Presentation on theme: "IGNITION INTERLOCKS How To Use Them Effectively to Reduce Drunk Driving Richard Roth, PhD Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute October 23-4, 2012 Research."— Presentation transcript:
IGNITION INTERLOCKS How To Use Them Effectively to Reduce Drunk Driving Richard Roth, PhD Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute October 23-4, 2012 Research Supported By NM TSB, NHTSA, PIRE, RWJ, and MADD
Drunk Driver Plows into Mexican Bike Race One Dead, 10 Injured, June 1, Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute This Is What We Want To Prevent
My Goal is to Reduce Drunk Driving by research to identify… and advocacy to implement… the most effective, cost-effective and fair initiatives. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute3
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute4 Give yourselves a round of Applause!
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute5 Alcohol-Impaired-Driving Fatalities 1400 in Region 5 in 2010 ~14% of 10,288 in U.S. …Normalized to Miles Driven
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute6 Better Worse 2010 FARS Data; Plot by Roth
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute10 Interlocks Up Fatalities Down
Federal Laws vs. Research 1. No interlock without prior period of hard license revocation for subsequent offenders. 2. Interlocked offenders may only drive to work, school, or treatment. 1A. Interlocks are more effective than hard revocation. 1B. Most revoked offenders drive while revoked, DWR. 1C. Offenders learn that they can get by with DWR. 2A. Ignored and Ineffectual 2B. Reduces sober-driving training. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute11 Before 2012
2012 Highway Bill Removes Restrictions and Offers Grants 1.Hard-revocation-period-before-interlock for subsequent offenders has been removed. 2.Federal restrictions on where and when an interlocked offender may drive have been removed. 3.Federal grants will be given to states that enforce an all-offender interlock law. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute12
2. Convict More Of Those Arrested Training of police in collecting and presenting evidence of DWI Video cameras on police cars. Eliminate shortages of prosecutors. Publicize records of judges who have the least recidivism of the offenders they adjudicate Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute16
3. Specific Deterrence Reduce Recidivism Ignition Interlock Sanctions License Revocation Community Service & Victim Impact Panels Alcohol Screening and Assessment Supervised Probation, SCRAM, 24/7 Treatment DWI Courts Jail Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute18
19 An Ignition Interlock is an Electronic Probation Officer Dedicated Probation Officer in Front Seat On duty 24 hours per day Tests and Records daily BAC’s Allows only Alcohol-Free Persons to Drive Reports All Violations to the Court/MVD Costs Offender only $2.30 per day (1 less drink per day) Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute Punishes Probation Violations Immediately
Why Interlock Drunk Drivers? 1.Interlocks are the most effective DWI sanction 2.They are the most cost-effective sanction 3.They are perceived as fair 4.Better than Hard License Revocation 5.They are paid for by offenders 6.They supply supervised probation. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute20
21 Interlocks are Effective, Cost-Effective and Fair Interlocks reduce DWI re-arrests by 40-90% They reduce the economic impact of drunk driving by $3 to $7 for every $1 of cost. Interlocks are perceived as a fair sanction by 81% of over 15,000 offenders surveyed...But they only work if… you get them installed. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
What Works? 1.All DWI offenders must be included 2.Must be mandatory not just voluntary 3.Avoid hoops: (pre-requisites to interlock) 4.Close loopholes 5.Compliance-Based-Removal 6.Triage to stiffer (and more costly) penalties 7.Indigent support 8.Promotion of General Deterrence Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute22
First Offenders are Biggest Problem Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute23
24 BAC Distributions by Arrest Number Are Similar Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
Main Key to an Effective Program The key to an effective interlock program is simply getting interlocks installed in the vehicles of arrested drunk drivers. Nothing else…( reporting, inspecting, sanctioning, monitoring)… is as important. These extra program components definitely add effectiveness, but they should be added only to the extent that funds are available. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute25
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute26 Recidivism: Interlock vs. Hard Revocation
Administrative and/or Judicial In administrative programs, MVD’s revoke licenses of arrested and/or convicted DWI offenders but allow them to drive legally while revoked if they install interlocks. In judicial programs, judges mandate that convicted offenders install interlocks as a condition of probation. Some states have both in series (e.g. Florida) or parallel (e.g. New Mexico). Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute27
Basic Administrative Program 1.An Interlock Licensing Law that makes an interlock license available to anyone revoked for DWI who installs an interlock 2.Permits driving anywhere anytime in a vehicle with a functioning interlock 3.License Fee offsets MVD costs Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute28 Problems 1.Only 10-20% will install. The worst offenders will not. 2.Most offenders will choose revocation over interlock. 3.HOOPS: Pre-Interlock requirements will further reduce compliance. 4.There will be little overall reduction in drunk driving.
