ENFORCEMENT

PROGRAM GUIDELINES

SPEED

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. iii

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1

CHAPTER 2. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..................................................................... 2 

CHAPTER 3. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION................................................................... 7

CHAPTER 4. ENFORCEMENT COUNTERMEASURES................................................ 14 

CHAPTER 5. ROLE OF ENGINEERING......................................................................... 25

CHAPTER 6. COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM ............................................................. 27

CHAPTER 7. LEGISLATION, REGULATION, AND POLICY......................................... 33

CHAPTER 8. PROGRAM EVALUATION........................................................................ 36

BIBLIOGRAPHY.............................................................................................................. 40
ii

LIST OF APPENDICES 

A. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS....................................................................................... A-1 

B. RESOURCES....................................................................................................... B-1 

C. CHECKLIST FOR SUSTAINING A LONG-TERM SPEED ENFORCEMENT 

PROGRAM........................................................................................................... C-1 

D. OVERCOMING OBSTACLES TO IMPLEMENTING AN EFFECTIVE 

 PROGRAM........................................................................................................... D-1 

E. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR SMALL COMMUNITIES............................. E-1 

F. EXAMPLE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A 

RESIDENTIAL SPEEDING CONTROL PROGRAM ............................................ F-1 
iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

It is well-established that speeding represents a risk to public safety. Excessive speed 

increases the likelihood of crashing and the risk of severe injury in a crash. In 2005, more 

than 13,000 lives were lost in speeding-related crashes (NHTSA, 2006a). Reducing 

speeding is a high-priority objective and effective speed enforcement is an essential 

countermeasure to reduce speeding and lowering crash risk. The National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration and the Federal Highway Administration have developed Speed 

Enforcement Program Guidelines to provide law enforcement personnel and decision 

makers with detailed information on how to establish and maintain an effective speed 

enforcement program. The guidelines were developed with input from many of the most 

successful law enforcement agencies in the United States and include information that can 

help establish an effective speed enforcement program, including details on: 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Program management, 

Problem identification, 

Enforcement countermeasures, 

Role of engineering, 

Public outreach and communications, 

Legislation, regulation and policy, and 

Program evaluation. 

Program management 

The success of a speed enforcement program requires careful planning and coordination of 

many stakeholders including law enforcement officials, policy makers, traffic engineers, 

judges and prosecutors, and community residents. This chapter provides guidelines on 

developing program goals and objectives, garnering support of key stakeholders, obtaining 

program funding, preparing a written plan, and establishing lines of communication with 

community partners. 

Problem identification 

Identifying problem locations that have a high rate of speeding-related crashes is at the 

heart of an effective speed enforcement program. Current and historical crash, speed and 

citation data, engineering assessments and details of resident complaints provide the 

information needed to identify problems. This chapter presents examples of crash, speed, 

and engineering assessments that are essential for planning and implementing a speed 

enforcement program. 

Enforcement countermeasures 

A successful speed enforcement program depends on the proper use of effective 

enforcement countermeasures. This chapter describes the methods, training and 

equipment and provides guidance on selecting appropriate tactics tailored to the community 

and to particular speeding problems. Tips are provided on integrating speed enforcement 

with other law enforcement objectives and encouraging creativity and initiative among 

enforcement personnel. 
iv

Role of engineering 

The traffic engineering or public works agency is responsible for roadway design and 

engineering studies in the community and is an important partner in an effective speed 

enforcement program. This chapter summarizes the role that engineering can play in 

helping identify problem sites, conduc

countermeasures. 

ting speed measurements, and planning appropriate 

Communications program 

An effective communications program will increase public awareness of the dangers of 

speeding and increase the deterrence effect of the speed enforcement program. This 

chapter provides step by step techniques for developing an effective media campaign. 

Communication program components include designating a point of contact, establishing 

roles for community participants, selecting the appropriate message and audience, choosing 

the best modes of communication, engaging enforcement personnel in communications and 

sustaining a long-term positive image in the media.

Legislation, regulation, and policy 

Local policy makers, public officials, judges, and prosecutors have an important role in 

increasing visibility, acceptance, and support for the speed enforcement program in the 

community. Policy makers establish the legal bases of a program, authorize funding, and 

influence community attitudes. The actions of traffic court judges and prosecutors to uphold 

citations and impose legal sanctions strongly influence the effectiveness of the program. 

This chapter provides guidance on informing and coordinating with these key stakeholders. 

Program evaluation 

Ongoing evaluation of the impact of the speed enforcement activities and communications 

program is essential to sustain an effective speed enforcement program. This chapter 

describes the steps for program evaluation including conducting periodic crash, speed, and 

engineering assessments, gathering input from the community, and preparing progress 

reports. 

Additional Resources 

The Speed Enforcement Program Guidelines also includes additional resources and key 

documents presented in the appendices.
1

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 

Traveling at excessive speeds has been consistently linked to crash risk, with crash 

rates increasing as speeds increase (Aarts and van Schagen, 2006). Consistent with 

the laws of physics, the probability of severe injury increases with the impact speed of 

the colliding vehicle. When the change in speed at impact (delta V) is 30 mph or 

greater, the risk of moderate or more serious injury increases to more than 50 percent 

(Bowie and Walz, 1994). 

Speed dispersion is also an important factor in the likelihood of a crash; large differences 

in speeds between vehicles traveling on a roadway are related to a higher crash rate 

(Aarts and van Schagen, 2006). Crash rates have been found to be lowest for drivers 

traveling near the mean speed, and the rates increased with deviations above and below 

the mean (Solomon, 1964; Cirillo, 1968). 

Crashes congest the roadways and result in economic losses. The costs of crashes 

include lost productivity, medical costs, legal and court costs, emergency service costs, 

insurance administration costs, travel delay, property damage, and workplace losses 

(Blincoe et al., 2000). According to the Fatality Analyses Reporting System (FARS) for 

2005, speeding-related crashes accounted for a total of 13,113 fatalities, which 

represented 30 percent of all motor vehicle fatalities (NHTSA, 2006a). The monetary 

cost for crashes attributed to excessive speeding was $40.4 billion, representing 18 

percent of total costs of motor vehicle crashes (Blincoe et al., 2000). 

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) recognize that speeding is a contributing factor in one-third of all 

fatal crashes and consequently is a high-priority traffic safety issue. Speeding extends 

the distance necessary to stop a vehicle and increases the distance a vehicle travels 

while the driver reacts to a dangerous situation. 

Speed limits represent a concerted effort to balance safety and travel efficiency and 

reduce congestion. They are intended to promote public safety by providing drivers with 

information to help them choose a reasonable and prudent speed that is appropriate for 

the existing traffic, weather, and roadway conditions. “Providing appropriate speed limits 

is the first step towards voluntary compliance and the cornerstone for effective speed 

management” (NHTSA, 2005b). When speed limits are set at levels that are largely selfenforcing, law enforcement officials can concentrate on the worst offenders – the 

minority of drivers who will only obey traffic regulations if they perceive a credible threat 

of detection and punishment for noncompliance. 

The objective of Speed Enforcement Program Guidelines is to assist law enforcement 

personnel and decision makers in establishing and maintaining a successful speed 

enforcement program in their communities. Sustaining speed enforcement activities and 

focusing on locations identified by crash data are the essential underlying principles. 

The guidelines presented in this document address program planning, operations, 

adjudication, marketing and media strategies, and evaluation. 
2

CHAPTER 2. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 

Sustained speed enforcement programs have been recognized by the highway safety 

community as essential to ensure compliance with speed limits and to maintain traffic 

movement at safe speeds (NHTSA, 2005a). Effective management of speeds depends 

on the interaction of laws and regulations, enforcement programs, prosecutorial and 

judicial support, and public awareness and attitudes working in concert with common 

objectives and priorities of each community. 

In this chapter, we examine the steps and components for managing an effective speed 

enforcement program based on the following elements: 

•

•

•

•

•

establishing goals, objectives, and performance measures; 

gaining support from key stakeholders; 

determining costs and obtaining funding; 

preparing a written comprehensive plan; and 

maintaining focus on traffic enforcement. 

ESTABLISHING GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES 

A key initial step in establishing a speed enforcement program is to determine the goals, 

objectives, and performance measures that will address the critical safety issues in the 

community. These goals and objectives serve as a reference point and basis for future 

evaluations. Examples of these goals and objectives are: 

•

•

•

•

•

Reduce the incidence of speeding (to no more than XX percent of free-flow 

traffic). A typical objective level may be in the range of 15 to 50 percent and may 

be revised over time. It is unrealistic to expect that the incidence of exceeding 

posted speed limits that are based on engineering studies would be less than 

about 15 percent. 

Reduce the number and rate of speed-related crashes (by XX percent). Modest 

targets (e.g., 5 to 10 percent each year) may be appropriate. Each year’s crash 

totals should be compared to an average of the previous 3 years’ crashes to 

reduce the error that may occur due to unusually high or low numbers of crashes 

during a single year. 

Increase public support of speed enforcement efforts. Measurement of public 

support can be accomplished with surveys and, when applicable, with analysis of 

Internet Web site hits or comments. 

