Highway Safety Assessment:

A Summary of Findings in Ten States

Warren G. LaHeist

Executive Summary

Under the Highway Safety Act of 1966, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) provides grants and technical assistance to states and communities. Section 402 of the Act requires each state to have a highway safety program to reduce traffic crashes and deaths, injuries and property damage. Section 402 grant funds are apportioned to the states based on the ratio of state population to the national population (75%) and state public road mileage to the total national public road mileage (25%). Section 402 was set up by Congress to provide Federal leadership and assistance to state and community highway safety activities.

From time to time, Congress earmarks §402 funds to be set aside for special purposes such as enforcement of the National Maximum Speed Limit or for traffic records development. In addition, Congress has passed legislation to provide incentive grants: Section 408 of the Highway Safety Act authorized NHTSA (enacted in 1982, funds were available through FY 1994) to provide alcohol incentive grants to states that had certain laws and provisions covering the apprehension, conviction and rehabilitation of persons driving while impaired from alcohol or drugs; Section 410 of the Act (originally enacted in 1988 and significantly amended in FY 1992 and FY 1998) to provide additional alcohol incentive grants for states meeting certain criteria concerning drunk driving; and Section 153 of the Act authorized NHTSA to provide incentive grants (in FY's 1992 through 1994) to states for passing and achieving compliance with their laws making it unlawful to operate a motorcycle without wearing a helmet and to operate a passenger vehicle whenever an individual in the front seat is not wearing a safety belt (except a child in a child restraint). Finally, Section 403 authorizes NHTSA to perform research, conduct demonstrations and provide technical assistance to improve the effectiveness of state safety programs.

The Federal highway safety program is a combination of formula and incentive grants and technical assistance to state and local governments. It operates under a set of guidelines that have evolved since the Highway Safety Act was passed in 1966. NHTSA handles those aspects of the program that concern traffic safety while the Federal Highway Administration is responsible for the safety of highway infrastructure. The highway safety program is a textbook example of how a small amount of Federal funding can catalyze significant changes in the nation's approach to safety.

The U.S. Congress and the Office of Management and Budget have expressed interest in what the highway safety program has achieved and how Federal funds were used. In response, NHTSA has conducted the assessment of the highway safety program. This study covers the period from 1980, when major changes in safety emphasis and funding began, to 1993. NHTSA reviewed the programs of ten states, one in each of its regions. Data collection, interviews and reports are now complete for all 10 states. The states are: Region 1 - Connecticut, Region 2 -New Jersey, Region 3 -Pennsylvania, Region 4 - North Carolina. Region 5 - Ohio, Region 6 - New Mexico, Region 7 -Kansas, Region 8 - Colorado, Region 9 - Nevada. and Region 10 - Washington. These ten states account for 21.8 percent of NHTSA Federal highway safety grant funding and represent geographic, programmatic, and management variety. From NHTSA's assessment of these ten states, key features and achievements of the highway safety program have emerged.

One of the goals of the assessment was to review the individual safety programs in the 10 states to answer the following questions about how Federal grants were used:

Were projects focused on major safety problems such as those identified through national priority rulemaking and through the states' own safety problem identification process?

Were new programs initiated with Federal grants?

Did Federal grants lead to participation or full support by state, community and private entities? Did Federal grants encourage other state and local spending on highway safety?

Were projects started at one or more sites replicated elsewhere in their original form or in an adapted form?

Were concepts and technology developed with federal funds used to improve state program effectiveness?

What would be the consequences of removing federal grants from the program?

Were projects formally monitored or evaluated to compare results with planned objectives or to determine effectiveness?

In the early 1980's, Congress reduced funding for highway safety grants. To ensure that Federal funds would be spent where they could have the most impact, NHTSA initiated discussions with the states, followed by rulemaking, to establish highway safety priority areas. Rulemaking resulted in identification of six priority areas: impaired driving, occupant protection, police traffic services, traffic records, emergency medical services and trauma care systems and roadway safety (FHWA's responsibility). Motorcycle safety and pedestrian and bicycle safety were added at a later date. Speed control was added to the list of national priority program areas on December 13, 1994 but it is included as part of Police Traffic Services in this assessment because it was not yet a separate priority area when the sample states were visited.

