Preface

The DOT Strategic Plan 2003-2008 document states the Department of Transportation's safety strategic objective as "Enhance public health and safety by working towards the elimination of transportation-related deaths and injuries." As such, the Secretary has established a goal to reduce the highway fatality rate to not more than 1.0 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled by 2008. This is a 41% reduction from a 1996 baseline of 1.7 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled. Consistent with the Departmental goal, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has set its goal of reducing the large truck fatality rate by 41% from 1996 to 2008. In support of this effort, FMCSA has established specific objectives focusing on individual areas of improvement as outlined in the 2010 Strategy: Saving Lives through Safety, Innovation and Performance document. These objectives, if met, will collectively lead toward FMCSA reaching its goal of 41% reduction in truck fatal crash rate and support the Department's overall goal of a 41% reduction in the highway fatality rate.

This report documents the progress of FMCSA toward meeting its specific safety objectives. Work on the selection of metrics for tracking FMCSA progress towards the safety objectives was initiated by a series of studies that tested the utility of various SafeStat measures and other industry metrics. The metrics selected as the most appropriate depiction of the achievement of the safety objectives were then calculated based on semiannual SafeStat runs between March 2000 and March 2002. A trend analysis was conducted to document progress over time. This report will be updated semiannually with more recent results from succeeding SafeStat runs.

The research for this report was conducted by the Research and Special Programs Administration's (RSPA) John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (the Volpe Center) in Cambridge, MA under a project plan agreement with the FMCSA. The two sponsoring divisions at the FMCSA are the Analysis Division (MC-RIA), managed by Dale Sienicki and the Strategic Planning and Program Evaluation Division (MC-PRS), managed by Sue Halladay. The Volpe Center project manager is Donald Wright, Chief of the Motor Carrier Safety Assessment Division in the Office of System and Economic Assessment. The analysis was performed at the Volpe Center by Donald Wright, David Madsen, and Julie Nixon of the Volpe Center, and Walter Zak and Leon Parkin of EG&G Services and Anusha Seetharaman of Cambridge Systematics Inc. under contract to the Volpe Center.

Executive Summary

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) document, 2010 Strategy: Saving Lives Through Safety, Innovation and Performance, establishes the agency mission of saving lives and reducing injuries in truck and bus crashes. In 2002, the introduction of the DOT Strategic Plan 2003-2008, FMCSA has aligned its goal with Department of Transportation's overall rate-based safety goal. The DOT Strategic Plan 2003-2008 states the Department's strategic safety objective is to "Enhance public health and safety by working towards the elimination of transportation-related deaths and injuries." As such, the Secretary has established a goal to reduce the highway fatality rate to not more than 1.0 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled by 2008. This amounts to a 41% reduction from a 1996 baseline of 1.7 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled. Consistent with the Departmental goal, the FMCSA has set its goal of reducing the large truck fatality rate by 41% from 1996 to 2008. This reduction translates to a 2008 rate of 1.65 fatalities per 100 million truck vehicle miles traveled. Assuming a yearly increase of 3.4% in truck miles traveled, that rate would result in an estimated total of 4,330 truck-related crash deaths in 2008. This total compares to an estimated 7,376 deaths in truck-related crashes in 2008, if the fatality rate remained at the 1996 rate of 2.81 fatalities per 100 million truck vehicle miles traveled.

In order to meet an overall fatality reduction goal, FMCSA formulated a set of eight safety objectives, which were documented in 2010 Strategy: Saving Lives Through Safety, Innovation and Performance Report. FMCSA addressed the underlying safety issues identified within each of these safety objectives by creating an environment of improved safety through better motor carrier compliance with Federal safety regulations, public education, and other strategies and safety programs. These objectives are the envisioned end-state that, when reached, will contribute to the meeting of the fatality reduction goal. To determine if, and/or to what extent, FMCSA is moving toward meeting these objectives, relevant metrics need to be established, calculated, and periodically updated.

The Volpe Center was requested by FMCSA to establish metrics and benchmarks against which to assess progress in attaining the FMCSA safety objectives. This was to be done objectively, emphasizing the use of SafeStat information. SafeStat (short for Motor Carrier Safety Status Measurement System) is a data-driven analysis system that utilizes a comprehensive variety of safety data to determine the relative safety fitness of individual motor carriers on a periodic basis. Additionally, however, SafeStat results can collectively be applied to assess the safety performance and status of the entire motor carrier industry or specific segments, such as high-risk carriers.