Conduct speed enforcement operations at XX locations each day/month/year, 

committing XX hours of law enforcement personnel time. 

Increase the number of officers who have completed basic and advanced traffic 

speed enforcement training. An agency may set a goal of a certain number of 

officers each year or to have all officers receive some level of training during the 

current year, with refresher training scheduled annually. Implementing regularly 

scheduled briefings and training on speed enforcement at roll call may be 

included in this objective. 
3

• Raise the awareness of judges and prosecutors of the speed enforcement 

program objectives and basis. Some successful agencies have implemented 

periodic information or training sessions with judges. 

GAINING SUPPORT FROM KEY STAKEHOLDERS 

Gaining buy-in 

Responsibility for reducing the speeding problem is rarely placed solely on law 

enforcement. An effective strategy involves gaining the acceptance, support, and 

participation of all stakeholders. 

These stakeholders generally include: 

•

•

•

•

•

•

law enforcement officials within the community, region, or State; 

government officials engaged in public safety issues; 

traffic engineering department, which can assist in conducting engineering 

analysis and spot speed studies along target roadways; 

judges and prosecutors, who need to support law enforcement’s focus on 

speed management; 

communications, marketing, and media representatives, who develop 

materials to disseminate the program’s message throughout the community; and 

community representatives, who give feedback on the program’s acceptance 

and success. 

Law enforcement personnel assume primary responsibility for the speed enforcement 

program. However, the success of a program can be enhanced by a clear plan and 

agreement for continuous and consistent support from key officials in the community. By 

providing a unique real-world view and sharing experiences regarding the speed 

enforcement program and its goals and successes, the law enforcement agency can 

recruit and motivate others within the community to assist in the program. 

Efforts to attain buy-in from community advocates and agencies might start with holding 

meetings to educate them on the goals and strategies for the speed enforcement 

program. During these meetings the law enforcement agency may provide the 

participants with the following information: 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

program information – when, where, and what the law enforcement agency is 

doing and what the program hopes to accomplish; 

partners involved in the program and each of their roles; 

funding for the program; 

why the program was initiated and why certain roadways were selected; 

existing conditions on roadways selected for increased enforcement; 

planned strategies for enforcing speeds within the community; 

how the speed enforcement program has lasting value to the overall safety of 

the community; 

overall traffic safety enforcement issues; 
4

•

•

role of the enforcement agency with respect to the speed enforcement 

program; and 

anticipated role of the agency being addressed during the current meeting. 

Once agencies have expressed an interest in or agreed to support the program, the law 

enforcement agency representative should continue to include them in the planning 

process and keep them updated on the progress of the program through periodic 

meetings, newsletters, emails, and information pages on the law enforcement Web site. 

The law enforcement agency may also consider sharing ideas for future actions and 

events. Keeping the partner agencies informed will sustain long-term support for the 

speed enforcement program. 

A variety of venues can be used to educate the public. Officers can start at the 

grassroots level by attending resident association meetings, PTA meetings, and other 

community events to speak directly to the residents. In addition to providing information, 

officers can request the opinions of and assistance from community members. 

Alternatively, the officer in charge of public information and communications may 

establish contacts at the local print, radio, or television media outlets to reach a broader 

range of residents. 

Coordinating key participants 

It is important to maintain open lines of communication among all stakeholders to 

effectively trade information and plan activities. Participants need to be regularly 

informed of project goals, activities, strategies, and emerging issues. 

Some communities form a local Transportation Safety Task Force or Traffic Safety 

Committee, which regularly meets to coordinate the program. The group normally 

consists of the above mentioned representatives. The task force or committee can work 

together to develop traffic calming measures, decide on locations for enhanced 

enforcement, exchange information on areas identified as problematic, schedule 

locations for spot speed studies, allocate funding and other resources, plan community 

activities, review the goals and objectives of the committee, examine progress, and 

develop plans. 

Local residents have a personal interest in lowering speeds, raising the level of traffic 

safety, and improving quality of life within their community. Grassroots activity also 

attracts the attention of elected government officials. Local stakeholders who may have 

a role in a traffic safety program include citizen volunteers, parent and teacher 

associations, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and Students Against Destructive 

Decisions (SADD) groups, local hospitals and clinics, volunteer emergency medical 

services, and fire and rescue services. 

Identifying high-risk areas as a priority to enhance support 

A program to reduce travel speeds in certain high-risk areas is likely to be supported by 

elected officials, the judiciary, and residents if they are aware of those risks and the 

speed enforcement program’s benefits. These high-risk areas include school zones and 

construction zones. In some communities, speed enforcement programs are initially 

developed as demonstration programs in high-risk areas; once the results show that 

reductions in speeds are possible, support for a more widespread speed enforcement 
5

program grows. For example, many automated speed enforcement programs begin in 

locations where crash and speed data indicate a high-priority speed problem that cannot 

be readily solved by engineering means. 

Another type of high-risk area is where a number of high-profile crashes have occurred. 

If the program is introduced as a means to control extreme speeders in a known crash 

zone, it is likely that political leadership and community residents will be more receptive 

(NHTSA, 2005a). 

DETERMINING COSTS AND OBTAINING FUNDING 

Speed enforcement programs require adequate funding and resources for command 

and management personnel, line officers, vehicles and other equipment, operating 

costs, and maintenance. Although the budget for the speed enforcement operation may 

or may not appear as a separate line item in the agency’s overall budget, it should be 

viewed as an integral part of the overall law enforcement effort and be supported by the 

agency’s broad-based source of funding. The continuance of the speed enforcement 

program should not be dependent on grant monies, which are uncertain from year to 

year, nor should it be expected to support itself through revenue from fines. The speed 

enforcement plan should be presented as a program to increase safety in the community 

and not as a tool for revenue collection. 

The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) has identified certain costs that 

should be taken into consideration when establishing a speed enforcement program 

(IACP, 2004). These include: 

•

•

•

•

•

staffing costs, which may have to be borne by overtime where the number of 

available staff is insufficient; 

procuring speed-measuring equipment – multiple law enforcement agencies 

may be able to purchase equipment together to take advantage of discounts 

for large orders; 

equipment servicing by agency staff, the manufacturer, or an independent 

service or testing laboratory; 

development or improvement of a data-processing system; and 

increased court time, resulting in additional staffing costs. 

Strategic deployment of traditional enforcement methods where and when speed-related 

incidents are most severe or common can help focus resources on potential problems. 

For some agencies, working traffic enforcement and crime enforcement jointly allows for 

a larger pool of resources. 

One method to increase effectiveness is to use technology to enhance policing, such as 

speed reminder signs and speed display trailers (Orrick, 2004). Some of these devices 

also record traffic speeds, which can supplement the agency’s data collection effort and 

support program evaluation. 

In addition to funding from local government, it may be possible to obtain federal grant 

funds via Section 402 of the Highway Safety Act. Each State’s Governor’s Highway 

Safety Representative can provide information on the funding for speed enforcement 

programs. Federal funding is usually granted for a limited period of time or as seed 
6

money to start specific activities. Grant monies may also be suitable for making onetime equipment or technology purchases. 

PREPARING A WRITTEN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 

Once a speed enforcement program is developed, a written plan should be produced to 

establish the program as a priority within the law enforcement agency. The plan may be 

shared with partner agencies and helps to coordinate and gain support from the 

stakeholders. Normally, the plan will contain: 

•

•

•

•

 details of the goals and objectives, 

 training requirements, 

 equipment and countermeasures, and 

 partners’ roles and responsibilities in the program. 

As operational aspects of the program change, the plan should be revised accordingly. 

MAINTAINING FOCUS ON TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT 

The program will be sustained over time if the law enforcement agency, partner 

organizations, and the community maintain the focus on traffic safety and speed 

enforcement. Within the law enforcement agency, conducting regular reviews at roll 

calls or special meetings and events will update officers on the program’s progress and 

remind personnel of the strategic plan. These steps will spotlight the program’s 

importance and help make speed enforcement an integral part of the agency’s culture. 

Periodic analysis and reporting of the impacts of the speed enforcement activity on 

speeds and crashes should be mandatory. These evaluations should be mandatory and 

will substantiate that the program is data driven and so will lend further support to 

sustaining the program. Formal and informal reports should be regularly provided to all 

stakeholders in the community. 

Program managers should also maintain regular contact with local print media or radio 

and television media stations to make sure that the speed enforcement program and its 

successes are a regular news story. This will ensure that the program remains a priority 

in the public eye. 

Appendix B presents a list of resources for developing and managing a speed 

enforcement program, and Appendix C provides a checklist for sustaining a program 

over the long term. Appendix D discusses how to overcome obstacles in program 

implementation. Finally, Appendix E reviews special considerations in program 

development and management for small and rural communities. 
7

CHAPTER 3. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION 

Identifying and prioritizing the locations where crashes and dangerously high speeds 

occur are critical steps in implementing a successful traffic speed enforcement program. 

Basic planning questions include: 

•

•

•

•

•

Where are the crash locations that have the highest priority for 

speed enforcement? 

Where are speed-related crashes occurring during daytime and at night? 