The current assessment looks at Community Traffic Safety Programs (CTSPs), a development of the late 1980's. CTSPs grew out of DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) task forces in some states, and out of occupant protection efforts in others. CTSPs are defined as a program administered by an established unit in the community, sustained over time, that has public and private participation and input to an action plan to solve one or more of the community's traffic safety problems.

The assessment focuses on reviewing the progress in the 10 states in each of these priority areas between 1980 and 1993.

Highway Safety Program Costs and Federal Funding

The total Federal and state expenditures in the 10 states for highway safety programs increased almost two and one half times from 1980 ($935,483) to 1993 ($2.32 billion). In constant dollars (1996 base), the increase was over 40 percent from 1980 ($1.78 billion) to 1993 ($2.52 billion). In contrast, the amount of Federal grant funds decreased 30 percent from 1980 to 1993. But in constant 1996 dollars, the decrease was almost 60 percent. In constant 1996 dollars per capita, total spending increased from $35 to $45 per person while Federal grants decreased from $1.54 to $0.59 per person. As a result, the percentage of the total expenditures that is Federal grant funds decreased from 4.4 percent in 1980 to 1.3 percent in 1993. Appendix A of this Summary Report compares key cost and performance data from NHTSA's 1975 Highway Safety Assessment with this Assessment.

The distribution of the total program expenditures by the states from all sources has not varied much between 1980 and 1993. The overwhelmingly large program area is Police Traffic Services (PTS) which is about 70 % of the total. Part of this is because officers are enforcing laws involving other programs areas (Impaired driving and occupant protection). Emergency Medical Services and Trauma Systems (EMS) is the next largest program area and varied between 18% and 20% of the total. Traffic Records (TR) varied between 7% and 10%. Next comes Impaired Driving at 1.9% and 3.0%. Occupant Protection (OP), Motorcycle Safety (MC), and Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety each represented less than 0.5% of the total program cost. The following chart shows these distributions.

In the distribution of §402 and other grant funds by priority area, there is a marked difference between 1980 and 1993 as seen in the next chart.

The most noticeable changes were for PTS which dropped from 60% to 39% of Federal funding, EMS which dropped from about 14% to almost 3%, Impaired Driving increased from 8% to 27%, OP which increased from about 3% to almost 19%, and Traffic Records which decreased from 11% to almost 8%.

Looking at spending from a different perspective, there has definitely been a shift from 1980 to 1993 in the proportion of total spending that is Federally funded, by priority area. The following table shows that the proportion of funds spent on impaired driving derived from Federal funds dropped from 19% in 1980 to 12% in 1993, Occupant Protection increased from 62% to 66% PTS, Traffic Records, and EMS all dropped from four to five percent to one percent or less. Motorcycle Safety decreased from 74% in 1980 to 8% by 1993, and Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety decreased from 65% to 42%. The major finding here is the continued dependence of Occupant Protection on Federal grant funds whereas other priority areas have been partially or almost completely successful in reducing their dependence on Federal funding.

Total Costs and Grants for Safety Priority Areas: Percent of total spending derived from Federal funds

Overview of Highway Safety Programs in the Ten States, 1980-1993

The Highway Safety Act of 1966 established the development of standards that would be the heart of state traffic safety programs. Beginning in 1967, the Federal traffic safety program included 18 highway safety program standards covering a wide range of safety issues. In 1982, grant funding was sharply curtailed and the grant program was refocused to cover priority safety areas based on guidelines rather than standards. The priority safety areas were based on analysis of crash data to determine where the major safety problems existed and for which methods were available or could be developed for addressing these problem areas. Until recently, the approval process was based on the states preparing a Highway Safety Plan (HSP), which included a discussion of crash data and the identification of safety problems to be addressed. The following is a discussion by priority area.

Impaired Driving

The 1980-1993 period was characterized by a remarkable increase in public awareness and government effort to combat drunk driving, and the nation has seen a decline in alcohol-involved crash fatalities from 23,000 (10.2 per 100,000 pop.) to 17,461(6.8 per 100,000 pop.).

Beginning in the early 1980's tougher impaired driving laws were enacted in most states. To explain the laws and to raise public awareness, public information and education campaigns were launched and sustained over the ensuing years. A large number of impaired driving reduction programs were established in the 1980's. There was Project Graduation, often begun with safety grant support and subsequently funded by PTA's and businesses. Students Against Drinking and Driving (SADD) chapters were created. Impaired driving information -- brochures, pamphlets, and related material -- was widely distributed. In the early 1990's almost 4.9 million informational items were distributed each year as compared to 1.6 million items in 1980 (a three fold increase).

