Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 1:59 am
Time: 1:59 am
Results for alcohol interlock devices
15 results foundAuthor: Robertson, Robyn D. Title: Alcohol Interlocks: Planning for Success. Proceedings of the 9th International Alcohol Interlock Symposium Summary: This report presents the findings from a symposium which addressed the issue of alcohol interlock systems. The symposium and the subsequents from it are designed to assist jurisdictions that have implemented, that are implementing or that are considering implementing alcohol interlocks to plan for success by sharing with them how to build and develop the essential ingredients of a successful interlock strategy. The information in this report summarizes what is currently known in the field, what issues or challenges still need to be addressed, and what current thinking is regarding potential ways these issues can be resolved. Details: Ottawa: Traffic Injury Research Foundation, 2009. 64p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: International URL: Shelf Number: 119110 Keywords: Alcohol AbuseAlcohol Interlock DevicesDrinking and Traffic AccidentsDriving Under the InfluenceDrunk Driving |
Author: Robertson, Robyn D. Title: The Implementation of Alcohol Interlocks for First Offenders: A Case Study Summary: Alcohol ignition interlocks are a proven tool to effectively monitor impaired driving offenders and reduce recidivism. Today, almost all U.S. jurisdictions have implemented an alcohol interlock law targeting repeat and even high-BAC offenders. More recently, at least 12 jurisdictions have moved to also include some or all first offenders in alcohol interlock legislation and several others are considering such laws. In order to learn from those states that have already implemented a first offender alcohol interlock law, the Traffic Injury Research Foundation conducted a case study to examine the experience of Illinois and compare it to the experiences of four other jurisdictions. The purpose of this case study was to gain insight into how legislation is translated into operational practices, and to provide guidance to other jurisdictions using the knowledge that has been gained to inform decision-making. The report summarizes research relevant to the use of alcohol interlocks for first offenders. It also documents the process employed by and the tasks completed in Illinois to implement their first offender alcohol interlock law. The report contains an overview of the resources that were allocated to the process and compares the results in Illinois with experiences in Colorado, Nebraska, New York and Washington, representing the diverse nature of alcohol interlock programs. Recommendations to assist other jurisdictions are formulated and discussed. Details: Ottawa: Traffic Injury Research Foundation, 2010. 58p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119511 Keywords: Alcohol AbuseAlcohol Interlock DevicesDrinking and Traffic AccidentsDriving Under the InfluenceDrunk Driving |
Author: Marques, Paul R. Title: Key Features for Ignition Interlock Programs Summary: This report describes an effort to document alcohol ignition interlock programs in the United States in order to highlight those programs or program features that are believed to be best able to serve traffic safety interests. Information has been gathered into this report bearing on important interlock program features together with some recommendations for States to consider as programs are developed. This publication reflects information of the time it was written. Therefore, some statements may be outdated. In addition to the literature search and telephone conversations with State experts identified by Governors Highway Safety Representatives, wide ranging commentary was provided by key informants during a parallel effort to document interlock program features undertaken by the Interlock Working Group of the International Council of Alcohol Drugs and Traffic Safety (ICADTS). All the above sources of information were compiled into a preliminary report in order to frame the discussion for an expert panel meeting. This final report represents the views of the authors, but also reflects input from panelists, written commentary to the IWG, and documented, published sources. The general topics in the body of this report include the following: program enrollment issues; interlock program ramp-up and expansion; standardization of reporting and information flow; program compliance, noncompliance and interlock removal; linkages to treatment; differences in court-based judicial programs and motor vehicle administered interlock programs; suggested core elements of interlock programs; and miscellaneous other topics. The authors believe that the single major difference among panelists centered on whether interlocks should play a role in the monitoring of court-ordered alcohol abstinence. This final report will be useful to anyone concerned about interlock implementation and traffic safety. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2010. 80p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119515 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesDriving Under the InfluenceDrunk Driving |
