Peace Officers Accident Reports (Form ST-3). For more information regarding these data sources, please refer to the Data Sources & Glossary for Performance Measures section below. Annual Tracking of Crash and Injury Trends Since 1991, Texas has presented a series of graphical representations of statewide crash experience trends, with six to ten years of data, in each Annual Report to NHTSA on the Texas Traffic Safety Program. These presentations provided a wide variety of crash and casualty information encompassing absolute numbers and mileage-based rates of both crashes and casualties by severity. Over the years, the specific data reported have evolved in response to changing traffic safety priorities at the national level and, at the state level, as a result of on-going internal planning efforts within TxDOT’s TRF-TS and the formal strategic planning process initiated in 1997. The current measures tracked and reported annually are enumerated in Table 1 - Goals, Strategies, Performance Measures and Objectives below. Traffic Safety Grant Proposal Process A key component of the problem identification process is vested in the proposal process for traffic safety funding by prospective traffic safety subgrantees and contractors. This is in addition to the analyses of crash data, tracking of local, state and national trends, application of relevant TxDOT and other research findings, etc. performed under the auspices of TRF. For each fiscal year, a public announcement for traffic safety project proposals is published in the Texas Register. The importance of clear, concise and accurate problem identification, supported with factual crash documentation, is stressed in the requirements provided for potential grantees proposing projects as one of the most important aspects of project proposals. A strong problem identification description accurately defines the nature and magnitude of the specific problem or problems in terms of causes of fatalities, injuries, crashes and property damage. Sufficient sourceidentified, verifiable data must be provided to justify the traffic safety problem in order for a proposal to be considered. Project proposers also identify specific traffic safety problems through archived and especially collected data from, for example, community assessments, traffic analyses, local speed and occupant restraint use surveys, local law enforcement agencies and hospital and emergency room reports. The proposals must be specific about the site location (city, county, roadway section, statewide), population data, the target audience, and over or underrepresentations. It is through analysis and synthesis of the data described above and the stringent requirements placed on potential subgrantees and contractors that the State’s traffic safety problems are identified and prioritized for inclusion in the State’s annual Highway Safety Performance Plan. Section Two: PERFORMANCE PLAN T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 State Demographics Analysis Geography Texas, the largest state in the contiguous United States, is bounded by Oklahoma (N); Arkansas (NE); Louisiana (E); the Gulf of Mexico (SE); Mexico, (SW); and New Mexico (W). North to south, Texas stretches 801 miles and the longest east-west distance is 773 miles. The state encompasses 261,797 square miles of land and 6,784 square miles of water. Population Texas’ population, 20,851,820 per the 2000 Census, was estimated to be 23,904,380 in 2007 and has been projected to be 24,330,646 in 2010 (Texas State Data Center). Projections indicate that in 2010, 47.4 percent of the population will be Anglo, 37.3 percent Hispanic, 11.3 percent Black, and 4.0 percent ‘other’ racial/ethnic groups. About 26.6% of the population will be less than 18 yearsold, 63% will be 18-64, and 10.4% 65 or older. Texans live in 254 counties that range in projected 2010 population from 65 (Loving) to 3,947,727 (Harris), and in area from Rockwall County’s 149 square miles to the 6,193 square miles of Brewster County (equal to the combined area of the states of Connecticut and Rhode Island). Despite vast expanses of low-density population, in 2007 Texas had 231 cities with populations of 10,000 or more. Of these, 61 had populations in excess of 50,000 and 31 had more than 100,000 residents. Transportation In FY 2007, there were 20.9 million registered vehicles in the state, including rental trailers, exempt vehicles and other special categories (TxDOT Vehicle Titles and Registration Division). Licensed drivers numbered 15,184,123 in 2007 (FHWA: Highway Statistics 2007). Of these, 6.3% (956,727) were