Impaired driving reduction incentive grants enacted by Federal legislation have been successful. The states participating in this assessment became eligible under at least one of the two incentive grant programs (§408 or §410) at some point during the 1980's and early 1990's. By the end of the 1980's, all 10 states had programs that included DWI offender evaluations, minimum sentences, and a license suspension process. Offender course fees and fines helped achieve self sufficiency.

Occupant Protection

The ten assessment states enacted belt use laws between 1984 and 1986. Since the mid 1980's, programs to raise the use of safety belts have provided the highest safety benefits at one of the lowest costs for any safety program. In 1993, the per capita cost was 13 cents and the cost per licensed driver was 19 cents a year. More than 66 percent of the costs of safety belt use programs continued to be funded with safety grants in 1993. The estimated safety belt use rate in 1980 was approximately 12 percent in the 10 states. Belt use laws raised this rate considerably -- to more than 47 percent in 1990, and more than 65 percent in 1993. NHTSA estimates that safety belts saved 1,673 lives in the 10 states in 1993, up from 115 in 1980. PI&E is an important component of the program to increase belt use. Approximately 2.3 million safety belt brochures were distributed in 1991, up from two million in 1981.

By 1985, all 10 states had mandatory child protection laws. Safety seat loaner programs were established throughout all 10 states. There was a trend toward partial self sufficiency in child passenger safety. Child safety seats are estimated by NHTSA to save 58 lives in 1993 as compared to nine lives saved in 1980. Five of the 10 states were close to complete self sufficiency, three used matching grants, but the remaining two depended on Federal grants.

Comprehensive Traffic Safety Programs

Seven of the 10 states covered in this report created comprehensive or community traffic safety programs (CTSPs) in the mid to late 1980's. More than 20 percent of an average state's safety grants were allocated to CTSPs. In one of the states, the CTSPs covered the entire state. In others, the coverage involved several counties or municipalities.

By combining the various safety program areas, economies of scale were achieved by, for example, making it possible for one source to supply technical assistance, support and materials to many, or all parts of the state.

The most important capabilities of CTSP's were the abilities of the states to address regional safety problems, to reach more citizens, and to gain resource support from local governments, communities and the private sector. The integration of programs also allowed better planning of projects to address key problems and to make better budgetary decisions about the level of program support. The number of CTSPs in the five states grew from two in 1987 to 83 in 1993.

Police Traffic Services

There were 97,736 sworn police officers in the 10 states in 1980, and 116,654 in 1993 -- a 19 percent increase. Based on data from 134 enforcement agencies in the 10 states, officers, in the aggregate, spend approximately 21 percent of their time performing traffic related activities. General patrol of city streets, with an emphasis on traffic violations, has declined slightly over the past 15 years. The Full Time Equivalent (FTE) number of sworn officers in traffic service per 1,000 licensed drivers declined from 0.60 in 1980 to 0.56 in 1993. In 1980, one citation was issued for every nine licensed drivers. In 1993, enforcement agencies issued a traffic violation citation to one of every 10 licensed drivers. This decline of approximately 10 percent has to be viewed against the ever tighter budgets and the diversion of sworn officers to crime enforcement and prevention over the past 15 years.

Despite these reductions in overall police traffic services, officers from 1980 to 1993 made 33 percent more DWI arrests and issued 14 percent more speeding citations. In 1980, officers made 238,000 DWI and 1.4 million speeding arrests as compared to 317,000 DWI and 1.6 million speeding arrests in 1993. The breath testing programs, based on data from five states, show continued growth. Unlike programs to curb impaired driving, the effort to curb speeding encountered difficulties. Data from eight states show that the average (weighted) percentage of motorists exceeding the 55 mile per hour National Maximum Speed Limit (NMSL) was 44.2 percent in 1980. It rose to 44.7 percent in 1986, and was 47.6 percent in 1992 (The percent of motorists exceeding the NMSL was not available for 1993). The NMSL was abolished by the end of 1995, even so officers are still responsible for speed control.