The Volpe Center was requested to conduct studies and research different approaches to utilizing SafeStat-based and other relevant measures that would quantify FMCSA's progress towards achieving its specific safety objectives. During this review, specific metrics were formulated for five of the eight safety objectives along with the general objective of reducing commercial motor vehicle crashes. In order to further refine and confirm the analysis, the metrics were calculated on comparative, longitudinal, or peer group bases. This resulted in a set of fifty different analyses and metrics that tracked safety improvement comparisons for various segments of the industry. Separately, the fifty analyses/metrics were each associated with a FMCSA safety objective. Collectively, the results provide a complete view of FMCSA's progress in achieving its safety objectives. This approach allows the FMCSA to monitor trends to determine changes in safety, and measure the extent of those changes.

This report contains the results for five SafeStat runs from March 2000 to March 2002. All metrics were benchmarked to the March 2000 SafeStat run results and updated on a semiannual basis. Overwhelmingly, the analyses/metrics in this report show that FMCSA is moving in a positive direction with respect to meeting its stated safety objectives. In nearly all cases, the trends of the metrics demonstrate an improvement from the baseline period of March 2000 to the most current period measured (March 2002). A summary of the results by FMCSA safety objective follows:

• All three crash metrics showed significant reductions in commercial motor vehicle crash involvement from the baseline ranging from 10% to 24%.
• The SafeStat peer-group analysis showed a reduction ranging from 6% to 24% in crash rates for all peer groups.

• All of the metrics revealed decreases in driver-related violations over the study period.
• Most of the metrics showed strong downward trends of driver-related violations with reductions of violation rates of about 10% from March 2000 to March 2002.

• There was a reduction in single passenger/single large truck crashes of 5.0% from 2000 to 2001, and
• A reduction of 5.4% in the number of such crashes where the passenger vehicle driver factors were recorded from 2000 to 2001.

• All three metrics reveal decreases in the number and extent of serious violations discovered during compliance reviews (CRs).
• The SafeStat-based measures show decreases of about 11% to 32% in violations of acute/critical regulations discovered.

• Since the development and national employment of SafeStat, FMCSA has been able to target its resources on 'high-risk" or "worst offender" carriers. The "worst offender" carriers that were targeted for FMCSA's Compliance Review (CR) program (i.e., SafeStat identified Category A/B carriers) demonstrated dramatic improvement in crash rate performance (reductions of 22% to 47%), in roadside inspection performance (violation rate reductions of 11% to 26%), and in safety compliance (CR-based violation rate reductions of 69% to 79%) within one-and-a-half years.
• The "worst offender" carriers that were targeted for the roadside inspection program (i.e., Inspection Selection System's recommended "Inspect" carriers) also showed dramatic improvement in crash rate performance (reductions of 29%) and in roadside inspection performance (violation rate reductions of 9% to 15%) within one-and-a-half years.
• The worst offenders of the most recent period (the Category A/B carriers identified in March 2002 SafeStat run) had lower crash rates (15% to 22% lower), lower inspection violations rates (12% to 20% lower), and lower CR violation rates (5% to 15% lower) than the Category A/B carriers identified in the baseline March 2000 run.

• All of the metrics revealed decreases in vehicle-related violations over the study period.
• Industry-wide metrics based on vehicle out-of-service inspections showed a decrease in vehicle out-of service rates of about 7% to 9% from the baseline period of March 2000 to March 2002.
• The SafeStat peer-group analysis showed a reduction in vehicle violation rates of about 9% from March 2000 to March 2002

While the results in this report show that the FMCSA is making strides toward meeting its safety objectives to ultimately achieve its goal of a 41% reduction in the large truck fatality rate by 2008, it is important to continue to monitor progress. This monitoring allows FMCSA to (1) adjust its safety programs based on where the most improvement is needed, and (2) observe the results of its efforts. Most of the analyses/metrics presented in this report are based on safety data used in semiannual SafeStat runs done in March and September. The results in this report are current through March 2002. Revisions of this document are planned that will contain updates of the results and further analysis of progress in attaining FMCSA's safety objectives.