under 21 years old (with more than 229,000 under 18) and 12.8% were 65 or older (1,948,316). There are approximately 79,975 centerline miles of state-maintained roadways, including 3,233 miles of Interstate highways, 12,100 miles of US highways and 16,330 miles of Texas State highways. Another 40,965 miles on the state system are designated as Farm or Ranch to Market roads. In addition to the state-maintained roads, there are approximately 226,000 miles of city and countymaintained streets and highways. While only 26.1 percent of roadways in Texas are state maintained, 73.8 percent of all vehicle miles traveled (VMT) occurs on state-maintained highways. In 2007, the average daily VMT on state maintained highways was 489.million miles. The average daily VMT on all roadways in the state was 662 million miles. The average annual VMT on state-maintained highways was 178.5 billion miles; 241.7 billion on all state roadways (TxDOT – Transportation Planning and Programming Division, FY2007 Certified Files). Section Two: PERFORMANCE PLAN T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Section Two: PERFORMANCE PLAN 2 0 1 0 T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 STEP 2: SET PERFORMANCE GOALS Strategic Planning Beginning with the traffic safety planning process for FY 97, the State initiated periodic, formal traffic safety strategic planning sessions. The strategic planning meeting for 2005-2010 was held in June of 2003. The attendees re-evaluated all strategies and goals and reviewed the Traffic Safety Program's vision and mission statement. Participants in the strategic planning sessions included traffic safety and engineering professionals from the TRF at TxDOT headquarters, TxDOT district traffic safety specialists, NHTSA Region 6, representatives from AAA-Texas, AARP, MADD-Texas, TXDPS, DSHS, TTI, TCE, TEEX, and TBC. As an outgrowth of the strategic planning process, Texas developed 18 specific goals for the traffic safety program, 78 specific strategies, and 32 specific performance measures. Objectives have been established for all 32 performance measures for 2010. These Texas traffic safety goals, strategies, performance measures and objectives for 2010 are outlined in Table 1 - Goals, Strategies, Performance Measures and Objectives below. As part of the strategic planning cycle, program goals and strategies were re-evaluated and modified as needed to make them more consistent with each other and better indicate progress toward those goals. The FY 2005 - 2010 Strategic Plan will be used to develop the HSPPs through FY2010. Through both the formal strategic planning efforts and the on-going management and administration of the Traffic Safety Program, TXDOT will continue to comply with both the letter and the spirit of all state and federal highway safety program requirements. The original plan was to conduct another Strategic Planning session during June 2008. However, due to the delay in getting more recent Texas crash data, the next strategic planning meeting is scheduled for the fall of 2009. Defining Objectives & Performance Measures Objectives and performance measures were subsequently developed by TRF-TS to improve safety on Texas roadways and reduce the number of crashes, injuries and fatalities. These objectives and performance measures have been included in the FY 2010 Performance Plan. Several modifications and additions were made for the FY 2010 Plan. TRF-TS has also included the new Traffic Safety Performance Measures for States and Federal Agencies, defined by NHTSA and the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA), as required by NHTSA. The following tables describes these performance measures, and provides a cross reference to TxDOT’s measures: Types of Performance Measures Type Core Outcome Measures Behavioral Measures Description Used to set national and State goals, allocate resources and measure overall progress (may include crashes, injuries, or fatalities, and may be presented as numbers, rates, percentages, or ratios). Provide a link between specific activities and outcomes by assessing whether the activities have influenced behavior (may include observed behavior on the road such as direct observations of seat belt use or vehicle speed, or self-reported behavior, program awareness, and attitudes obtained through surveys. Activity Measures Document program implementation and measure specific actions taken to reduce crashes, injuries and fatalities (a variety of actions taken by law enforcement, courts, media, education, and others). Periodic surveys to track driver attitudes