Enhanced Administrative Program 1.Compliance Based Removal; eg 6 months and 5000 miles of no recorded BAC’s > 0.04% 2.Requirement for unlimited license Reinstatement 3.Vehicle Forfeiture for driving while revoked without an interlock. 4.No Hoops (pre-interlock requirements) Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute29 Problems 1.It still is a voluntary program. 2.Most offenders will choose to drive without a license. 3.There is a low probability of apprehension for DWR. 4.The worst offenders will not be interlocked. 5.Result: many unlicensed and uninsured bad drivers
Basic Judicial Program Judicial option to mandate an Interlock sanction as a condition of probation. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute30 Problems 1.Many judges will not mandate an interlock 2.Many offenders will plea away interlock sanction 3.Many offenders will just not comply. 4.Offenders will claim “not driving” or “no car”. 5.Those who need it most will not be interlocked. 6.Result: many unlicensed and uninsured bad drivers
Enhanced Judicial Program 1.Mandatory Judicial Interlock sanction as a condition of probation 2.Installation report to court within 2 weeks 3.One year for 1 st, 2 yrs for 2 nd, 3 yrs for 3 rd, Lifetime for 4 th. 4.Compliance Based Removal: with carrots and sticks 5.Home Photo Breathalyzer for those who claim “no car” or “not driving” (Alcohol-free breath twice per day) 6.Offender financed indigent fund with objective standards Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute31 Problems 1.Such a program does not yet fully exist. 2.Requires some administrative components 3.Frequent monitoring reduces cost-effectiveness 4.Possibility of pleas from DWI to careless or reckless
Add On’s 1.Focus probation resources on those who do not install IID’s 2.Criminal sanction for attempts to circumvent interlock 3.IID probation review every six months 4.Triage of sanctions for those who are not compliant. 5.No pleas from DWI to careless or reckless driving 6.Interlock as a condition of bond Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute32 Suggested Triage for Non-Compliance 1.Photo Interlock 2.Require morning and evening breath tests 3.Screening and Treatment if indicated 4.Continuous Alcohol Monitoring (eg SCRAM or TAD) 5.DWI Court
Best Practice Recommendation 1.Combine previous four programs in PARALLEL 2.Include “ADD ON’s” and Triage as funds permit 3.Focus probation and MVD resources on those who do not install. 4.Let the interlock sanction tests that are above set-point. 5.Collect monthly reports, but only monitor circumvention. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute33 Collect data for research on effectiveness. 1.DWI arrests and convictions 2.license revocations and interlock licenses. 3.Interlocks installed and removed 4.A-I crashes, injuries, fatalities.
34 Evidence of Effectiveness 1.Recidivism After a DWI Arrest 2.Recidivism After a DWI Conviction 3.Overall Statewide Recidivism vs. Time 4.Reduction in Alcohol-Involved Crashes 5.Reduction in Alcohol-Involved Injuries 6.Reduction in Alcohol-Involved Fatalities 7.Correlation between Interlocks Installed and Measures of Drunk Driving 8.New NHTSA Comparison Criteria: Alcohol-Impaired Driving Fatalities per 100 MVM 9.Opinions of Interlocked Offenders Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
Model Ignition Interlock Program by Dick Roth October 10, 2012 page 1 of 2 1.Mandatory Interlocks as a condition of probation for all convicted offenders. 1 yr. for 1 st, 2 yrs. for second, 3 yrs. for 3 rd, and 5 yrs. for 4 or more. 2.Electronic Sobriety Monitoring for convicted offenders who claim “no vehicle” or “not driving. Daily requirement of morning and evening alcohol-free breath tests as a condition of probation.(or $1000/yr. for supervised probation) 3.An ignition interlock license available to all persons revoked for DWI with no other restrictions. Allow MVD to set fee to cover cost. 35Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
Model Ignition Interlock Program by Dick Roth October 10, 2012 page 2/2 4.An Indigent Fund with objective standards such as eligibility for income support or food stamps. 5.Vehicle immobilization or interlock between arrest and adjudication. Offender’s choice……. By voiding Vehicle Registration until interlock is installed or offender is adjudicated not guilty..(Alternative: Interlock as a condition of bond) 6.Vehicle forfeiture for driving a non-interlocked vehicle while revoked for DWI. 7.Compliance Based Removal: No end to revocation period before satisfaction of at least one year of alcohol-free driving with an IID. (e.g.. ≥ 5000 miles and ≥ 1 year with no recorded BAC>0.05 by any driver). 8.Criminal sanction for circumvention of IID. 36Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute37 VIII. 2. Recidivism vs Duration of Interlock….PRELIMINARY DATA 1 year is Best A year or more is best More than 2 years is best More than 2 years is best From T sav, T spo
