A RELEVANT METHODOLOGY FOR AIDING HIGHWAY SAFETY DECISION MAKERS IN RESOLVING HIGHWAY SAFETY PROBLEMS Thesis for the Degree of M. SI MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY NOEL C. BUFE 1971 THahn LIBRARY - :Michigan Sm: University ‘5 BIND-INGVGY ” HOAE 8x SMIS' BOOK BM“ IND. LIBRARY BINDERS w 9 T. menu} ._.__‘ .4 I 1%; '” 3:1 . [1.9 (3 T R."'\CT A RELEVANT METHODO‘OGY FOR AIDINC HiGHwAY SAFETY OECISION MAKERS IN RESOLVlHC HPGSHAY SAFETY PROBLEMS By Noel C. Bufe The objective of this thesis is to provide a relevant methodology for aiding highway safety decision makers in systematically managing existing and newly prOposed highway safety programs to achieve a re“ duction in losses caused by traffic crashes. The problem of highway safety is far more complex than many early investigators recognized. This complexity is due to at least three major factors: 1. A large number of variables influencing highway safe y. 2. A complex and, in most cases, unknown relationships among these variables and between these variables in safe performance. 3. The fact that both these variables and functions vary probaalisticaliy over time. N Because of the complexity of the traffic safety problem It is important to structure it in the context of a systems anaiysis frame- work. This approach allows for bre'king down the complex system of traffic safety into component parts which are more amenable to sci- entific inquiry and management control. in addition, it also pro- vides the basis for investigating the interrelationships that exist between its component parts and for then allocating resources to meet the specific problems identified in the system. Noel C. Bufe Designing to improve the productiveness of highway safety counter- measures calls for the need to carefully isolate the variables operating in the system and then employing various experimental remedies in an attempt to effect change. The highway safety manager does not now have such devices available and, although some conceptualizing has taken place in this regard, this thesis attempts to prepose a workable management system which considers the allocation of resources based upon thorough consideration of those collective relationships between countermeasure activity and desired results. A RELEVANT METHODOLOGY FOR AIDING HlCHWAY SAFETY DECISlON MAKERS IN RESOLVING HIGHWAY SAFETY PROBLEMS by Noel CE'Bufe A THESlS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Criminal Justice i97l \ .. ,4..- -- r\ "34"" ‘ —q \r\ kgjiuil~ Approved. 1 AA CL; \ ‘. 'tavaxgfl-\ .5: . j. A Chairman g r" 2' ) U / (a M», .LJVVI {‘..:._I.L....... L..:>~ M-‘fih _,//// Member I: / / 7.2.7“ I"- I! 4.! J’fi/‘f //\m “9/ .-.....L lel' ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am deeply indebted to Dr. Villiam Pollock, Research Psychologist, Highway Safety Research Institute, University of Michigan, for his assistance and contributions in the literature review section of this thesis and for his influence on my thinking throughout the course of the study. I am also deeply indebted to professional members of the staff of the Office of Highway Safety Planning, Michigan State Police (George H. Stewart, Bobbie R. Oaks, Ronald L. 805, and William A. Walker) who assisted greatly in the conceptualization of the grouping of work activity found in Chapter VI. In addition, I am deeply in- debted to my secretary, Mrs. Lorna Smyth, who sacrificed some of her off-duty time to type this thesis. Sincere appreciation is given to Dr. Victor Strecher, Chairman, and the other members of my thesis committee for their helpful guidance, efforts, time and encouragement. A special type of thanks is given to my wife, Nancy, and my children who were so patient and offered encouragement and the neces- sary moral SUpport that is, indeed, needed during this type of activity. .TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments List of Appendices . . . . . . . . . . Chapter l. Problem Definition . . ll. Highway Safety Situation ~~ National and in Michigan . . . . . lll. Literature Review iv. The Traffic Safety System V. A Contemporary Management Technique VI. Modeling for Highway Safety Planning in Michigan . . . . . . . . . Goal Analysis -- Problem Definition Highway Safety Model Design Highway Safety Model Development Highway Safety System Evaluation Bibliography [\p‘)CrldE(:e€' o I o t u o o o o o o o c o o Annenjix Appendix A B LIST OF APPENDICES Highway Safety Program Structure Relationship Between Program Elements, Sub- Elements, and Tasks Michigan's Highway Safety Program Structure Sub-Element Plan Form 99 100 101 102 CW PlER l PROBLtM DEFiNlTlON CTI. “J -——-‘-- . ofl Thié "fl. Hit? ()i, ,__ .; ----_- — L. .-. 'i’ fin dulvm h{nmgw(3afi_ if EG'L) C: dCCL3L0n mL --.—.o.- 0‘ (YtiL/VG ’HL HO‘LU L.“ . Iii/1:.) . _..‘,--.. -—._ -- , l.— —..._.——'-- -‘v—n .' .L'c c1m3he3 . -u . -.—.—.———.——.—.— Zian.én £03393 C L“ bqf (&_§ The problem of hignway investigators recognized. major factors: .— _-.— .. 03cd ling“ H befiti Lt’q am.’ to och/etc safety is far more complex This complexity is due to at tue3L5» L3 to [mLu;WL'9 a fintrw'irtinoLuuaofouL' .---W.——-—._ —-— 5/WHVTOLMfflVUVULWi - -a... .— -..— -o----. heiue- -_--——-c -oovoc than many early least three 1. A large number of variables ianUencing highway safety. 2. A complex and, in most cases, unknown relationships among these variables and between these variables in safe performance. 3. The fact that both these variaoie- and functions vary pro. hablit tically over time. Because of the coerle xity of the traffic important to structure it in the context of work. This approach allows for breaking down safety into component parts which are cinquiry and management control. the basis for investigating the i In addition, It nter-relationships that safety problem, systems analysis frame- 13 complex system of more amenable to scien- also pirvid 5 exit t betvee n its component parts and for then allocating resources to meet the Specific problems identified in the system. 1William Hall and William Carlson, Methodolog P. 29. “Hi Highway Safety Research lnsti ' .ll :es, ghway Safety Project Evaluation tute , December 31, i9b8. Designing to improve the productiveness of highway safety counter- measures calls for the need to carefully isolate the variables Operating in the system and then employing various experimental remedies in an attempt to effect change. The highway safety manager does not now have such devices available and, although some conceptualizing has taken place in this regard, this paper attempts to prOpose a workable management system specifically for the State of Michigan which considers the allo~ cation of resources based upon thorough consideration of those collective relationships between countermeasure activity and desired results. A very basic need in developing a comprehensive statewide highway safety program for Michigan is the injection of structured evaluation activities into action projects. In order to allocate resources to obtain the greatest benefit, information concerning the effectiveness of ongoing and projected project activity is essential. Unfortunately, traditional highway safety efforts have been devoid, for the most part, of the structured, quantitative procedures necessary for appropriate evaluation. This is, at least partially, a result of poor communication and interaction between highway safety researchers and highway safety practitioners.. Directors of highway safety resources often do not realize the importance of evaluation nor appreciate the function it has in improving highway safety efforts. On the other hand, the re- searcher, who is very aware of evaluation requirements for finding answers and refining efforts, frequently disregards the real world constraints of action programs and attempts to interject eXperimental designs not apprOpriate to the thrust of specific highway safety ac- tivities. In any case, it is clear that a compromise between purity of evaluation measures and reality of action programming efforts is needed. The management product of this work will aid both manager and research in this regard. Until highway safety countermeasures can be evaluated, directly or indirectly, with some certainty in terms of crash reduction, decisions on what countermeasures are apprOpriate to what problems must remain largely subjective. Attempting to relate individual countermeasure projects to crash variations is futile -- the context, usually involving many crash reduction efforts Operating simultaneously, just does not permit clean measurement of the impact of any one of the countermeasures. Great benefit will be realized as the matter of highway safety effectiveness measurement becomes a reality and subjectivity can be lessened. The obvious question arises -- why the concern about the careful scheduling of highway safety resources? In fact, most Americans are quite apathetic about death and injury resulting from the use of our highway and street system. On the other hand, Americans are concerned about personal security. We pay enormous sums for our country's defense and insurance coverage for every conceivable risk. Every business sets up contingency funds to provide a reserve for the uneXpected. It's puzzling then to explain why we find one large~area in which the amount of money spent for human protection does not cor- respond to the investment involved, namely the broad field of high- way transportation. The estimated total cost of providing motor vehicle transportation in the United States in 1962 was $95 billion or about one-sixth of the U. 5. gross national product. This $95 billion keeps traffic rolling, but only ;1 billion (less then l%) of this huge expenditure goes for safety (courts, police safety planners and driver education).2 It is also important that the highway transportation system remain viable for the economic stability of this nation. The high- way safety matter then has very far reaching ramifications beyond just insuring the safe arrival of a person traveling from one loca- tion to another. In 1969, for example, 2A% of retail sales were automotive; 79% of households owned cars; 86% of travelers used automobiles; 82% of commuting workers used automobiles as a means of transportation; and 89% of intercity travel was by motor vehicle.3 2”Billions for Transportation, How Much for Safety,“ Traffic Safety, National Safety Council. October 1963. Pp. 22—23. 3”l970 Automobile Facts and Figures,” Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc., New York, N. Y. Pp. 29-53. Motor vehicle transportation is vital to the American way of life; as a matter of fact, it affects nearly every facet of our society. it permits widespread dispersion of residential areas; Opens up recreational areas; has promoted the development of modern retail shOpping centers; provides for rapid delivery Of farm products to the market places; and has permitted the establishment of consoli- dated school systems. Highway safety managers have primary reSponsibility for safe travel, yet the success Of their efforts have tO be considered in the context of how their good works will contribute to the welfare of the people generally. Highway safety planners should be ever mindful of this circumstance, and it is imperative that they be Speaking in terms of the benefits of their programs can bring in this broader context. The challenge, then, speaks very clearly to the student of this problem: The investment made for the safety of the highway transportation system is small and must be wisely managed to in- sure the best possible return for costs committed for highway safety. CHAPTER II HIGHWAY SAFETY SITUATION -- NATIONAL AND IN MICHIGAN It seems that too few really understand what the traffic accident situation is all about. Not too many Americans understand that on an average day, the highway casualties in the United States total over 10,000 injured.h TOO few realize that these traffic accidents account for more than 1,000 deaths weekly across this nation and result in approximately $1 billion Ioss each month. Americans are still killing and maiming themselves on our highways at about the same rate that we have experienced in the past years. This is particularly distressing as we Observe the increasing trends in vehicle miles traveled, total vehicles registered, and numbers Of licensed drivers which greatly in- crease one's potential Of becoming involved in an automobile crash. Yet, somehow this pressing problem, which afflicts great numbers of peOpIe in this country, still does not seem to get through to the thinking and emotions of most Americans or to generate social concern which this unpleasantness clearly deserves. . Specifically, motor vehicle deaths continued their rise in 1969 and reached an estimated total Of 56,A00 which surpasses the death figure of American lives lost in the whole Of the Viet Nam war. This is the highest annual toll on record surpassing the 55,200 toll Of 1968.5 “William Haddon, Jr., ”Address before Association of Minnesota Counties,“ U. S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Safety Bureau, November 28, 1967. P. 1 -5J. L. Recht, ”The 1969 Traffic Story,” Traffic Safety, March 1970. P. 17. The grim statistics unmistakably highlight that in motor vehicle deaths the nation faces a destructive problem equal in size and com~' plexity to other social ills such as crime, disease and poverty: - Highway injuries exceed by 10 times all violent criminal acts combined, including homicides, armed robbery, rape, riot, and assault. - Motor vehicle crashes rob society of nearly as many productive working years as heart disease and of more than are lost to cancer and strokes. Only about I of 5 expected man years of life lost to heart disease is in the age interval between 20 and 65; in contrast, 7 out of 10 man years lost to motor vehicle deaths are in the productive years between 20 and 65. The dimensions of the problem extend beyond the death and injury totals, for each American family also suffered an average financial loss estimated at $291 as a result of highway crashes in 1968 -- a total loss of almost $15 billion.6 What further complicates the traffic safety problem is that we are not dealing with a situation so divorced from other things that it can be solved with parochial efforts and understanding which has, for over 60 years, constituted our total response and which has ac- counted for almost 2,000,000 highway dead.7 The problem needs to be viewed, not as a matter in isolation from the rest of human affairs, but as having such a close relationship with other contemporary issues that it can be dealt with properly only in a much broader context than has traditionally been the case. 6”Administration of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Act,” .Message from the President of the United States, U. S. Govt. Printing ' Office, Washington 1969. 7Haddon, op: cit., P. 2. _——- Consider a few illustrations. l. The continuing, tragic, and large contribution of alcoholics and other heavy drinkers to highway crashes, especially to the most severe ones, must be approached in terms of the location and treat- ment of the alcoholic and other problem drinkers in society in general, and not exclusively in terms of their behavior on the highway, either as drivers or as pedestrians. 2. The problem of the teenagers, of young men of high school and college age who are crashing as the re- sult of drinking and other teenage behavior must be considered in the context of the overall behavior of the young, and not only as a problem in relation to the highway. 3. ‘ The deaths of children playing under the wheels of cars reflect our failure to plan our communities with suitable, neighborhood play areas, not to mention our failure to provide care for the children of working and otherwise occupied mothers who cannot prOperly supervise their children. A. The deaths of so many of our elderly pedestrians reflect our failure to provide environments for them which are sheltered in much the same way as those we need for our children. Yet here, too, we seldom think in urban planning of the inevitable results over many decades of interlacing the paths of every- day pedestrian activity and those of moving traffic. This broad understanding of the highway safety problem is an im~ portant consideration in attempting to c0pe with it and one that the highway safety manager should take account of in his decision making process to more fully Optimize the utilization of available resources. 8William Haddon, Jr., “The National Highway Safety Program -- 18 Months Later,” Driver Behavior Cause and Effect, Insurance Institute for High- way Safety. March 1968. P. 14. ’ ‘ There have been, however, some encouraging trends in Michigan highway safety experience during the past four years which indicate positive gains and impact on the total highway safety situation. A slowing trend during this period in total deaths attributed to traffic accidents has been noted while at the same time an increase in the exposure factors has occurred. Travel has increased during the past four years (1966-1969) about 16%; motor vehicles registered have gone up 10%, and licensed drivers 6%. Interestingly, the deaths which have been up 69% over the period of 10 years, l959 thru 1969, have increased only 8% for the period 1966 thru 1969. Injuries as a re- sult of traffic crashes are up l70% over the same l0 year period; yet for the four year period i966 thru I969, they increased only l2% of which the biggest growth has come in the less severe category of injury indicating some lessening of the degree of injury occurring to accident victims. The number of accidents during the ID year periods shows an increase of 67%; yet, in the last four years, the rate has stabilized and the growth shown is at the 9% level. The death rate per 100 million miles has increased 2% during the 10 year period 1959 tnru l969, but for the last four years has shown a decrease of 7%.9 The exPerience so far this year further amplifies the decrease in death rate to the point where the current statistic is lower than it has ever been in the history of the state and deaths will be over 300 less than last year. 9”Michigan Traffic Accident Facts,“ Michigan Department of State Police, East Lansing, Mich. 1969. P. 6. -10- Although this record reflects improvement, there certainly is little comfort in the fact that we still suffer the loss of human life that, to a great extent, could be avoided. The toll is still tragic. One person is killed every 3 hours and 3] minutes as a re~ sult of a traffic accident in this state. One person is injured every 3 minutes. one out of every 3,297 Michigan residents was killed in a traffic accident; one out of every A6.7 persons was in- jured; one out of every 13 motor vehicles registered in Michigan and one out of every 15.