At what locations are speeds dangerously high? 

To what extent can speed enforcement serve as a countermeasure for road 

design and traffic flow factors that are also associated with crashes? 

At what locations are citizens complaining about speeding and reckless driving? 

SITE SELECTION 

Responsibility for collecting and analyzing crash and speed data to identify problem 

locations should be assigned to the traffic safety unit of the enforcement agency or one 

of its partners, such as the jurisdiction’s traffic engineering unit. Once the various data 

sources are analyzed, a list of potential enforcement sites is compiled. These road 

segments should clearly exhibit a higher rate of excessive speeds and or speed-related 

crashes. These sites or “hot spots” are normally targeted for enhanced enforcement on 

a periodic basis. The schedule of deployments at each site should be focused on the 

times of day when crash risk is elevated, randomly assigned across the calendar, and 

frequent enough to remind drivers that their likelihood of being cited is high if they speed. 

The number of visits and duration of enforcement activity at each of the locations may be 

further adjusted as evaluation data are collected. 

The site selection method may be basic such as creating lists and manually preparing 

“pin maps,” or technologically sophisticated such as using Geographic Information 

System (GIS) applications. Common to all approaches is the requirement to organize 

data according to the location and date of occurrence, with other data elements such as 

day/night, crash severity, or road surface condition added as appropriate. The data 

should be updated regularly. 

For speed enforcement programs that encompass several communities within a region 

or State, it is important to use consistent record-keeping and data collection methods 

across all of the communities. Consistency helps expedite multi-agency planning, 

comparison of programs, issues and problems, and evaluation. 

Law enforcement agencies can make effective use of several types of data to identify 

and evaluate the locations and extent of speed-related problems. The various data 

elements may be obtained from existing data sources, but in some cases the jurisdiction 

may need to implement its own data collection and management program. Primary 

sources of information are crash data, speed data, engineering studies, citation records, 

and resident complaints. 
8

ACCESSING HISTORICAL AND OTHER PRE-EXISTING DATA 

Existing records systems may contain information on speeds, motor vehicle crashes, 

citizen complaints, and enforcement activity. Identifying speed-related problem locations 

can be supported by reviewing a number of historical or preexisting data sources, 

including: 

•

•

•

•

•

Traffic speed and volume studies, which are usually conducted by State, 

county, or local traffic engineering agencies, or by consultants engaged by 

the community. 

Other engineering studies focusing on road design and traffic operations issues 

that may be related to the cause or effects of excessive speed. 

Traffic accident files, usually maintained by the local law enforcement agency as 

well as by one or more agencies in State government. Most States and many 

local government agencies maintain computerized crash records systems that 

support a broad spectrum of analyses. 

Traffic citation records, also maintained at both the local and State levels. 

Citizen complaints obtained through telephone, Internet, and in-person contacts 

with residents and drivers familiar with problem locations. 

Many communities maintain their own data as routine components of their traffic 

engineering, public works, or public safety operations. Public works or traffic 

engineering agencies normally maintain traffic speed and volume studies for planning 

traffic operations and road improvements. The local law enforcement agency typically 

maintains at least two to three years of crash and citation records that are readily 

available, but older crash and citation records may not be as readily accessible. In local 

communities where comprehensive traffic data and driver records systems are not 

available, the required data may be accessible from regional or State agencies such as 

the State Department of Transportation (DOT), the Governor’s Highway Safety Office, 

the county DOT, or the local Department of Public Works. Acquiring data from those 

sources involves establishing a routine contact procedure and requesting specific 

information, such as the most recent data concerning: 

•

•

•

24-hour spot speed and volume data at the road location nearest the location 

in question, 

3 years of crash data for the road segment between intersections A and B, or 

citations written by all agencies at the road segment in question. 

When a jurisdiction encounters difficulties or delays in acquiring relevant speed and 

crash data, it may focus on resident complaints and officer knowledge until speed and 

crash data become available. Whenever possible, it is advisable to follow up using 

measured speed data and crash records. The local law enforcement agency may have 

to collect its own speed data rather than access data from other sources. 

To efficiently use any of these data sources, the challenge is to organize the data in a 

manner that can answer the basic questions regarding location and priority. Sorting by 

location, organizing by priority, showing the locations on a map, and preparing an action 

plan are the basic steps. 
9

CRASH ASSESSMENTS 

Crash data are available from police accident reports and from supplemental 

investigations conducted for fatal and other severe crashes. Crash data may be used to 

help identify high-crash locations, to aid in the choice of safety programs or countermeasures, and to assist in evaluations of enforcement effectiveness. Crash data can be 

combined with traffic volume data to compute crash rates (e.g., the number of crashes at 

a location divided by the average annual daily traffic). Crash reports contain much 

information that would be useful in planning speed enforcement and other crash 

countermeasure programs, including: 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

date, 

location, 

time and light condition, 

speed limit, 

weather and road surface condition, 

injury and property damage extent, 

speed as a factor, 

crash type, and 

direction of movement. 

The local law enforcement agency often has the most up-to-date information on crashes 

that occur within the community. Crash reports prepared by the local agency’s officers 

are sometimes supplemented by reports prepared by higher level agencies for the most 

severe crashes. Although the crash report is directly useful to count, locate, and 

describe well-defined crash characteristics such as time of day and weather, it is difficult 

to interpret crash causes and whether speed was a factor in each crash. 

An agency typically evaluates the effectiveness of its speed enforcement program by 

analyzing the year-to-year changes in the number and characteristics of crashes 

overall and at each priority site in relation to the amount of enforcement activity overall 

and at each site. Examples of effective use of crash data for program design and 

evaluation include: 

•

•

•

Use of GIS mapping to identify sites for enforcement. Public dissemination of 

enforcement site information raises public awareness and cooperation. 

Focusing resources on those areas with the highest fatality rates or serious injury 

crash rates. 

Providing access to the information via a Web site presenting information on 

fatalities, crashes, and overall speeds on sections of roadway. 

Some local communities find that statewide electronic data are not sufficiently detailed to 

pinpoint the causes or locations of certain types of crashes. In these cases, it may be 

more productive for local traffic officers or other experts who are experienced in crash 

forensics and familiar with local conditions to conduct reviews of hard-copy crash 

reports. Their knowledge and experience is a valuable resource for examining crash 

causation factors, indicating locations where speed appears to be a crash factor and 

developing appropriate countermeasures. 
10

SPEED ASSESSMENTS 

Traffic speed data may be used to determine where additional speed enforcement 

activities are needed to control excessive speeds, to evaluate the effectiveness of 

speeding countermeasures, and to help determine the amount of tolerance that would 

normally be considered when conducting speed enforcement at a particular location. 

Although speed data are often available from centralized sources, excessive speed 

problems can occur at locations where no previous speed data have been collected; in 

this case the local community must collect its own data. 

Traffic speed and volume studies are periodically conducted by State, county, or local 

traffic engineering and planning agencies for key roads as a routine component of 

transportation planning and analysis. Spot speed studies often use road tubes or other 

devices to count and measure the speed of each vehicle that passes a location. 

Methods for conducting spot speed studies are provided in many traffic engineering 

handbooks (e.g., Smith et al., 2002). Spot speeds are normally measured for at least 

24 hours and are often measured in each lane in each flow direction. To ensure that the 

results are unbiased the measurement days should be chosen to represent the types of 

traffic flow of interest. For enforcement program planning, speed data should ideally be 

limited to free-flowing vehicles, which have substantial separation (at least 3 to 5 

seconds) from the vehicle ahead of them and whose speeds are therefore not 

constrained by surrounding traffic or congestion; when the data are analyzed the 

constrained vehicles need to be separated out. A report is prepared that provides 

average daily and hourly traffic volume counts and measures of traffic speed, including 

the average, the 85th percentile, range and dispersion of speeds, percentage of 

vehicles exceeding the speed limit by various amounts, and other measures for the freeflowing vehicles. 

Other types of speed studies measure “average” or “pace” speeds over a distance of 

roadway. They are conducted either from a moving vehicle with a calibrated 

speedometer or from a stationary or moving vehicle. The most common brand of 

average-speed computer technology is VASCAR. It is generally more difficult to obtain a 

large, representative sample of speeds using these techniques. 

When data from centralized sources are not available for a specific location, the local 

law enforcement agency needs to arrange for its own data collection. The most 

common speed measurement methods involve either manual measurement using radar 

or laser or automated roadside devices that use a roadway recorder. These recorders 

may be self-contained and placed in the roadway or placed at the roadside and 

connected to pneumatic tubes, tape switches, or other sensors placed on the roadway. 

Manual methods may be useful to conduct a preliminary assessment but are the least 

desirable for evaluation of program effectiveness because their results may be biased 

due to several factors: 

•

•

Persons operating radar or laser are likely to be conspicuous and thus may have 

a lowering influence on speeds. 

Radar may be detected by vehicles equipped with radar detectors, which would 

influence speeds downward. However, LIDAR is not easily detected in time to 

reduce speeds. 
11

•

•

Personnel need to be trained to systematically measure a random sample of 

vehicles from the traffic stream in each lane and direction. Bias occurs without a 

random sample. 