Substantial improvements were made to the training of police officers in the field of crash investigation with courses funded with safety grants. In the early 1990's, between 200 and 600 police officers, depending on the size of the force in a state, were trained each year at various levels of crash investigation. This was more than double the number trained in the early 1980's. Safety grants made up only a very small part of traffic related enforcement costs -- 3.8 percent in 1980 and less than 1 percent in 1993. Total enforcement costs were estimated at $1.61 billion for the 10 states in 1993. This amounted to $512 per traffic citation, or $29 per capita, each year. In 1996 dollars, the 1993 costs would be $1.75 billion as the total enforcement cost for the 10 states, $556 per citation and $31 per capita. In comparable 1996 dollars, the 1980 values would have been $407 per citation and $25 per citizen with a total traffic related cost of $1.25 billion. This means that there was a 40 percent real cost increase between 1980 and 1993 for traffic enforcement.

Traffic Records

By 1986, all l0 states were able to produce detailed crash statistics on an annual basis. These and other data were sufficient to carry out extensive problem identification analyses. Beyond crash data, annual compilations of impaired driving, speeding arrests and citations for violating occupant protection and child restraint laws were also being recorded. New traffic court case systems were providing data on dispositions and fines, and automated driver licensing systems contain data on license suspensions and revocations.

There were 42 computer/zed data systems in the 10 states in 1980, compared to 70 in 1993. The safety grant portion of all traffic records system costs in the 10 states was 5.2 percent in 1980 which decreased to 1.4 percent in 1993. This shows an increasing trend toward self sufficiency.

Emergency Medical Services

The number of Emergency Medical Technicians increased in the 10 states from 95,500 in 1980 to 171,290 in 1993, a 79 percent increase, while the number of people injured in crashes remained nearly constant. This means that emergency medical services were made available to a larger percentage of people injured in crashes. Most of the 10 states enacted new, or revised, EMS legislation to establish medical direction procedures, regulations and practices. In two of the 10 states, a dedicated EMS fund was established that was supported by surcharges on moving violations. By the early 1990's, five of the 10 states supported their EMT training without safety grants. Safety grants for EMS programs amounted to 3.4 percent in 1980 of all EMS costs which decreased to 0.2 percent in 1993. During the time when safety grants from NHTSA were being reduced, Federal grants from Health and Human Services (HHS) were increasing. The HI-IS grants were not specifically tied to highway safety issues.

The level of EMT services was continually upgraded, and there were approximately 4,000 paramedics in 1980 in the l0 states which increased to 21,300 paramedics in 1993. The number of trauma centers that were accredited, designated, verified or otherwise identified as meeting the American College of Surgeons standards grew from 29 in 1980 to 94 in I993.

Safety grant "seed money" helped provide leverage for state funds to improve the EMS delivery systems in the early 1970% and 1980's. By the 1990's most of the pre-hospital care programs and services were self sufficient -- funded by fees, taxes and private contributions and possibly HHS Federal grants. The advanced life saving and trauma care systems are essentially self sufficient in most states, being funded by fees, taxes, gifts and endowments. Safety grants were used in the 1980's for paramedic training, and in the early 1990's, for EMS planning and advisory services.

Motorcycle Safety

In the United States, motorcyclist fatalities declined from 5,144 in 1980 to 2,449 in 1993 as motorcycle ridership decreased, especially among young people. In 1980, four of the 10 states required helmets be worn by all riders and two states for riders either under 16 or under 18 years old. As part of the change in public attitude regarding traffic safety, a mandatory helmet use law was reinstated in one of the states in 1992. Grants were primarily used to help create most of the rider education programs in the 1970% and early 1980%. The states enacted legislation to establish rider education funds supported by license or registration fees. This led to self sufficiency for all but one of the states. In the 10 states, there were 64 graduates for every 1,000 new motorcycle registrations in 1984. There were 24,400 rider education graduates in 1993, or 482 graduates for every 1,000 new motorcycle registrations -- a seven fold increase over 1984. Almost one-half of all new registrants in 1993 appear to be taking the rider education courses. In 1993, rider education cost an average of $191 per graduate.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety

Pedestrian fatalities in the United States declined from 8,070 in 1980 to 5,649 in 1993, and bicyclists from 965 to 816 respectively. Elementary school education programs, that include components on pedestrian and bicycle safety, have been institutionalized in the states. New approaches begun with safety grants in the late 1970's and early 1980's were curtailed after reductions in the safety grant program in 1982. Communities, however, continued to support bicycle rodeos, and many programs shifted to comprehensive traffic safety programs in the latter 1980's.