“ licensed drivers in Michigan were involved in a traffic accident. These accident facts can be portrayed even more vividly by saying that for every person murdered in this state, 4 persons lose their lives in traffic accidents. For every person injured in a crime against a person, five are injured in traffic accidents. The economic loss as a consequence of traffic accidents in Michigan is in the neighborhood of half a billion dollars a year. Other traffic accident statistics indicate that 56% of traffic fatals occur on weekends from Friday through Sunday and that Saturday is the most hazardous day in the week for driving, particularly between 2:00 a.m. and 3:00 a.m. Excessive speeds or speed too fast for con- ditions was indicated in AA% of all fatal accidents. It is also interesting to note that 69% of all accidents occurred in urban areas, but 69% of all traffic deaths occur in rural areas, which speaks directly to the greater risk of death in rural accidents.10 ‘Olbid. P. 5. -1]- History is repeating itself again this year with an over repre- sentation of young drivers in fatal accidents. Although the driver age group from 15 to 2A accounts for only 21% of the drivers, they are involved in 39% of the accidents and 35% of the fatals. As a , matter of fact, for youths between the ages of 15 and 24, accidents claim more lives than all other causes of death combined and 7 times more than the next leading cause which is homicide.11 In 1969, Michigan had A05 pedestrian fatals. This represents an approximate 20% factor in the total traffic accident fatality picture. Pedestrian safety, compared to other traffic safety activities, has received too little attention.12 In those fatal accidents where a drinking condition was deter- mined, alcohol was a factor in nearly half of them (h2%). Evidence continues to mount that the majority of drinking drivers involved in accidents who have a high concentration of blood alcohol fit into the clinical definition of alcoholism. There is substantial evidence that individuals with a high concentration of blood alcohol have had their driving skills and abilities debilitated to the point that they are extremely dangerous and are high risk drivers on our highways. The real significance of this identification of the high concentra- tion of blood alcohol is particularly noted in that these concentra- tions are most pronounced in fatal and severe injury accidents. In H“Accident Facts 1970 Edition,” National Safety Council, Chicago, 111., P. 9. '12“Michigan Traffic Accident Facts 1969,” 0P- Clt° P' 5' -]2- a study conducted in Michigan, a team of researchers reported the relative probability of a driver becoming involved in an accident is 25 times greater if his blood alcohol level is at the 0.15% level and 7 or 8 times greater if his blood alcohol is at the 0.10% level.13 ”Drivers with positive alcohol levels caused more than one-fifth of all accidents observed in this study, while constituting about 11% of the driving p0pu1ation. Drivers with alcohol levels 0.05% and higher caused 15% of the acci- dents, while accounting for just over 3% of the driving pOpulation. Drivers with blood alcohol levels of 0.10%, representing less than 1% of the driving pOpulation, accounting for almost 10% of the accidents. Drivers over 0.15% blood alcohol level account for almost 6% of the accidents.l+ They amount to less than 0.15% of the driving population. The recently completed University of Michigan Highway Safety Research Institute study of the Wayne County traffic fatality ex- perience corroborates the earlier findings and demonstrates conclusively the dominant role that alcohol misuse plays in the fatal picture. For example, of the 8A driver fatalities in Wayne County from July 15, 1967, to January 15, 1968, 16.7% had alcohol concentrations at the time of death equal to or greater than 0.25% (W/V), 32.1% had alcohol concentrations in the 0.15 to 0.2h% range, and lh.3% were in the 0.10 to 0.1A% range; only 26% were negative. When acci- dent reSponsibility was introduced, it was found that 79% of all dead responsible drivers had alcohol concentrations above 0.10% and 68% were in the 0.15% or greater range. Thus, nearly two-thirds of the 13R. F. Borkenstein, “The Role of the Drinking Driver in Traffic Accidents,” Dept. of Police Adm., Indiana Univ., Bloomington, Ind., P. 167. ‘llubid. P. 165. -13- drivers died with alcohol concentrations at which driving skills are definitely impaired. Further, nearly half of these fatal drivers had reached or exceeded the high alcohol concentration of 0.15%, a figure rarely reached by social drinkers. This fact, together with other findings of this study, supports mounting research evidence both here in Michigan and elsewhere in the country that points strongly to the fact that alcoholism itself is a major component of the alcohol problem.15 Recent studies conducted in California and Oregon concentrated on chronic drinking drivers. These studies also produced some sig- nificant statistics. One in four of these drivers was driving with a suspended license when arrested for drunken driving. Three in ten were involved in collisions. All had a record of prior accidents. One in four had a criminal record.16 The Highway Safety Act gives the Federal Government responsibiiity for the leadership and coordination of a national highway safety pro~ gram, but recognizes the primary and historic responsibility of the state and local government for the safe use of their road and street systems. The federal-state partnership is necessary to provide for the unique problems encountered from state to state in geographic, economic, population and other demographic considerations. 1 - . . . 5State of Michigan Highway Safety Plan, Office of Highway Safety Planning, Bureau of Planning 8 Program DeveIOpment, Exec. Office of the Governor, Oct. 15, l968.’ P. 11-3. 16 . ”Keynote Address, Highway Users Federation for Safety and Mobility,” Washington, D. C., April 1970, P. 2. Given by Harry Heltzer. -14- The law states at the outset that each state shall have a highway safety program approved by the Secretary of Transportation designed to reduce traffic accidents and deaths, injuries, and property damage resulting therefrom. These prOgrams will be in accordance with uni- form standards promulgated by the Secretary of Transportation and shall be eXpressed in terms of ”performance criteria”17 which means that all new investments made in the field of highway safety must be evaluated in terms of the reduction in losses brought about by the new investment. This provision of the Act is most important as it is the basis in law for requiring that the states improve their plan- ning capabilities to deal more adequately with the problem. The law further states that the Secretary of TranSportation shall not approve any state highway safety program which does not: A. Provide that the Governor the state shall be responsible for the administration of the program. 8. Authorize political subdivisions of the state to carry out local highway safety programs within their juris- dictions as part of the state highway safety program if such local highway safety programs are approved by the Governor and are in accordance with the uniform standards of the Secretary. 17"Highway Safety Act of 1966,ll Public Law 89-56h, 89th Congress, 8.3052. September 9, 1966. P. 1. E. -15.. Provide at least h0% of all federal funds apportioned under this section to any state for any fiscal year will be expended by the political subdivisions of the state in carrying out local highway safety programs authorized in accordance with the approval process mentioned above. Provide that the aggregate expenditure of funds of the state and political subdivisions thereof, exclusive of federal funds for highway safety programs, will be maintained at a level which does not fall below the average level of such expenditures for its last two fiscal years preceding the date of enactment of this section. Provide for comprehensive driver training programs.18 The State Legislature passed an implementation measure (Act 213, Public Acts of 1967) that empowered the Governor of Michigan to carry out the necessary procedures in compliance with federal requirements. The creation of the Office of Highway Safety Planning, within the Governor's office followed. The purposes and functions of the Office of Highway Safety Planning are to: A. Substantially reduce the traffic accident eXperience on a statewide basis. 18Ibid. Pp. l and 2. ~16- Develop a long-range comprehensive highway safety policies plan for Michigan that conforms with the minimal federal requirements and meets the specific needs of the state. Coordinate existing and future highway safety resources. Study and analyze highway safety needs at the state and local level. Establish annual highway safety priorities for pro- gramming. Develop guidelines for agencies preparing reports required by the Act. Clarify federal standards for state and local officials. Provide technical assistance to local political sub- divisions in the analysis of their highway safety needs and deveIOpment in highway safety projects. Establish criteria for the distribution of highway safety program funds. Provide liaison between federal, state and local agencies. Develop programs of public education regarding highway safety. Develop and solicit support from official and citizens1 traffic safety interests. -17.. After consultation with state and local officials, the National Highway Safety Bureau (agency responsible for administering the National Highway Safety Program) issued a set of 16 standards forming the foundation for state and local community safety programs.19 These standards are important to highway safety programmers as they represent the basic structure from which a State's program must be based. Succinctly, the areas of prime concern are listed below along with a general status of Michigan's compliance with the respec- tive standard. Compliance is important as it suggests where emphasis might be required in programming. - Periodic Motor Vehicle Inspection - Each state shall \ have a prOgram for periodic inspection of all registered vehicles 9£_an experimental, pilot or demonstration pro- gram approved by the Secretary of Transportation. Michi- gan's motor vehicle check lane program is being evaluated as an alternative to the periodic program. Upon completion of this effort, we will be in a better position to determine our next action in this program area. - Motor Vehicle Registration - Each state shall have a motor vehicle registration program and record-keeping system to provide rapid identification of each vehicle and owner; data will be made available for accident re- search and safety program development. Federal highway _l9lbid. P. l ~18- safety funds are being used to eXpedite the conversion Of our manual records system to a computer based operation. Motorcycle Safety - Operators must be licensed and examined Specifically for the Operation of motorcycles; also sets protective apparel and equipment standards. We need upgrading in this program to insure motorcyclists are required to wear eye protective devices and that Operators are licensed only after they have passed an examination especially designed for motorcycle Operation. Driver Education - Requires comprehensive driver education and training programs be made available to all youth of licensing age; also requires training and retraining of adults and the regulation of private driving schools. Michigan can be proud of its progress in the driver education program area. We will be examining various means tO upgrade driver education, especially the means to bring about improvement in the areas of teacher preparation and evaluation. Driver Licensing - Each state shall have a driver licensing program to insure that only persons physically and mentally qualified may drive; re-examination, medi- cal advisory board and record system are also required. We have some deficiencies in this area. We need to -19- provide a medical advisory board to the licensing authority to assist in establishing medical criteria and vision requirements for drivers. We need a re- examination program to test operators at least every four years. Tests must also be devised to test Opera- tors in the classes Of vehicles they will be Operating. Codes and Laws - Each state shall develop and imple- ment a program to achieve uniformity Of traffic codes and laws throughout the state. Michigan needs to conduct a study to insure the Objectives Of this standard. Traffic Courts - To provide prompt impartial adjudi- cation Of proceedings involving motor vehicle laws. Michigan has just reorganized its court system and it will be necessary to observe its Operation for a time before considering any alterations. Alcohol in Relation to Highway Safety - Each state, in cooperation with local subdivisions, must develop programs to reduce traffic accidents resulting from persons driving under the influence of alcohol; re- quires implied consent statute. In Michigan, we re- cently enacted an implied statute and, as a result, the breathalyzer program was implemented. Emphasis now must be placed on measures to rehabilitate drinking drivers after being identified as being repeatedly de- linquent drinking drivers. Identification and Surveillance Of Accident Locations - Each state, in COOperation with county and other local governments, shall have a program for identifying, in- vestigating and surveillance Of high accident locations as a basis for establishing priorities for improvement. This is one of the major deficiencies in our State pro- gram. Currently, we can only partially achieve the objective of this standard on 9200 miles Of our highway system, which is approximately 10% Of our statewide road network. Traffic Records - Requires a statewide system and compatible local systems to include all traffic data for the entire state; includes data on driver, vehicle, accident and highway. We are doing fairly well in the develOpment Of a sound traffic records system, but local communities are not benefiting very much from the state level system. Emergency Medical Services - Each state, cooperating with local subdivisions, shall have a program to insure prompt, emergency medical care for accident victims. Specifies communication and personnel requirements. This program needs improving for eXperts indicate great saving Of life from prOper emergency medical care. -2]- Highway Design, Construction and Maintenance - Every state in COOperation with county and local governments shall have a program Of highway design, construction and maintenance to improve highway safety. The current level Of compliance with this program is not known. We will be investigating to learn more about our posi- tion in this program area. Traffic Control Devices - Each state, in COOperation with county and local governments, shall have a pro- gram for traffic control (signs, markings, signals) and other traffic engineering measures to reduce traffic accidents. This is another area where we must collect more information. Pedestrian Safety - Every state in cooperation with its political subdivisions shall develop and implement a program to insure the safety Of pedestrians of all ages. Our state is lacking in most areas Of this standard. Police Traffic Services - Every state in COOperation with its political subdivisions shall have a program to insure efficient and effective police services utilizing traffic patrols: TO enforce traffic laws; to prevent accidents; to aid the injured; to document the particulars of individual accidents; to supervise -22.. accident cleanup and to restore safe and orderly traffic mOvement. Prior to the emphasis of society on crime in the streets and riots, the traffic respon- sibility Of the bigger police departments was fairly well handled. In the past five years, this hasn't been the case and much needs to be done to strengthen our program in this area. Debris Hazard Control and Cleanup - Each state in COOperation with its political subdivisions shall have a program which provides for rapid, orderly, and safe removal from the roadway Of wreckage, spillage, and debris resulting from motor vehicle accidents, and for otherwise reducing the likelihood of secondary and chain-reaction collisions, and conditions hazardous to the public health and safety. This is a very com- plicated standard to implement as it involves very extensively both public and private intersect. We don't even know where we stand in this standard area and need considerable study to learn more about our current posture in this program area. -23 The highway safety management system for Michigan must be structured to place emphasis on the problems the state faces in achieving minimal compliance with the federal standards just dis- cussed. Our rural death problem is severe and the management structure must make the distinction between urban and rural problems. Traffic accident countermeasures are going to have to be separated to show impacting programs which speak to young driver problems. The same applies to our pedestrian problem. It was interesting to learn how badly Michigan needs a system which will enable planners to learn about where accident problems are developing. Most persons don't even realize our state has this deficiency. lmportantly, we must focus on the problem drinker as he is over represented as a cause in our accident experience. But most important of all is to realize that predictors Of the success Of various traffic accident countermeasures are really not available and until they are, we must cautiously approach the problem in a comprehensive fashion as drastic changes in program mix would only provide further confusion. Priorities that deal with Michigan's problems in a more systematic fashion that provides for evaluation is the real challenge the management system must be responsive to if we are to efficiently COpe with the death and injury caused by motor vehicle crashes. The Highway Safety Act gives states new cause for vigorously pursuing this hard challenge. Bevel isneaning business, adopted a: as an expl manager-en 'tconomic analysis, tOOl in h The liter of hlghrg availabiE GOO: Peared d eStabi ; 5 Sa'ew F respect its imp} Prod“Ct ventOry wh'ch c< CHAPTER III LITERATURE REVIEW DeveIOpment of an effective management reporting system that is meaningful for evaluating program progress is hardly a new concept -- business, industry, and, later, government at various levels have adopted explicit procedures fOr evaluating their performance, generally as an expression Of value eXpended versus value received. These management decision aids are identified in various ways such as ”economic analysis, cost benefit analysis cost effectiveness analysis,” etc. Recognition of the potential of such a management tool in highway safety is liberally represented in the literature. The literature can be categorized by: (1) writings on the functions of highway safety program management; and (2) writings on the tools available for program management. Good examples of the first category are three reports that ap- peared during 1968, each of which was oriented to helping states establish their NHSB-monitored highway safety program. An Automotive Safety Foundation report reviewed each Of the program standards with respect to intent and tO state functions and resources required in its implementation.20 At the time Of this publication in 1968, this product was and, tO a lesser extent, still today is a valuable in- ventory type product for the various Highway Safety Bureau Standards which constitute the basis for state comprehensive program planning. 