CMF / CRF Details
Implement automated speed enforcement cameras
Countermeasure ID: 11488
Description:
Prior Condition: No Prior Condition(s)
Category: Advanced technology and ITS
Study: Safety Impact of Automated Speed Camera Enforcement: Empirical Findings Based on Chicago’s Speed Cameras, Tilahun, 2023
| Crash Modification Factor (CMF) |
|---|
| Value: | 0.855 |
| Adjusted Standard Error: | |
| Unadjusted Standard Error: | 0.045 |
| Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) |
|---|
| Value: | 14.5 (This value indicates a decrease in crashes) |
| Adjusted Standard Error: | |
| Unadjusted Standard Error: | 4.5 |
| Applicability |
|---|
| Crash Type: | All |
| Crash Severity: | C (possible injury) |
| Roadway Types: | Not specified |
| Street Type: | Not Specified |
| Minimum Number of Lanes: | |
| Maximum Number of Lanes: | |
| Number of Lanes Direction: | |
| Number of Lanes Comment: | |
| Crash Weather: | Not specified |
| Road Division Type: | |
| Minimum Speed Limit: | 25 |
| Maximum Speed Limit: | 35 |
| Speed Unit: | mph |
| Speed Limit Comment: | |
| Area Type: | Urban |
| Traffic Volume: | |
| Average Traffic Volume: | |
| Time of Day: | Not specified |
| 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: | 2010 to 2017 |
| Municipality: | Chicago |
| State: | IL |
| Country: | |
| Type of Methodology Used: | |
| Other Details |
|---|
| Included in Highway Safety Manual? | No |
| Date Added to Clearinghouse: | Dec 12, 2023 |
| Comments: | |
[View score details]