Evaluation of the National Impaired Driving High-Visibility Enforcement Campaign: 2003–2005

NHTSA · 2007 · ROSA P / United States. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Office of Behavioral Safety Research

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 evaluates the National Impaired Driving High-Visibility Enforcement Campaign conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) from 2003 to 2005. The initiative was motivated by a stagnation in progress against alcohol-related traffic fatalities; after a significant decline in the 1980s and early 1990s, fatalities increased by over 200 deaths between 1994 and 2002. The campaign aimed to reverse this trend by implementing a national crackdown modeled on the successful "Click It or Ticket" seat belt enforcement program. The strategy combined intensive, high-visibility law enforcement (sobriety checkpoints and saturation patrols) with a paid and earned media campaign using the slogan "You Drink & Drive. You Lose" to create general deterrence among drivers, particularly young adult males. The program focused on 13 "Strategic Evaluation States" (SES) with high alcohol fatality rates, later joined by two additional states in 2005. NHTSA provided technical assistance, federal funding for media ($11 million in 2003; $14 million in 2004 and 2005), and targeted advertising in SES markets. Enforcement activities occurred during 18 consecutive nights around major holidays (July 4th in 2003; Labor Day in 2004 and 2005). Evaluation methods included national telephone surveys to measure message awareness and enforcement visibility, analysis of FBI Uniform Crime Reporting data for DWI arrests, and examination of fatal crash statistics comparing pre-program (2001–2002) and post-program (2004–2005) periods. Results indicated that the media campaign successfully reached the target audience. Awareness of messages encouraging avoidance of drinking and driving rose to 80–88% among drivers aged 18–34 following each crackdown, though this awareness did not persist between campaigns. Similarly, reports of seeing special police efforts increased post-crackdown. However, there were no significant changes in self-reported drinking and driving behaviors, and DWI arrest rates remained stable. Regarding crash outcomes, alcohol-related fatalities declined from the pre-crackdown to post-crackdown periods in both SES and non-SES states. Specifically, the average yearly number of fatal crashes involving alcohol-impaired drivers decreased in 7 of the 13 SES and 23 of the 36 non-SES. For the target demographic of male drivers aged 18–34, declines were observed in 8 SES and 18 non-SES. Statistical analysis confirmed a decline in fatality rates but found no significant difference in the rate of decline between SES and non-SES states. The report concludes that while the campaign successfully raised public awareness and coincided with a decline in alcohol-related fatalities, the enforcement intensity may have been insufficient to produce statistically significant behavioral changes or distinct improvements in SES states compared to others. The authors suggest that more frequent enforcement waves and higher intensity are necessary to build cumulative deterrence. Consequently, NHTSA adjusted its strategy to include two annual crackdowns and leveraged new congressional funding mandates requiring sustained, high-visibility enforcement throughout the year.

Key finding

Alcohol-related fatalities declined from the pre-program period of 2001-2002 to the post-program period of 2004-2005 in both Strategic Evaluation States and non-participating states.

Methodology

dataset

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).

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.

• dui enforcement
• public messaging
• drowsy as impairment

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: countermeasure evaluation, policy recommendations