20A Fact- Gathering Guide to Assist States in DevelOping a Highway —v-.—-.—_— Safety Program, Automotive "Safe tv foundation, Washington, D. C. 1968. -25.. A second ASF report on contract activities Sponsored by NHSB gave elaborate development to an idealized state structure and asso- ciated functions for a highway safety program.2' Both ASF reports frequently mentioned the need for program/project evaluation in terms of safety benefits relative to program costs, but did not go into just how to do such an evaluation. The second ASF report was less Specific than the first in terms of structuring to even engage in the evaluation process, but together with their first effort, made up the best available resources on the matter of highway safety management. Peat, Marwick, Livingston and Company, sponsored by NHSB, developed a highway safety program management structure, including description Of needs for measuring program efficiency and effectiveness.22 While the need for cost-effectiveness methods is mentioned, no discussion of how they might be used is developed in the report. This work, however, will probably constitute the framework from which most states will model their highway safety programs for control and management purposes -- and provided the basic structuring for the Michigan pro- gram approach develOped in this thesis. These types Of studies were oriented toward what_a highway safety program structure should do in program evaluation, but did not address how to do it. Conversely, a variety of reports have been written on 2'Highway Safetngrogram Management, Automotive Safety Foundation, Rept. on NHSB Contr. NO. FH~11-6537, August 1968. ' 22HighwaySafety Management Guidelines for State Governments, Peat, Marwick, Livingston and CO., Wash., D.C., Rept. on NHSB Contr. No. FH-11-6627, June 1968. ~26- how to do resource allocation and program evaluation in the context Of highway safety. A brief chronology of significant reports follows, intended as an accounting of cost effectiveness/highway safety state of the art. A monumental work in proposed budgeting for a motor vehicle injury prevention program was prepared by a Department of Health, Education and Welfare committee in 1966.23 Concentrating on only the human involvement in traffic accidents, the committee assigned costs to traffic mortality and morbidity degrees, and looked at various driver and pedestrian countermeasure programs intended to reduce traffic death and injury. In doing so, the HEW committee bravely estimated the number of deaths and injuries, and associated dollar savings, to be accrued from various sizes and mixes Of programs in driver licensing, driver education, improved restraint systems, etc. Benefit/cost estimates then formed the basis for budget recommendations. The HEW study must stand as a landmark in predictive evaluation of traffic safety countermeasures. However, the Foreword to the report wisely observes, . . . ”Many of the estimates, especially estimates of the potential effectiveness of programs to persuade the public to use safety devices, are subject to great uncertainty.” Since the release of this report, it has been the subject among highway safety management specialists Of considerable debatable conversations. 23Motor Vehicle Injury Prevention Program, Rept. 1966-1, Disease Control Programs, U.S. Dept. of Health, Education 8 Welfare, August 1966. -27- The highway safety practitioner would like very much to have solid data presented in the fashion this study did; however, it appears more research is needed before conclusive evidence can be made available to SUpport resource allocations on a cost/benefit basis. Two related studies reported in 1966 are worthy of mention due to their individual, comprehensive cost-effective analyses of highway safety problems, although in both cases the approach was confined to highway construction problems. Jorgensen and Associates, assisted by Westat Research Analysts, Inc. attacked the general problem of identifying high-accident sites and of evaluating various highway im~ provement plans for reducing the high accident rate.2h Models for predicting probable accident reduction for various improvement classes were develOped; cos.t- effectiveness methods for economic evaluation of the various improvement projects were derived. Similarly, Curly and Haney were concerned with evaluating the economic desirability of highway improvement projects.25 Interestingly, their criterion measure was estimated user-traveI-time saved by various highway con- figurations. With a dollar value assigned to time, methods for benefit/ cost evaluation of proposed highway designs were developed. This raises the question of selection of criteria for evaluation of the highway safety system and suggests that perhaps more than one method might be appropriate. 2“Evaluation of Criteria fOI Safety Improvements on the Highways, Jorgensen and Assoc. /Westat Research Analysts, Inc., Rept. to Bur. _Pub. Rds. , October I966. 25D. A. Curry and D. G. Haney, A ianual for Conducting Hiplway Economy Studies, Stanford Research Institute, Rept. for Bur. Pub. Rds., August T9 ~28— Relative to that use of accident cost estimates as a criterion, two significant papers appeared in late 1966 that considerably ampli- fied the extant data on accident costs., Wilbur Smith and Associates did an exhaustive 12-month study of accidents in the Washington area and extracted cost data as a function of many human, vehicle and en- vironment parameters of reported and unreported accidents.26 With a more analytic procedure, Smith and Tamburri reviewed and combined accident cost data from several older studies, and developed a straight" forward method for evaluating candidate highway improvement projects on the basis of least cost per eXpected accident reduced.27 Again, however, these studies were highway or environmental in orientation and these categories of program activity are generally regarded as being more susceptible to this sort of analysis processing. An interesting report on how to do cost/benefit analyses of accident countermeasures was produced, also in I966, by Recht.28 He showed a complete willingness to use any available data, augmented strongly by rationality, to estimate probable changes in accident experience as a function of a change in some traffic parameter. With this estimate of parameter change effect, he derived and described 26A Re ort on the Washington Area Motor Vehicle Accident Cost Stu_y (WAMVACS, Wilbur Smith and Assoc. , Rept. for Bur. Pub. Rds. and others, November 1966. 27R. N. Smith and T. N. Tamburri, Direct Costs of California State Highway Accidents, Division of Highways, State of California, July 1967. 28J L. Recht, How to do a Cost/Benefit Anal ysis” of Motor Vehicle ' Accident CounteImeasures, mNational Safety Council, mSeptember 1° 66. -29.. a relatively simple method for producing what amounts to figures of merit for various countermeasures in reducing accident cost. His ”break-even analysis” provides benefit/cost results which, when re- viewed with available data and considered judgment, may be very use- ful in ranking candidate projects or mixes of projects. He cautions that any such method does not make allocation or evaluation decisions, but only serves as a tool for clarifying and, possibly, ordering possibilities. The technique's shortening appears to be over the reliability of available data and the non-consistency of rationality used by highway safety practitioners. Subsequently, Campbell and Rouse reported an exercise of the Recht method to determine what accident reduction would be required to barely justify, i.e., ”break-even,” the cost of reflectorized plates.29 Their exercise was intended both to illustrate Recht's method and to champion the notion that cost/benefit techniques are required in safety planning because data on traffic parameter effects on accident experience are so slowly being develOped. This work is extremely valuable to the highway safety practitioner as it critiques an evaluation attempt with available data and explains in considerable detail the methodology and data base needed to complete a more satis- factory evaluation product. 293. J. Campbell and W. S. Rouse, Highway Safety Program Costs Compared £2_Benefits Received, Univ. of North Carolina, Highway Safety Research Center Bulletin, June I967. -30.. The more recent studies, with only few exceptions, may be characterized more as dissertations on elegant solutions to high- way safety management problems, if basic parameter data were available, than as attempts to use what is available for immediate solutions. In a symposium focused on a theme of planning, programming and bud- geting (the PPS system), Wiederkehr presented a paper on rather powerful techniques for priority-ordering and budget planning for highway improvement.3O He developed two versions of a model for complex manipulation of highway and user variables, with many of the variables having subjectively assigned weights. A companion paper at the same symposium by Dietz developed a similarly elegant model, computer based, for identifying hazardous highway locations and for cross comparing benefits and costs of various hazard reduction possi- bilities.31 The two papers combined result in a more SOphisticated version on the earlier work by Jorgensen, discussed above, but with a complexity that causes questions about their immediate operational suitability, primarily because of the lack of suitable data banks and of expertise to conduct apprOpriate analysis required by the techniques. A highly readable book prepared in 1968 by staff of A. D. Little, Inc., provides a thoughtful treatise both on cost-effectiveness meth- odology for highway safety and on traffic parameter data deficiencies that preclude efficient application of that methodology in safety 30R. R. V. Wiederkehr, “A Methodology for Programming Highway Safety Improvement Projects,” Analysis for Planning Programming Budgeting: 1Washington Operations Research Council, 1968, Pp. 81—96. 31$. K. Dietz, “Cost Effectiveness Evaluation of Methods for Iden- tifying Hazardous Highway Locations,“ Analysis for Planning_Pro- ramming gudgeting: Washington Operations Research Council, 1968, Pp. 65-80. -31- planning and evaluation.32 The authors review the state of knowledge of various traffic safety improvement areas and identify where data firmness may permit assessment of improvement benefits. The book is a valuable reference for highway safety planners. In a series of memoranda under a NHSB contract, Rand personnel looked at the state of the art of highway safety with the intent of structuring a major conceptual framework for relating traffic safety activities to accident and injury causation. The goal was a program to reduce causation, with considerable attention being given to the economic and social consequences of such a program. Two of the memo- randa are particularly pertinent here. In the first, Wohl gives an overview of the traffic safety system and attempts to identify some of its aspects which may be suitable for analysis and evaluation.33 His dissertation tends to embroider a bit on social consequences of current practices, but provides some philOSOphical base for highway safety planning and evaluation. A somewhat more pragmatic approach is taken in the other pertinent Rand memorandum, again by Wohl.3h 32Cost Effectiveness in Traffic Safety, prepared by Arthur D. Little, Inc., F. A. Drager: .Y., I968. 33M. Wohl, Putting the Analysis and Evaluation of Traffic Safety, Measures intg_Perspective, Rand Memo. RM-SG3I-DET on NHSB Contr. No. Fri-1136398, April 1968. 3AM. Wohl, A_Conceptual Framework for Evaluating Traffic Safety Measures, Rand Memo. RM-5632-DOT on NHSB Contr. No. FH-iI-6698, April 1968. -32... In that paper, a very complete, complex formulation of a “net present value” model for highway safety benefit-cost evaluation is presented. One would suSpect that the model is presented solely as a vehicle for identifying the formidable list of data, and research, needs to make the model work. This paper is fine reading for context and overview purposes, and for research planning, but not totally applicable to the here-and-now agonizing problems faced by highway safety opera- tional planners. Two interesting papers reviewed resulted from relatively recent NHSB-sponsored efforts. They differ greatly in sc0pe and grandeur. The first, by Fleischer is a relatively low-level up-dating of thoughts and methods for cost-evaluating highway safety projects.3S Two methods are discussed by Fleischer, one called ”present worth method” and the other, ”benefit-cost ratio method.” Neither method has any particular new features, and each as usual requires values to be placed on countermeasure cost and benefit costs. In contrast, a recent effort by Operations Research, Inc. for NHSB constitutes a massive, molar approach to modeling the highway safety resource allocation and effectiveness evaluation problem.36 356. A. Fleischer, Cost-Effectiveness and Highway Safety, Dept. of Indust. and Systems Engrng., Univ. of So. Calif. Rept. No. USCUSEwIOO on NHSB Contr. No. FH-ll-6800, February 1969. 36W. J. Leininger, et al, Development of_§_Cost-Effectiveness System for Evaluating Accident Countermeasures: Vols. I-VI, Operations Re- search Inc. Rept. on NHSB Contr. No. FH-ll~6h95, December 1968. -33- In six healthy volumes, the report describes a linear-programmed computer model involving the interaction of thousands of variables and constraints. It is probably safe to conclude that the model could very capably replace a lot of human highway safety planners, jf_good firm data were available on each of its variables, their joint variations and interactions, and individual and joint effects on some measurable traffic parameter, and if_concensus on reasonable constraints in variable limits and combinations were available. Such conditions, however, are not present, but the model should con- stitute a valuable developmental tool for potential use at some, probably, distant point in the future, and as an immediate mechanism for identifying data needs in highway safety planning. In discussions with a state highway safety coordinator from one of the pilot states where this model was develOped, he indicated little value could be realized from it until a suitable data base could be made available. Another work of interest was produced by a contract let through the Michigan Office of Highway Safety Planning.37 This product developed a good guideline for structuring evaluation of individual project efforts. 37W. Carlson and W. Hall, Highway Safety Project Evaluation Methodologies, Univ. of Mich., HSRI Rept. to Office of Highway Safety Planning, State of Mich. December 1968. The literature review chapter develOps the need for considering both the requirements of a management control system for highway safety as well as a concern for the lack of adequate data systems to support the management system used to guide the direction of the highway safety resources allocations process. It would seem very inapprOpriate to consider one without the other as was done in some of the past research work on the matter of highway safety management. In some of the literature, conclusions were conditioned to mention the data limitation. The management system prOposed in this thesis will necessarily be structured to provide pertinent management infor- mation and data for measurement that uses available information. CHAPTER IV THE TRAFFIC SAFETY SYSTEM The traffic system is organized to permit the movement of people and goods for the satisfaction of a variety of individual needs, both commercial and private. ”Traffic safety is a very general measure of the effectiveness of the traffic system.”38 If we understand how 'individual cars and people perform in this system, we may next con- sider what happens in the traffic situation and, particularly, what happens when there is a breakdown. The problem of highway safety divides logically into three parts. These parts are commonly referred to as the pre-crash, crash, and the post-crash phases.39 In the pre-crash phase, the issues are those which determine whether or not a crash takes place. 'In this phase, we are concerned with those elements of the system which are designed to prevent accidents from occurring in the first instance. Examples of these are traffic accident countermeasure programs for the drunken driver; designing into the highways adequate signaling, markings and signing systems; and include those measures which can be taken to influence driver behavior to circumvent the tragedy of the next phase which is the crash phase. 