It would be difficult to deploy officers for the length of time needed to collect an 

adequate number of measurements over the full measurement period (24-hour 

minimum). If the sample period is too short it may result in a biased estimate 

of speeds. 

Roadside devices, which are commonly used by traffic engineering agencies, are often 

set up to provide “bin” data reports, in which vehicles are grouped into speed classes or 

bins (e.g., 0 to 5 mph, 5 to 10 mph, 10 to 15 mph) but individual vehicle measurements 

are not stored. Bin data are useful but preclude separating free-flowing vehicles from 

those that are constrained by adjacent vehicles. Some measurement devices do permit 

recording individual vehicle speeds. They can be programmed to start and end data 

collection at the desired dates and times, and they can be left unattended. 

Speedometers in patrol vehicles are an effective and inexpensive way to measure 

speeds, but the speedometer needs to be accurately calibrated and certified and the 

officer needs to be proficient at speedometer clocking. A number of large law 

enforcement agencies use VASCAR with fixed-wing aircraft using markings along 

specific roadways; the aircraft work together with vehicular teams on the ground to 

apprehend speeders. 

Many communities use “stealth” devices to measure speeds along the roadways and 

determine suitable locations for increased speed enforcement. The stealth devices are 

able to record natural driver behavior because they are undetected by the motorist. 

Many of these devices produce reports identifying the times of day with higher speeds, 

85th percentile speeds, and volumes of vehicles. There are also various visible speed 

measurement devices that are used to raise public awareness and reduce speeds and 

that may also record speeds. These include Speed Monitoring and Recording Trailer 

(SMART) units and radar boards. 

ENGINEERING ASSESSMENTS 

When engineering studies are performed to examine safety problems or to establish 

speed limits, they include a formal engineering review that examines the speeds of freeflowing traffic combined with information on roadway geometry, crash characteristics, 

land use, and access. The results of such studies are usually presented in a report that 

provides details concerning: 

•

•

•

•

•

average annual and hourly vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic volume; 

traffic speeds for each flow direction by hour of day; 

road design elements that may be crash factors such as horizontal and vertical 

curvature, drainage, pavement condition, sight distance restrictions, roadside 

objects, signage, markings and delineation, etc.; 

road lighting and traffic control devices, including signals, signal timing, and 

stop signs; 

summary of crashes and crash causes over a multiyear period; 
12

•

•

plans for expected new development that may change the traffic flow 

characteristics in the future; and 

recommendations for the speed limit. 

The most effective speed enforcement programs have well-established liaisons with the 

traffic engineering function to share such information and collaborate when devising 

speed-related safety problem solutions. In situations where speed limits have been 

established by legislative authority rather than by administrative action resulting from 

engineering studies, the speed studies are particularly valuable to the law enforcement 

agency to: 

•

•

•

evaluate what a safe and reasonable travel speed is for a particular 

road segment; 

make recommendations for speed limit adjustment; and 

determine guidelines for the speed above which a speeding citation would 

normally be considered. 

CITATION ANALYSIS 

A review of the locations, cited speeds, and frequency of speeding citations can provide 

useful information to help determine problem locations and to measure the effectiveness 

of enforcement and/or media programs. A high number of citations along a particular 

road segment may indicate an excessive speed problem, while a change over time in 

the number of citations may suggest that the incidence of excessive speeding has 

changed. When using citation data, the officers’ knowledge of the locations and 

situations where citations have been issued will help interpret the findings. Care should 

be taken to properly 

examples: 

interpret the number of citations at any location, as in the following 

•

•

•

Some road segments where many citations have been issued may actually have 

an excessive speed problem, whereas at other locations it may just be easier to 

conduct enforcement. 

The difference between the cited speed and the speed limit can provide a 

measure of the degree to which speeds are excessive at a location but in 

some cases the cited speed may have been reduced from the actual speed of 

the vehicle. 

Changes in the number of citations over time may represent a change in 

speeding behavior or may be due to changes in speed enforcement program 

resources or priorities. 

RESIDENT COMPLAINTS 

Another method for selecting sites for speed enforcement is on the basis of complaints 

by residents within the community. Most residents are concerned about speeders on 

their streets endangering other drivers, walkers, joggers, bicyclists, and children. They 

are often aware of incidents such as near-misses or fender benders that are not reported 

to the local law enforcement agency. The traffic enforcement agency should establish 

and publicize the means to receive and compile citizen complaints according to date, 

time, location, and nature of complaint so that problem locations can be investigated and 
13

prioritized according to the frequency of complaints or the severity of the speeding 

problem. Citizen complaints may be reported by telephone hotline, by Internet Web 

sites, and during regularly scheduled community meetings. 

The enforcement agency should respond to complaints following specific procedures. 

For example, where complaints suggest an ongoing problem, the agency may schedule 

a speed study and follow up with directed patrols or other appropriate countermeasures, 

consistent with the principles of community and problem-oriented policing. An effective 

response to a complaint includes: 

•

•

•

•

logging the complaint in the records system; 

assigning an officer to investigate; 

investigating the complaint by visiting the problem site, interviewing the 

complainant, observing traffic, and measuring speeds; and 

documenting the findings. 
14

CHAPTER 4. ENFORCEMENT COUNTERMEASURES 

SPEED ENFORCEMENT STRATEGIES 

There are several tactical approaches adopted by most law enforcement agencies to 

increase motorist compliance with speed limits: 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Stationary patrols use marked or unmarked vehicles stopped at roadside to 

monitor traffic speeds. 

Mobile patrols use marked or unmarked vehicles traveling with traffic to detect 

specific violators in the immediate vicinity of a moving patrol car. 

Highly visible enforcement strategies use multiple stationary or mobile marked 

patrol cars to remind the public that enforcement is present and to increase the 

actual and perceived risk of detection among the driving public. 

Stealth methods use unmarked, unconventional, or hidden vehicles to monitor 

speeds and apprehend speeders. 

Automated speed enforcement (ASE) uses equipment that monitors speeds 

and photographs offenders to produce a citation that is later mailed to the 

registered owner of the offending vehicle. 

Aerial speed enforcement from aircraft measures vehicle speeds based on 

the time it takes a vehicle to travel between two or more pavement markings 

spaced a known distance apart. Identifying information regarding a violator’s 

car type, location, and cited speed is transmitted to officers on the ground, who 

issue citations. 

Corridor safety program is often a joint operation involving multiple law 

enforcement agencies. Data on crashes and speeds are used to identify traffic 

corridors where speeding is contributing to unsafe conditions. These corridors 

are designated for enhanced speed enforcement. 

Neighborhood speed watch is a public awareness program that gives citizens a 

role in solving speeding problems in their neighborhood. Local residents monitor 

the speed of vehicles traveling through their neighborhood, using speed reader 

boards or radar units provided by the local law enforcement agency or 

transportation department. Participants record the date, time, location, and 

license plate numbers of motorists driving in excess of the posted speed limit. 

The information may be used in a variety of ways, including sending letters to the 

vehicle owners regarding the speeding incident and designating the location for 

enhanced enforcement. 

There is no single best method for enforcing speeds. Each jurisdiction needs to 

customize a combination of technologies and tactical methods to enforce speeds that 

works best for its community. In addition, print or broadcast media and other means of 

communications may be used to increase deterrence and voluntary compliance. 

Educating the driving public on the basis for speed limits and the community’s speed 

enforcement policy may also work to reduce speeds. 
15

IDENTIFYING APPROPRIATE COUNTERMEASURES 

Speed enforcement countermeasures need to be tailored to the particular problems 

identified in the community and local circumstances. The selected enforcement 

methods should be based on analysis of data on speeds and crashes and on citizen 

reports. Other types of countermeasures may be considered to supplement 

enforcement, including engineering responses and communications efforts. 

TRADITIONAL ENFORCEMENT 

Traditional speed enforcement works when the level of enforcement is sufficient to 

convince most drivers of the strong likelihood of detection and sanctions if they exceed 

the speed limit. To achieve sustained deterrence, the level of enforcement must be 

maintained on a schedule that is either continuous or frequent enough to keep speeds 

down, which is difficult for most law enforcement agencies. However, there are 

alternative methods for increasing enforcement effectiveness. Enhanced effects can be 

achieved by planning patrols to enforce speed regulation where risk-taking is most 

evident and traffic volumes are sufficient, such as varied deployment on commuter 

routes. Selective deployment may also single out particular behaviors. Deployment at 

localities and times when speeding is most likely to occur, made highly visible to the 

public, and maintained for more than a year is likely to successfully deter speeding 

(TRB, 1998). Enforcement conducted at low to medium intensity in a random pattern 

and sustained over a long period of time at various speed enforcement sites can also be 

effective (Newstead et al., 2001). 

Highly visible enforcement strategies help to deter speeding by reminding the public that 

enforcement is present, which increases the actual and perceived risk of detection. 

Enforcement blitzes, where many units are deployed at high-priority locations and are 

widespread for a defined period of time (e.g., Click It or Ticket), have high visibility and 

achieve results for a time. However, unless they are sustained over the long term, their 

benefit will eventually be reduced. 