The reemphasis on pedestrian and bicycle safety in the early 1990's focused on bicycle helmet use, and laws to make such use mandatory. This has already been a successful program. Smaller scale pedestrian safety programs directed at senior citizens were just beginning in the early 1990's.

A Synopsis of Findings in Relation to the Assessment Questions

The heart of this Assessment was a review of 171 individual highway safety programs in the 10 states. From the review of these 171 programs, it became possible to answer the seven assessment questions listed at the beginning of this report. The results are summarized in Table 1, and in the following discussion including examples of typical safety projects in the individual states.

Were projects focused on major safety problems such as those identified through national priority rulemaking and through the states' own safety problem identification process?

All the 171 programs reviewed in this assessment were focused on major safety problems, either established as national priorities or as priorities based on a states' own safety problem identification process. A fundamental step, in line with the Transportation Research Board's publication Comprehensive Computerized Safety Record Systems in 1985, was taken by many states when they began to review and upgrade their data collection and processing systems and to improve their analytic capability for problem identification.

The state traffic safety offices became able to access crash data for problem analysis and to publish the crash statistics. Every project that addressed impaired driving, for example, was based on the analysis of crash data that identified the degree of the problem in terms of age, time period and location.

In 1980, crash data in one state showed that the number of fatalities per 1,000 licensed drivers were declining, but young people were being killed at twice the rate of others in alcohol related crashes. This persistent problem was addressed anew with an alcohol and drug education project established at junior high schools in 40 school districts of the state.

Were new programs initiated with Federal grants?

New programs and major program changes in all safety program areas were initiated with safety grants. As Table 1 shows, 92 percent or 157 of the 171 programs constituting the array of safety efforts of the 10 states covered in this report, were initiated with safety grants. The other 14 programs were initiated with either private or state or local funds without Federal grants.

All the states in this assessment used safety grants to initiate -- and continue -- campaigns to raise public awareness of the drinking and driving problem. One of the states launched a media campaign called "It's Time to Treat Drunk Driving Like the Crime It Is" with a grant of $100,000.

A model safety belt community program that began operations in 1985 in one of the states was supported with safety grants and a statewide public information campaign that started in 1985 and continued in 1986 was funded with a grant of $155,000. In another state, Federal grants were used for projects promoting the use of bicycle helmets, safety education classes and bicycle rodeos All the comprehensive traffic safety programs (CTSPs) were initially begun with either basic or incentive safety grant support. States also used safety grants to establish and upgrade their breath testing programs.

Safety grants were used in nine of the 10 states to initiate emergency medical technician (EMT) training. One of the states used $900,000 for the training of 8,000 EMTs in 1980 and 1981.

Did Federal grants lead to participation or full support by state, community and private entities? Did Federal grants encourage other state and local spending on highway safety?

An important outcome of the safety grant program is that states and communities have taken over the responsibility for projects that began with federal support. This "catalytic" effect of the safety grant program appears in many forms: Federal funds are matched by state and/or private groups (leveraging); states continue safety projects after federal funding ceases (grants serve as seed money); and projects continue to be supported through user fees (become self-sufficient).

More than two-thirds (68 percent) of the 171 safety programs in the 10 states showed evidence that safety grants led to or encouraged state, local or private participation and support. Traffic records programs -- the development and implementation of crash and other traffic related data systems -- had the highest participation level (90 percent). The least amount of state, local and private support (48 percent) was for programs that promoted safety belt and child safety seat use.

In one state, where liquor sales were state-controlled, a two percent from liquor sales profits was deposited into an alcohol education fund. That state also fielded model county comprehensive DWI programs that drew a great deal of support from volunteers. The programs were begun with safety grants of $500,000 in 1990. By 1991, grant funding was down to $100,000. Several projects were self sufficient by 1993.

The youth-oriented SOBER program in another state was funded with grants of $114,000 that were matched by $265,000 provided by the counties in which the program was operating. One of the states enacted legislation in 1991 to establish a $60 fee for every DWI conviction to support the breath testing program.

Motorcycle rider education programs had been established in all 10 states by 1991. They were supported primarily by funds derived from license surcharges.