38James O'Day, ”Systems Analysis and the Driver,” Driver Behavior, Cause and Effect, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. March I968. P. 9“. 39William Haddon, Jr., “The National Highway Safety Program-—18 Months Later,” Driver Behavior, Cause and Effect, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. March I968. P. A. -36- In the crash phase, we are concerned with the circumstances which, in the crash itself, determine whether or not any injuries occur and, if so, their severity. Here the success of the vehicle package in protecting its occupants is of paramount importance. Also important is the success of the highway designer in providing the safest possible highway crash design of the road; for example, by insuring that vehicles that do leave the roadway will not hit solid objects that decelerate them too abruptly to allow the sur- vival of those involved. In the post-crash phase, concern becomes whether or not many will live or die. Here, of course, the principal issues involved are the rapidity and quality of the post-accident response; the accident detection and communication systems efficiency; emergency transportation; and the provisions of the best in first aid and medical care. To complete the matrix of arranging highway safety in some systematic fashion, we must look at other dimensions of the problem. We have just discussed the sequencing of highway safety activity in the three crash phases. Now what is necessary is that we look at the elements that make up the basic traffic safety system, the VEHICLE, ENVIRONMENT and DRIVER.Li0 The VEHICLE is the projectile which flows through the highway and street system. The concern with the vehicle lloHaddon, Op, Cit. “Address Before Associated Minnesota Counties,” P. 14. -37... is to insure that measures be instituted to make the vehicle safe from mechanical breakdown and also crash worthy in the event that it becomes involved in an accident. The second basic element involved in the highway safety system is the ENVIRONMENT on and through which the vehicle travels. In addition to the highway and street network system itself, this element includes such other things as the signs, markings, and signals which direct the vehicle in a safe manner through the system and the main- tenance for Upkeeping the condition of the highways. It is also important in examining the environmental system that crash locations be analyzed and defects that might be contributing to accidents be corrected. The third basic element in the highway safety system and, perhaps, _the most important is the DRIVER himself. Here we become involved directly with the matter of human behavior and those things which are instituted as traffic accident countermeasures to more prOperly identify the behavior traits which are most desirable to be operating in the highway safety system and SUppFeSS those that are not. Such activities as driver education, safety education, driver licensing and testing, pedestrian and passenger education, and traffic law enforcement all constitute activities which attempt to deal with develOping and molding human behavior so that drivers are better pre- pared to c0pe with situations that they will meet while traveling on our highways. -38- Analytical tools we have at hand for resolving highway safety problems in the area of the vehicle and environment are adequate to protect us from any generally bad and expensive ventures. When human beings, the drivers, are concerned, the situation is not nearly so clear. The interface with humans in the highway traffic system is complex and most often requires more than physical engineering solutions alone can offer. 6 In order that the traffic safety system is able to permit the efficient movement of people and goods, its users must conform to some pre-determined agreed upon rules or laws; otherwise, the traffic system would become clogged and calamity would be the certain consequence. Most persons who Operate in the traffic system tend, through a number of means, to acquire the norms of the group who share in the use of the system. When drivers fail to conform to these norms, then we experience behavior which deviates from the rules of the sub-culture of safe drivers. Even though the rules of the traffic system may deviate slightly from one area to another, or from one state to another, certain conformity to basic standards of conduct on the road are re- quired in order to successfully move about in the system. Societal norms can be thought of as having a tolerance limit; that is, the ratio between violation of the norm and the society's it.“ willingness to tolerate or stress The unique feature about l”Marshall B. Clinard, Sociology of_Deviant Behavior, Third Edition (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968) Pp. 20-22. -39.. . deviant behavior operating in the traffic system is that although society may have developed tolerance limits for certain types of deviant behavior, in the traffic system those that deviate greatly increase the potential for becoming involved in a crash. Truly devi- ation in the traffic system is “unhealthy” in the pure meaning of the word. We have observed that the traffic safety system consists of various phases and program elements which, in turn, have sub-elements, all coming to bear at various times and in various ways as one travels through the system. Much attention is focused on the driver who is the most elusive variable in the system. This emphasis is necessary to begin a study of the highway safety problem. Basically, the driver or human involvement can be categorized into his physical characteristics, his performance characteristics, and the effects of his Operating in the traffic with other cars and drivers.“2 Physical characteristics refer to such things as driver's perception, motor characteristics, his vision capability, his hearing capability, his physiological response to certain inputs, and his outputs in terms of physical strength. These kinds of things constitute a human's physical characteristics which become an input into the next category of the human element which is performance. This category AZO‘Day, QB: Cit., ”Systems Analysis and the Driver,” P. 9“. -40- of activity is concerned with how well the human Operator accomplishes Specific operational tasks, how well he stays in the center of the lane or how well does he maintain following distance; or simply, how does he pass another car. It is obvious that just a study of the mass physical characteristics alone will not permit accurate predic- tion of what performance a driver will execute, for his attitudes about safe driving, his desires to get somewhere, and the effects of. legal and social sanctions on his action all have a bearing on his I performance in the system. Given full understanding of his perfor- mance characteristics based upon his physical characteristics and the knowledge of the traffic situation, it becomes more likely that human behavior can be predicted with more reliability.A3 There has been much discussion about accident proneness of cer- tain personality types. This theory has proved to have little fruit- fulness because: I. The number of accident repeaters in any group is quite small. 2. While there are low correlations between time periOds, most of the accident repeaters in one period are not the same persons as the repeaters in succeeding time periods. 3. Removing from the highway the driver who with multiple collision in one period makes almost no difference in the number of accidents in the succeeding periods.Ml h3ibid, Pp. 9h-97. MIJames Ray Adams, “Personality Variables Associated with Traffic Accidents,” Behavior Research 12 Highway Safety) January I970. . Pp. 7-8. -4]- This research stresses that in the absence of a strong rela- tionship between a factor and accidents, it is just not justifiable to eliminate from the driving population a person who merely appears to possess a suspicious factor. The major flaw in the accident prone concept is the fact that people who have accidents in one period of time are not necessarily those who have it in the next. In fact, it has been shown by Forbes, using data gathered by the Bureau of Public Roads in I938, that if all accident repeaters during a three-year period were eliminated from the road during the next three years, the accident rate would drop only h% and that more accident free drivers would be eliminated than accident producers.“5 The nagging fact remains that some people do have more accidents than others. Certain people are accident prone, but sometimes only for a short period of time and then there are Others who are accident prone over extended periods of time, perhaps for several years or for most of their remaining lifetime.“6 In the case of the short-term accident proneness, the individuals are usually reacting to the destructive influences which originate primarily from external pressures and once they are relieved, they begin to return to their former state Of more favorable adjustment. “ST; W. Forbes, “The Normal Automobile Driver as a Traffic Problem,” is of_General Psychology, I939, 20, h7I-h7h. h6Fredrick L. McGuire, Behavioral Research io_Highway Safety(op: cit.) P. 27. -42- _ The case of the long-term accident proneness individual usually involves or results from influences which stem largely from internal sources and while these pressures may rise and wane, they are rela- tively constant and always a threat. DeveIOping the highway safety problem in a system fashion pro- vides an orderly arrangement of its various components which are interrelated and which act or interact to accomplish certain task functions. By dOing so, we have provided the basis for a scientific examination of how highway safety system component parts affect each other. The process Of introducting various traffic accident counter— measures and determining cause and effect relationships can be more readily achieved when this complex problem is separated in this de- tailed fashion. CHAPTER V A CONTEMPORARY MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUE The seriousness of the highway safety problem has required that it be functionally structured so that it can be more effec- tively studied, managed and controlled. In executing the manage- ment of this system, it becomes highly desirous that Operational Objectives be identified in such a fashion to permit sound evalu- ation of attempts made to COpe with the objective. A management system in highway safety has emerged from the pressure of the need to know brought upon the contemporary leader. This system most resembles the Program Planning and Budgeting System (hereafter in this thesis referred to as PPBS). It is significant to develop this concept for purposes of this paper as it so closely aligns itself with the management control system that will be de- veloped in the next chapter. PPBS is a system aimed at helping management make better decisions on the allocation Of resources among alternative ways to Obtain certain pre-designated objectives. PPBS should not be confused with efforts to reduce public spending; it is neutral on the issue of cost re- duction but its objective is to provide information and the benefits obtainable at different funding levels, and for any given level of funding, it seeks the most efficient allocation of resources. There is very little that is new in the concept of this approach; however, what is new is that the process of planning, programming and budgeting -4q- have been brought together into a package; a systematic application of the package to decision making.“7 The PPB System has three primary distinctive characteristics. I. It calls for an identification of the fundamental Objectives Of the organization. 2. It requires explicit consideration of future year fiscal implications. 3. It calls for the systematic analysis Of ways of meeting the Objectives.ll8 It should be noted that PPBS and Program Budgeting, as traditionally used, are not equivalent. Typically, the term Program Budgeting has been limited to budgeting systems emphasizing categorization by pro- grams without explicit provision for this systematic analysis andi multi-year prospective as provided for in PPBS.“9 A PPB System, typically, has the following components: I. ACROSS THE BOARD PROGRAM STRUCTURE. The first steps in the institution of the PPB System is the identification of the organization‘s basic Objectives. These activities are then grouped in the categories which aim at grouping together work tasks, regardless Of organizational placement, that contribute toward the same Objective. l'7”Criteria for Evaluation in Planning State and Local Programs," 'Committee on Governmental Operations, United States Senate, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. July I967. P. 9. “Subset. P. 2 IICIan-I n o -h5- MULTI-YEAR PROGRAM AND FINANCIAL PLAN. In a PPB System there exists a multi-year plan which - uses a program structure as discussed above. This plan is of two major parts.' The first part is the financial plan where all pertinent costs are con- sidered including capital as well as non-capital costs as well as all other supporting costs. External revenue should be identified as well as all other sources. The second part deals with program plans. Five years, in addition to the current fiscal year, has typically been selected for presentation in the multi-year plan. PROGRAM ANALYSIS. A systematic identification and analysis of alter- native ways to achieve government objectives is the cornerstone of PPBS and is commonly referred to as Program Analysis. This analysis follows the problem solving approach as shown below. a. Fundamental Objective is identified and documented. b. Major feasible alternatives are searched out. c. For each of the altneratives, the best available estimate Of the total program costs for each year. d. For each alternative, the best available estimate of the benefits. ~h6- e. The major assumptions and uncertainties associ- ated with the alternatives. f. The impact of prOposed programs on other programs both within the agency itself and throughout the rest Of the system.50 It should never be eXpected that PPBS will be able to give definite answers but rather considerable improved infOrmation perti- nent to resource allocation and program selection decisions. One of the principal problems in the highway safety problem is the need for identification of criteria that could be used to evalu- ate the effects Of the various program countermeasures in order that progress made in coping with the problem can be evaiuated. This study process is not only important for research purposes but also for the program manager as it places him in an improved posi- tion to determine whether the means that were executed in the attain- ment Of certain objectives or goals were successful. In addition, it wOuld be important for the managers to know to what relative degree various alternative means had in the Obtainment of the specific Objectives. Because the criteria problem is so critical in the analysis pro- cess of the PPB System, it is important to review them prior to the discussion of the analysis process used in research and for PPBS purposes.51 _50Ibid. P. 2. Slibid. Pp. 9-21. -A7- Listed below are considerations which are helpful in the selec- tion of criteria for analysis purposes. I. Criteria must be related to Objectives. Criteria listed for a major program or mission should provide a specific basis on which to evaluate the contri- bution that each alternative course of action makes to these objectives. There are different levels of criteria. This speaks to the matter Of a goal at one level Of administration being a process to the subordinate level and the need to carefully predetermine criteria prior to the evalu- ation process. Multi-year criteria will frequently be needed for individual problems. In the major mission or program areas, several criteria are listed on occasion for more than one program area. This is especially true when there is present a number of possible cause-effect variables Operating in the system. Inter-actions occur among program areas and among criteria. Specific programs may simultaneously have complex effects on program areas and criteria. It is important, in program analysis, to attempt to consider and evalu- ate all such effects tO the extent they may be important to the decision making process. -ug- It is sometimes necessary to distinguish certain groups involved with the problem. This criteria challenges the analyst to be thorough in his plan- ning efforts to provide for the concentration of emphasis on those portions Of the problem which are Of greater magnitude than perhaps others. For example, certain classes of drivers might be more .frequently guilty of committing a certain violation. It is necessary for the analysis in this instance to interpret or recommend emphasis to a specialized problem maker, rather than a program being designed for drivers generally. Criteria need to be thoroughly defined. It is im- portant in the analysis process that an understanding be reached at the outset as to what is to be measured exactly. Otherwise, when the evaluation process be- gins, no one will have a point Of reference or bench mark from which progress can be related to and judged by. Definition should be specific as to who is in- volved and what program action is to be covered by the program. -q9- Criteria can and should be expressed in different forms, when appropriate. Criteria may be expressed in absolute numbers, averages by comparing one area to another area or, in some cases, even combining these criteria forms together to make another cumula- tive criteria. Estimates of the criteria magnitudes are needed for each of the plan. This speaks to the importance of determining in advance, when possible, the types of programs that may be Offered during a specific year in order to be in a position to correctly determine program success on the basis of emphasis from one year to the next. It also Offers the Opportunity to measure the forecasting ability of the manager. A money criteria is always needed. This criteria is acute and important in both government and private industry. The monetary criteria speaks to the actual dollar changes that would occur for each alternative program compared to some base. Monetary criteria can be complex. Monetary effects Of a program alternative can be Of many types. These include the effects both within the system and outside the system. For example, much Of the law enforcement activity has a bearing on both the crime and highway safety problems. -50- IO. Criteria for government-citizen relations. Although these considerations will normally be secondary to the fundamental purpose of the service being planned for, it is necessary, when it can be arranged, to make the service pleasing to the public. II. Political considerations are an additional evaluation factor: Whenever possible, they should be considered and qualified to the extent practicable in the analysis process. The Operation of the PPB System can be viewed as a continuing dialogue between the chief executive and the agencies which are the public producers of goods and services. This dialogue is essential between the chief executive and the agencies which are the executors of the organization's goals and objectives. The chief executive, reflecting the demands Of the electorate, generates broad objectives and guidelines. The Operational staffs, in conjunction with analytical staffs, translate these broad Objectives into more specific Operational Objectives and structure information to display the options for pur- suing the Objectives. Systems analysis is primarily focused on the interpretation of broad objectives and guidelines in the structuring of information in such a way that the decision maker can evaluate the Options available to him. Its realistic goal is to improve the decision making process -5]- not necessarily the creation of a mechanism that automatically pro- duces ideal decisions. Systems analysis can be characterized as follows: I. The definition of the public problem. Projection of determinants of the problem. 