There are jurisdictions in which traffic speed enforcement is emphasized as a 

component of a more comprehensive approach to law enforcement. This approach is 

known as Looking Beyond the Traffic Ticket (NHTSA, 1992). Traffic enforcement and 

crime enforcement should be organized to work hand in hand to increase safety in the 

community, with the understanding that routine traffic stops result in reductions in local 

criminal activity. 

MOBILE PATROL 

Mobile and stationary speed enforcement methods differ in their levels of effectiveness, 

with stationary speed enforcement somewhat more effective in reducing casualties and 

fatal crashes than mobile enforcement (Elvik, 2001). A low to moderate level of 

enforcement from a stationary vehicle over a long period of time is effective in deterring 

speeding at a specific location and may have a halo effect around the enforcement site 

(Newstead et al., 2001). Randomized selection of speed enforcement sites also 

increases the deterrent effects. 

Mobile patrols, which are generally used on more open and rural roads, can reduce 

speeding over long sections of road. Research on the effects of mobile enforcement 

shows mixed results (Delaney et al., 2003; Elvik, 2001). Mobile speed enforcement 
16

should be a component in a broader program of speed enforcement that includes 

stationary enforcement and media components. For most communities with both 

local and higher-speed roads, a combination of stationary and moving methods may 

be appropriate. 

A number of jurisdictions have had success using nontraditional speed enforcement 

platforms, including unmarked and unconventional vehicles equipped with mobile video 

cameras to detect aggressive drivers and stationary speed enforcement using bucket 

trucks, pickups, and other maintenance-type vehicles from which the speed 

measurement equipment was operated. Stealth methods of detection often reflect how 

seriously a community or law enforcement agency views speeding. These methods 

increase uncertainty about the location and timing of enforcement and may result in a 

greater general deterrent effect among drivers who are aware of this enforcement 

technique. However, they may have a lesser effect on unfamiliar drivers than visible 

enforcement. Unmarked vehicles are often used to enforce aggressive driving, 

especially on very high speed roads. They are used to unobtrusively observe traffic and 

measure speeds. In some cases the unmarked vehicle makes the stop, and in other 

cases the stops and citations are completed by a marked vehicle. Agencies should 

prepare special guidelines on how to approach the public for officers conducting 

enforcement in unmarked and nontraditional vehicles. 

AUTOMATED SPEED ENFORCEMENT 

Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE) has been successfully deployed in many urban 

and suburban settings in the United States and abroad and may be a cost-effective way 

to reduce speeds and crashes. This method is particularly effective where roadway 

geometry or traffic volume make it difficult to use more traditional methods. ASE is best 

used to supplement traditional enforcement and should not replace the traffic unit’s role 

in the jurisdiction. The amount of revenue resulting from ASE operations should never 

be used to help justify it. In fact, the costs of establishing an ASE program are high and 

in most communities the revenue from ASE is just enough to maintain the ASE program. 

In some jurisdictions, specific types of locations are designated for enhanced speed 

enforcement, such as school zones and construction zones. Speed enforcement at 

these locations is often more broadly supported by the public due to the widespread 

recognition of dangers to children and workers. ASE has been used to supplement 

traditional speed enforcement in these areas. 

PERSONNEL 

Regardless of whether the speed enforcement program is organized as a specialized 

unit or broadly integrated within the routine operations of a law enforcement agency, key 

traffic enforcement roles must be clearly identified and assigned to specific individuals. 

For large police agencies, separate individuals may be assigned to each role, while in 

smaller agencies one individual may have multiple roles. These key roles include: 

• Primary command and program management – The officer in charge of the 

speed enforcement program should be clearly designated. This person may be 

the chief of the agency, the officer responsible for a traffic enforcement unit, or 

an individual designated especially for this program. The officer who has primary 

charge of the unit is responsible for planning and managing the speed enforce-
17

ment operations and conducting higher level coordination with public officials 

such as the mayor, town council, public safety commissioner, judges and 

prosecutors, and other commands within the police department, as well as with 

engineers and community representatives. 

A dedicated program manager will heighten the success of the program and 

strengthen support from the community and other stakeholders. Visible 

commitment from a program manager will serve as a strong role model for other 

law enforcement personnel, who will look toward the program manager for 

guidance and support. 

The program manager may assign responsibility to garner support and 

coordinate the various agencies to one law enforcement representative, who will 

serve as point of contact with partners in the community. 

•

•

•

•

•

Public information and communications – Often called the public information 

officer, the individual in charge of public information and communications is the 

primary point of contact with the public and media. Contact may be through 

press conferences, press releases, newsletters, Web site, community meetings 

and annual reports. 

Equipment and technology management – This function includes planning, 

specification, procurement, testing, and calibration of speed enforcement 

equipment either in house or with outside facilities or manufacturers. Many law 

enforcement agencies assign an officer who is trained on calibrating and 

certifying speed measuring equipment. In other situations the agency maintains 

a working relationship with the manufacturers of the speed measuring devices. 

Training – An individual should be assigned to identify, organize, and schedule 

all levels of training for traffic enforcement personnel, including coordinating 

training at the police academy level, at the local level, by outside experts from 

other law enforcement agencies or equipment manufacturers, and at roll call. 

Liaison with other governmental agencies, including transportation engineering 

and planning agency, public works, regional planning organization, and other 

partners in the community. 

Primary enforcement/patrol – These are the officers with day-to-day speed 

enforcement duties. 

EQUIPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY 

Traffic law enforcement personnel need accurate and reliable equipment to monitor 

traffic speeds and provide evidence that meets the standards of proof needed to uphold 

a speed limit citation. Selection of speed enforcement equipment should relate to the 

road type where it is used. Hand-held radar is sufficient for residential areas and other 

relatively low-volume locations. Laser devices are often more useful for arterial roads 

where speeds and volume may be higher and pinpointing an individual vehicle is more 

difficult. Mobile radar devices, including single and dual antenna units, are effective for 

use on higher speed roads in rural areas. ASE has been found to be effective on local 

and arterial roads in urban and suburban areas. 

Radar, is the most common method of speed enforcement in the United States. It 

directs an electromagnetic signal at a moving vehicle and measures the frequency of the 
18

reflected signal to determine the speed of the target vehicle. Radar units may be used in 

either a stationary or moving vehicle mode. Hand-held radar units have the transmitter, 

receiver, processor, and antenna in a single unit and are used in a stationary mode by 

officers who aim the radar gun at approaching or receding vehicles. Console radar units 

are installed in a vehicle and can be used in either a stationary or moving mode. They 

have one or two antennas mounted on the enforcement vehicle and, depending on the 

model and configuration, measure speeds of traffic moving toward or away from the 

patrol vehicle from either the front or back. 

Although not used to gather evidence to support speeding citations, some communities 

use drone radar units in patrol vehicles or other enclosures on the side of roadways to 

continuously transmit signals on the same frequencies as speed enforcement radar. 

Drone radar triggers radar detectors to display a warning causing drivers to believe that 

speed enforcement is being operated in the vicinity and to slow down. 

Laser (LIDAR) devices use an infrared laser light wave emitted at frequencies that allow 

the beam to be focused on a narrow target area. LIDAR devices are usually hand held, 

similar to hand-held radar. When using LIDAR, the officer focuses on one vehicle at a 

time, producing evidence that can be more precisely associated with a specific vehicle 

than with radar. LIDAR is not vulnerable to radio interference, is not detectable by radar 

detectors, and is not easily detected by LIDAR detectors. 

Calibrated speedometers in patrol vehicles are often used to measure speeds and pace 

vehicles. The method involves pacing a suspected speeder over a certain time or 

distance while observing the speedometer reading. 

Average-speed computers determine speed by timing how long it takes a vehicle to 

travel between two fixed objects or markings a known distance apart along a road. The 

method can be used in both moving and stationary modes. 

Digital video equipment is used in enforcement vehicles in many jurisdictions to assist in 

pacing suspected speeders and to provide supporting evidence if a case goes to court. 

While this tool has proved to be very useful, agencies should consider the requirements 

and costs for equipment, computer support, and substantial data storage capacity. 

ASE, also known as speed cameras or photo radar, is used in many communities in the 

United States and abroad to supplement more traditional speed enforcement operations. 

ASE uses a narrow-beam radar or LIDAR to measure speeds and a film or digital 

camera to photograph only vehicles that exceed a speed that is set by the operator at 

the start of each deployment. The photograph is stamped with date, time, location, and 

speed, and provides evidence of the vehicle make, model, and license tag number to 

identify the registered owner, who is sent a citation via mail. Depending on State and 

local ordinances governing ASE, either the registered owner or the driver may be held 

responsible for the citation, and the offender’s driving record may or may not be 

assigned points. ASE is most often deployed using marked mobile police vehicles with a 

speed display board on the back, although some communities use marked or unmarked 

patrol-type vehicles and some agencies have ASE units mounted on poles at locations 

where speeds are a consistent problem. Communities typically lease the photo radar 

equipment from a vendor that is also responsible for processing the images, identifying 

registered owners from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) records, and printing 

citations on behalf of the law enforcement agency. 

