Pavement Markings and Safety Final Report, November 2010

Previous research on pavement markings from a safety perspective tackled various issues such as pavement marking retroreflectivity variability, relationship between pavement marking retroreflectivity and driver visibility, or pavement marking improvements and safety. A recent research interest in this area has been to find a correlation between retroreflectivity and crashes, but a significant statistical relationship has not yet been found. This study investigates such a possible statistical relationship by analyzing five years of pavement marking retroreflectivity data collected by the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) on all state primary roads and corresponding crash and traffic data. This study developed a spatial-temporal database using measured retroreflectivity data to account for the deterioration of pavement markings over time along with statewide crash data to attempt to quantify a relationship between crash occurrence probability and pavement marking retroreflectivity. First, logistic regression analyses were done for the whole data set to find a statistical relationship between crash occurrence probability and identified variables, which are road type, line type, retroreflectivity, and traffic (vehicle miles traveled). The analysis looked into subsets of the data set such as road type, retroreflectivity measurement source, high crash routes, retroreflectivity range, and line types. Retroreflectivity was found to have a significant effect in crash occurrence probability for four data subsets—interstate, white edge line, yellow edge line, and yellow center line data. For white edge line and yellow center line data, crash occurrence probability was found to increase by decreasing values of retroreflectivity.

Statewide Process and Comparative Outcomes Study of 2003 Iowa Adult and Juvenile Drug Courts, August 2009

A statewide evaluation of the six adult and three juvenile drug courts in operation during calendar year 2003 was conducted. Completion rates, recidivism, substance abuse treatment, and supervision and placement (juveniles only) costs were examined by model (Judge and Community Panel) and by Judicial District. In addition, adult drug court participants were compared with a group of offenders who were screened and declined or were rejected by drug court in 2003 (referred) and a sample of offenders starting probation in 2003 (probationer). The adult participant and comparison groups were tracked from their entry into drug court, or the study, through December 31, 2007. This yielded an average post-program follow-up time of almost 3 years (2.9) for drug court participants. For the juvenile portion, drug court participants were compared with a group matched on several demographic and offense variables (Matched Comparison group) and juveniles referred to drug court who did not enter the program (Referred Comparison group). The juvenile participant and comparison groups were tracked from their entry into drug court, or the study, through approximately 16 quarters after program discharge with an end date of December 31, 2007.