3. Generation of alternative approaches that government or private industry might use to attack the problem for cost effectiveness evaluation of the alternatives. h. Interpretation of quantitative results.52 It is important in the execution Of the systems analysis process: to be alert to several principles of a good analysis.53 I. It is important to tackle the right problem. If the analyst is negligent in identifying the apprOpriate problem in which to investigate, then it is not too likely that upon conclusion of this investigation they will have discovered the solution. 2. The analyst must be systems oriented. It is important to consider all the inter-dependencies that are in- volved in what might be considered a single problem in order to be sure that the entire system will not be affected by any change that has not considered all of the integral parts. 52Lyden and Miller, “Planning, Programming, Budgeting: A Systems Approach to Management.“ 53Ibid. P. 292. -52... 3. The presence of uncertainties should be recognized and an attempt made to take them into account. The analyst's responsibility in this connection must be that he is able to identify these uncertainties and evaluate their impact as a part of the analysis de- sign process in order that his conclusions can be tempered by this limitation. h. The analyst attempts to discover new alternatives as well as improve the obvious ones. The analyst's role in this regard is to attempt to broaden his dimensions so that all possible means for achieving a goal can be considered and not just those that are currently in existence. 5. The analyst should strive to Obtain standards traditional to size in the execution of his eXperiments and in- vestigations of existing systems. In concluding the review of the PPB System, it must be pointed out that the PPB System, as a management device, has some limitations and presents problems which should be given thorough consideration before its implementation. It goes without saying that the efforts to group activities into an appropriate cluster for a single program or program element is, indeed, a difficult undertaking. This is further complicated by the bureaucratic resistance stemming from both the desire to retain power and status and the fear that dupli- cations and inconsistencies might be revealed. Another set of difficulties -53.. arises from the fact that oftentimes this process is not likely to work out neatly and promptly after the introduction of the PPB System. This is especially critical for it is during this very same time that the technique is being encouraged on peOple when, in fact, it cannot, at this point, demonstrate real concisely its long-range benefits. It also should be pointed out that the old budget structure will probably continue to exist side by side with the new one. This serves as a translating device for the new system but also creates duplication of effort in that two systems are being maintained. This creates large amounts of paper work, conflicts between program de- cisions and decisions about carrying the new system to an annual budget cycle when it is, in fact, a multi-year approach. Another consideration that must be designed out of the PPB System is the pressures that the analysts receive to exclude certain alternatives because of a pre-conceived notion that the decision maker might not like certain ones. As a consequence, these alternatives are drOpped from the study and this certainly could be disasterous, in some instances. It is within the basic concepts Of PPBS that the Michigan model for planning and programming highway safety efforts is being designed. It appears to offer sound guidelines for structuring and then managing a program Of any sort, and it is hoped the technique will be useful when applied to the highway safety problem. CHAPTER VI MODELING FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY PLANNING IN MICHIGAN The purpose of this chapter of the thesis is to provide a frame- work for bringing together the'characteristics of the highway safety problem in Michigan with appropriate program measures which result in improvement for coping with highway crashes. As indicated in some detail early in this thesis, the Governor of each state is re- quired by law to be the program focal point for coordinating the statewide highway safety program being executed in his respective jurisdiction. The programs are to be standardized to conform with national minimal highway safety standards presently promulgated in I6 functional areas. Through the new approach, the whole thrust of the state's highway safety program must be designed to demonstrate the relationship Of program Objectives with accident reduction, and it is the purpose of this program model to facilitate such management action. The comprehensive program model Offered in this chapter will provide a framework for considering legislative, organizational, Operational and financial input, all leading to the single Objective of reducing traffic crashes and resulting death and injury and property damage caused therefrom. This structure will also be flexible enough to include local inputs and be designed so that the highway safety standards which constitute the basis from which all programming will emanate are monitored and controlled. ”55.. All highway safety activities to include two years prior to the current fiscal year and the two years succeeding will be pro- vided for in the model. The model will be structured to permit the focus of management attention to the matter of effectiveness. High- way safety activity will be segregated to the task level and then pyramided in the model so that like activities will be relating to principal program elements and sub-elements to facilitate evaluation as is characteristic in PPBS programs. The model will highlight for the manager resource allocation information and will be flexible enough to permit adjustment when necessary to meet the changing con- ditions of the problem and be able to incorporate resources that may become available at any point in time during the operation of. the highway safety program. In the course of research for this paper, the importance of being able to relate activity with results was repeatedly emphasized and this process was commonly referred to as the process of evaluation or determining effectiveness. The term “effectiveness” refers to a measure of how well a program is achieving a stated objective. It might be well to distinguish before proceeding with details of the program model how the term effectiveness differs from the term efficiency. In a simplified fashion, the distinction is made by stating that ef' ficiency refers to a measure of how well we deployed resources to produce an output as distinguished from how well the output achieved an objective, which is our concern in the area of effectiveness. ~56- In the case of highway safety specifically, our objective is to re- duce fatalities, injuries and property damage resulting from crashes. In the case of efficiency, we are concerned with how well we are able to convert money and other resources to a public service with- out necessarily being concerned about what that service achieves in- terms of our ultimate objective. It is important to ask why the emphasis on modeling for highway safety when we know, in fact, that efforts have been somewhat effec- tive in the past in that the mileage death rate has been reduced through the years to the point that had we been killing at the same death rate as we were in the 305, our fatalities as a result of high- way crashes would be in excess of 100,000 a year instead of the 55,000 which is certainly tragic enough.54 The problem is that the highway safety technology does not produce specific answers to the question of what independent variables cause certain effects in terms of achieving our ultimate objective. In essence, in the traffic safety situation, we know what we are trying to do and we know,for the most part, what resources are available and essentially what tasks are being executed. Our problem is we don't know the relationship be- tween these inputs and outputs and, more particularly, what tasks are more important and which ones of them will give us the greatest good. This model is designed to assure that the highway safety work v—w ‘ SH'Summary of Legislative Intent,“ National Highway Safety Bureau, ‘ U. S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D. C. Dec. 7, I970. P. 6‘ . -57.. tasks are planned so that determinations can be made for learning which traffic countermeasures have the most effect in reducing the traffic accident loss experience. This model for highway safety programming requires meaningful planning in order that we clearly identify the objectives and sub- objectives we are attempting to achieve and that we relate these specifically to the Operations which hold the best possibility for achieving these ends. In addition, the model will emphasize the systems approach as described in thapter IV and work activity will ‘be segregated in a logical fashion to aid in the evaluation process. The remainder of this chapter will be organized in sub-sections in order that the material can be logically presented for ease of understanding. The first section will deal with goal analysis-- problem definition. This will be followed with an area devoted to highway safety model design. The next section will deal with model development and the last section will deal with highway safety system evaluation. -58- Goal Analysis -- Problem Definition The initial undertaking in the development Of a highway safety program model is to carefully examine the purposes the new system is being designed to serve. In the case of this system model, the basic purpose is to provide highway safety managers with a meaning- ful mechanism from which they can control the traffic crash problem. Its design considered both long and short range dimensions and the important fiscal and program descriptions together to facilitate the decision making process by having Optimal information available from which sound judgment can be promulgated. 'After a review of Michigan's highway safety situation as develOped in Chapter II, the problem can be characterized generally by reference to the fact that alcohol is overly represented in crashes and that the chance factor for involvement in crashes at the blood alcohol level .072 begins to raise rapidly as compared to a sober driver. Youths between the ages of 16 - 2A are overrepresented in the crash experience as is the contributing factor of speed. We also know the weekend and certain hours of darkness chances for involve- ment in crashes increase significantly. Programming for Michigan's highway safety problem will have to consider remedial measures which are designed to address these problem characteristics as a minimum and still treat comprehensively as many problem characteristics as possible. This comprehensive approach is necessary because the highway safety technology is not adequate to be selective in deter- mining what can be totally disregarded as an ineffective program. -59- To adequately determine needs specifically throughout the state is a very difficult matter. No such efforts have ever been conducted on a community to community basis; however, one is being done at this time. It is important to discuss the basic principles of plan- ning as it is an integral part of information input to the highway safety management model being designed. Management system has as its basic function the activities of planning, assessing and controlling.55 One of the principal features Of the planning process is the design constraints built into the plan initially for aiding in the evaluation of the efforts eXpended. This ingredient of evaluation has been the most frequently neglected element Of highway safety programs in the past. Inadequate evaluation has resulted in negligible innovations in highway safety programs and perpetuation of expensive and, perhaps, ineffective programs. Historically, comprehensive evaluation of highway safety pro- grams has been absent primarily because management has not been sold on the importance of the factor of evaluation. Program management in the past has, in fact, considered evaluation to be a lower pri- ority item in the planning and programming process. This is, in part, due to the fact that there is insufficient numbers of profes- sional personnel who are capable Of doing such evaluations. SO, one of the first things that must be built into the planning process for highway safety programs is the need for preparation of people in the evaluation process. 'c. '. :~' . h 55Carnahan, James,”Highway Safety Management, A Syllabus.“ Highway Users Federation for Safety and Mobility, Wash. D.C., July 1970. Chapter V. Po. 12—22. -60- The nature of management then enables five things to be accom- plished: 1. It formulates the objectives of an organization in a small number of general statements. 2. It tests the statements of objectives in actual experience. 3. It predicts behavior. A. It appraises the soundness of decisions when they are still being made. 5. It enables practioners to analyze their own experience and results in improved performance. Planning for highway safety activity involves adherence to careful general planning guidelines which, if adhered to, would improve the efficiency and effectiveness Of highway safety program- ming. In the planning process what is needed at the outset is the collection of information to permit realistic planning and effec- tive implementation which includes extensive information about the existing system or those programs now in Operation. Highway safety planning is characterized by its established predetermined course of action. In addition to defining the short- range goal of action for experimentation and meeting particular pro- blems, the planning process does, in turn, provide for long'range activity for meeting more comprehensive needs. Essentially, in the planning process, we have the responsibility for identifying the highway safety problem, providing factual information needed for .56Ibid. Chapter v-13. -6l- administrative programs, providing technical financial information needed to allocate highway safety resources and serve to stimulate further change.57 In formulating objectives, the highway safety standards serve as a minimum guideline, but highway safety program models should be constructed to provide flexibility to go beyond these as problems vary from one state to another. In addition, local policy determina- tion is critical in determining the objectives of the highway safety program. The data collection process usually entails a detailed in- ventory to discover and eliminate deficiencies and help in the process of determining program priorities. This inventory focuses on safety activity and certainly facilitates the evaluation process to have that kind of data available. Law and legal authority must also be searched out in this inventory process to insure the identity of those regulatory agencies involved in the program and to have know“ ledge of the law as it affects behavior Of drivers Operating in the system. This is again something that is currently being undertaken in Michigan and is a necessary prerequisite in any program planning approach in highway safety. In the identification of problem and needs, it is important that conditions in local communities be considered in order that traffic accident countermeasures can be addressed to appropriate 57Ibid. Chapter VI, Pp. 6-12. -62- problems. In addition, current technology should be an important constraint in what is designed in programming in order that perpetu- ation of things found to be ineffective will not be re-introduced. In develOping the plan, it should be emphasized that complete strategy should be spelled out to reach the objectives in the total comprehensive broad approach to the problem. Responsibilities should :“ be identified as to who will be responsible for carrying out these duties and, importantly, the time frame and a schedule of when these ' ? things will occur. 