Police and other public safety officials should consider the costs for the equipment, 

operations, staff training, service, and maintenance needs in comparison to the expected 
19

benefits and the community’s interests prior to purchasing such equipment 

(Orrick 2004). 

KEEPING CURRENT WITH METHODS AND TECHNOLOGY 

Keeping current with the latest techniques and relevant equipment will increase the 

effectiveness of a long-term speed enforcement program. Program managers who 

become members of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the National 

Sheriffs’ Association, the National Center for Rural Law Enforcement or other relevant 

organizations will have access to material on strategies, equipment, and funding options. 

Officers can also find the most current information on different policing methods and 

technologies on the Web sites of NHTSA, the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, the 

National Traffic Law Center, and the IACP Technology Clearinghouse. These 

organizations also publish reports, journal articles, and newsletters with information 

regarding speeding, speed enforcement techniques, and critiques of equipment. 

Appendix B provides a more complete list of resources. 

Contacting other communities and law enforcement agencies can help to identify new 

and alternative policing techniques. Other agencies can share their experiences with 

various types of equipment that are under consideration for purchase in your community. 

Listening to “lessons learned” from other communities might help identify what might or 

might not work in your community. 

An agency should develop a long-term budget that will allow for replacement of outdated 

equipment and the purchase of new equipment in stages. 
20

TRAINING 

Officers participating in a speed enforcement program need to be well trained in speed 

enforcement techniques, measurement devices, and the goals and objectives of the 

speed enforcement plan. Personnel may be assigned duties as specialized traffic 

enforcement officers or more generally as patrol officers who conduct traffic enforcement 

alongside their other duties. Training and certification on the use of radar, LIDAR, or 

other evidentiary speed measurement devices is normally required by law enforcement 

agencies in the United States, and in many cases such training is required by State 

statute. Proper training helps ensure that the officer’s testimony and the measurement 

device’s readings meet the standards of evidence and thus are sufficient proof of 

speeding to sustain a conviction for the offense. 

Comprehensive training on speed enforcement includes background on the relationship 

between excessive speeds and crashes, procedures for deployment, use of speed 

measurement equipment, apprehension of speed limit violators, interaction with the 

driver and other occupants, examination and investigation of license and registration 

documents, citation preparation, and court testimony. Training on the use of speed 

measurement equipment includes the theory of how the instrument works, operating 

procedures, legal considerations, and field exercises. In most jurisdictions recertification 

is required and conducted on an annual or biennial basis. Training on equipment may 

be conducted by law enforcement, civilian, or manufacturer’s personnel. The Speed 

Measuring Device Operator Training Program has been developed by NHTSA for law 

enforcement agencies to use for this training need. 

Specialized training, course materials, and other resources are available from: 

•

•

•

•

•

State police academies, 

IACP, 

National Sheriffs’ Association, 

International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards and 

Training – courses institutionalized in the States as Police Officer Standards and 

Training (P.O.S.T.), and 

NHTSA Enforcement and Justice Services Division. 

The amount of training for speed enforcement varies considerably among agencies; 40 

hours or more each on radar or LIDAR is not uncommon. In some States, training 

documentation must be available for presentation in court and formal reevaluation is 

conducted on an annual basis for each type of equipment. 

Although most of the formal training has been standardized at the State level, there are 

methods used by individual law enforcement agencies to supplement the basic training. 

Many agencies use roll call training or periodic updates to review best practices for 

conducting speed enforcement. Some agencies have developed online training that 

may be accessed by staff to enhance in-person training sessions. 

IDENTIFYING AN ENFORCEMENT THRESHOLD 

The Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) Survey of the States on speeding 

found that in most States the public perceives that there is a cushion or threshold above 

the speed limit in which officers will not cite offenders. In many of the States this is the 
21

enforcement practice, usually allowing for a threshold between 5-10 mph above the 

speed limit (GHSA, 2005). 

While speed limits are legally binding, some tolerance is often applied in order to focus 

enforcement on the most dangerous vehicles. An officer is usually provided some 

discretion in whether or not to issue a ticket for a speed that is just a small amount over 

the speed limit. Because it is difficult to cite drivers who are operating a vehicle within a 

couple of miles per hour of the limit, most jurisdictions adopt an enforcement threshold 

either officially or unofficially. 

Law enforcement personnel, the courts, and the public should have a clear 

understanding of the enforcement threshold. Since absolute “zero tolerance” 

enforcement is generally not feasible but a very tight threshold is acceptable under 

limited circumstances, it may be more suitable to use “the equipment manufacturer’s 

specification for measurement precision” as a definition of the enforcement threshold 

(NHTSA, 2005a). 

A tighter enforcement threshold is appropriate for speed zones where the speed limit 

has been set using the engineering or rational methods. When speed limits are based 

on the 85th percentile speed of free-flowing traffic in combination with a review of 

crashes and roadway design factors, the threshold may be just a couple of miles per 

hour and should be based on review of speed data. 

Enforcement thresholds may be adjusted over time as the speed enforcement program 

in a community grows and becomes more widely known, especially when done in 

combination with a review of speed limits. When a rational limit is first implemented, the 

threshold may begin at a higher level such as the 90th or 95th percentile speed and after 

a short time be reduced to near the 85th percentile, close to a “no tolerance” policy for 

those locations. 

Once an enforcement threshold policy is decided, a consistent approach is important to 

maintain public confidence in the enforcement program. It may be useful to prepare 

written enforcement guidelines or a table breaking down enforcement threshold 

recommendations by road, speed limit type, and speed limits. 

HOURS AND DAYS OF OPERATION 

The hours and days of operation should be directed on the basis of the speed and crash 

data collected at each of the sites. The distribution of speeds should help determine the 

appropriate times to conduct speed enforcement. 

Although maximizing the number of hours conducting speed enforcement is important, 

the decision on the number of hours must take into account the staff and funds available. 

The initial enforcement effort may be more vigorous (e.g., every day or every few days), 

followed by less frequent visits, with the followup schedule determined on the basis of 

speed data analysis. Three to six months of enhanced and concentrated enforcement in 

a selected speed zone followed by periodic visits every 45 to 60 days is suggested as a 

starting point. 

CITATION PROCESSING AND RECORDS 

Maintaining up-to-date records of citations allows a law enforcement agency to track 

ongoing activities and plan future enforcement actions. Tracking the activities within a 
22

speed enforcement program may require modifications to the agency’s record-keeping 

system so that all arrests made as a consequence of traffic enforcement stops are 

available for analysis (NHTSA, 2000). Details about the types of citations issued and 

other arrests that occur during speed enforcement activities, including criminal arrests, 

may be used in reports and presentations to bolster support of the program. 

Many departments use computerized systems to track citations. Some departments 

have electronic citation systems that record each citation on a laptop or pocket personal 

computer as it is issued, while others manually enter citation information after the fact. 

Adjudication of citations is often tracked within the court system’s computers, although 

citation information may only be available in the court records system after the charge 

has been adjudicated. If a computerized tracking system is not available, the officers 

may manually track their traffic citations on an activity log. 

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 

A law enforcement agency needs to plan and manage the budget and allocation of 

personnel and equipment for day-to-day operations of the speed enforcement program. 

Budget constraints should be considered when deciding on the types of services and 

equipment to be employed. Reporting the program’s accomplishments to higher levels 

of command within the law enforcement agency, to the local governing body, and to the 

public in terms of the number and types of actions and speed and crash reduction can 

help sustain or increase the program’s budget. 

If funding is cut it is important to remain committed to the program. If resources are 

diminished, the effort may be concentrated on a smaller set of the highest priority sites, 

based on speed and crash data and citizen complaints. Delivering a prioritized set of 

speed enforcement services to the extent possible consistent with the stated program 

objectives will improve the likelihood of acquiring funding in the next budgetary cycle. 

INTEGRATING WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OBJECTIVES 

A law enforcement agency can sustain a long-term speed enforcement program by 

integrating the program with other law enforcement objectives. The motor vehicle is a 

primary tool used by criminals while engaging in illegal activities, including armed 

robbery, drive-by shootings, drug deals, and carjacking. Vehicles are used to reach the 

scene of a crime and to elude the police. Increasing vigilance in traffic safety in the 

community can also have an effect on local criminal activity. During routine traffic stops, 

officers frequently identify individuals with outstanding warrants or who are suspects in 

various illicit activities. 

Some law enforcement agencies have a dedicated traffic division as well as a general 

patrol division. Within these agencies it is a common misconception that the traffic 

division is solely responsible for enforcing traffic laws, while officers from other divisions 

are responsible for enforcing all other violations and crimes. Program managers will 

need to stress to all officers the need to recognize that traffic enforcement is part of their 

duties and responsibilities in the community. 

Law enforcement agencies may track the results of routine traffic stops and use their 

findings to promote the speed enforcement program. Officers can report how often 

routine traffic stops in their community have revealed greater violations or illegal 

activities. Information on the number of criminal stops made in the course of traffic 
23

enforcement activities may be used to garner further recognition and appreciation of the 

speed enforcement program. 