Author: Robertson, Robyn D. Title: The Implementation of Alcohol Interlocks for Offenders: A Roadmap Summary: Alcohol ignition interlocks are a proven tool to effectively monitor impaired driving offenders and reduce recidivism. Today, almost all U.S. jurisdictions have implemented an alcohol interlock law targeting repeat and even high-BAC offenders. More recently, at least 12 jurisdictions have moved to also include some or all first offenders in alcohol interlock legislation and several others are considering such laws. The Roadmap was designed to help administrators and staff plan, develop and implement improvements to alcohol interlock strategies to ensure that the goals and objectives of legislation are achieved. It contains practical steps to guide the implementation of alcohol interlock devices as part of a strategy targeting either repeat, high blood alcohol concentration (BAC) or first offenders. Critical steps in the process ranging from the drafting of legislation and the development of an implementation, to the organization of staff education and public awareness through to the creation of an evaluation plan for the strategy are discussed. Important considerations and caveats that impact decision-making at each stage of the process are also highlighted. The Roadmap was created with input from seasoned professionals who have played a leadership role in these initiatives or who have been intimately involved in interlock delivery. Input was sought from representatives of driver licensing, criminal justice, and hybrid (licensing and justice combined) interlock initiatives to achieve a balanced and inclusive perspective on effective strategies to apply these tools to supervise drunk drivers. Details: Ottawa: Traffic Injury Research Foundation, 2010. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 5, 2010 at: http://www.tirf.ca/publications/publications_show.php?pub_id=254 Year: 2010 Country: International URL: http://www.tirf.ca/publications/publications_show.php?pub_id=254 Shelf Number: 120192 Keywords: Alcohol AbuseAlcohol Interlock DevicesAlcohol Law EnforcementDriving Under the InfluenceDrunk Driving |
Author: Marques, Paul R. Title: Evaluation of the New Mexico Ignition Interlock Program Summary: This Evaluation of the New Mexico Ignition Interlock Program begins by summarizing the development of alcohol ignition interlock devices, laws, and programs during the past 22 years. It then reviews the laws that were written in New Mexico from 1999 to 2005. It goes on to characterize current penetration of interlocks relative to alcohol-related risk indicators, followed by detailed methodological reports on eight studies undertaken to understand the effects of several aspects of the New Mexico laws. The eight studies include (1) an evaluation of recidivism among court-mandated offenders who were required to install interlocks but were not allowed to drive those cars; (2) an evaluation of recidivism differences of first-time offenders who installed interlocks relative to matched offenders who did not; (3) an evaluation of the effect of an interlock licensing law that allows revoked DWI offenders to install an interlock on an insured vehicle and drive that way during the remainder of their revocation period; (4) an evaluation of a strong mandate in Santa Fe County during a 2-year period in which electronically monitored house arrest was required for offenders who did not want to have an interlock or claimed no plan to drive; (5) an evaluation of the patterns of elevated BAC tests by hour of the day and day of the week from among the more than 10 million New Mexico breath tests collected by interlock devices; (6) a comparative evaluation of predictors of recidivism including prior DWI, measures of drinking from the interlock event record, age, and other predictors; (7) a report on an interview process that included key informants, such as judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and probation officers, who manage or administer the interlock program; and (8) a report on focus group findings with interlock-using DWI offenders. Each of the eight studies is reported with Methods, Results, and Comments sections. The conclusion summarizes key findings and places the New Mexico results in the larger context of the national effort to reduce impaired-driving-related injuries and deaths. This report begins with an executive summary that touches on all these topics, including key findings, lessons learned, and potential areas for improvement of the New Mexico program. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2010. 312p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 11, 2010 at: http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/811410.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/811410.pdf Shelf Number: 120445 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesDriving Under the InfluenceDriving While Intoxicated (New Mexico)Drunk DrivingIgnition Interlock ProgramRecidivism |