1 Overview

1.1 Background

To measure progress against this goal, FMCSA has developed yearly targets. The table below shows the actual fatality rate per 100 million truck miles traveled for 1996-2001, along with the target values for 2002-2008. These target values represent a reduction in the fatality rate of approximately 5% per year.

1.2 FMCSA Safety Objectives

1. All commercial motor vehicle drivers are fully qualified, safe, alert, and healthy.
2. Improve the safety and performance of non-commercial drivers with respect to trucks.
3. Commercial motor vehicles have optimum safety performance.
4. Roadway systems are optimized for commercial motor vehicle safety.
5. Increase the safety performance of the worst offenders to meet the norm.
6. Facilitate improvement in the overall safety performance of the motor carrier industry through refined and enhanced safety management systems.
7. High quality, complete, and timely safety performance data are available.
8. A dynamic and focused motor carrier research and technology program exists.

1.3 Project Design

1.3.1 Scope

The Volpe Center conducted studies and researched different approaches to utilizing SafeStat-based and other relevant measures that would quantify FMCSA's progress towards achieving its specific safety objectives. During this review, specific metrics were formulated for five of the eight safety objectives along with the general objective of reducing commercial motor vehicle crashes. In order to further refine and confirm the analysis, the metrics were calculated on comparative, longitudinal, or peer group bases. This resulted in a set of fifty different analyses and metrics that tracked safety improvement comparisons for various segments of the industry. Separately, the fifty analyses/metrics were each associated with a FMCSA safety objective. Collectively, the results provide a complete view of FMCSA's progress in achieving these safety objectives. This approach allows the FMCSA to monitor trends to determine changes in safety, and measure the extent of those changes. Table 1-2 provides the metrics for each safety objective, along with the carrier population and approach used for computing the metrics (i.e., comparative, longitudinal, or peer group).

1.3.2 Approach

• March 25, 2000 (baseline)
• September 23, 2000
• March 24, 2001
• September 22, 2001
• March 23, 2002

The Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) data were also used to calculate fatal crash-related metrics on an annual basis.

• Comparative Analysis: comparing metrics for carrier populations over each SafeStat run. Each population is treated separately across SafeStat runs when the selected metrics are calculated. The results for the selected population are then compared to the results for the 'like' populations of other SafeStat runs. The approach uses the cumulative mean to calculate each metric. The cumulative mean is calculated by summing the safety event data (such as the number of crashes of all carriers in the population) and dividing by the sum of the normalizing data (such as the collective number of power units operated by the carriers in the population).
• Longitudinal Analysis: tracking a selected high-risk carrier population over a number of SafeStat runs. A baseline carrier population is selected for a SafeStat run and the metrics for that specific population are tracked over following SafeStat runs. This technique shows how the same carriers perform over time. The cumulative mean is also used with this approach.
• Peer Group Analysis: All SafeStat measures based on crash and inspection data are grouped into "peer groups." The peer groups are defined such that carriers with comparable amounts of safety events are grouped together. This analysis examines the 50th (median) and 75th percentile (highest quartile) measures associated with each peer group. This approach provides insight into how different segments of the carrier population, such as carriers with few crashes or carriers with many crashes, are performing over time.

1.3.3 Carrier Populations

• All Carriers. Associated metrics are calculated using all carriers that had data available at the time of the SafeStat run.
• High Risk Carriers - SafeStat Category A and B. FMCSA identifies carriers as being high safety risks based on their SafeStat results. The group of carriers with the worst performance and compliance according to the SafeStat results are known as "Category A and B" carriers. FMCSA subsequently targets these high-risk carriers for safety interventions, such as CRs, to encourage the carriers to improve their safety fitness.
• Inspection Selection System (ISS)"Inspect" Carriers. The ISS provides a recommendation to aid roadside inspectors based on the safety status of the responsible carrier. The main goal of ISS is to prioritize and target carriers with poor safety performance. Carriers with the highest priority are given a recommendation of "inspect" based on poor SafeStat results.
• Other Non-Carrier Population: Fatal Truck/Passenger Vehicle Crashes. Associated metrics are based on data from fatal crashes involving a single large truck and a single passenger vehicle.