ENCOURAGING CREATIVITY AND INITIATIVE AMONG ENFORCEMENT 

PERSONNEL 

Sustaining an effective speed enforcement program requires motivation to remain 

dedicated to the objectives of the program. One of the most important ways to motivate 

and focus officers on speed enforcement is to ensure that the agency’s commitment 

starts at the top of the chain of command. Successful programs have demonstrated that 

when the leadership of the law enforcement agency supports and is engaged in the 

speed enforcement program, the line officers will follow. For example, one large State 

highway patrol deploys all of its personnel, including the higher ranking officers from 

headquarters, to the field to participate in traffic law enforcement during high-profile 

events such as holiday weekends. Their motto is that everyone who wears the uniform 

is a traffic officer. When the line officers see the Commissioner on the side of the road 

enforcing traffic, it inspires them and reinforces the importance of their work. 

Another approach to encourage staff support for the speed enforcement program is to 

permit the officers to use their own experience and discretion. For example, during the 

early stages of the program officers may be encouraged to participate in the decision 

making process and take the initiative in planning and conducting operations. Officers 

soon realize that “little stops result in big stops,” that their traffic enforcement actions 

reduce crime, and that they create a safer environment for residents. Line officers may 

also be encouraged to present innovative ideas to reduce high speeds on the roadways 

as part of a speed enforcement campaign. When their recommendations are 

incorporated into the program, the officers will see that the program reflects their input 

and will become more highly motivated. 

In some cases officers may feel that speed enforcement is disconnected from their work 

in criminal law enforcement or even in traffic enforcement. Some steps to prevent 

resistance within the law enforcement agency are to avoid setting quotas, rotate 

personnel, schedule speed enforcement in such a manner that it is not monotonous, and 

combine speed enforcement with other enforcement activities so that the efforts are 

diversified (IACP, 2004). Applying the principles of community policing and problem 

solving to traffic safety issues may also reconnect speed enforcement activities to the 

broader law enforcement objectives of officers. 

AWARDS FOR OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE

Recognition of officers’ efforts and accomplishments can be used to motivate 

participants and strengthen the speed enforcement program. This recognition 

demonstrates the value of traffic enforcement within the agency. 

Recognition of a job well done can take a variety of forms, including: 

•

•

•

a letter of recognition prepared by a supervisor for the officer’s permanent file, 

which is important to the officers on both a personal and professional level; 

a wall plaque that is updated annually to recognize officers who were successful 

in speed enforcement as well as other areas of traffic enforcement; 

presentation of the “Chief’s Coin” to officers who perform above expectations; 
24

•

•

annual ceremonies to recognize officers with excellent performance records, 

such as an “Officer of the Year” recognition ceremony; or 

provision of new equipment to top-performing officers. 
25

CHAPTER 5. ROLE OF ENGINEERING 

Traffic engineers are responsible for decisions regarding design features of roads and 

for measuring vehicle travel along roadways. 

WORKING TOGETHER TO IDENTIFY ROAD SAFETY ISSUES 

Traffic engineering and law enforcement have a common goal of moving traffic efficiently 

and safely. Roadway design is a key factor in determining travel speeds and may 

influence crash risk. Traffic engineering has the responsibility for designing and 

maintaining roadways. This role often extends into establishing speed limits and 

collecting information on prevailing speeds on those roadways. 

There needs to be an established protocol for communication between the law 

enforcement agency and the traffic engineering department. The agency 

representatives should meet regularly to review data and should work together to 

develop solutions to the traffic safety problems. 

Many communities depend on a State agency to collect speed data and conduct 

engineering studies. Program managers may also seek assistance from other sources, 

such as a regional council of governments or a private engineering firm. Although law 

enforcement agencies can complete the speed studies themselves, any assistance 

with data collection or analysis will allow officers to focus additional enforcement hours 

in the field. 

COORDINATING SPEED MEASUREMENTS TO IDENTIFY PROBLEMS AND 

EVALUATE PROGRAM 

Regular speed data collection along selected roadways is important for both problem 

identification and program evaluation. Initially, officers can identify potential problem 

sites using crash and citation statistics and resident complaints and follow up with speed 

studies when warranted. Once increased enforcement begins on the selected 

roadways, the sites should be revisited regularly to assess any changes in the roadway 

conditions and driving behavior. 

SETTING SPEED LIMITS 

Speed limits are intended to promote public safety by providing information that will help 

drivers choose a reasonable and prudent speed for prevailing conditions. Posted speed 

limits seek to confine speeds beneath an upper bound and to produce relatively uniform 

speed that is not too fast for ideal conditions. 

Setting speed limits should be conducted as a formal process that uses information on 

travel speeds, crashes, road design, and land use to achieve a balance of safety and 

efficiency. The practice should depend to a great extent on the function of the roadway 

(e.g., providing safe access to abutting properties on local roads at the expense of travel 

speed, or minimizing travel time without compromising safety on limited access roads). 
26

Speed limits may be set according to one or more of the following approaches: 

•

•

•

•

•

•

Engineering study is most commonly used for speed zones on certain classes 

of roads where the speed limit needs to be varied depending on geometry and 

other road conditions. 

Variable speed limits are speed limits that are sensitive to changing traffic and 

roadway conditions. 

Computerized expert systems are used to set speed limits for speed zones 

and are based on a more comprehensive set of decision and judgment rules than 

basic engineering study. 

Special situations often require special consideration and methods for 

establishing speed limits. Advisory speed limits help drivers select safe speeds 

at hazardous locations. Nighttime speed limits are used to reduce the risk of 

crashing at night due to reduced visibility and driver fatigue. School speed limits

are established in the vicinity of schools during certain hours. Work zone speed 

limits are intended to reduce speed in areas where sudden slowing and stops 

are likely to occur. 

Basic law limit leaves the decision of what is careful or reasonable and prudent 

entirely up to the driver. 

Statutory limits represent tradeoffs between safety and travel time, and they are 

established through the political process. These speed limits are arbitrary, not 

depending on specific road design features or operating characteristics. 
27

CHAPTER 6. COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM 

If the public does not understand the basis for speed limits and the consequences of 

speeding they are less likely to comply with speed limits. Appropriate media and 

communications campaigns can fill this gap in knowledge and effectively promote safer 

speeds. Educating the public on speed enforcement programs helps drivers understand 

what they may expect from the program, and makes them aware of the full implication of 

their actions (ACPO, 2004). 

ESTABLISHING A POINT OF CONTACT 

Residents in the community should be provided with a point of contact, or 

representative, responsible for responding to queries on the speed enforcement 

program. The designated representative may be from within the law enforcement 

agency, such as a public information officer or community liaison, or from one of the 

other key organizations coordinating the speed enforcement program. The 

representative should be well-informed about the program objectives, goals, and 

activities so he or she can easily address any questions or concerns from the 

community. Contact information including a telephone number, mailing address, and 

email address should be provided with any information distributed to the public and 

should be easily found on the community Web site. The representative may present 

information on the program at community board meetings, school functions, or other 

public events. Residents should understand that they can approach the representative 

to voice complaints, volunteer, offer ideas, and get information about the program. 

ENCOURAGING COMMUNITY AWARENESS AND INVOLVEMENT 

In many communities the law enforcement agency does not have the staff necessary 

to develop a large-scale media campaign single-handedly. However, most communities 

have concerned citizens or civic leaders who may be interested and willing to get 

involved in the speed enforcement program. 

Establishing a local Traffic Safety Committee is an effective way to get residents 

involved in the speed enforcement program. Communities can include grassroots 

components in their speed enforcement program by coordinating with local 

organizations, the schools, and various youth programs. For example, in one effective 

community program, the program manager developed an education program using 

NHTSA brochures and fact sheets on speeding and crashes and presents the 

curriculum at local drivers’ education courses, in high school prior to drivers’ education, 

and to parents. 

Speed enforcement programs can encourage resident participation by conducting 

unique local programs that capture the community’s attention. For example, the 

program could organize a contest to develop a program slogan or message to be 

included on all marketing and media publications. Alternatively, the speed enforcement 

program could develop signs, window clings, balloons, etc., that can be used by 

residents who are interested in lowering speeds in the community. One slogan that is 

widely used in many jurisdictions is “Keep Kids Alive... Drive 25”; this campaign was 

designed by residents of Nebraska and is currently used in 700 communities throughout 

the United States. The goal of this safety campaign is to raise the compliance of drivers 

to drive at the posted speed limits. 
28

SMART trailers and speed reader boards are speed measurement devices that are used 

to raise community awareness of speeding and the enforcement program. Program 

managers can recruit resident volunteers to operate speed reader boards and monitor 

speeds in the community. The volunteers pick up the equipment from the police 

department or meet with an officer in the field to receive the equipment on site and then 

record license tags of vehicles traveling in excess of the speed limit. A formal letter from 

the law enforcement agency, including the date, location, speed, and vehicle 

information, may be mailed to the vehicle owner. 

Residents should be informed about the speeding problem in their community and given 

details regarding the speed enforcement plan and sites through community meetings, 

the department Web site, or local newsletters. By providing information on how sites are 

selected and showing that enforcement is driven by data rather than by revenue, the 

agency is likely to increase public support. 