Three year effectiveness of interlocks for first offenders by BAC Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute38
First Offenders are much more dangerous than the general population Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute39
48 I.2. Increase the Incentives Right to Drive Legally Required for an Unrestricted License Avoid Recording of First Conviction Shred Plate..Right to Re-register Vehicle Condition of Bond on arrest Condition of Probation on conviction Avoid Electronic Sobriety Monitoring Reduce or Avoid Jail time Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute Administrative Incentives Judicial Incentives >70% ~15%
49 I.3. Eliminate Hoops No Pre-requisites for Interlock Period of Hard Revocation (Re-define) Fines and Fees Paid Outstanding legal obligations Alcohol Screening and Assessment Medical Evaluation DWI School Victim Impact Panel Community Service Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
50 I.4. Close Loopholes Not convicted Waiting out Revocation Period “No Car” or “Not Driving” Excuse Driving While Revoked Driving a non-interlocked vehicle Few Warrants for Non-compliance Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
51 I.5. Triage Up in Sanctions Extension of Interlock Period Photo Interlock Home Photo Breathalyzer Continuous BAC monitoring Treatment House Arrest Jail Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
III.1. The New Mexico Laws 1999 Optional Judicial Mandate for 2 nd and 3 rd DWI 2002 Mandatory Judicial Sanction for 1 st Aggravated and All Subsequent Offenders 2002 Indigent Fund 2003 Ignition Interlock License available for all revoked offenders with no waiting period. (Admin. Prog. For All) 2005 Mandatory Judicial Sanction: 1 yr for 1 st ; 2 yrs for 2 nd ; 3 yrs for 3 rd ; and lifetime with 5 yr review for ALR and JLR periods increased 2009 No Unrestricted License without Interlock Period 2010 Objective Standard for Indigency 52Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
III.6. What We Have Learned Given a choice, most offenders choose revocation over interlock …and they keep driving after drinking. First offenders must be included because they are 60% to 80% of all DWI offenders, and almost as likely to be re-arrested as subsequent offenders. There must be an Interlock License available ASAP. Revoked offenders are 3-4 times more likely to be re-arrested for DWI than interlocked offenders. Hard revocation periods just teach offenders that they can drive without being arrested. Judicial Mandates get more interlocks installed than Administrative requirements. 53Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
V. Loopholes that Remain in NM 1.“No Car” or “Not Driving” excuse SB No interlock between arrest and adjudication (Learning, DWI, Absconding) SB Ineffective Penalty for DWR..SB Possibility of waiting out revocation period without installing an interlock 5.No Objective Standard for Indigency 6.Insufficient Funding: Increase Alcohol Excise Tax 7.Refusals and Drugs Warrants for BAC SB Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute55 Not Arrested While Interlocked N=14, % Arrested In Interlocked Vehicle N=~92 0.6% Arrested In Vehicle With a Different License Plate N=~ % Sample of 15,109 Interlocked In New MexicoVIII.3.
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute56 VIII.6. Who Dies in Alcohol-Impaired Crashes?
57 VI. Myths About First Offenders 1.First Offenders Drove Drunk Once 2.Are Not Alcohol Abusers or Alcoholics 3.Are a Negligible Part of the DWI Problem 4.Are Less Likely to be Re-Arrested 5.Are Not Responsible for Most DWI Fatalities 6.√ Interlocks are not cost-effective for them 7.√ Interlocks are a not a fair sanction for them 8.√ Interlocks are not effective for them 9.√ Interlocks are too lenient. Revoke them 10.Sanctions are more important than prevention Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
58 They have driven an average of 500 times after drinking before their first arrest. VI.1 First Offenders Are Not First Offenders R. Roth. Anonymous surveys of convicted DWI offenders at Victim Impact Panels in Santa Fe, NM Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute They are multiple offenders who were finally caught.
59Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
60 VI. 4. First Offenders are Just as Dangerous as Subsequent Offenders Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
What Fraction of Impaired Drivers in Fatal Crashes are First Offenders? Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute61 NHTSA Definitions; Impaired Driver: BAC >= 0.08 First Offender: No BAC Conviction in Previous 3 Years. 92 % pp 4-5 VI.5
62Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute VI.10 The importance of Prevention and General Deterrents
63 VII. Truths About Young Offenders (Those Under 30) 1.Have the highest DWI arrest rates 2.Have the highest re-arrest rates 3.Have the highest DWI crash rates Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
64Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute DWI Citations Fall Off Dramatically With Age Underage drinkers do not have the highest arrest rate, but VII.1.
65Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute Those who have their first DWI before 21 have the highest 5 year re-arrest rate. VII.2
67 VIII. Miscellaneous Findings 1.Females are an increasing fraction of DWI 2.Longer interlock periods are more effective for subsequent offenders. 3.How do interlocked offenders get re-arrested for DWI? 4.Variations in Installation Rate by County. 5.Crime and Punishment 6.Who Dies in Alcohol-Impaired Crashes 7.BAC Limits by Country Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
68Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute VIII.1. Female DWI’s in NM
69Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute 1. Recidivism After a DWI Arrest in NM 77% lower 78% lower 84% lower 76% lower
70Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute 2. Recidivism After a DWI Conviction
72 Survey of 1513 Interlocked Offenders % who responded agree or strongly agree with each of these statements 88% Helpful in avoiding another DWI 83% Helpful at reducing their drinking 89% Effective at reducing their drunk driving 72% All convicted DWI’s should have interlocks 63% All arrested DWI’s should have interlocks. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute 9.
Evidence of Cost-Effectiveness Cost of interlocks is less than one third of the savings in the economic impact of the drunk driving crashes prevented. Benefit/Cost ~3. National Research that takes into account benefits other than DWI crashes shows an even greater Benefit to Cost Ratio. In a survey of 1513 Interlocked offenders, 70% agree or strongly agree that The benefits of interlocks outweigh the costs. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute73
Evidence of Fairness Anonymous Survey of 1513 Interlocked Offenders: 80% responded agree or strongly agree to: “Interlocks are a fair sanction for convicted DWI.” ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Anonymous Survey of 15,641 Convicted Offenders while waiting for Victim Impact Panels to start: 81% responded Yes to the question: “Do you think that interlocks are a fair sanction for DWI? Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute74
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute75 Where Should We Focus our Sanctions? In the past we have focused on Subsequent Offenders. Subsequent Offenders have a slightly higher re-arrest rate. Many more First Offenders are re-arrested than Subsequent Offenders because there are more First Offenders. Now we are Focusing on First Offenders Data from NM CTS, Plots by Roth 3/1/11
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute76 Interlocked Offenders Have Less Recidivism For up to 8 Years After Arrest
77 I. Developing an Interlock Program 1.Identify Goals 2.Use Carrots and Sticks 3.Eliminate Hoops 4.Close Loopholes 5.Triage Sanctions 6.Research Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
78 I.6. Research Measures of Effectiveness Interlocks per Arrested Offender Recidivism of Interlocked vs. Not Interlocked Reduction in Overall Recidivism Reduction in DWI Crashes Reduction in DWI Injuries Reduction in DWI Fatalities Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
79 Goal An Effective, Cost-Effective, and Fair Ignition Interlock Program That Reduces Drunk Driving Crashes, Injuries, and Fatalities. Get interlocks installed ASAP after DWI. Get all offenders to install. Keep interlocks installed until there is evidence of changed behavior. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute Objectives in Performance Terms
Source: Most Countries Have per se BAC Limits Below 0.08% Roth 10/23/201280Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute
After Thoughts Reaction Time Interlock for Drugged Drivers Diversion Program for first DWI, eg Oregon + Plate Removal on Arrest (leave at jail to be recovered with 1. contract of interlock installation, 2. successful administrative appeal or 3. Judicial dismissal.) Federal Grants for “Enforcing all-offender Interlock Law.” Define Enforcing as >50% inst. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute81
82 VIII.4. Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute Ratio for New Mexico 8169 / 9829 = 0.83
Roth 10/23/2012Region 5 Ignition Interlock Institute83 Richard Roth, PhD Executive Director Impact DWI Impact DWI Websites Thank You!