and awareness concerning impaired driving, seat belt use, and speeding issues. Survey Section Two: PERFORMANCE PLAN T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Performance Measure Description and Cross-Reference TxDOT Perf. Measure # Figure # FARS CRIS FARS, FHWA 4 5 3 4 1 1 FARS 17 11 FARS 8 7 FARS FARS FARS FARS FARS 25 12 13 6 19 17 9 9 6 12 Survey 14 10 eGrants 18 n/a eGrants 9 n/a Number of speeding citations issued during grant-funded enforcement activities NHTSA Perf. Measure eGrants 26 n/a Driver attitudes and awareness concerning impaired driving, seat belt use, and speeding issues Survey 30 n/a Description Core Outcome Measures C-1 Number of traffic fatalities (3-year or 5-year moving averages) C-2 Number of serious injuries in traffic crashes C-3 Fatalities/VMT (including rural, urban, and total fatalities) Number of unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant fatalities, all seat positions Number of fatalities in crashes involving a driver or motorcycle operator with a blood alcohol concentration of .08 g/dL or higher Number of speeding-related fatalities Number of motorcyclist fatalities Number of unhelmeted motorcyclist fatalities FARS Number of drivers 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes Number of pedestrian fatalities C-4 C-5 C-6 C-7 C-8 C-9 C-10 Behavioral Measures Observed seat belt use for passenger vehicles, front seat B-1 outboard occupants Activity Measures Number of seat belt citations issued during grant-funded A-1 enforcement activities Number of impaired-driving arrests made during grant-funded A-2 enforcement activities A-3 Data Source Survey Survey-1 Note: The information in this table is taken from NHTSA’s Traffic Tech publication number 371, April 2009, entitled Traffic Safety Performance Measures for States and Federal Agencies. As a result of these changes, the thirty-six performance measures enumerated in Table 1 - Goals, Strategies, Performance Measures and Objectives below have been established to track progress on the eighteen traffic safety goals. The FY10 HSPP was sent to the Governor’s Texas Review and Comment System (TRACS). Additionally, the HSPP was sent to TxDOT District TSSs, TRF Program Managers, TRF Administration as well as the NHTSA Region 6 Office, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Agency (FMCSA). Section Two: PERFORMANCE PLAN T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Table 1. Goals, Strategies, Performance Measures and Objectives Goals Strategies Performance Measures Most Recent Status 2010 Objective 1. Mileage Death Rate [NHTSA C-3] 1.43/100M VMT (2007 CRIS) 1.40 fatalities per 100M VMT (CRIS) 1.42/100M VMT (2007 FARS) 1.41 fatalities per 100M VMT (FARS) 2. Mileage Death Rate (FARS – Urban) 0.99/100 M VMT (2007 FARS) 0.98/100 M VMT (FARS) in Urban areas (FARS) 3. Mileage Death Rate (FARS – Rural) 2.20/100M VMT ( 2007 FARS) 2.18/100 M VMT in Rural areas (FARS) 4. Number of traffic fatalities (FARS) [NHTSA C-1] 3,466 (2007 FARS) 3,460 traffic fatalities (FARS) 5. Number of serious injuries in traffic crashes (CRIS) [NHTSA C-2] 89,476 serious injuries in traffic crashes (2007 CRIS) 89,450 serious injuries in traffic crashes (CRIS) 6. Number of drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes (FARS) [NHTSA C-9] 598 drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes (2007 FARS) 590 drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes (FARS) Overall State Goal To reduce the number of motor vehicle crashes, injuries and fatalities Planning and Administration Program Area – 01 Provide training and assistance for local and statewide traffic safety problem identification. Provide procedures and training on highway safety planning and project development. To provide effective and efficient management of the Texas Traffic Safety Program Ensure availability of program and project management training. No current quantifiable performance measures or objectives Review and update program procedures as needed. Conduct periodic project monitoring and evaluation of traffic safety activities. Perform accurate accounting and efficient reimbursement processing. Maintain coordination of traffic safety efforts and provide technical assistance. Section Two: P E R F O R M A N C E PLAN T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Table 1. Goals, Strategies, Performance Measures and Objectives Goals Strategies Performance Measures Most Recent Status 2010 Objective Alcohol and Other Drug Countermeasures Program Area – 02 Increase enforcement of DWI laws. 7. Number of DUI-related (alcohol or other drugs) KAB crashes (CRIS) Increase sustained enforcement. Increase high visibility enforcement. 