Author: McCartt, Anne T. Title: Washington State’s Alcohol Ignition Interlock Law: Effects on Recidivism Among First-time DUI Offenders Summary: Objective: More than half of U.S. states require some DUI offenders to install ignition interlocks on their vehicles for a certain period of time if they want to drive. Increasingly states are strengthening these laws to apply to all offenders, including first-time offenders. The current study evaluated two changes in Washington state’s interlock law: moving the issuance of interlock orders from the courts to the Department of Licensing in July 2003, and extending the interlock requirement to cover all convicted offenders, including first-time offenders with blood alcohol concentrations (BACs) lower than 0.15 percent (―first simple DUI offenders‖), in June 2004. The primary focus was whether or not these law changes affected rates of recidivism among first-time DUI offenders. Method: Trends in the types of convictions resulting from a DUI arrest, rates of interlock orders and installations, and rates of recidivism were examined, using data extracted from driver license records. The main focus was first-time convictions (simple, high-BAC, and test refusal DUI; deferred prosecution; or alcohol-related negligent driving) stemming from arrests on DUI charges occurring during January 1999-June 2006. Regression analyses examined the effects on rates of recidivism of the law changes and of interlock installation rates. Possible general deterrent effects of the law changes on alcoholimpaired driving were examined by comparing trends in single-vehicle nighttime (9 p.m.-6 a.m.) policereported crashes and fatal crashes in Washington with trends in California and Oregon. Results: Throughout the study period, about three-quarters of DUI offenses were first offenses. Simple DUI convictions and alcohol-related negligent driving convictions each accounted for about 30-40 percent of first DUI-related offenses. After interlocks were required for simple DUIs in 2004, the proportion of simple DUI convictions trended somewhat downward, while the proportion of alcohol-related negligent driving convictions continued a slow, long-term upward trend. The interlock installation rate among first simple DUI offenders increased dramatically as a result of the 2004 law change, going from less than 5 percent before the law change to about one-third after; increases in installation rates were observed among other first DUI offenders as well. Extending the interlock requirement to first simple DUI convictions was estimated to have lowered the cumulative rate of recidivism during the 2 years following arrest by about 12 percent among people with such convictions (e.g., from an expected 10.6 percent without the law change to 9.3 percent among offenders arrested in the second quarter of 2006, the last part of the study period) and by about 11 percent (from an expected 10.2 to 9.1 percent) among all first-time DUI offenders. There was an estimated 0.06 percentage point decrease in the 2-year cumulative recidivism rate for each percentage point increase in the proportion of first simple DUI offenders who installed interlocks. If the interlock installation rate had been 100 percent rather than 34 percent for first simple DUI offenders arrested in the second quarter of 2006, and if the linear relationship between the recidivism rate and the rate of interlock installations continued, the 2-year cumulative recidivism rate could have been reduced from 9.3 to 5.3 percent. Similarly, if the interlock installation rate had been 100 percent rather than 24 percent for all first DUI offenders arrested in the second quarter of 2006, their 2-year cumulative recidivism rate could have been reduced from 9.1 to 3.2 percent. Although interlock installation rates increased somewhat after moving responsibility for issuing interlock orders to the Department of Licensing in 2003, that action did not significantly affect recidivism rates, perhaps due to the short follow-up period before the second law change. The 2004 law change was associated with a 4.8 percent reduction in the risk of single-vehicle nighttime crashes in Washington, but the change was not significant given the variability in the data. A smaller and likewise non-significant reduction in the risk of single-vehicle nighttime fatal crashes was estimated. Conclusions: Extending an interlock requirement to all first-time DUI convictions reduces recidivism among the cohort of affected offenders, even with relatively low interlock use rates, and additional gains are likely to be achievable with higher use rates. Jurisdictions should seek ways to increase installation rates among offenders required to install interlocks and should re-consider policies that allow reducing DUI charges to other traffic offenses that do not have an interlock requirement. Details: Arlington, VA: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 2012. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 20, 2012 at: http://www.iihs.org/research/topics/pdf/r1168.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.iihs.org/research/topics/pdf/r1168.pdf Shelf Number: 125696 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesDriving Under the Influence (U.S.)Drunk DrivingRecidivism |