0. (‘5‘ - '- Competent plan evaluation will facilitate plan modifications. Evaluation, among other things, should include how far has the plan progressed toward stated objectives within the time frame. In addition, what improvements are needed to make the plan more effective and what program needs can be anticipated during the next evaluation period. Evaluation must also provide the Opportunity for equating performance to cost and calculating and comparing various returns on investments. ~63- Highway Safety Model Design Presented in this section will be a detailing of the design framework from which program develOpment can be initiated. Design- ing for a system such as highway safety includes special attention to the matter of input, output analysis, structure design and design documentation. ,‘4ms Webster defines the system as an assemblage of objectives and/or activities united by some form of regular interaction or interde- pendence. The purposes of structuring the highway safety problem in a l systems fashion is to arrange program activities into a logical, manageable group of activities so that assessment can be related to specific types of highway safety activities. Further, the program structure or model for this project will analyze the interrelation- ships among the highway safety activities and identify coordinating requirements. It also provides a framework for fixing responsibilities so that work tasks can apprOpriately be assigned and controlled for monitoring progress in achievement of Objectives. It also provides a framework from which the distribution of resources can be examined carefully at any time during the course Of the programming and makes more orderly the record keeping and reporting requirements generated by the program and necessary for adequate control. -64- The initial task to be undertaken in developing the substantive programming model for Michigan is to modify existing national high- way safety program plans to the Michigan situation utilizing the inputs developed through the efforts described in the earlier sections of this thesis. The National Highway Safety Bureau has provided basic guidance in identifying program format requirements which are necessary for controlling and standardizing the thrust the various states will be taking in upgrading their highway safety systems. To be more specific, the National Highway Safety Bureau has identified what it refers to as a “highway safety program struCture” which systematically places activities and the elements in the system in an orderly fashion for analytical and research purposes. What must now be done in each of the states is this ”model” structure must be adjusted and the substantive programming elements developed into neatly identifiable packages for implementing in Michigan. What is necessary in develOpment Of a systems model for high- way safety in Michigan is to develop a program structure which integrates into a cohesive program its primary elements and functions as they relate to its various system phases. The Obvious benefits to be derived from structuring the problem in this fashion is that Operating boundaries are established around the universe of activities -65- that could conceivably be associated with the highway safety system . and, further, this approach provides a more realistic means for evalu- ating the objectives of these activities that are a part of the pro- gram structure.' Another benefit of establishing a program structure is that it permits the develOpment and implementation of a compre- hensive program instead of approaching the problem in a piecemeal fashion. After the activities are identified by the program structure, it becomes easier to pinpoint duplications of effort, inconsistencies, conflicts, inappropriate competition, and inadequacies that Operate in the system. The formal structuring of the problem also permits the decision maker to coordinate points Of information in activities that are similar and, more particularly, to allocate resources con- sistent with the scope and importance of various program units within the system. The program structure also provides benchmarks for examining program benefits and identifying and isolating the variables that Operate in the system for better optimizing the resources de- voted to the resolution Of the highway safety problem. The program structure develOped in this thesis consists of a program classification table in the left vertical column. This leg of the matrix groups activities by purpose, function and component (human, roadway, vehicle, comprehensive, and infrastructure).58 The human category includes activities which relate directly to the human 58”National Highway Safety Program, Management and Reporting System,” Vol. III, Concepts, National Highway Safety Bureau, prepared by Peat, _Marwick, Mitchell 8 CO., Washington, D. C. Pp. 3-16. -66- whether pedestrian or driver. The roadway category deals with those elements in the system which have to do with the surroundings of humans operating in the system. Comprehensive deals with program activities which affect more than one of the basic elements (vehicle, human, or roadway). Infrastructure represents categories of activities which underly the operation Of the rest of the system and their im-' ' pact on safety is felt only through other action groups.. Vehicle gflhj represents the projectile which flows through the traffic system. i The program phases (entry, Operations, crash, review, and systems diagnosis) which is reflected on the other leg of the matrix, permit : identification of what each activity will achieve and when, in the EL_a cycle of events, a particular activity will occur.59 §fl££y_refers to the point in time before humans become involved in the system. The Operating phase refers to direct preventive activity being exe- cuted to reduce the Opportunity for a motor vehicle crash. The Eflffifll phase represents the Operation of the highway safety system when persons become involved in a crash. The review phase is easily recog- nized as what we traditionally refer to as the follow-up phase which includes adjudication. The systems diagnosis phase is the stage which critiques and serves as the most immediate input stages for changing the ongoing system. After development of the program structure, as shown in Appen- dix A, for Michigan's highway safety system, each of its functions ”59Ibid. Pp. 3-16. -67- will then be further structured to more carefully analyze the activities within the program structure. Program elements will be identified which, for our purposes, will be defined as the highest management unit in the program structure. (Program elements are shown in Appen- dix A as the title of each of the boxes in the structure.) The program elements are Objective oriented and, insofar as possible, are organizationally discrete. Program elements generally describe the type of program to be carried out and indicate the nature of the Objectives. Elements contain activities addressing one system com- ponent in one program phase and they contain activities which are closely related to each other and which are usually the principal responsibility of one agency. These elements will represent the basic unit of Objective oriented planning as they contain the ex-' plicit indicators Of program effectiveness and link program outputs with Objectives. In further breaking out the program structure, we have beneath program elements what will be referred to as program sub—elements. Sub-elements are unique activities which relate to program elements and objectives and make it possible to assess in an easier fashion program progress and effectiveness. See Appendix B. Sub-elements are identified and address, usually a discrete portion of specific activity. In effect, they are sub-sets Of element activities and address a component sub-group with special needs or problems. T)- lint-1r "L 1.- P. 3.2.5). I -68- Below the level of a sub-element are program tasks which are . readily identifiable units Of work performed to satisfy the objec- tives Of the elements or sub-elements. See Appendix C. Tasks are sets of activities within sub-elements. They describe the work to be done and represent one type of activity which is a responsibility of one organization. There are four types Of tasks: (a) Operational Tasks, which describe the actual work of the sub- element; (b) Operational Support Tasks, which develop resources to carry out the operations; (c) Innovative Tasks, which initiate work Of the sub-system; and (d) Interface Tasks, which are parts of the other sub-elements affecting the Operation of the various sub-elements under study. The distinction for clarifying purposes between elements, sub- elements and tasks can be understood by noting that while prOgram elements and sub-elements are generally related to activities which are directed toward the ultimate Objective of the highway safety system, program tasks are related to specific aspects of program management; for example, Operation, training, procurement, systems develOpment, etc. Tasks have a standard set of milestones or bench- marks for determining what is to be expected from the achievement of task goals. Using this systematic approach to the management of the high- way safety system, a strategy of activity will be offered which speaks to the more prominent contributing factors causing accidents. -69- It is important to identify program objectives at this stage of model develOpment to structure for the important matter Of evalu- ation. Objectives have been developed for each of the sub-element programs in the program structure. In addition, at this point of develOpment is the indication of the volume measure used to help in evaluation of the sub-element program. Volume measures indicate the activity level of the sub-element and are expressed generally in the terms of the number Of objects serviced. They are stated in terms of improved service or standard of performance that is eXpected to be achieved through the result of the program being proposed. Coverage measures are also developed to indicate the percentage Of the total program clientele serviced by the program and is an important factor in determining the extent to which the program is being disseminated to the user of the highway system. Effectiveness measures are expressed in terms of the degree to which objectives were achieved. To use the terminology Of the systems approach for highway safety with the definitions that have just been used, one could say that innovated tasks are introduced tO the existing highway safety program, and these require Operational SUpport and activity on the part Of certain agencies which are trans“ Iated into work output or achieving specific ends. These work out- puts are defined in terms of volume outputs which Speak to the clientele or coverage of this work activity which ultimately must be evaluated in terms Of how well it achieves the Objective that -70.. was predesigned in the work package or in our terms, the effective- ness of achieving an objective. The whole process of utilizing the work program or the highway safety model is to provide a systematic way of developing the problem statements and describing the existing countermeasures used to cope with the problem. Next, it is necessary to identify program objectives that are desirable beyond that which is currently being executed, then to develop programs to meet these objectives. Importantly, the next phase is to structure how these new programs will be evaluated in achieving predesignated goals. Listed below are specific sub-element Objectives and evaluative outputs in the form of coverage (C) and volume (V) measures. Sub- element effectiveness criteria can be identified by merely trans- lating the terminology of the Objective to include the universe the Objective statement is working against. For example, the pedestrian education sub-element Objective reads, "To reduce the number of pedestrian crashes with undesirable pedestrian behavior." By adding the wording ”versus total number Of pedestrian crashes'I to the sub- element objective statement, the effectiveness measure is identified. This follows in every case. Pedestrian Education Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of pedestrian crashes with undesirable pedestrian behavior Output: (C) Percent of elementary schools giving pedes- trian education. (V) Number of elementary schools giving pedes- trian education. Jfl-‘a-a- -71.. Passenger Education Sub-element: ' Objective: To reduce the number Of passenger fatalities and injuries. Output: (C) Percent of passengers passing through check lanes who have had driver education, Special edu- cation or first aid training. ' (V) Number of passengers queried times reciprocal of check lane vehicle sample proportion. Private Passenger Car DE Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the numbers of trained drivers involved W”* as private passenger car Operators in crashes. ! Output: (C)' Percent of new, passenger car drivers who took a driver education course. (V) Number of new, passenger car drivers who took a driver education course. Motorcycle DE Sub-element: Objective: TO reduce the number of trained drivers involved I - as motorcycle operators in crashes. T Output: (C) Percent of new, motorcycle Operators who took a driver education course. (V) Number of new, motorcycle operators who took a driver education course. Cargo Vehicle DE Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of trained drivers involved as cargo vehicle operators in crashes. Output: (C) Percent of new, cargo vehicle drivers who took a driver education course. (V) Number of new, cargo vehicle drivers who took a driver education course. Bus DE Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of trained drivers involved as bus drivers in crashes. Output: (C) Percent of new, bus drivers who took a driver education course. ‘ (V) Number of new, bus drivers who took a driver education course. Other Vehicle DE Sub-element:- Objective: Output: -72- To reduce the number of trained drivers involved as Operators of “otherll vehicles. (C) Percent of new, “other” vehicle Operators who took a driver education course. (V) Number of new, I'Other” vehicle Operators who took a driver education course. Private Passenger Car DTSL Sub-element: Objective: Output: To reduce number of initial and renewal applica- tion rejections for driver licenses. (C) Percent of population eligible who received initial or renewal Operator license. (V) Number of initial or renewal Operator li- censes issued. Motorcycle DT8L Sub-element: Objective: Output: TO reduce the number of initial and renewal application rejections for motorcycle Operator license. (C) Percent of population eligible who applied for initial or renewal motorcycle Operator license. (V) Number of initial or renewal motorcycle opera- tor license endorsements. Cargo Vehicle DT8L Sub-element: Objective: Output: To reduce the number Of initial and renewal appli- cation rejections for cargo vehicle driver licenses. (C) Percent of population eligible who applied for initial or renewal cargo vehicle driver license. (V) Number of applicants for initial or renewal cargo vehicle driver license. Bus DT8L Sub-element: Objective: Output: To reduce the number of initial and renewal appli- cation rejections for bus driver licenses. (C) Percent of pOpulation eligible who applied for initial or renewal bus driver license. (V) Number of applicants for initial or renewal bus driver license. Other Vehicle DTBL Sub-element: Objective: Output: To reduce the number of initial and renewal appli- cation rejections for “other” vehicle licenses. (C) Percent of pOpulation eligible who applied for initial or renewal “other" vehicle license. (V) Number of applicants for initial or renewal “other” vehicle license. -73- EMS (Urban) Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of injury victims subsequently listed as fatalities. Output: (C) Percent Of ambulance runs related to traffic. (V) Number of ambulance runs related to traffic. EMS (Rural) Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of injury victims subsequently listed as fatalities. Output: (C) Average response time of ambulance units (from dispatch to hospital arrival). (V) Number of ambulance runs related to traffic. Private Passenger Car |8R Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of private passenger cars with defects. Output: (C) Percent of private passenger cars inspected. (V) Number of private passenger cars inspected. Motorcycle IBR Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of motorcycles with equip- ment or registration defects. Output: (C) Percent of motorcycles inSpected. (V) Number of motorcycles inSpected. Cargo Vehicle IBR Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of cargo vehicles with equip- ment or registration defects. Output: (C) Percent of cargo vehicles inspected. ' (V) Number of cargo vehicles inspected. Bus I8R Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number Of buses with equipment or registration defects. Output: (C) Percent Of buses inspected. (V) Number of buses inspected. Other Vehicle 18R Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of “other” vehicles with equipment or registration defects. Output: (C) Percent of "other" vehicles inspected. (V) Number of "other” vehicles inspected. MVC8I Service (Urban) Sub-element: - Objective: To reduce the number Of crashes involving previous crash debris or blockage. Output: (C) Percent of tow-away accidents. (V) Number Of tow-away accidents. -7g_ MVCSI Service (Rural) Sub-element: ' Objective: To reduce the number of crashes involving previous crash debris or blockage. Output: (C) Percent of tow-away accidents. (V) Number of tow-away accidents. New Construction Sub-element: Objective: TO not reduce the miles of new road under construc- tion conforming to Department of State Highways “Adequacy” ratings. Output: (C) Percent of new road mileage surveyed for compliance with standards. ' (V) Number of miles Of new roads constructed. Reconstruction and Modification Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the miles of existing roads not conforming to Department of State Highways ”adequacy“ ratings. Output: (C) Percent of existing roadway rated for adequacy. (V) Number of miles of existing roadway rated. Traffic Control Devices Sub-element: _ Objective: To reduce the number of traffic control devices rated "inadequate” Output: (C) Percent of roadways rated for “adequacy” of traffic control devices. (V) Number of traffic control devices rated. Normal Surveillance and Repair Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of crash site repair needs - discovered. - Output: (C) Percent of road miles under regular sur- ‘ veillance schedule for identification of needed spot repair. , (V) Number of spot repair or reconstruction recommendations made. Specific Repair Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of crash site repair needs reported. ‘ Output: (C) Percent of reported crash sites subsequently inspected for repair and reconstruction needs. (V) Number of crash sites inspected for repair and reconstruction work needed. -75- Crash Location (Urban) Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of crashes at identified repeat crash sites. Output: (C) Percent of identified repeat crash sites inspected for repairable construction defect. (V) Number of repeat sites inspected and recom- mended for improvement. Crash Location (Rural) Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of crashes at identified ~repeat crash sites. Output: (C) Percent of identified repeat crash sites . inspected for repairable construction defect. (V) Number of repeat sites inspected and recom- mended for improvement. Police Traffic Services (Urban) Sub~element: ' Objective: To reduce the number of moving violations. Output: (C) Number of miles of urban roadway versus number of traffic patrolmen with predominantly urban re5ponsibilities. (V) Number of citations for moving violations. Police Traffic Services (Rural) Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of moving violations. Output: (C) Number of miles of rural roadway versus number of traffic patrolmen with predominantly rural responsibilities. (V) Number of citations for moving violations. Alcohol Control Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number Of alcohol-related violations. Output: (C) Percent of police departments with trained Operators and alcohol test equipment. (V) Number Of alcohol tests performed. Driver Operation and Condition Violations Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of moving violation conviction repeaters. Output: (C) Average delay time from issuance of citation to closing of case. (V) Number of driver citations processed. Motor Vehicle Defects Violations Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of vehicle defects Output: (C) Average delay time from issuance Of citation to closing of case. (V) Number of vehicle defect citations processed. 