1.3.4 Data Sources

• MCMIS maintains a comprehensive record of the safety performance of interstate carriers and hazardous materials shippers subject to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) or Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR), and of intrastate companies subject to federal and state motor carrier safety regulation. It supports the FMCSA mandate to monitor the safety of motor carriers engaged in interstate commerce in the United States and is maintained by FMCSA. MCMIS is also the source of data used for the semiannual SafeStat results. Many of the metrics used in this report are based on "snapshots" of the MCMIS database at the time of SafeStat runs.
• The Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) contains data on a census of fatal traffic crashes within the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. To be included in FARS, a crash must involve a motor vehicle traveling on a traffic way customarily open to the public and result in the death of a person (occupant of a vehicle or a non-occupant) within 30 days of the crash. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) maintains the FARS database.

1.3.5 Metrics to Measure Progress

SafeStat Measures

The Recordable Accident Rate (RAR) is computed in SafeStat using the number of recordable crashes and commercial vehicle miles traveled (CVMT) information collected from compliance reviews (CRs). The RAR is measured in the number of recordable crashes per million CVMT. Only carriers that have received a CR over the past 12 months have a RAR calculated. SafeStat also places carriers into "peer groups" based on the number of recordable crashes so that carriers with similar amounts of crash experience have their RARs compared with one another. For the calculation of "cumulative mean RAR," the number of recordable crashes of the carrier population with a CR within the past 12 months was normalized by the population's total number of CVMT.

The Driver Inspection Measure (DIM) is computed in SafeStat using driver roadside inspection data from inspections performed within the last 30 months. SafeStat calculates the DIM for carriers that have had a minimum of three driver inspections. To compute a DIM, SafeStat weights each inspection by its age and the number of driver OOS violations found, and then normalizes the weighted driver OOS results by the number of driver inspections to obtain a weighted driver OOS rate. The DIM is adjusted upward in instances where the driver was found "jumping," or violating, OOS orders. SafeStat also places carriers into "peer groups" based on the number of driver inspections, so that carriers with similar amounts of inspections can have their DIMs compared with one another. To calculate the "cumulative mean DIM," the driver inspections and resulting DOOS violations from all carriers with three or more driver inspections over the past 30 months were used.

The Vehicle Inspection Measure (VIM) is computed in SafeStat using vehicle roadside inspection data from inspections performed within the last 30 months. SafeStat calculates the VIM for carriers that have had a minimum of three vehicle inspections. To compute a VIM, SafeStat weights each inspection by its age and the number of vehicle OOS violations found, and then normalizes the weighted vehicle OOS results by the number of vehicle inspections to obtain a weighted vehicle OOS rate. SafeStat also places carriers into "peer groups" based on the number of vehicle inspections so that carriers with similar amounts of inspections can have their VIMs compared with one another. To calculate the "cumulative mean VIM," the vehicle inspections and resulting VOOS violations from all carriers with three or more vehicle inspections over the past 30 months were used.

The Moving Violations Measure (MVM) is calculated in SafeStat using serious moving violations recorded during roadside inspections that have occurred over the past 30 months. SafeStat weights each moving violation by its age for carriers with a minimum of three moving violations, and then normalizes the weighted violations by the number of drivers to obtain the Moving Violations Measure (MVM). SafeStat also places carriers into "peer groups" based on the number of moving violations so that carriers with similar amounts of violations can have their MVMs compared with one another. For the calculation of the "cumulative mean MVM," the entire carrier population with three or more serious moving violations over the past 30 months was used to compute number of moving violations normalized by the entire carrier population's number of drivers.

The Driver Review Measure (DRM) is calculated in SafeStat using the results from compliance reviews performed within the last 18 months. SafeStat quantifies the number and severity of violations of driver-related acute/critical regulations cited at a carrier's most recent compliance review into the DRM.

The Safety Management Review Measure (SMRM) is calculated in SafeStat using the results from compliance reviews performed within the last 18 months. SafeStat quantifies the number and severity of violations of safety management-related acute/critical regulations cited at a carrier's most recent compliance review into the SMRM.

The Safety Evaluation Areas (SEAs) Values are calculated in four areas, Accident, Driver, Vehicle, and Safety Management. For each of the SEAs, values ranging from 0-100 are determined for all carriers with sufficient safety data related to that SEA. Each SEA value approximates the carrier's percentile rank to all other carriers with sufficient data. The higher a carrier's SEA value, the worse its safety status. Therefore, an Accident SEA Value of 80 indicates that approximately 80% of the carrier population had better safety performance than that carrier with respect to accidents and 20% had worse.