TABLE 1. ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS and ANSWERS

Were projects started at one or more sites replicated elsewhere in their original form or in an adapted form?

The replication of programs based on pilot projects, or started at a limited number of sites, was widespread in all 10 states. Adaptations and replications occurred in more than 152 (89 percent) of the 171 programs that were assessed. All occupant protection and comprehensive traffic safety programs followed the route from pilot or initial sites to other areas in the states.

Impaired driving programs were among those most frequently replicated. The "Slow On the Bottle, Enjoy the Road" (SOBER) campaign in one state began as a pilot in 1979 in three of the state's counties. By 1982, the campaign was picked up by another seven counties. [n the next year, 1983, 18 more counties replicated the campaign.

The safety belt promotion campaigns were statewide efforts, but were often carried out by unique organizations that had chapters in many of a state's localities. In one example, the Extension Homemaker program began a safety belt awareness campaign that eventually also included 1,000 "4-H clubs involving 24,000 members. Safety-seat loaner programs are a prime example of child safety protection projects that quickly spread throughout a state. One state began a pilot loaner program in two of its counties in 1981. It expanded rapidly to 50 programs by the end of 1982. By 1984, there were 77 loaner programs run by volunteers, and by the early 1990's, loaner safety seats were available to every child in the state.

Were concepts and technology developed with Federal funds used to improve state program effectiveness?

Technology developed with technical assistance grants under the §403 program was used in 57 percent of the programs that were part of this assessment. Occupant protection and emergency medical services have led the safety priority areas in using technology and demonstrations to further state program effectiveness. The other safety areas have also benefitted from technical assistance, often through the adoption of new technologies and processes first developed by other states and by NHTSA.

In one state, model local crash data collection systems that could be used to identify key problems were developed with technical assistance grants.

One state received a technical assistance grant in 1987, three years after the state had enacted a mandatory safety belt use law, to conduct a valid observational survey of belt use. Another state received funds to study the effects of combining public information with enforcement activities to boost the use of child restraints in 1989.

More than 40 percent of the many enforcement programs in the 10 states were improved by the development of new technologies. Primary among these, in more recent years, were the development of Standardized Field Sobriety Testing (SFST) and the methodology for implementing effective sobriety checkpoints. Laser speed devices were tested by a number of police agencies in six of the 10 states.

What would be the consequences of removing Federal grants from the program?

It is concluded that more than 40 percent of the programs in the I0 states would not have been initiated or would have been discontinued in the absence of further safety grants. The problem is critical for almost 90 percent of the programs that promote the use of safety belts.

For another 36 percent of the programs, federal grants were important for their initial start-up and/or continuation. The majority of enforcement programs were in that category. Some 20 percent of the programs did not depend on federal funds for implementation or continuance The majority of emergency medical services programs were among this group.

Almost 80 percent of the public information and education programs on impaired driving would likely be discontinued or considerably reduced. Only the DWI offender evaluation and education programs are self sufficient in all of the 10 states, although there are grants from the Department of Health and Human Services that support certain aspects of these programs.

By 1993, safety seat loaner programs were heading toward self sufficiency in several of the states and were run by volunteers. The other states remained dependent on Federal support with grant support ranging from 50 to more than 90 percent.

The comprehensive/community traffic safety programs (CTSPs) would certainly lapse without safety grants. Much like the grant assistance that is needed for safety belt and child restraint use programs, and for impaired driving reduction campaigns, there continues to be a need for grant funds.

New approaches to DWI enforcement would very likely be reduced or not attempted without the availability of safety grants. Although such grants constituted one percent or less of total traffic enforcement spending in 1993, grants have provided the incentive to establish new approaches such as sobriety check points, video taping of offenders, and training. The upgrading of breath testing equipment would be affected -- substantially slowed -- in many states. In some states it would lapse. The concurrent training of breath test device operators would follow suit.

Hard hit would be the speed enforcement programs that no longer benefit from set asides and the acquisition of vehicles, radar and new laser devices would very likely be delayed. Training for the various levels of crash investigation would have to be reduced without the assistance of safety grants. Educational outreach programs conducted by enforcement agencies, on the other hand, have been supported by states and localities and would, therefore, not be affected by reductions or elimination of grant funds.

