1 / 20

Indiana Crash Form Redesign and System Changes

Indiana Crash Form Redesign and System Changes. International Traffic Records Forum July 2003 Robert C. Zahnke. Background. Indiana’s crash form – last modified in the early 1980s Indiana’s crash records system – antiquated IBM mainframe technology

tuckerr
Télécharger la présentation

Indiana Crash Form Redesign and System Changes

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. Indiana Crash Form Redesign and System Changes International Traffic Records Forum July 2003 Robert C. Zahnke

  2. Background • Indiana’s crash form – last modified in the early 1980s • Indiana’s crash records system – antiquated IBM mainframe technology • Indiana State Police – repository for crash records • 18 – 20 months in arrears – manual data entry

  3. Indiana Facts • 220,000 annual crashes • 50,000 personal injury crashes • 800 fatal crashes (1.2 fatalities/MVMT) • 650 + law enforcement agencies • 3 types of agencies

  4. Indiana Crash Forms • Standard officers’ crash form • Truck & Bus supplemental form • SR-21 (proof of insurance)

  5. The Early Years • 1998 • Formation of the State steering committee • Stormed/shot down [wounded but not dead] • Prioritize • 1999 • Crash form • Content • Combining forms • MMUCC • Crash location • Mainframe issues

  6. Crash location Demonstration project using 3 counties $50,250 funding Evaluated test results against existing system Crash form changes Purely content changes “itwill cost $1 million to change report” Evaluation funding 1999 Evaluations

  7. Crash location Existing system 4 – 6 percent error rate Existing system failed to locate a number of crashes Substantial time savings Crash form The “$1 million” became less than $100,000… The Results

  8. The “Former” Crash Form • Two-page form • Overlay guide

  9. The Crash Form Transformation • Focus - content & eliminating the supplemental form • Piloted/solicited feedback • Revised it • Piloted it again • The “Kentucky” form

  10. The Transformation (2001)… • “Bubble” entry format • Size as an issue • 2 page report now became 4 pages • Benefits • “B+” Records Division • “B+” Content • “D-” Officer

  11. Field Test Results… • Field tested • Modified • Field tested • Guidelines for officers prepared • Train-the-trainer

  12. New Crash Form • Introduced in March 2002 • Paper only, no electronic format • Available in pdf format, no edit checks • Eliminated the need for a supplemental report • Limited input from road officers

  13. Where is Indiana in 2003? • “New” form – revised • Addressed the officers’ concerns • Flow of the form • Number of drivers • Number of injured • Electronic crash form

  14. Processing the Crash Form • High speed scanning • Files an image • Recognizes the “bubbles” • Provides the mechanism for high speed data entry • Provides the input for crash location • Automatically locating 75 – 80% of the crashes

  15. What Lies Ahead? • 2003 • Transition to “new” form • Accept electronic form • Enter backlog of “old” crash forms • Enter backlog of new crash forms • GIS locating 2001 – 2002 crashes

  16. Beyond 2003 • 2004 • Back end queries – local through statewide level • Address the SR-21 – shifted the burden

  17. Data Analysis Perspective • 3 additional years of crash data within the next 9 months • Both 2002 and 2003 will each have 2 different crash forms (variables) • Ability to conduct “real-time” data evaluations

  18. In Retrospect… • Take it in small bites • Let the data sell the project • Use demo/pilot projects • Recognize “players/objectives” • Officers • Data content • Data processing/entry • Back end (what’s going to happen to the data?)

  19. Who Made It Happen in Indiana? • Traffic Records Steering Committee • State agency leadership • Indiana Criminal Justice Institute • Indiana Department of Transportation • Indiana State Police, Sheriffs, Municipal Officers • The “right” contractor

  20. Funding • Funding • NHTSA/Indiana Criminal Justice Institute • DOT/Indiana Department of Transportation • Further information • Robert C. Zahnke • Purdue University • rzahnke@ecn.purdue.edu • (765) 496-3716

More Related