The State-Reported Crash Rate (SRCR) is the number of state-reported crashes for the entire carrier population over the past 30 months divided by the number of power units. It is similar to the "cumulative mean AIM," but without the time and severity weighting.

The Vehicle Out-of-Service (VOOS) Rate is the number of vehicle OOS inspections normalized by the number of vehicle inspections over the past 30 months for the entire carrier population. It is similar to the "cumulative mean VIM," but the VOOS rate is not time weighted nor does it account for multiple VOOS violations from a single inspection.

The Driver Out-of-Service (DOOS) Rate is the number of driver OOS inspections normalized by the number of driver inspections over the past 30 months for the entire carrier population. It is similar to the "cumulative mean DIM," but the DOOS rate is not time weighted nor does it account for multiple DOOS violations from a single inspection.

Hours of Service (HOS) Violations Rate is the number of hours of service out-of-service violations found in driver roadside inspections over the past 30 months normalized by the number of driver inspections for the entire carrier population. HOS refers to the number of hours that a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) driver may drive, and the number of hours a CMV driver may be on duty, before rest is required, as well as the minimum amount of time that must be reserved for rest. Refer to 49 CFR 395 for further information. The data for this metric only became available in March 2001.

Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Violations Rate is the number of CDL out-of-service violations found in driver roadside inspections over the past 30 months normalized by the number of driver inspections for the entire carrier population. The data for this metric only became available in March 2001.

Percent of Compliance Reviews with No Acute or Critical Violations is measured by the percentage of compliance reviews in which no violations of acute or critical regulations were discovered.

Post-Crash Inspection DOOS and VOOS Rates are based on the results of the subset of inspections conducted on the drivers and vehicles after being involved in a reportable crash. The DOOS and VOOS rates are the fraction of post-crash inspections with DOOS violations and VOOS violations, respectively.

Number of Fatal Truck/Passenger Vehicle Crashes and the Percentage with Passenger Vehicle Driver Factors are both calculated using the FARS data for fatal crashes involving crashes between large trucks and passenger vehicles. Passenger vehicle driver factors are noted by the officer at the scene based on the officer's judgment. Such factors describe the condition and judgment of the passenger driver that could have contributed toward the crash.

1.4 Organization of this Report

Section 2: General Objective: Reduction in Commercial Motor Vehicle Crashes

Section 4: Improve the Safety and Performance of Non-commercial Drivers with Respect to Trucks

Section 6: Increase the Safety Performance of the Worst Offenders to Meet the Norm

Section 8: Summary of the Results to Date and Plans for Updates

2 General Safety Objective: Reduction in Commercial Motor Vehicle Crashes

2.1 Accident Involvement Measure (AIM)

The peer group analysis for the AIM was conducted by grouping carriers with similar numbers of reportable crashes using the peer grouping in used SafeStat (i.e., carriers with 2-3, 3-8, 9-20, 21-88, 89+ crashes). Figures 2-2 and 2-3 show that, in both the 50th and 75th percentile studies, the AIM value decreases over time. In March 2002, however, instead of a slight decrease from September 2001, as shown in the cumulative mean, there is a slight increase. This is true of all peer groups, with the exception of the 89+ recordable crash group, which shows a decrease of approximately 5%. This trend shows that there is an improvement in the performance of carriers that have been involved in the largest number of crashes.

Figure 2-1: AIM Cumulative Mean- All Carriers

Figure 2-2: AIM Peer Group Analysis- 50th Percentile

Figure 2-3: AIM Peer Group Analysis- 75th Percentile

2.2 Recordable Accident Rate (RAR)

The peer group analysis for the RAR was conducted by grouping carriers with similar numbers of recordable crashes using the peer grouping used in SafeStat (i.e., carriers with 2-4, 5-19, and 20+ crashes). Figures 2-5 and 2-6 illustrate that all peer groups' RAR for both the 50th and 75th percentiles improved between the March 2000 baseline and the March 2002. However, there are some fluctuations in the value over the runs. The 20+ recordable crash peer group has an initial increase in the 75th percentile value of 3% before decreasing for the remainder of the runs. The 5-19 recordable crashes peer group, for both the 50th and 75th percentile, shows increases in September 2001 when compared to the previous period of 2% and 5%, respectively.