More than one half of the programs to develop and implement traffic records systems had a critical need for grant support. Six of the 10 states continue to rely in whole or in part on safety grants for new data systems development, system upgrades and design.

The EMS systems would be the least affected by grant funding reduction, although Federal grant assistance was found to be critical or important to 38 percent of the programs in the 10 states. The partial funding of EMT training programs and support for several of the central EMS offices would lapse with the withdrawal of grant funds. Most EMS programs are, however, self sufficient and funded through fees, taxes and private contribution and possibly HHS Federal grants. Many ambulance units are made up of volunteers. Trauma care centers have been developed with state, local and private support. Some paramedic training and EMS/Trauma Care planning would be affected.

The motorcycle rider education programs in all states are, or are close to being, self sufficient. Removing safety grants would not have any effect on most of the programs, but those that still rely on such funding would have to reduce the number of rider courses or increase their fees.

Almost 90 percent of the pedestrian and bicycle safety programs in the 10 states would have to sharply curtail their activities in adult pedestrian programs and for certain bicycle safety activities. There is some local support for bicycle helmet purchases, bicycle rodeos and the distribution of informational brochures.

Were projects formally monitored or evaluated to compare results with planned objectives or to determine effectiveness?

Four out of every 10 programs was formally monitored, assessed or evaluated in some way to determine effectiveness, or measure accomplishments. Programs for occupant protection, traffic records, motorcycle safety and emergency medical services were subjected to more review than the other safety priority areas.

Crash data and related traffic data systems that served the problem identification process were frequently reviewed in all states. Observational sampling with multi-stage probability samples of road segments to determine safety belt use was employed by the states. While 70 percent of the 37 enforcement programs did not include assessments or evaluations, they were monitoring the 55 mph NMSL.

NHTSA's EMS Assessments were conducted in each of the 10 states. While focusing on current status in relation to guideline requirements, the EMS Assessments provided a much needed set of information that could be used to make subsequent improvements.

The beneficial effect of using a motorcycle helmet has been shown in many studies. One state, however, undertook an impact evaluation of its rider education program -- and was not able to find a relationship between such a program and crash outcomes.

It should be noted that many of the projects implemented by the states evolved from program strategies previously demonstrated and evaluated by NHTSA. The agency will continue to be the principal evaluator of programs of national interest.

General Conclusions

The planning process for States to obtain Federal funds has helped assure that highway safety programs receiving grants undertaken by states are focused on major safety problems. State traffic safety offices' increased ability to access crash data for problem analysis was instrumental in identifying major safety problems so that programs to resolve them could be developed and implemented. The planning process also helped assure that safety grants initiated new programs and resulted in major program changes in all safety program areas.

States and communities tend to take responsibility for projects begun with Federal funds when project objectives are perceived as relating to established state and local safety goals. The states and communities must perceive that they "own" the safety projects before they are willing to invest time and resources on them. In the individual priority areas, between 50 percent and 90 percent of the safety programs were taken over by states and localities after Federal funding ended. In addition, projects once begun in one location were repeated elsewhere. All this suggests that because of good problem identification based on automated crash data, states were able to address safety issues with programs that in their view truly reduced crashes and their consequences.

The Federal grant program has achieved the intent of Congress when it passed the Highway Safety Act of 1966. Federal grants which represent less than two percent of the funds expended on highway safety programs have led the states in addressing the most important safety issues and leveraged funds to provide many services to a wide public. Even so, in some priority areas states continue to be highly dependent on Federal direction and funding. While it is unknown whether programs would have been initiated by states without Federal direction or funding, it seems obvious that Federal leadership and resources have helped states to maintain traffic safety programs addressing the most important issues.

Because of the limited time period for which Federal grants were available, and the fact that development of new, innovative problem solving approaches is a slow evolutionary process, it was necessary in some instances for states and communities to repeat the same programs which had been "repackaged".

Under the process in place until FY 1996, fewer than half of the traffic safety programs are monitored or evaluated to determine their effectiveness. Because evaluation studies can be difficult and expensive to perform and often do not arrive at conclusive results, energy was focused on planning without the benefit of objective evidence that programs are achieving their goals, except the evidence provided by national demonstrations. This may be driven by the limited time period that a project can receive Federal funds. There may be a tendency to put as much Federal grant funds into the operation of the project rather than spending resources on evaluating the project.