Author: Willis, Charlene Title: Alcohol Ignition Interlock Programmes for Reducing Drink Driving Recidivism (Review) Summary: Convicted drink drivers are sometimes offered the choice of a standard punishment, or for an alcohol ignition interlock to be fitted to their car for a fixed period. To operate a vehicle equipped with an interlock, the driver must first give a breath specimen. If the breath alcohol concentration of the specimen is too high, the vehicle will not start. A number of studies have been conducted to see whether the interlock stops drink drivers from offending again. Most of these studies have not been of high quality. The interlock seems to reduce re-offending as long as it is still fitted to the vehicle, but there is no long-term benefit after it has been removed. However, more studies of good quality are needed to confirm these findings. The low percentage of offenders who choose to have an interlock fitted also makes it difficult to reach firm conclusions about their effectiveness. Details: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2009, Issue 1. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 29, 2014 at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004168.pub2/pdf Year: 2009 Country: International URL: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004168.pub2/pdf Shelf Number: 131974 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesAlcohol Law EnforcementDriving Under the InfluenceDriving While IntoxicatedDrunk DrivingIgnition Interlock ProgramRecidivism |
Author: Fieldler, Katherine Title: Case Studies of Ignition Interlock Programs Summary: Under a contract with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Acclaro Research Solutions, Inc. prepared this program guide of case studies. The guide profiles the work of six States and their use of ignition interlocks as part of an overall strategy to combat alcohol-impaired driving. This guide is the result of a multi-phased effort involving a scan of relevant literature, informal discussions with interlock experts and program administrators, a case study selection process, and site visits to each selected program. The six States profiled in this document are Colorado, Florida, Illinois, New Mexico, New York, and Oklahoma. Each State demonstrates unique approaches and innovations in the use of interlocks. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2012. 172p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 20, 2014 at: www.nhtsa.gov/ Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: www.nhtsa.gov/ Shelf Number: 131981 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesAlcohol Law EnforcementDriving Under the InfluenceDriving While IntoxicatedDrunk DrivingIgnition Interlock Program |
Author: Reddy, Vikrant P. Title: Cutting Edge Corrections: Using Technology to Improve Community Supervision in Texas Summary: Over the last three decades, the United States has seen an extraordinary burst of technological innovation. Desktop computing, mobile communication, and mapping are just a few aspects of daily life that are completely different than they were only thirty years ago. For Texas legislators, these innovations have provided exciting new opportunities throughout public policy. In education policy, for example, digital learning could lead to a revolution in student outcomes. Criminal justice policy in Texas is one area that could especially benefit from innovation. In particular, technology has the potential to completely revolutionize community supervision. The fundamental needs of community supervision are technologies for monitoring offenders, for communicating with them, and for analyzing data about them. In all of these areas, technology has grown leaps and bounds. Key Points - Use risk assessments to match probationers and parolees with the most appropriate level of supervision. - Explore use of including voice recognition reporting for the lowest-risk offenders, thus reallocating supervision resources to frequent home visits as well as GPS monitoring for high-risk offenders. - Given that many of those under supervision with technical probation revocations become absconders, consider using enhanced monitoring in order to reduce technical revocations. - While continuing to use ignition interlock devices where appropriate, also consider expanding the use of other alcohol detection devices that are directed at stopping alcohol abuse, not just drunk driving. Details: Austin, TX: Texas Public Policy Foundation, 2014. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Perspective: Accessed May 5, 2014 at: http://www.texaspolicy.com/sites/default/files/documents/2014-04-PP17-CuttingEdgeCorrections-CEJ-ReddyLevin_0.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.texaspolicy.com/sites/default/files/documents/2014-04-PP17-CuttingEdgeCorrections-CEJ-ReddyLevin_0.pdf Shelf Number: 132239 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesCommunity SupervisionCriminal Justice PolicyOffender MonitoringOffender SupervisionProbationersTechnology and Crime |