Figure 2-4: RAR Cumulative Mean- All Carriers

Figure 2-5: RAR Peer Group Analysis- 50th Percentile

Figure 2-6: RAR Peer Group Analysis- 75th Percentile

2.3 State-Reported Crash Rate (SRCR)

Figure 2-7: SRCR Cumulative Mean- All Carriers

2.4 Summary

3 Safety Objective: All Commercial Motor Vehicle Drivers are Fully Qualified, Safe, Alert, and Healthy

3.1 Driver Inspection Measure (DIM)

The peer group analysis for the DIM was conducted by grouping carriers with similar amounts of inspections using the peer grouping used in SafeStat (i.e., carriers with 3-15, 16-30, 31-60, and 61+ driver inspections). The peer group comparisons show a deceasing trend. In Figure 3-2, 50th percentile values have decreased in the range of 6% to 12% since the March 2000 SafeStat run. The DIM 75th percentile values in Figure 3-3 shows a similar trend. The higher the number of inspections, the higher the decrease in values; for example, carriers in the 61+ inspection group, for the 75th percentile, had a decrease of about 12% compared to around 5% for the 3-15 inspection group. Both the 50th and 75th percentile values show that the carriers with a greater number of inspections demonstrated a higher level of improvement.

Figure 3-1: DIM Cumulative Mean- All Carriers

Figure 3-2: DIM Peer Group Analysis- 50th Percentile

Figure 3-3: DIM Peer Group Analysis- 75th Percentile

3.2 Moving Violation Measure (MVM)

The peer group analysis for the DIM was conducted by grouping carriers with similar amounts of inspections using the peer grouping used in SafeStat (i.e., carriers with 3-9, 10-28, 29-94, and 95+ serious moving violations). The peer group analysis also shows a decrease in percentile values for the first three peer groups of 3-9, 10-28 and 29-94 serious moving violations. See Figures 3-5 and 3-6. These groups lowered their 50th and 75th percentile MVMs by 4.6% to 11.8% when comparing the baseline value in March 2000 to the March 2002 value, while the 95+ moving violation peer group MVM remained steady.

Figure 3-4: MVM Cumulative Mean- All Carriers

Figure 3-5: MVM Peer Group Analysis- 50th Percentile

Figure 3-6: MVM Peer Group Analysis- 75th Percentile

3.3 Driver Out-of-Service (DOOS) Rate

Figure 3-7: DOOS Cumulative Mean- All Carriers

3.4 Hours-of-Service (HOS) Violation Rate

3.5 Commercial Drivers License (CDL) Violation Rate

3.6 Post-Crash Inspection DOOS Rate

3.7 Summary

4 Safety Objective: Improving the Safety and Performance of Non-Commercial Drivers with Respect to Trucks

4.1 Number of Single Passenger Vehicle/Single Large Truck Fatal Crashes and Number with Passenger Vehicle Driver Factors

4.2 Summary

5 Safety Objective: Improve the Overall Safety Performance of the Motor Carrier Industry Through Refined and Enhanced Management Systems

5.1 Driver Review Measure (DRM)

Figure 5-1: DRM Cumulative Mean - All Carriers

5.2 Safety Management Review Measure (SMRM)

Figure 5-2: SMRM Cumulative Mean- All Carriers

5.3 Percent of Compliance Reviews (CRs) with No Acute or Critical Violations

5.4 Summary

6 Safety Objective: Increase the Safety Performance of the Worst Offenders to Meet the Norm

6.1 Comparative Analysis Results - SafeStat Category A and B Carriers

6.2 Longitudinal Analysis Results - SafeStat Category A and B Carriers

Three baseline groups of Category A and B carriers were identified from the SafeStat runs of March 2000 (baseline 1), September 2000 (baseline 2), and March 2001 (baseline 3). Each baseline group was then tracked over the next six months, year, and year-and-a-half. Table 6-3 shows that all metrics had a significant decrease after the year and year-and-a-half marks when compared to the baseline. This analysis demonstrates that the worst offenders, according to past SafeStat runs, improve their safety over time.

