1 / 30

Substance Abuse Policy Research Program Annual Grantee Meeting November 29-30, 2006

Regaining Control of Revoked DWI Offenders Interlocks As an Alternative To Hard License Revocation. Paul Marques, PhD and Richard Roth, PhD Pacific Institute For Research and Evaluation. Substance Abuse Policy Research Program Annual Grantee Meeting November 29-30, 2006.

shairston
Download Presentation

Substance Abuse Policy Research Program Annual Grantee Meeting November 29-30, 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Regaining Control of Revoked DWI OffendersInterlocks As an Alternative To Hard License Revocation Paul Marques, PhD and Richard Roth, PhD Pacific Institute For Research and Evaluation Substance Abuse Policy Research Program Annual Grantee Meeting November 29-30, 2006 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  2. An Ignition Interlock is an Electronic Monitor with Rejection Authority • 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 (or DMV in Administrative Programs) • Costs Offender only $2.30 per day. (1 less drink per day) 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  3. Contrast groups for each study set to 100% Simple Combining of StudiesRecidivism While Interlocks Installed 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  4. Simple Combining of StudiesRecidivism Same People After Interlocks Removed (Striped Bars) 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  5. Mathematical Combining of Interlock StudiesRelative Risk of Recidivism(with Interlocks Installed) = .36 A Meta-Analysis of Interlock Studies Alcohol ignition interlock programmes for reducing drink driving recidivism. Source:Willis, Lybrand, & Bellamy, 2005 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  6. Post interlock results A Meta-Analysis of Interlock Studies Alcohol ignition interlock programmes for reducing drink driving recidivism. Source:Willis, Lybrand, & Bellamy, 2005 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  7. BUT – While Interlocks are Very Effective Few studies are at a Jurisdictional Level • AND few programs achieve high installation rates –average is under 10%. • Florida (and Quebec) have innovative administrative programs that each achieved 26% installation rates. • In Hancock County Indiana a Judge who required interlocks of all offenders achieved 62% installation • the highest until Santa Fe County (Dick will explain) • THE NATIONAL SAFETY CHALLENGE is to Increase Penetration 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  8. Growth in Interlocks USA – trend is only linear from 1986-2006 • First program 1986 in California • National penetration less than 10% • 1.4 million DUI arrests per yr (FBI) • MADD intends big push to increase to 500,000 in 5 years (by 2011). • NOTE: Sweden will require on all cars by 2012 1998 Freund estimate 2002 Rauch estimate 2006 Roth estimate 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  9. MADD’s projection • Unless we can inflect the growth curve it will be another 60-80 years before we approach interlocks for all DUI. • MADD wants to do a national program of ramping up the installation rate to 500-700,000 in 5 yrs. The MADD goal 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  10. New York Times Editorial November 25, 2006Sensing You're Too Drunk to Drive .. “The initial (MADD) goal, which is backed by associations of State highway officials and car manufacturers, is to have all states do what New Mexico has already done: require that all convicted drunken drivers, even first-time offenders, have devices installed in their cars that measure alcohol in the breath and immobilized the car if levels exceed set limits.” 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  11. 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 85% of over 4000 offenders surveyed. • ..But they only work if… • you get them installed. 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  12. In 2003, New Mexico had a law mandating interlocks for all High BAC and Subsequent DWI offenders, but few interlocks were being installed. The Problems • 35% of DWI offenders were revoked but not convicted. • 25% of DWI offenders were 1st non-aggravated. • Subsequent offenders had mandatory hard revocation. • Judges were reluctant to mandate interlocks for those whose licenses were revoked. • 75% of revoked offenders continue to drive. • Few revoked offenders ever get re-licensed. 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  13. NM Ignition Interlock License Act Purpose • To increase the utilization of interlocks by those arrested for drunk driving, • To eliminate the reluctance of judges to mandate interlocks for those who cannot get a license to drive, • To reduce drunk driving, and • To reduce the number of revoked offenders who never reinstate licenses. 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  14. In New Mexicoan Ignition Interlock License… • is available to anyone revoked for DWI, • requires an approved interlock and insurance, and • allows driving anywhere, anytime in an insured, interlocked vehicle. 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  15. So our first research question is..Has the Ignition Interlock License Act Increased the Utilization of Interlocks by DWI Offenders? 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  16. 2732 / year 2732 / year Interlock Licensing Act An alternative to revocation Mandatory for aggravated and subsequent convictions Optional for 2nd and 3rd conviction 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  17. How does New Mexico compare with other states in interlock utilization? 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  18. 2nd QuestionHow many interlock licenses have been granted and is the rate changing? 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  19. 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  20. Is there a Reduction in Recidivism? • Court Mandated Offenders --ie those who install within 90 days after conviction • Other Revoked Offenders --“Voluntary” installations • SF County Overall before and after mandatory interlocks and Licensing Act • New Mexico Overall before and after 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  21. Court Mandated vs Voluntary Installations 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  22. Effectiveness with Court Mandated Offenders Comparison GroupsInterlocked Groups 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  23. Effectiveness with Volunteers ie. Not court-mandated Comparison GroupsInterlocked Groups 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  24. Statewide recidivism decreased. A 16% Reduction 8.0% Before 6.7% After 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  25. Before A 29% Reduction After 8.7% Before 6.2% After 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  26. 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  27. Fewer Alcohol Involved Fatal Crashes and Fatalities 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  28. Self Selection In Choosing Interlocks Among DWI Offenders Revoked 10 yrs For 3 Convictions in 10 years. Comparison Group Matched on Age, Priors, Time between Priors, and Sex. Those who do not install interlocks Are much more likely to be arrested than those who do install. 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  29. Group: 3 or More Convictions in 10 years HR = 0.67 P = 0.13 Using MCPHRA with Covariates: Age Conv Date Time B. Conv Gender Priors 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

  30. Survey of Interlocked Offenders N = 796 77% 81% 63% 69% 2006 RWJ SAPRP Annual Mtg.

More Related