Traffic Tech #198: Occupant Protection Special Traffic Enforcement Programs Evaluated in 20 States |
|---|
|
OCCUPANT PROTECTION SPECIAL TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS EVALUATED IN 20 STATES
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) awarded Occupant Protection Special Traffic Enforcement Program (OP sTEP) demonstration grants to 20 states in late 1995. The grants were awarded to increase occupant protection and reduce impaired driving under the umbrella program Campaign Safe&Sober.
In exchange for these demonstration grants, states were asked to carry out periodic waves of highly visible law enforcement coupled with extensive media support. Seat belts, child restraints, and impaired driving were emphasized following a five-step demonstration model as a guide:
NHTSA's Campaign Safe&Sober (CS&S) is a community-based strategy to encourage states and local level groups to promote national traffic safety programs under a common umbrella. States are free to develop their own program initiatives and materials. In order to receive grant funds, a state had to have a belt use law and have demonstrated active participation in the CS&S program. States also agreed to conduct and report on statewide programs of periodic, highly publicized enforcement according to the five-step model.
The height of OP sTEP activity was during the middle of 1996. Somewhat fewer programs were reported during the latter half of 1997, but some efforts were still being reported through the summer of 1998. Reporting improved as the quarters progressed. State reports usually included details on enforcement, public information and education, and changes in seat belt use. Citation data and seat belt use rates were reported most of the time while public information and education received less detailed attention.
Seat belt use was the foremost focus of most OP sTEP programs. During periods of wave enforcement one quarter of a million (273,437) seat belt citations were issued; only speeding citations were more numerous (391,437). Additionally over half a million (572,290) other citations and arrests were issued. Secondary law states issued proportionally fewer seat belt citations than primary law states, 21 percent versus 46 percent, respectively. This is not surprising because motorists in secondary law states must be stopped first for reasons other than solely failing to wear a seat belt.
Primary Law States Increased the Most
The chart above shows that primary law states achieved the greatest gains. Primary law states began the program with a higher seat belt use rate (62.9 percent average) than secondary law states (54.7 percent average). Increases in seat belt use were greater per enforcement wave for primary law states. Secondary law states did not achieve the same level of positive changes as primary law states. The mean average for percentage point increases across secondary law states was +5.6 percentage points compared to +16.8 percentage points for primary law states.
Enforcement Usually Accompanied by
Widespread Publicity Efforts
Periods of enforcement were usually accompanied with widespread publicity efforts. Nearly 300,000 various PI&E items were printed, aired, or distributed to the public, a number known to underestimate what actually occurred. Press releases in newspapers were most common. Other PI&E items described in reports included public service announcements, interviews, handouts, and billboards. Few were funded by the grants alone. Local newspaper articles reporting law enforcement activities generated a significant proportion of publicity, which also brought the occupant protection message closer to home.
Case Study States
The report describes program experiences in three case study states: Iowa, Indiana, and New Jersey. The OP
sTEP program accomplished what it set out to do in generating incremental law enforcement efforts against seat belt violations. States used much of the funding to compensate law enforcement agencies for overtime patrols that otherwise would not have been on the road. The extra patrols were perceived to be an effective highway safety effort as well as a deterrent to criminal activity.
Law Enforcement Reactions
Because of different reporting practices, citation activities were not comparable among states. There were some difficulties in conducting observational seat belt use surveys before and after every enforcement wave because of inconsistent survey procedures.
Programs were noticeably effective in changing police officers' practices (if not their attitudes) about seat belt enforcement, especially in secondary law states. One secondary state informed the public to expect two citations if they were unbelted when stopped. Some law enforcement agencies suggested changes in the timing of enforcement waves, shifting from the first quarter to more activity during the summer months, or a shift to accommodate local events.
HOW TO ORDER
For a copy of Occupant Protection Special Traffic Enforcement Program Evaluation (31 pages), prepared by Preusser Research Group, write to the Office of Research and Traffic Records, NHTSA, NTS-31, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20590, fax (202) 366-7096, or download from NHTSA's web nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury Linda Cosgrove, Ph.D., was the contract manager.
U.S. Department
of Transportation
National Highway
Traffic Safety
Administration
400 Seventh Street, S.W. NTS-31
Washington, DC 20590
Traffic Tech is a publication to disseminate
information about traffic safety programs,
including evaluations, innovative programs,
and new publications. Feel free to copy it as you wish.
If you would like to receive a copy contact:
Linda Cosgrove, Ph.D., Editor, Evaluation Staff
Traffic Safety Programs
(202) 366-2759, fax (202) 366-7096
mailto:lcosgrove@nhtsa.dot.gov