8,438 DUI-related (alcohol or other drugs) KAB crashes (2007 CRIS) 8,400 DUI-related (alcohol or other drugs KAB crashes (CRIS) 8. Number of fatalities in crashes involving a driver or motorcycle operator with a BAC of .08 or above (FARS) [NHTSA C-5] 1,333 fatalities involving a driver or motorcycle operator with a BAC of .08 or above (2007 FARS) 1,300 fatalities involving a driver or motorcycle operator with a BAC of .08 or above (FARS) 9. Number of impaired-driving arrests made during grant-funded enforcement activities (eGrants) [NHTSA A-2] 10,124 impaired-driving arrests made during enforcement activities (eGrants) TBD * 10. Number of 16-20 year old DUI drivers (alcohol or other drugs) in KAB crashes per 100,000 16-20 year-olds (CRIS) 66.7 16-20 year old DUI drivers (alcohol or other drugs) in KAB crashes per 100,000 16-20 year-olds (2007 CRIS) 66.5 16-20 year old DUI drivers (alcohol or other drugs) in KAB crashes per 100,000 16-20 yearolds (CRIS) Improve BAC testing and reporting to the State’s crash records information system. To reduce the number of alcohol impaired and driving under the influence of alcohol and other drug-related crashes, fatalities and injuries. Improve anti-DWI public information and education campaigns. Increase the number of law enforcement task forces and coordinated enforcement campaigns. Increase training for anti-DWI advocates. Increase intervention efforts. Improve and increase training for law enforcement officers. Improve DWI processing procedures. Improve adjudication of DWI cases through improved training for judges, administrative license revocation judges, and prosecutors, and improved support materials for judges and prosecutors. Expand “El Protector” and keep concentration on alcohol. Develop a DWI and minor in possession tracking system. To reduce the number of DUI-related crashes where the driver is under age 21 Improve education programs on alcohol and driving for youth. Increase enforcement of driving under the influence by minors laws. Increase public education and information, concentrating on youth age 5-13 and 14-20, including parent education on drinking and driving. Develop innovative ways and programs to combat underage drinking and driving. * The objectives for Activity Measures are determined by the performance measures in the individual approved STEP grants within the eGrants system. Since not all STEP grants have been awarded for the upcoming fiscal year, specific objectives are not defined for this activity measure. Section Two: P E R F O R M A N C E PLAN T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Table 1. Goals, Strategies, Performance Measures and Objectives Goals Strategies Performance Measures Most Recent Status 2010 Objective 11. Number of students trained in EMS classes 1,081 students trained in EMS classes (2008) 1,100 students trained in EMS classes 12. Number of motorcyclist fatalities (FARS) [NHTSA C-7] 407 motorcyclist fatalities (2007 FARS) Reduce motorcyclist fatalities to no more than 400 (FARS) 13. Number of un-helmeted motorcyclist fatalities (FARS) [NHTSA C-8] 239 un-helmeted motorcyclist fatalities (2007 FARS) Reduce un-helmeted motorcyclists to 230 (FARS) Emergency Medical Services Program Area - 03 To improve EMS care and support provided to motor vehicle trauma victims in rural and frontier areas of Texas. To increase the availability of EMS training in rural and frontier areas. Increase EMS involvement in local community safety efforts. Motorcycle Safety Program Area - 04 Increase enforcement of existing motorcycle helmet law for riders and passengers under 21. Improve public information and education on motorcycle safety, including the value of wearing a helmet. To reduce the number of motorcyclist fatalities Improve public information and education on the value of not operating a motorcycle while under the influence of alcohol and/or other drugs. Increase rider education and training. Section Two: P E R F O R M A N C E PLAN T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Table 1. Goals, Strategies, Performance Measures and Objectives Goals Strategies Performance Measures Most Recent Status 2010 Objective 14. Observed seat belt use for passenger vehicles, front seat outboard occupants [NHTSA B-1] 92.9 percent (2009) 93.2 percent 15. Safety belt use rate by children age 5-16 70.7 percent (2008) 75.0 percent 16. Child passenger restraint use rate for children ages 0-4 84.0 percent (2008) 85.0 percent 17. Number of unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant fatalities, all seat positions (FARS) [NHTSA C-4] 1,013 unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant fatalities, all seat positions (2007 FARS) Decrease unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant fatalities, all seat positions to 1,000 (FARS) 18. Number of seat belt citations issued diruing grant-funded enforcement activities (eGrants) [NHTSA A-1] 110,728 seat belt citations issued during grant-funded enforcement activities (2008 eGrants) TBD * Occupant Protection Program Area - 05 Increase enforcement of occupant protection laws. Increase sustained enforcement. Increase high visibility enforcement. Increase public information and education campaigns. To increase occupant restraint use in all passenger vehicles and trucks Increase intervention efforts by Healthcare professionals, teachers, and all safety advocates. Concentrate efforts on historically low use populations. Increase judges’ and prosecutors’ awareness of safety belt misuse. Increase retention of child passenger safety (CPS) instructors. Increase training opportunities for CPS instructors. Increase EMS/fire department involvement in CPS fitting stations. Maintain CPS seat distribution programs for low income families. Increase occupant protection education and training for law enforcement and judges. * The objectives for Activity Measures are determined by the performance measures in the individual approved STEP grants within the eGrants system. Since not all STEP grants have been awarded for the upcoming fiscal year, specific objectives are not defined for this activity measure. Section Two: P E R F O R M A N C E PLAN T E X A S H I G H W A Y S A F E T Y P E R F O R M A N C E P L A N F O R F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 1 0 Table 1. Goals, Strategies, Performance Measures and Objectives Goals Strategies Performance Measures Most Recent Status 2010 Objective 19. Number of pedestrian fatalities (FARS) [NHTSA C-10] 410 pedestrian fatalities (2007 FARS) Reduce pedestrian fatalities to 400 (FARS) 20. Number of bicyclist fatalities (CRIS) 50 bicyclist fatalities (2007 CRIS) Decrease the number of fatalities to 47 (CRIS) 21. Number of KAB crashes (CRIS) 67,780 KAB crashes (2007 CRIS) Reduce KAB crashes to 67,600 (CRIS) 22. Number of intersection and intersection-related KAB crashes (CRIS) 27,301 intersection and intersection-related KAB crashes (2007 CRIS) Reduce intersection and intersection-related KAB crashes to 27,275 (CRIS) 23. Number of CMV (large truck) involved fatalities. All crashes involve at least one vehicle with a vehicle body type of “Semi-Trailer” or “TruckTractor” (CRIS) 437 fatalities in crashes involving motor vehicles with a body type of ‘semi-trailer’ or ‘truck-tractor’ (2007 CRIS) No more than 430 fatalities for vehicles with a body type of ‘semitrailer’ or ‘truck-tractor’ (CRIS) 24. Number of CMV (large truck) involved: fatal crashes. All crashes involve at least one vehicle with a vehicle body type of “Semi-Trailer” or “Truck-Tractor” (CRIS) 371 fatal crashes involving motor vehicles with a body type of ‘semi-trailer’ or ‘trucktractor’ (2007 CRIS) No more than 365 fatal crashes for motor vehicles with a body type of ‘semi-trailer’ or ‘trucktractor’ (CRIS) Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Program Area - 06 Increase enforcement of traffic laws about bicycle right of way. Increase motorist awareness for sharing the road with bicyclists. Improve bicycle crash data. To reduce the number of motor vehicle-related pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities Increase public information and education efforts on the use of safety equipment. Improve identification of problem areas for pedestrians. Improve pedestrian “walkability” of roads and streets. Improve data collection on pedestrian injuries and fatalities. Improve public education and information on pedestrians and “safe walking.” Police Traffic Services Program Area - 07 To increase effective enforcement and adjudication of traffic safety-related laws to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes To reduce commercial motor vehicle crashes, injuries and fatalities involving vehicles with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or greater Increase enforcement of traffic safetyrelated laws including speed-related. Increase sustained enforcement including speed related laws. Increase public education and information campaigns. Increase traffic law enforcement. Technical and managerial support to local law enforcement agencies and highway safety professionals. Increase public information