Changes in the Management of the §402 Grant Program Beginning in FY 1996

The State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program was enacted by the Highway Safety Act of 1966 as {}402 of Title 23, U.S.C. Grant funds are provided to the states, Indian Nations, and Territories each year based on a formula of population and road mileage to encourage and facilitate implementation of programs to improve highway safety. The grants provide "seed" money for safety programs and leverage public and private sector resources for highway safety.

The §402 process that was in place through the time period of the assessment required states to develop Highway Safety Plans (HSP's) that included data to support problem identification and project descriptions for proposed programs. The Plan was approved by the Regional Office and changes in excess of 10 percent of programs costs needed prior approval. The process to make changes was often time-consuming, resulting in some states delaying making changes, though warranted, until the following fiscal year. Annual Reports were required and accountability was at the project/program level.

Beginning in FY 1996, NHTSA initiated a new performance-based process for the management of the §402 State and Community Grant Program - this was consistent with efforts to relieve burdens on the states under the President's regulatory reform initiative. The change took place not long after the data collection phase for the highway safety assessment was completed in 1994. The new process requires states to develop Performance Plans that establish state traffic safety goals and performance measures, and to describe the processes used to (1) identify highway safety problems; (2) establish goals; and (3) select projects to be used to achieve the performance measures. Also, the state prepares a Highway Safety Plan which describes specific programs and projects to be funded. Annual Reports are still required; however, accountability is now at the goal level. The new process provides states with maximum flexibility to make program changes as they are needed. States agreed that, if progress toward meeting goals does not occur in a state, both state and Federal officials would cooperate to develop an improvement plan for the state. States are free at any time to request assistance or advice from the regional offices, which remain ready to devote available resources as needed.

A recent NHTSA Publication, Evaluation of the Section 402 Pilot Process (not part of this Assessment) found that the immediate effects of the change on the highway safety programs included greater linkage between project and problem identification and re-energized state highway safety office staff. The first Annual Reports under the new process indicated that pilot states were clearly making progress toward achieving established performance goals. Some states exceeded nearly all their short-term performance measures and were crafting more ambitious goals for future years. Some states were overly ambitious in setting their first year performance measures and revised them for the next year. These are expected outcomes in the transition from the old to the new process.

Based on information in Evaluation of the Section 402 Pilot Process, DOT HS 808 583, May 1997 and the Interim final rule, 23 CFR Parts 1200 and 1205, June 26, 1997

Other improvements derived from the new process include paperwork and time saving considerations because fewer reviews and discussions with Federal agencies are needed, less detailed information is required, and planners are free from rigid Federal formats. Success is measured in terms of achieving performance goals rather than completing projects. States with their flexibility can broaden the types of programs funded which leads to increased partner involvement - both in terms of funds and types of involved organizations. Program quality is improved because planning documents are more useful and are based more on the "big picture". NHTSA Regional staff are able to devote more time to value-added activities and marketing priorities. Data systems have been expanded to identify traffic safety problems which helps in determining and measuring performance goals. States still emphasize priority areas under the new process even though they are not required to do so. Establishing baseline measurements for some states was a problem because data collection systems had not been established. In other cases, there is a lag time between data collection, analysis and when the information can be incorporated into the strategic planning process. Steps are being taken to improve even further the data systems needed for problem identification and to measure progress in terms of performance measures.

In addition to the Regional Office staff being freed up from administrative oversight activities to being able to provide more technical assistance to the states, the Traffic Safety Programs Office has created a Technical Assessment Program to assist states by examining state programs in areas such as EMS, Traffic Records, and Police Traffic Services. At a state's request, teams of technical experts are sent to examine the state's program against existing technical program criteria. The team accordingly provides the requesting state with a report of the assessment, along with recommendations on how the state can improve its program.

This Highway Safety Assessment was originally planned to include recommendations for improvements based on looking at programs before the change in operating procedures had been invoked. It became apparent that the new procedures have already achieved many of the improvements that were going to be recommended or have changed conditions so that other recommendations no longer apply. As a result, the assessment contains no recommendations but is a document that shows how states implemented their highway safety programs with Federal funding stimulation during the 1980-1993 time period. The major conclusion is that with very little Federal assistance, states have been able to focus their resources on resolving major highway safety problems, and they achieved significant improvements in many key measures of safety performance.