Benefits of Adopting MMUCC Guidelines:

1
Benefits of Adopting MMUCC Guidelines

• A Logical Step Towards a National Crash Reporting
  Form
• Presented at the
• 28th International Traffic Records Forum
• Orlando, Florida August 5, 2002

2
Some of us, it seems, are always thinking about
food . .

• Since we had such a nice lunch today (or did we?)
  its hard to think about pie. But we need to
  think about pie (and Im not talking about peach,
  key lime or sour cream raisin here)

3
But the Transportation Pie (and our place in it)
FHWA Annual Budget 255 Billion FHWA Safety 731
Million NHTSA 500 Million Traffic Records 9
Million
Annual U.S. DOT Road Funds distributed to the
states
4
As the Pie hopefully illustrates

• We in the greater highway safety community
  compete for funding resources.
• And on the state (and federal) level, these
  resources are becoming increasing scarce.

5
In order to compete, we have to be able to make
our case

• Make my day

• We can only bluff or B.S. our way so far

6
New NHTSA Administrator Runge

• Has made a strong case for the need for data
  data which can justify (or refute) the efficacy
  of our safety belt, child restraint, and impaired
  driving programs just to name a few.

7
Unfortunately (or fortunately)

• There is one H_ _ _ of a lot more to highway
  safety data than dwelling in the land of our
  failures.
• Come on people less than 1 crash in 150 results
  in a fatality yet . . .

8
If you look at our (collective) highway safety
data collection, analysis and, ultimately, our
program justification we spend far too much time
and energy focusing on those .6 of 1 of the
crashes in this country which comprise our
ultimate failures - - - our fatalities
9

• Serious, life-threatening injuries in traffic
  crashes outnumber deaths nearly 10 to 1.
• Overall traffic injuries outnumber deaths nearly
  100 to 1, but . . .

3,500,000
10
Despite well over a decade of CODES and a push
for capturing, analyzing and utilizing trauma
data by former NHTSA Administrator Martinez, our
collective efforts in analyzing traffic crash
injury data are marginal (if not downright woeful
and pathetic)
11

• We (data) geeks love to get in there and MMUCC
  around with the data
• Well, we need to MMUCC around a lot more with the
  crash data for the 99.4 of crashes which do not
  result in the loss of life and (perhaps) just a
  little less with the .6 who do

12
Lets talk injury data. . . . . .
Lets talk CODESA good start, a good effort, but
(shortcomings)

• Only able to match a (relatively) small of
  cases linkage issues. Nationally, (roughly)
  just 5 of all injury crashes can be linked to a
  discharge record. For Iowa, the figure is less
  than 10.
• Problems with outlyers especially in small
  databases- high degree of variability
• Uneveness in crash matching certain types may
  match more frequently

13
Imputation of missing values issues, so . . .

• Injury data from crash reports (while lacking the
  injury detail, accuracy or medical outcomes
  associated with CODES) does have the significant
  advantage of a larger, much more robust and
  complete database.

14
The crash database also could (can) accommodate
an analysis of crash severity vs. injury
severitybut the one bigthing we lack is
15
STATE COMPARABLE CRASH INJURY DATABASES

• OR
• SC CID
• Not an abbreviation for a South Carolina economic
  development initiative
• No relation to EL CID as far as we know

16
In order to have SC CID

• Barring the full-fledged adoption of a
• national crash report form anytime soon
• (sorry to drizzle on your parade Major)

• WE MUST
• Go to the bar and hoist a few tall ones

17

• Continue plodding along with a relative absence
  of meaningful, comparable injury crash data . . .
  And suffer the consequences
• Adopt the MMUCC guidelines and have SC CID coming
  out our E.A.R.S.

18
And now for the hard part selling MMUCC on
the home front orMaking the Most out
ofUrCase forComparability
19
Why MMUCC?

• Because it makes cents (and dollars as well)
• It will (potentially) improve your states
  ability to document crashes causes, crash
  outcomes and the impact your highway safety
  programs are having on those causes and outcomes.

20
Why MMUCC?

• It will increase your ability to compare your
  crash causes and outcomes with those of other
  states (particularly MMUCC compliant states) and
  help you to see (analyze) what areas your doing
  well in and what areas may need improvement (i.e.
  a new highway safety program approach)

21
Why MMUCC?

• If your already a CODES states . . . CODES is
  looking more at multi-state analysis . . . Your
  MMUCC compliant crash database will put you 1
  step ahead of the game . . . or conversely, at
  least allow you to avoid scrambling to keep up

22
Why MMUCC?

• A high tide raises all boats . . . If we,
  collectively, can improve our ability to analyze
  crash injury data . . . and document the value of
  highway safety programs in impacting the number
  of those injuries which occur (and their
  severity) these programs will have a better
  opportunity for optimal funding (whats good
  for the goose)

23
Or we can ignore this opportunityand gamble
with our future