1 (I‘VE-n -76- State Codes and Laws Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of Michigan statutes not in substantial compliance with Uniform Vehicle Code. Output: (C) Percent of Michigan Code analyzed for com- pliance with UVC. (V) Number of statutes analyzed for compliance. Local Codes and Laws Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of local jurisdictions which do not have model traffic ordinances. Output: (C) Percent of local communities using model traffic ordinance. (V) Number of local communities using model traffic ordinance. Central Traffic Data Bank Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the total turn-around time for system inquiries. Output: (C) Percent of individual crash report forms on file in central traffic data bank. (V) Number of crash reports handled. Operating Agency Records Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the average response time to information requests. Output: (C) Percent of inquiries answered with summary information. (V) Number of input units. Management Information System Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of safety system parameter files not directly coupled to central management. Output: (C) Percent of information inquiries answered with requested information. (V) Number of inquiries so answered. R80 Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number Of fatalities and personal injury accidents. Output: (C) Percent of planned R80 projects active during period. (V) Number of active R80 projects. Planning Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of fatalities and personal injury accidents. Output: .(C) Percent of SEP‘s modified during period. (V) Number Of SEP's modified during period. n1!— -77- Management Sub-element: Objective: To reduce the number of fatalities and personal injury accidents. Output: (C) Percent of task projects meeting scheduled milestones and objectives. (V) Number of task projecgg meeting scheduled milestones and Objectives. It is obvious from the questions called for by these statements Of objectives that a considerable data base is needed for supply- ”tr“ ing output information. Work is currently underway to make the I necessary data available. In the past, the call for these data was not frequent and thus way not routinely programmed for dissemi~ flD-r‘i’fl: nation. It goes without saying the whole model is useless without such a complete data system and certainly the unavailability of Objective oriented data speaks to the lack of and the dire need for a systematic planned approach to the highway safety problem. ' 600amkot, David K., Interim Report - "Summary Of Effort to Collect Data for AHSWP Effectiveness and Output Criteria.” Highway Safety Research Institute, Univ. Of Mich., Ann Arbor, Mich. Feb. 15, 1970. -78- Highway Safety Model Development In this phase of the work, emphasis is on the format which will be offered to bring all the system information together for the manager to utilize for highway safety decision making. DeveIOp- ment will include the structure for the information system he will use, plus the identification Of the areas of work activity that “Rafi have been identified which brings focus to the problems characterized in the section on goal analysis and problem definition. The primary instrument for bringing all the problem information together is called the “Highway Safety Program Annual Sub—Element I ' Plan" form. (See Appendix D) This form is a single page document for placing both program and fiscal information together which provides a basis from which the state's highway safety program can be managed. The form itself is pretty much self-explanatory in terms of what is meant by the information that will be entered in each of the respective sections. However, it is important to highlight some of the more important features and to describe how the objectives that have been identi- fied along with the effectiveness materials will be reflected on this form. Numbers 63 and b contain the important measurement cri- teria that will be used to assess the program outputs in terms of achievement of the objectives identified earlier in this chapter. Tasks and Milestones are entered in Section 9 of the report along with entries to indicate which standards are to be implemented by . the program action and who has the basic responsibility for the -79- planned activity. Columns that are adjacent to the Tasks and Mile- stones section of the report are headed by fiscal years and you will note that the form is good for a period Of five years. However, principal emphasis is on the fiscal year where it has been sub- divided in to quarters and total column for the current fiscal year of the plan. In these columns are entered numbers which indicate the units Of activity that will be carried out in each of the task areas. Columns are also structured to hold the units of activity for the two years previous to and subsequent to the fiscal year being planned for primarily. Section 10 is an important section Of this form and the purpose of this segment of the report is to develop in a brief, narrative fashion the objectives of the program which helps eXplain the task activities which are entered in a much briefer form in Section 9. Section 11 is the cost by task information and this is where the dollars come in to the program planning document and, again, the dollars are matched with the units of activity for each of the years and provide a comparison of cost with units Of output which can be used for cost effectiveness review. Section 12_of the report is a breakout of the costs by participating governments and indicates importantly in the last line the share of federal revenues that are being allocated to local jurisdictions. This is to monitor the #03 requirement to local communities that is established by law. -80- These forms are completed on all sub-element plans and the com- pilation Of all these together constitute the heart of the Highway Safety Program model which presents a framework or model from which any state can structure its activity in a very systematic fashion to schedule and monitor highway safety program activity. For Michigan, in particular, the program activity suggested and detailed to the task level for cOping with the highway safety problem is shown on the following pages. Each of the elements detailed with sub-element and task descrip- tions correspond to the highway safety program elements shown in Appendix C. The elements detailed here are also numbered to corres- pond to the numbered boxes in Appendix C and, in addition, their system placement is indicated to correspond with the component parts Of the highway safety system (human, vehicle, roadway, comprehensive and infrastructure) and with the five phases Of the system (entry, Operating, crash and cleanup, review, analysis and program development). ._-£| 2. Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: Element: Sub~Elementsz Tasks: -8]- Driver Education Systems Placement: Human, Entry Private Passenger Motorcycle ' Cargo Vehicle Bus Other Curriculum Development Commercial School Licensing EXpanded Use Of Simulation EXpand Teacher Training Programs Establish Student Response to Teaching Systems EXpand Adult Driver Ed Programs ; Pilot Demonstrate Multi-Jurisdictional Administration of Driver Ed Establish Driver Ed Data System DeveIOp Alcohol Education Material for Driver Ed Develop and Implement Training Programs for Commercial School Driver Training Teachers Establish Remedial Reading Instruction for Slow Learner Slow Learning Driver Ed Classes Provide Complete Driver Ed Instruction for all Eligible Students Driver Testing and Systems Placement: Human, Entry Licensing Private Passenger Motorcycle Cargo Vehicle Bus Other Vehicle Implementation of Retesting of Drivers at Renewal Establish a Medical Advisory Committee Assume Operation of Additional Driver License Stations DeveIOp a Master Plan for Design, Construction and Loca- tion of Driver Licensing Facilities Conduct In-Depth Evaluation of Existing Driver Improve- ment Programs Conduct a Study to Determine the Total Trainees and Training Programs for the Staff of the Secretary of State Conduct a Review of the Driver Control Processes Conduct a Feasibility Study Relative to the Use Of Simulation ' in Administering Driver Road Tests Conduct Feasibility Study to Determine the Practicality Of Embossed Driver License System. .A‘ I 3. Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: A. Element: vSub-Elements: Tasks: 5. Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: -82- Pedestrian and Passen- Systems Placement: Human, Entry ger Education Pedestrian and Passenger DeveIOp Public Education Program for Passenger Safety Establish Data System Curriculum DeveIOpment Provide School Safety Officers Provide School Crossing Guards Develop Improved Pedestrian Safety Equipment at Hazardous Crosswalks and Intersections Emergency Medical Systems Placement: Human, Crash Services ' and CleanUp Emergency Medical Services, Urban Emergency Medical Services, Rural Establish EMS Section in Health Department Survey EMS Capabilities DeveIOp and Implement Comprehensive Plan Pass Licensing Law License Operators Train EMS Instructors Train Operating Personnel Upgrade Ambulance Service Establish EMS Data System Establish Communication System Establish Minimum Equipment Package for Ambulances Private Passenger Systems Placement: Vehicle, Entry InSpection and Registration Private Passenger Motorcycle Cargo Vehicle Bus Other Vehicles Implement Vehicle Driver Inspection Lane Program Obtain Legislation for Authorizing Follow-Up of Enforce- ment on Defective Vehicles Continue Evaluation Of Further Expansion Of Vehicle Driver Inspection Lane Program Continue Implementation of Automated Interface Of LEIN with Motor Vehicle Registration File Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: -83- Motor Vehicle Crash Systems Placement: Vehicle, Crash and Investigation Services and Cleanup Motor Vehicle Crash and Investigation Services, Urban Motor Vehicle Crash and Investigation Services, Rural Implement Motor Vehicle Crash and Investigation Service Implement Accident Prevention Program DevelOp Basic Police Training Programs for In-Depth Investigation Conduct workshops on Traffic Records for Police Personnel Conduct Alcohol in Relation to Highway Safety Workshop for Trained Police Personnel Roadway Construction Systems Placement: Roadway, Entry and Inspection Standards and Certification New Construction Reconstruction and Modifications Extra Roadway and Accessories Conduct Inventory of Highway Design Standards _ Conduct Evaluation Study of Roadway Lighting Needs DevelOp Programs for Evaluating Engineering Countermeasures at Hazardous Locations EXpand Evaluation System for Determining Effectiveness of Engineering and Improvements Inventory of Hazards Within Highway Right-Of-Way Inventory of Traffic Control Devices Statewide Conduct Training Programs for Paraprofessional Traffic Engineer Types 8. 10. Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: -34- Roadway Repair and Systems Placement: Roadway, Crash Investigation Service and Cleanup Normal Surveillance and Repair Specific Repairs Develop Statewide Accident Detection System Develop Standards and Procedures for Cleanup of Debris Training of Accident Investigation Personnel Schedule Of Tow Truck Services Perform Accident Investigation Perform In-Depth Accident Investigation on Selective Basis Implement a Radio Detection and Communication System Of Accidents Conduct Inventory of Railroad Crossings Conduct Training Programs for Highway Maintenance Personnel in First Aid Crash Location Identi- Systems Placement: Roadway Review fication and Reconstruction Services Crash Location, Urban Crash Location, Rural Implement seven counties accident location system Implement Accident Location System Statewide Implement Accident Location System in Urban Areas Incorporating Existing Statewide System Implement System for Identifying and Coordinating Engineering Features to Accident Locations for Analysis Enforcement Systems Placement: Comprehensive, Operating Police Traffic Services, Urban Police Traffic Services, Rural Alcohol Control Implement Selective Enforcement Practices Implement Accident Prevention Programs DeveIOp Basic Traffic Police Training Programs Implement Specialized Police Traffic Services Training Conduct Traffic Records WorkshOp for Police Personnel Conduct WorkshOps for Police Personnel in Alcohol in Relation to Highway Safety. ll. 12. Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: -85- Administration and Systems Placement: Comprehensive, Judicial Countermeasures Review for Crashes and Moving Violations Driver Operation and Conditions Violations Motor Vehicle Defects Violations Strengthen Driver Improvement Program EXpand and'Coordinate Public Information Regarding Drinking Drivers in Relation to Highway Safety Correlate Vehicle Defects with the Driver Record File Convert SOS Driver and Vehicle Record System to an Automated 24-Hour Day Operation Analysis and DeveIOp- Systems Placement: Infra-Structure, ment of Codes and Laws Analysis and Pro- gram Development State Codes and Laws Local Codes and Laws Adopt Joint Legislative Resolution Creating a Study Committee to Update the Michigan Vehicle Code DeveIOpment of a Project to Fund Staff for Performing Comparative Study of Michigan Vehicle Code with the Uniform Vehicle Code Perform the Comparative Study Recodify Existing Michigan Vehicle Code as a Result of the Comparative Study Coordinate and Recodify Product with Pertinent Agencies and Interest Groups Introduce the Product to the Legislature DevelOp Project PrOposal for Motor Vehicle Law Violations Classification Study Pass Law Requiring .10 Blood Alcohol Level Comparative Study of the Model Traffic Ordinance with Michigan's Version Survey to Determine Compliance Of Michigan Communities with the Michigan Uniform Traffic Code for Cities, Townships and Villages . Enact Legislation Making Revision of Michigan Traffic Ordinance a Requirement for Local Communities Establish WorkshOp for Traffic Court Judges and Local Prosecutors 13. 1“. Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: Element: Sub-Elements: Tasks: -86- Traffic Records and Systems Placement: Infra-Structure, Management Information Analysis and Pro- gram Development Central Traffic Data Bank Operations Agency Records Management Information Systems Conduct ln-Depth Analysis of Statewide Traffic Records System DevelOp a Training Program for Traffic Records Personnel Pilot Demonstration of MultivJurisdictionaI Traffic Records System at Regional Level Conduct Feasibility Study of Implementing a Scannable Traffic Crash Form SOphisticating Traffic Crash Reporting System to Local Communities Implementation of the Traffic Crash Location System Implementation of the Management Information System Systems and Program Systems Placement: Infra-Structure, Analysis Analysis and Pro- gram Development Research and DeveIOpment Planning and Management Development Of a Highway Safety Assessment System for Local Governments Local and Regional Planning Pilot Projects DeveIOpment Of an Evaluation System for the Management Of the State's Highway Safety Program Personality profile Study of Alcoholics Design of Public Information Program Community Assessment Of Capability to Deal with Alcoholism Problems Manpower DeveIOpment Update Comprehensive Safety Plan and Annual Work Program Perform Fiscal Survey for Determining Compliance with Base Year Requirement Provide Project Development and Monitoring Services Evaluate Results of Project Activity 0 -37- ' Highway Safety System Evaluation Systems evaluation can be analyzed into three major types of activities61 -- development stage, testing stage, and documentation stage. In the development stage, concern is for establishing cri- teria for evaluation. For the proposed model, this criteria for determining effectiveness was discussed in the section of this chapter on system design. In the testing phase, these criteria are subjected tO refine- ment as a result of analysis conducted at various levels in the pyramid of work activity. These analyses usually are performed as a separate action apart from the management reporting system, but the results of these analyses become important factors in determining which measurement criteria will be used in the reporting system in Sections 6a and 6b of the sub-element plan form. The documentation stage is, in fact, the report form complete in its final form to include data which describes the progress Of the work in both fiscal and program. The pure evaluation process then can begin and this is a tough proposition. h Yv V v 6lVinsonhaler, John F., Ph.D., Computers in Education and Social Science, Part III Computer Application, Chapter 6, P. 6h. Michigan State University, East Lansing, Mich. -88— In the past, statistical indices were the principal techniques used for the evaluation of most social programs. These measures describe the state of current conditions and the number and kinds Of activities that were being carried on but did not usually permit any specific evaluation Of how well or poorly a public service or community agency was doing.62 The demand shifted to comparative m— .