Author: Chapman, Eric Title: General Deterrent Evaluation of the Ignition Interlock Pilot Program in California Summary: Currently, there are four counties in California that are participating in the ignition interlock device, IID, pilot program: Los Angeles, Alameda, Tulare, and Sacramento, per California Vehicle Code Section 23700. The pilot program requires all driving under the influence, DUI, defendants, including first time offenders, to pay for, install, and then maintain the IID for a period of time as determined by the number of drunk driving convictions the individual has. An IID is a breathalyzer instrument that is professionally installed in the defendant's vehicle by a court-approved company. The driver must blow into the device, providing an alcohol-free sample. If alcohol is detected, the car will not start. Once started, the driver will be prompted to give another sample within 15-minutes of driving and then again about every 45-minutes. If alcohol is detected during a random sample, the car will stall and become inoperable. These are referred to as "sample failures" and are reported to the court. The present study analyzes DUI conviction data from July 2007 through June 2013. The results indicate that IID installation rates among all DUI offenders increased dramatically in the pilot counties from 2.1% during the pre-pilot period to 42.4% during the pilot period. The results of the Auto-Regressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) analyses show that the IID pilot program was not associated with a reduction in the number of first-time and repeat DUI convictions in the pilot counties. In other words, no evidence was found that the pilot program has a general deterrence effect. Details: Sacramento: California Department of Motor Vehicles, 2015. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 15, 2015 at: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/065e8803-83ed-4d16-9335-c67e7e23c6ea/S5-247.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CONVERT_TO=url&CACHEID=065e8803-83ed-4d16-9335-c67e7e23c6ea Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/065e8803-83ed-4d16-9335-c67e7e23c6ea/S5-247.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CONVERT_TO=url&CACHEID=065e8803-83ed-4d16-9335-c67e7e23c6ea Shelf Number: 135237 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesAlcohol Law EnforcementBreathalyzerDriving Under the InfluenceDrunk Driving (CaliforniaIgnition Interlock Program |
Author: Robertson, Robyn D. Title: DWI Dashboard Report: A Tool to Monitor Impaired Driving Progress Summary: The Working Group on DWI System Improvements1 is a prestigious coalition of senior leaders of organizations representing frontline professionals in all segments of the DWI2 system. The initiatives undertaken by the Working Group in the past decade have demonstrated the need for increased understanding of operational and system practices associated with proven countermeasures. More recently, the Working Group has turned its attention to the need for robust and comparable performance measures in all segments of the DWI system with linkages to traffic safety measures. In 2013, this series of activities culminated in a project undertaken by the Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF), with support from the Working Group, and funded by Anheuser-Busch. It involved the development of a user-friendly, flexible tool designed to capture information that jurisdictions can use to increase understanding of why they are or are not making more progress in reducing impaired driving prevalence, deaths and injuries. Performance indicators of impaired driving typically include: the annual number of alcohol-impaired driving fatalities and injuries; fatalities per vehicle miles travelled (VMT), and criminal justice performance indicators (e.g., impaired driving arrests and/or convictions). Although these indicators provide important insight and are helpful to measure progress nationally as well as to facilitate comparisons across jurisdictions, they reveal little about how or why progress is, or is not, occurring within jurisdictions. This incomplete picture of the problem makes it challenging for jurisdictions to determine what action to take, particularly in an era when most jurisdictions have implemented a comprehensive array of proven countermeasures and interventions (e.g., alcohol interlocks, DWI courts, substance abuse treatment). Compounding this issue are factors related to the context of the jurisdiction (e.g., cultural aspects, population, geography, resources, political environment), and the actual quality of interventions (e.g., use of program features, evidence-based practices, fidelity to the model). These gaps make it challenging for jurisdictions to make informed decisions about impaired driving priorities, and to strategically pursue those that are most achievable and that represent the most efficient use of dwindling resources. Ultimately, this hampers the ability of jurisdictions to capitalize on their strengths, or to target problem areas that can have the biggest impact and are most amenable to change. Goals and methods The goal of this work was to enable jurisdictions to gain insight and understanding into how and why progress is, or is not, being achieved in reducing impaired driving in their individual jurisdictions, and to inform decision-making about strategies to address the problem. This was achieved with the development of a dashboard tool that jurisdictions can use biennially (every two years) or annually to monitor their own progress in preventing and reducing impaired driving. Details: Ottawa: Traffic Injury Research Foundation, 2015. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 6, 2015 at: http://www.tirf.ca/publications/PDF_publications/DWIWG_Dashboard_9.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://www.tirf.ca/publications/PDF_publications/DWIWG_Dashboard_9.pdf Shelf Number: 135523 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesAlcohol Law Enforcement Driving Under the Influence (Canada) Driving While Intoxicated Drunk Driving Traffic Safety |