6.3 Longitudinal Analysis Results - ISS Inspect Carriers

Three baseline groups of ISS inspect carriers were identified from the SafeStat runs of March 2000 (baseline 1), September 2000 (baseline 2), and March 2001 (baseline 3). Each baseline group was then tracked over the next six months, year, and year-and-a-half. Table 6-4 shows that all metrics had significant decreases after the year and year-and-a-half marks when compared to the baseline. The SRCR shows that ISS inspect carriers improved over time with approximately 20% reduction in SRCR after one year and almost a 30% reduction after 1.5 years. Figures 6-1, 6-2, and 6-3 show declining trends in the SRCR, DOOS and VOOS rates, respectively, over time for the three baselines. This analysis demonstrates that the worst offenders, according to past ISS recommendations, improve their safety over time.

Figure 6-1: Longitudinal Analysis of SRCR Cumulative Means for ISS Inspect Carriers

Figure 6-2: Longitudinal Analysis of DOOS Cumulative Means for ISS Inspect Carriers

Figure 6-3: Longitudinal Analysis of VOOS Cumulative Means for ISS Inspect Carriers

6.4 Summary

7 Safety Objective: Commercial Motor Vehicles have Optimum Safety Performance

7.1 Vehicle Inspection Measure (VIM)

The peer group analysis for the VIM was conducted by grouping carriers with similar amounts of inspections using the peer grouping used in SafeStat (i.e., carriers with 3-10, 11-20, and 21+ vehicle inspections). Figures 7-2 and 7-3 show decreasing trends in VIM percentile values. All of the inspection peer groups show steady decreasing trends for both 50th and 75th percentiles, overall demonstrating a decrease in the range of 6.2% to 9.7% since the March 2000 SafeStat run. The only exception is the 75th percentile values of the 3-10 inspection peer group showing little change over the analysis time period.

igure 7-1: VIM Cumulative Mean- All Carriers

Figure 7-2: VIM Peer Group Analysis- 50th Percentile

Figure 7-3: VIM Peer Group Analysis- 75th Percentile

7.2 Vehicle Out-of-Service (VOOS) Rate

Figure 7-4: Vehicle Out-Of-Service Rate

7.3 Post-Crash Inspection VOOS Rate

7.4 Summary

8 Summary of the Results to Date and Plans for Updates

8.1 Summary of Results

• All three crash metrics showed significant reductions in commercial motor vehicle crash involvement from the baseline ranging from 10% to 24%.
• The SafeStat peer-group analysis showed a reduction ranging from 6% to 24% in crash rates for all peer groups.

• All of the metrics revealed decreases in driver-related violations over the study period.
• Most of the metrics showed strong downward trends of driver-related violations with reductions of violation rates of about 10% from March 2000 to March 2002.

• There was a reduction in single passenger/single large truck fatal crashes of 5.0% from 2000 to 2001, and
• A reduction of 5.4% in the number of such crashes where the passenger vehicle driver factors were recorded from 2000 to 2001.

• All three metrics reveal decreases in the number and extent of serious violations discovered during compliance reviews (CRs).
• The SafeStat-based measures show decreases of about 11% to 32% in violations of acute/critical regulations discovered.

• Since the development and national employment of SafeStat, FMCSA has been able to target its resources on 'high-risk" or "worst offender" carriers. The "worst offender" carriers that were targeted for FMCSA's CR program (i.e., SafeStat identified Category A/B carriers) demonstrated dramatic improvement in crash rate performance (reductions of 22% to 47%), in roadside inspection performance (violation rate reductions of 11% to 26%), and in safety compliance (CR-based violation rate reductions of 69% to 79%) within one-and-a-half years.
• The "worst offender" carriers that were targeted for the roadside inspection program (i.e., Inspection Selection System's recommended "Inspect" carriers) also showed dramatic improvement in crash rate performance (reductions of 29%) and in roadside inspection performance (violation rate reductions of 9% to 15%) within one-and-a-half years.
• The worst offenders of the most recent period (the Category A/B carriers identified in March 2002 SafeStat run) had lower crash rates (15% to 22% lower), lower inspection violations rates (12% to 20% lower), and lower CR violation rates (5% to 15% lower) than the Category A/B carriers identified in the baseline March 2000 run.

• All of the metrics revealed decreases in vehicle-related violations over the study period.
• Industry-wide metrics based on vehicle out-of-service inspections showed a decrease in vehicle out-of service rates of about 7% to 9% from the baseline period of March 2000 to March 2002.
• The SafeStat peer-group analysis showed a reduction in vehicle violation rates of about 9% from March 2000 to March 2002

8.2 Plans for Updates