—_— -—-‘£m ratings of communities and, here again, service rather than research or evaluation was the keynote of this approach. ‘1'". One of the principal weaknesses or shortcomings Of this technique was that the system required self rating appraisal forms which has a built in bias. In any case, in early evaluation guides, too great an emphasis was placed upon administrative as compared to scientific considerations. In our contemporary society, increasing pressure has been put upon public service and community programming to evaluate activities. The current desire to judge the worthwhileness of public service pro— grams is but one aspect of modern society‘s belief that many Of its social problems can be met most effectively by planning action based upon existing knowledge.63 Evaluation refers to the social process of making judgements of worth. While it implies some logical or 62Suchman, Edward A., Evaluative Research. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1967. P. 14 ‘ T" T“ 53Ibid. P. 2. -89- rational basis for making such judgments, it does not require any systematic procedures for marshaling or presenting Objective evidence to support the judgment. “Evaluation" then can be defined as a more" common sense usage Of the process Of assessment or appraisal of value. ”Evaluative research" which, on the other hand, is restricted to the utilization of scientific research methods and techniques for the 1““0 purpose of making an evaluation.6h It is important to recognize the distinction between these two techniques as each has its place in performing analysis services for highway safety and the analysis service must be specific to indicate the type being performed in a particular situation. Evaluation is a form of applied research whose major Objective is not the production of new basic knowledge, but rather the study of effectiveness of the application Of such know; ledgePS Evaluation is the follow-up of results to determine the degree which the program fulfilled its objectives. Measurement achievement Of progress toward a predetermined goal has a relations ship to program evaluation. This process is also concerned about determining whether the goals themselves are valid. Bigman expands upon the purposes Of evaluation by listing six main uses of evaluation study. 1. To discover whether and how well objectives are being fulfilled. 2. TO determine the reasons for specific successes or failures. 6‘Hbid P. 7. -90- TO uncover the principles underlying a successful program. To direct the course of experiments with techniques for increasing effectiveness. To lay the basis for further research on the reasons for the relative success of alternate techniques. To define the means to be used for Obtaining objectives and even 68 redefine sub-goals in light of research findings. mU'l These purposes strongly suggest almost intrinsic relationship between evaluation and program planning and in develOpment. The evaluation process can formulate some analytical questions as well. Hertzog proposed some questions for a satisfactory evalu- ation of effort.67 1. What kind of change is desired? 2. By what means is change to be brought about? 3. What is the evidence that the change Observed is due to the means employed? A. What is the means of the changes found? 5. Were there unexpected consequences? The following review list is essential for evaluation. 1. Identification of the goals to be evaluated. Analysis Of the problem with which the activity must cope. 3. Description and standardization activity. A. Measurement of the degree of which that change takes place. 5. Determination Of whether the observed change gs due to the activities or to some other cause. 9 66ibid. P. 29. 67Ibid. P. 29. 53mm. P. 31. 69Ibid. P. 31. -9]- Evaluation always starts with some value, either eXplicit or implicit; for example, it is good to live a long time, then the goal is formulated derived from its value. A pre-condition to an evaIU* ation study is the presence of some activity whose objectives are assumed to have value. Value may be defined as any aspect of a situation, an event or object that is invested with a preferential {.~m interest as being good, bad, desirable, undesirable, or the like.70 1 Values are the principles by which we establish priorities and I I hierarchies of importance among needs, demands and goals. In the evaluation process, values must be formed, goals set. L--( Most programs have multiple objectives and this is particularly true of highway safety. A great deal Of the confusion regarding ob- jectives could be eliminated by recognizing that these Objectives can be classified in a number of different ways depending on one‘s purposes. In principle, one may hypothesize an unlimited universe Of Objectives and sub-objectives corresponding to the various steps or actions that make up a total program. While these steps usually comprise a continuous series of events for evaluation purposes, it is essential to sub—divide them tha some discernible hierarchy of sub-goals, each of which may be the result of the successful achieves ment Of the preceding goal and, in turn, a pre~condition to the next higher goal. This chain of Objectives is Often trichotomized in the literature as immediate, intermediate and ultimate goals.71 -92- Intermediate goals refer to the results of the specific act with which one is momentarily concerned. The intermediate goals push ahead toward the accomplishment of the specific act and the ultimate goal then examines the final success Of achieving the intermediate goal. Ultimate evaluation refers to the determination Of the final success Of the program in eliminating or reducing the social problem r“'* at which it was aimed. These evaluation levels correspond nicely to the program levels in the Michigan Highway Safety Program structure and are, indeed, applicable to that problem situation. Several classifications have been prOposed for ordering the different types Of criteria for evaluation. Paul Speaks Of three major sets of criteria. 1. Assessment of effort by which is meant the energy and action of the service team, that is, talks given, etc. 2. Assessment of effect which refers to the result Of the effort rather than the effort itself. 3. Assessment of processed which deals with the analysis of why and how much of the effort was achieved.72 Evaluation of highway safety activity must be carefully controlled to consider both the validity and reliability of the results produced. Validity refers to the degree to which any measure or procedure succeeds in doing what it is purported to do.73 '72Ibid. P. 52'. 73Ibid. P. 120. -93- . Factors which affect validity can be categorized as follows: proposi- tional validity, instrument validity, sampling validity, observer and evaluator validities, subject validity, administration validity, analysis validity. Reliability has to do with the test of reproducibility of at least selected types of measurements on samples of subjects throughe . q‘ufi out the course of Specific study.7h The essential factor in these tests is the independent application by two or more persons of the same procedure to the same object or study whether the object of study or be whatever in order to determine the lack Of the same re- !——— sults will be achieved under similar circumstances.75 Reliability refers to the degree to which this measure can be dependent upon to secure consistent results upon repeated application. Therefore, reliability indicates the probability Of obtaining the same results upon repeated use Of the same measuring instrument whether this be an objected test or a subjective judgment. The major sources of unsystematic variation in evaluative research are: subject reli- ability, Observer reliability, situational reliability, instrument reliability, and processing reliability.76 The technology of evaluation goes hand in hand with a good prO* gram for determining effectiveness. In the highway safety system, it is not going to be enough to secure data which answers the queS* tions framed for determining the extent to which an Objective is 7'41bid. P. 116. 75Ibid. P. 116. 751b1d. P. 117. -9“- achieved. Careful pre-planning design can insure that sound evalu- ative methodologies are introduced to make more valid and reliable ' the results that will be produced. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Clinard, Marshall B. ,Socioloqy_ of Deviant Behavior, Third Edition, (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968) Little, Arthur 0., Inc., Cost Effectiveness jfl_Traffic Safety; F. A. Drager: New York 1968. Suchman, Edward A., Evaluative Research, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1967. Publications of the Government, Learned Societies, and Other Organizations fi—‘v Adams, James Ray, “Personality Variables Associated with Traffic Accidents,‘l Behavior Research 12 Highway Safety, January 1970. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc., 1970 Automobjle Facts and Figures, New York, N. Y. T T Automotive Safety Foundation, A Fact Gathering Guide to Assist States in Developing a Highway Safety Prggram. Washington, D. C., 1968. Automotive Safety Foundation, “Highway Safety Program Management,” Rept. on NHSB Contr. No. FH-ll~6537. August 1968. Borkenstein, R. F. ,The Role of the Drinking Driver in Traffic Accidents, Department of Police Administration, Indiana Uni- versity, ”Bloomington, Indiana. Campbell, B. J. and Rouse, W. S., "Highway Safety Program Costs Come pared to Benefits Received, Highway Safety_Research Center Bulletin, University Of North Carolina. June 1967. T Carnahan, James, ”Highway Safety Management, A Syllabus." Highway Users Federation for Safety and Mobility, Washington, D. C. July 1970. Committee on Governmental Operations, "Criteria for Evaluation in Planning State and Local Programs,“ U. S. Senate, U. S, Govern- ment Printing Office, Washington, D. C. July 1967. Curry, 0. A. and Haney, D. G., "A Manual for Conducting Highway Economy Studies,” Stanford Research Institute, Rept. for Bureau of Public Roads. August 1966. -96- Damkot, David K. ”Interim Report - Summary of Effort to Collect Data for AHSWP Effectiveness and Output Criteria.” Highway Safety Research Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. February 5, 1970. Dietz, S. K. “Cost Effectiveness Evaluation of Methods for Identi« fying Hazardous Highway Locations.” Analysis for Planning Programming Budgeting: Washington Operations Research Council. 1968. Fleischer, G. A. “Cost-Effectiveness and Highway Safety." Depart- ment of Indust. and Systems Engrng., University Of Southern California Rept. No. USCUSE-IOO On NHSB Contr. NO. FH—11-6800. February 1969. Forbes, T. W. ”The Normal Automobile Driver as a Traffic Problem,” J: gf_General Psychology. 1939. Haddon, William, Jr. ”Address Before Association Of Minnesota Counties." U. S. Department of Transportation, NHSB. November 28, 1967. Haddon, William, Jr. ”The National Highway Safety Programs—18 Months Later,“ Driver Behavior Cause and Effect. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. March 1968. Hall, William and Carlson, William. Highway Safety Project Evaluation Methpdologjes. Highway Safety Research Institute, December 31, 1968. Heltzer, Harry. "Keynote Address,“ Highway Users Federation for Safety and Mobility, Washington, D. C. April 1970. “Highway Safety Act of 1966,“ Public Law 89-564, 89th Congress, 5.3052 September 9, I966. Jorgensen and Assoc., Westat Research Analysts, Inc. “Evaluation Of Criteria for Safety Improvements on the Highways,“ Rept. to Bureau of Public Roads. October 1968. Leininger, W. J., et al. llDeveIOpment of a Cost-Effectiveness System for Evaluating Accident Countermeasures,” Vols. I-VI. Operations . Research, Inc., Rept. on NHSB Contr. NO. FHelIe6h95, December 1968. Lyden and Miller, Planning, Programming, Budgetingt’ fl_SYStems Approach £2_Man§gement. ‘ 't‘ **z v+~. ~ is s .-e. ‘fi.‘fifi . McGuire, Fredrick L. Behayioral‘Research'jfl_Highway Safety. -97- Message from the President of the United States, "Administration ‘ of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Act,” U. S. Govern- ment Printing Office, Washington 1969. "Michigan Traffic Accident Facts,” Michigan Department Of State Police, East Lansing, Michigan. 1969. National Safety Council, ”Accident Facts 1970 Edition.‘I Chicago, Illinois. O'Day, James. “Systems Analysis and the Driver," Driver Behayior, Cause and Effect. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. March 1968. Peat, Marwick, Livingston and CO. “Highway Safety Management Guide« lines for State Governments," Rept. on NHSB Contr. No. FH-11e6627, Washington, D. C. June 1968. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell 8 Co. “National Highway Safety Program, Management and Reporting System,” Vol. III, Concepts, National Highway Safety Bureau, Washington, D. C. Recht, J. L. ”How to do a Cost/Benefit Analysis Of Motor Vehicle Accident Countermeasures." National Safety Council, September 1966. Smith, R. N. and Tamburri, T. N. “Direct Costs of California State Highway Accidents.” Division of Highways, State of California. July 1967. Smith, Wilbur and Assoc. “A Report on the Washington Area Motor Vehicle Accident Cost Study (WAMVACS)” Rept. for Bureau of Public Roads and others. November 1966. State of Michigan Highway Safety Plan, Office of Highway Safety Planning, Bureau of Planning and Program Development, Executive Office Of the Governor. October 15, 1968. uSummary of Legislative Intent," NHSB, U. S. Department of Trans- portation, Washington, D. C. December 7, 1970. U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, “Motor Vehicle Injury Prevention Program," Rept. 1966~1, Disease Control Programs. August 1966. Vinsonhaler, John F., Ph.D., Computers jp_Education and Social Spience, Part III Computer Application, Michigan State University} East Lansing, Michigan. -98- Wiederkehr, R. R. V. ”A Methodology for Programming Highway Safety Improvement Projects.” Analysis for Planning, Programming, Budgeting: Washington Operations Research Council. 1968. Wohl, M. “A Conceptual Framework for Evaluating Traffic Safety Measures." Rand Memo RM-S632-DOT on NHSB Contr. NO. FH-11-6698. April 1968. Wohl, M. ”Putting the Analysis and Evaluation of Traffic Safety Measures into Perspective." Rand Memo RM-S631-DOT on NHSB Contr. No. FH-ll-6698. April 1968. Periodicals "Billions for Transportation, How Much for Safety,” Traffic Safety, National Safety Council, October 1963. V Recht, J. L. "The 1969 Traffic Story," Traffic Safety, March 1970. Appendix A -99- Far-monubma zooE7. ZCCthoz- .eO-uiruo-btun .- 55»; $320.- . 1 . zotkuoa 7.2.8 1 .- hzc; 5:55.- Ir H h‘ HUC...&HM IOC<¢F20H¢ zo-t‘O-Guoz- 9.2 2953“,: v.5!!- oz< :28 “32:”; .63: 32:8- «2.0: r h ZC-r._.mn_<>>IO_I . Appendix B -100- mxmdk oz<.mkzw2w4wm3m.mhzwfiwqm Edy-00mm zuwBPmm EImZO-kdjwm gau-owx >uz-umwxw h-onq taum zo-wduanu muwzwmmqa oz< za-uwmmomn wuxtzw-z-«x x< ends-unuomu pawza-pa- manna-m axe .eo ”(ecoamxaah .zo-hqo-euxrou Amrxnmmuu mu-pamm mo zo-»«u-m-wmuu are uz-qume uz-amuxiomoumm oz< zo-»mo mu-w-4-umo muunaauoma ozq .zo-peu-szzou .wa-smmm oz-mumxiomouwm oz< uz-mzmu-a zo-kmo mwmaouuomq kmmhwm oz< wmmk pzmzno-muuo mnmmozqwm no pmu-znxzou ord .mu-mmmm .wmmzm>-FUmnmm hzuzu04u>mo mmmnamuomu oz< mhszWm-20wm uz-meu-4 { oz-mZmu-J oz< uz-kmmk «u>-mo pzmxaoqm>mo uqua0maua 4:m oz< au-ym goozum oz< mmmnou zo-»<:4<>u uuqudOuxwa oz< zo-wuthmz- oz-awuxcomoumm zo-h<¢wmo hzmxaoum>uo oz-mzwu-a Jooxum -<-omwxaou zo-huo tauau-mxau zo-k-mo zo-h<:4<>u oz< oa-aumxiomouwu zo-h<¢mao sumac“; pzuxno-w>mo >oo-oaozhmz oz< .zo-»Hhummum zo-»< now zq-xw canon; or“ xuuzmwn awake use-:us «exec az-mzaa-s ax zo-e-aa az-cma- mus-«a use-zws -<-aauxeou .1. u-u-xus -<-aau520a az-nzua age z-emwu zo-kaUSOM «us-ma zo-cqasaw «ms-«a w-a>uaoeox u-u>aaoeox 114 amazummaa 11- amaWMMwumw>mwM zo-»-ao .uL azezmwmnwwmmu . anomo zdxsx zdwooan >kmu«m >«3zu-x uh.-E.Zw «cc-couecmfi ac _ cce r"- acofino-O>OO tea :Oecomom m-w>4ocoa< JOQO xcnm 950 02::- 35:00 ZOE. 30300 0.020) .055- u:c_~e.o_> :oEucoU Q .w cot-Zeno 52.5 mZO-POZ->Os- d uwImdzu .10; wwxDmdw-umwkznoog J<-U_DD-1 .w .Z_5_O< .9200 3:024 :05:- moo-zom 05-0; 00:0.- -con-D- woo-zom 2:95. 00:0.- ran-.0354- .Pszmou-on-Zm — n o o— n25.30004- >a-Stco--u=xw 295$ .00; gnu-o uxaoom 2:025 catnu-z-uos- 752...: .00... snan :caox use d catcaszOn-Om coco-20>»:w EE-OZ CO-uoazncco 392 wo_>mmm 20:03-952002- d mos-mm 203(03-5-“0 .m .kaD- hum-amn- ZO-h-uo-hhwzl: a . w0¢<02.-Om .w0>s_ .- ESE-Sam 50>: a_o-u--.o»oo-onmm mO->:wm concave-um 30>;- ZO-h<0_kmm>z_ 20.52-56.5- a 1923- .w 20:09.52. wJU-Im> mOhOE NAG-rm) any-.05- . o — — o m eouconuom cot-nova..- ZO-hduzow chZwmmoceoeoEw 03-50) 09-00 nan 1:35- moBEow 225-222 o-o_;o> 0030 30:35- >Ocou-OEw beacon-"o.- o-OBK 3933-02 cone-ounce 303t- wU->mwm 4(0-022 0257303 d >02w0mw2w mug-huh cm>Eo ZO§-¢o I J I—r _ H d # I . N 35.53ka 2Pmu<>>IO-I €32”me so ,l L >-Pumhhm rm Ni...- IE .2909 0 5a a can 0 2a e um.- -..C N»...- »m om>0mee< m5; 448E we Omeméo .m meg .v .02 .m map-e. .~ fied-0H: "me-2....- .- J Z<1~Q FZN-Zmi-MQDW 44.37-7- 2>T-D-_ I- MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY L O 3 1293 3012 268 IIIRIIIIES 2