CMF / CRF Details

CMF ID: 4076

Upgrade unpaved or non-existent shoulders to composite shoulders

Description: Upgrade shoulders on rural two-lane roads from unpaved or non-existent shoulders to composite shoulders.

Prior Condition:  Unpaved or non-existent shoulders on rural two-lane roads.

Category: Shoulder treatments

Study: Estimation of Safety Effectiveness of Composite Shoulders on Rural Two-Lane Highways, Zeng, H. and S.D. Schrock, 2012

 
Star Quality Rating:3 Stars  [View score details]
Rating Points Total:80
Crash Modification Factor (CMF)
Value:0.944
Adjusted Standard Error:
Unadjusted Standard Error:0.183
Crash Reduction Factor (CRF)
Value:5.6  (This value indicates a decrease in crashes)
Adjusted Standard Error:
Unadjusted Standard Error:18.3
Applicability
Crash Type:All
Crash Severity:K (fatal),A (serious injury),B (minor injury),C (possible injury)
Roadway Types:Not Specified
Street Type:
Minimum Number of Lanes:2
Maximum Number of Lanes:2
Number of Lanes Direction:
Number of Lanes Comment:
Crash Weather:Not specified
Road Division Type:Undivided
Minimum Speed Limit:
Maximum Speed Limit:
Speed Unit:
Speed Limit Comment:
Area Type:Rural
Traffic Volume:Minimum of 380 to Maximum of 2340 Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
Average Traffic Volume:980 Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
Time of Day:All
If countermeasure is intersection-based
Intersection Type:
Intersection Geometry:
Traffic Control:
Major Road Traffic Volume:
Minor Road Traffic Volume:
Average Major Road Volume :
Average Minor Road Volume :
Development Details
Date Range of Data Used:2000 to 2009
Municipality:
State:KS
Country:USA
Type of Methodology Used:Before/after using empirical Bayes or full Bayes
Sample Size (crashes):17 crashes before, 19 crashes after
Other Details
Included in Highway Safety Manual?No
Date Added to Clearinghouse:Nov 01, 2012
Comments:In this study, the treatment group was found to be not represented well by the reference group with respect to FI crashes and related crashes. Two EB results were combined to make the final estimates: one used separate SPFs for each type of studied crash, and the other one used the same SPF for all crash types, which performed similarly in both the reference and treatment groups. The combined EB resulted in better estimates with lower standard errors.