State of the Practice of State Alcohol Ignition Interlock Programs
archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified
Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)
Summary
This report documents the current state of practice for state alcohol ignition interlock programs (BAIIDs) across the United States. Motivated by the need to understand why interlock use rates remain relatively low compared to the number of driving while impaired (DWI) offenders, the study aims to provide stakeholders with comprehensive data on how jurisdictions administer these programs. The research was conducted under the National Cooperative Research and Evaluation Program, a collaboration between the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA). The methodology involved a mixed-methods approach, utilizing an online survey followed by telephone group discussions with BAIID program administrators and staff. Invitations were sent to all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Thirty-eight programs participated in the survey, discussions, or both, while thirteen did not respond. Where possible, missing data were supplemented with publicly available information and data from the Coalition of Ignition Interlock Manufacturers. The study focused on key program characteristics, including legislation, funding, data management, vendor oversight, technology features, and driver compliance monitoring. The findings reveal significant variation in program structures. Regarding legislation, 36 states and the District of Columbia have "all-offender" laws mandating interlock use for any convicted alcohol-impaired driver, regardless of blood alcohol concentration or offense history. Nine states require interlocks only for repeat or high-BAC offenders, and three require them only for repeat offenders. Most states employ "hard suspension" laws, prohibiting driving until an interlock license is obtained. In terms of funding, 36 jurisdictions provide indigent funding to help low-income offenders participate, though usage rates generally remain below 10%. A major challenge identified was data management; 16 states reported inadequate data collection tools, often due to budgetary constraints or because vendors owned the data, rendering it inaccessible to program staff. Additionally, 35 states require enhanced technology features such as cameras or GPS. Compliance monitoring varied, with 30 states having designated agencies for oversight, while two states reported no monitoring due to lack of authority or resources. The significance of this report lies in its provision of a detailed inventory of state practices, highlighting both common strengths and systemic challenges. It underscores the widespread adoption of all-offender legislation and indigent funding mechanisms while identifying critical barriers to program effectiveness, such as poor data infrastructure and legislative hurdles. By documenting these variations, the report supports policymakers and practitioners in identifying best practices and areas for improvement to enhance the efficacy of interlock programs in reducing recidivism and alcohol-related crashes.
Key finding
State alcohol ignition interlock programs vary significantly in legislative requirements and operational practices, with widespread challenges in data management and driver compliance monitoring limiting program effectiveness.
Methodology
survey
Sample size: 38
Provenance
The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).
| Stage | Outcome | Tool | Model | Prompt | Attempts | Completed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| discover | success | rosap | — | — | 2 | 2026-05-23 |
| archive | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-23 |
| extract | success | cached | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
| clean | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-01 |
| chunk | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-01 |
| embed | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-02 |
| enrich | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-23 |
| promote | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-23 |
| summarize | success | llm | qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant | summ-v5 | 3 | 2026-06-10 |
| tag | success | vector_similarity | — | — | 19 | 2026-06-11 |
| verify | success | — | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.
Topics
Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.
Information type
What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).
- Applied Guidance: policy recommendations, countermeasure evaluation