Author: Greenway Transportation Planning Title: Minnesota Ignition Interlock Program Evaluation: Final Report Summary: Although there have been trending reductions in impaired driving fatalities over the past few years, Driving While Impaired (DWI) arrests and impaired driving fatalities are still a problem in the US. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reported 9,967 alcohol-impaired driving fatalities in 2014, which accounted for 31% of total fatal traffic crashes (NHTSA 2015). In 2015 NHTSA reported that 35,092 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes, an increase of 7.2 percent over the 32,744 fatalities reported in 2014. This is the largest percentage increase in nearly 50 years. Impaired driving is a serious problem in Minnesota. In 2014, 111 people were killed in alcohol-related crashes. This accounted for 31% of all traffic fatalities in Minnesota. In 2015, the number rose. One hundred thirty-seven people were killed, more than 2,203 were injured, and costs amounted to more than $285 million. In an attempt to deter motorists from driving while impaired and thereby enhancing road safety, the use of ignition interlocks became law in Minnesota on July 1, 2011 with Minnesota Statutes 171.306 - Ignition Interlock Device Program. Research has shown that interlock programs reduce the incidence of impaired driving when an interlock device is installed in the vehicle. A study of New Mexico's interlock program found that offenders who participated in the program had a 61% lower recidivism rate while the device was in use in their vehicle, and a 39% lower recidivism rate following the removal of the interlock compared to offenders who never had the device installed (Marques et al. 2010). The goal of this project is to evaluate the effectiveness of the interlock program in Minnesota and provide a comprehensive report to the Minnesota Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) based on the results of the evaluation. Details: St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Office of Traffic Safety, 2016. 160p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 1, 2017 at: https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/ots/reports-statistics/Documents/mn-iid-eval.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/ots/reports-statistics/Documents/mn-iid-eval.pdf Shelf Number: 140777 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesAlcohol Law EnforcementDriving Under the InfluenceDrunk DrivingIgnition Interlock Program |
Author: Traffic Injury Research Foundation Title: 2016 Annual Ignition Interlock Survey: United States Summary: The Traffic Injury Research Foundation USA, Inc. (TIRF USA) in partnership with the Association of Ignition Interlock Program Administrators (AIIPA) and TIRF in Canada conducted a national survey in 2016 of the number of installed and active ignition interlocks in the United States (U.S.). These data provide a comprehensive picture of interlock installations across the U.S. and are a useful benchmark for state ignition interlock program administrators and the impaired driving community to measure interlock usage and growth in interlock programs on an annual basis. Drunk driving fatalities decreased 51 percent from 1982 to 2015, but it seems progress has been eroded in recent years. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), there were 1,089,171 DWI arrests in 2015. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reported 10,265 alcohol-impaired driving fatalities in 2015 which accounted for 29% of total fatalities. This is a 3.2 percent increase from 2014, compared to an overall increase in fatalities of 7.2 percent (NHTSA 2016). Interlock programs have been proven to reduce impaired driving while the interlock is installed in the vehicle. Furthermore, interlocks are associated with a reduction in DWI deaths of up to 15% (see: Kaufman & Wiebe 2016; Lucas et al. 2016; Vanlaar et al. 2017; McGinty et al. 2017) and reductions in DWI recidivism (McCartt et al. 2013). Increasing program participation is paramount to reduce impaired driving fatalities and injuries. A NHTSA study of 28 state interlock programs revealed that there were eight interlock program components which may increase interlock use (Casanova Powell et al. 2016). The feature that was found to have the highest correlation with increasing interlock use was implementing a strong interlock requirement and/or incentive in legislation or policy. All states and the District of Columbia have some form of interlock law that includes either judicial discretion or an administrative requirement or a hybrid of the two. States are encouraged to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of their interlock programs. As a result, there have been several interlock law changes over the past few years. To illustrate, in 2014, Alabama, Mississippi, and Missouri passed a law requiring all DWI offenders to install an interlock. Indiana also passed legislation requiring ignition interlocks for repeat offenders, and to allow judges to order interlocks for first-time offenders. South Carolina passed Emma's Law, which requires all high-BAC (0.15) offenders to install an interlock. In 2015, Delaware, and Texas passed an all DWI offender law requiring an interlock. In addition, Kentucky strengthened its ignition interlock law which required an interlock for repeat offenders, high-BAC (0.15) first offenders and offenders who refuse a chemical alcohol test. In 2016, Vermont and Washington D.C. passed an all offender interlock law, and Maryland passed "Noah's law", an all offender law with a five-star rating from MADD (MADD 2017). Details: Hamden, CT: TIRF, 2017. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 14, 2017 at: http://tirf.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/TIRF-USA-Annual-Interlock-SurveyReport-19.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://tirf.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/TIRF-USA-Annual-Interlock-SurveyReport-19.pdf Shelf Number: 146101 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesAlcohol Law EnforcementAlcohol-Impaired DrivingDriving Under the InfluenceDriving While IntoxicatedDrunk DrivingIgnition Interlock ProgramTraffic Safety |
Author: Kerns, Timothy J. Title: Effectiveness of an ignition interlock device in reducing alcohol-impaired driving recidivism and alcohol-impaired motor vehicle crashes in Maryland Summary: Background: Multiple studies have shown that ignition interlock devices reduce alcohol impaired driving recidivism while the device is installed on the vehicle. However, many of these studies rely on convictions and have limited follow-up after the device has been removed from the vehicle. Objectives: The aims of this study were to compare the characteristics of drivers who installed an ignition interlock device after receiving an alcohol impaired driving citation and a control group that did not install the device and to determine their risk of receiving a subsequent alcohol related citation or being involved in an alcohol related crash. Methods: A Cox proportional hazard test was used to compare the risk of a subsequent citation or motor vehicle crash between the study groups. Results: The interlock group had a lower proportion of females (22.2% interlock vs 24.2% control, p<0.05), and a higher mean age (36.5 years vs 34.3 years, p<0.05). Forty-six percent of those installing an ignition interlock device had a BAC above 0.15 g/dL as compared with 25% in the control group (p<0.05). The BAC test refusal rate was higher among interlock installers (41.4% vs 33.0%, p<0.05). While the device was installed on the subject's vehicle, drivers were 22% less likely to receive an impaired driving citation as compared to the time when the device was not installed (HR=0.78; 95% CI: 0.73-0.84). After removal, the interlock group was 32% more likely to receive an impaired driving citation versus controls (HR=1.32; 95% CI: 1.22-1.42). Similar patterns were observed with respect to motor vehicle crashes. Conclusion: Drivers who have installed an ignition device on their vehicle have a lower risk of receiving a subsequent alcohol involved driving citation and of being involved in an alcohol related motor vehicle crash while the device is on the vehicle as compared to the control group. Upon removal, the risk of both citations and crashes is higher for those who had an interlock device installed. Ignition interlock devices are effective for the time they are used but should not be the only tool to prevent future events of alcohol involved driving among those previously arrested for impaired driving. Details: Baltimore, MD: University of Maryland, 2017. 118p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed October 20, 2017 at: https://archive.hshsl.umaryland.edu/bitstream/10713/6751/1/Kerns_umaryland_0373D_10843.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://archive.hshsl.umaryland.edu/bitstream/10713/6751/1/Kerns_umaryland_0373D_10843.pdf Shelf Number: 147743 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesAlcohol-Impaired DrivingDriving Under the InfluenceDrunk DrivingIgnition Interlock Program |
Author: Casanova-Powell, Tara Title: Evaluation of State Ignition Interlock Programs: Interlock Use Analyses From 28 States, 2006-2011 Summary: In 2010, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and NHTSA began collaborating on a project to evaluate ignition interlock programs in selected States. The purpose of the evaluation was to provide information and best practices to States for ignition interlock programs. The project was managed by the Governor's Highway Safety Association and conducted by the Preusser Research Group. Research was conducted to determine the following: - How States can increase interlock use among DWI offenders who are required or eligible to install one. - Which changes in ignition interlock programs led to increases in ignition interlock use. - Identify the key features of ignition interlock programs. - Which key program features were related to higher ignition interlock use rates. Details: Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, & Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2015. 144p. Source: Internet Resource: DOT HS 812 145: Accessed June 27, 2018 at: http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/172626.aspx Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/172626.aspx Shelf Number: 150715 Keywords: Alcohol Interlock DevicesDriving Under the InfluenceDriving While IntoxicatedDrunk DrivingIgnition Interlock ProgramRecidivism |