ROLE OF MARKETING AND MEDIA 

An effective media campaign can increase voluntary compliance as well as increase the 

deterrent effect of the enforcement program. The major objectives of the media 

campaign are to: 

•

•

•

•

make traffic safety an integral part of the public agenda; 

enhance the deterrent effect by increasing perceived risk of detection and of 

crashes due to speeding; 

provide support for law enforcement activity by correlating enforcement with the 

reduction of crashes and injuries; and 

provide information that will support decision-making processes regarding safety 

programs and policies (Cameron et al., 2003). 

An effective publicity campaign must be supported by the government, community, and 

law enforcement. Global Road Safety Partnership (GRSP) has provided guidelines on 

how to develop a strong media campaign (GRSP, 2002). These guidelines include: 

•

•

•

•

•

Define the problem – Identify the types of behavior to be modified (in this case 

speeding) and the target group. 

Consider the relevant information and data sources to be shared with the 

audience – The agency may publicize high speeds measured on specific 

roadways in the community or the numbers of crashes in the past year that were 

related to speeds. 

Identify specific venues to be used for the campaign – Include plans for a 

mass media campaign, community events, or other types of activities. 

Determine objectives – Prepare a list of media campaign objectives. The 

objectives should be specific and measurable. To illustrate, reducing speeds on a 

neighborhood road may be measured by conducting speed studies prior to, 

during, and following the media campaign. Increased public awareness of 

speeding on community roads can be measured via surveys. 

Agree on supporting activities – The supporting activities may include 

elements such as high-profile enforcement, community meetings, events 

organized by voluntary organizations, or publicity on local radios and 
29

newspapers. Key activities that support the goals of the media campaign must 

be planned in advance. Partner agencies including law enforcement and other 

community organizations should work together to develop activities. 

•

•

Select a lead agency – To maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of the 

media campaign, a lead agency should be appointed to work in consultation with 

the other partner organizations. The lead may be the law enforcement agency, 

using a communications officer or other contact within the agency. Other 

potential lead agencies include the government communications department or 

transportation department. In some communities the media and communications 

program is developed by volunteers from among the residents. 

Use the right skills – Media campaigns to promote traffic safety require 

individuals with the following skills: 

-

-

-

a project manager with the skills to coordinate and deliver the campaign 

on time and according to the available budget, 

experienced staff with knowledge in behavioral or social sciences that will 

work on the content of the campaign and identify the target audience, and 

media and marketing staff to assist in delivering the message according 

to a well-designed marketing and advertising program. 

Individuals with these skills may be found in local government agencies, 

business partners, colleges or universities, or volunteer organizations. 

•

•

•

•

Create a communications brief – The communications brief summarizes the 

goals and objectives of the media campaign, the target audience, planned 

activities, and potential methods to measure the effects of the campaign. This 

brief can be made available to partners in the community and the public at 

meetings or via a Web site or newsletter. 

Develop the campaign – During the development phase creative ideas should 

be designed and tested on a focus group made up of individuals similar to the 

target audience. Make revisions to the product based on these events. Include 

suggestions from partner agencies. 

Deliver the campaign – Attempt to launch the media campaign with fanfare, 

including press releases, paid media, and extensive advertising. Reinforce the 

media message regularly at community events and during any press time. 

Encourage other stakeholders to use the key messages from the media 

campaign in any relevant forums in which they participate. 

Evaluate the impact – An effective media campaign includes an evaluation 

piece, similar to the speed enforcement program as a whole. A pre- and postcampaign survey of the target audience can be used to measure exposure as 

well as effects of the campaign on knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. 

Behavioral changes may also be measured via speed studies. 

Publicity campaigns alone may have a mild impact on attitudes and behavior but work 

best when combined with enforcement (GRSP, 2002). Ultimately, the greater risk of 

being stopped and penalized is a stronger motive for reducing speeds than the risk of 

being in a crash. The use of publicity and media enhances the effects of an 

enforcement campaign if the announcements on enforcement activities are realistic 

(Elvik, 2001). 
30

NHTSA SPEED CAMPAIGN TOOL KIT 

To assist States and communities in their speed management programs, NHTSA 

has developed a speed communications toolkit with an enforcement message 

as well as a social norming message to be used in between enforcement periods. The 

Web-based toolkit provides earned media templates such as press releases, letters to 

the editor, op-ed pieces and fact sheets that can be tailored to the specific city, town 

or jurisdiction, while at the same time providing a means for partnering with other 

States, communities, and organizations. The toolkit also includes television spots in 

English and Spanish, radio spots, billboard creatives and posters to support your speed 

management initiatives. 

The toolkit can be found at http://www.trafficsafetymarketing.gov

If your State or community does not wish to utilize the tools developed by NHTSA in this 

toolkit, we have provided information below for you to begin your own speed campaign. 

SELECTING THE TARGET AUDIENCE 

Specific audiences that may be targeted include residents in the community, residents 

from neighboring communities, young drivers, and/or repeat offenders. Messages may 

be tailored for each audience according to its characteristics, such as age group, 

knowledge, and attitudes. Focus groups can be helpful to learn about the types of 

messaging suitable for a specific target audience, such as radio stations that attract 

teens, foreign-language radio stations, or billboards at the entrance to the community to 

inform neighboring residents about the speed enforcement program. 

SELECTING THE RIGHT MESSAGE 

An effective message regarding the dangers of speeding and a speed enforcement 

program is emotive, attention grabbing, and informational; includes an enforcement 

slant; and provides information on the consequences of speeding. Delivering a strong 

message requires marketing, social advocacy, and advertising expertise (GRSP, 2002). 

Stakeholder meetings should be held in the planning and development stages to discuss 

the objective of the campaign and the type of messaging, activities, and materials that 

will be developed. It is important to keep the stakeholders involved while the program is 

running and to get their assistance in presenting the key message of the media 

campaign in various forums during the course of the program. 

It is important to focus on both the content and the style of the message. Where multiple 

messages are used there should be a consistent slogan or tag line that ties them 

together. Message content should be realistic and credible. It is more interesting if the 

message contains new information. The message should be presented in novel ways to 

gain and maintain attention, especially in a long-term speed enforcement program. 

Methods to revise and refresh media messaging include meeting with your partners to 

devise new creative approaches, evaluating the success of the current message and 

media campaign, and conducting focus groups with representatives from your target 

audience to assess possibilities for new message content. 
31

OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMUNICATION 

Various modes of communication can be used for informing the public of enforcement 

activities and the program’s goals and progress, as well as for receiving comments and 

concerns from the residents of the community. Selection of a specific method should be 

tailored to the characteristics and needs of each community. Opportunities for 

communication can include the following: 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Traffic Safety Committee – The formation of a local Traffic Safety Committee 

can increase community support for speed enforcement efforts.

Committee meetings and local government assemblies – Participation may 

be as a speaker, a participant in a question-and-answer session, or an expert to 

support governmental activities. 

Local radio, including public service announcements, traffic reporting, and 

paid media – Use this platform to establish a recognized presence, answer 

residents’ questions, and relate recent or upcoming activities. For example, 

officers may participate in the morning traffic report on various local radio shows, 

giving residents an opportunity to speak directly with law enforcement and relate 

issues that are important to them. 

Local newspapers and newsletters – Provide press releases on activities 

and outcomes of the program on a regular basis. Raise the reporters’ interest 

by encouraging them to ride along and witness the speed enforcement activity 

in action. 

A prominent spokesperson – Recruiting a local sports figure or media icon to 

present the speed enforcement message on the various media outlets may 

provide an effective boost to the campaign. 

Fliers and brochures – These may be used to relate factual information and 

data, describe activities, and detail the goals and objectives of the program. 

Fliers and brochures may be handed out in various public venues or mailed to 

community residents. 

Informational handouts provided by law enforcement personnel – Handouts 

such as a ticket enclosure with information about the risks of speeding and the 

speed enforcement program may serve as educational material and be 

distributed while conducting speed enforcement activities. 

Web sites – The community and the law enforcement agency Web sites are 

useful venues to announce program activities, present answers to frequently 

asked questions, present findings and report program progress, and provide 

contact information. 

Fixed billboards, variable message signs (VMS), and speed reader boards – 

These may be used to publicize speed-related messages and eye-catching 

slogans. They may be located in construction zones and school zones, along 

highways and arterial roadways, and in residential communities. 

School activities and local grassroots events – These venues are helpful for 

face-to-face meetings with community residents. For example, a booth on the 

speed enforcement program might be set up at a community health fair or on 

back-to-school night at the local high school. 
32

•

•

National or statewide slogans and events – Capitalize on large-scale special 

enforcement activities and tailor messaging for your community. 

Annual evaluations and reports – Furnish partner agencies and members of 

the community with the program evaluation results in a periodic or annual report. 

This report may be a short leaflet or a more comprehensive report detailing 

activities, speed and crash data, and public opinion regarding the program. 

ROLE OF ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL 

In addition to their enforcement role, officers may play a part in the media and 

communications plan. High-profile policing and inclusion of law enforcement in the 

media campaign send a powerful deterrent message (GRSP, 2002). 

Many larger State, county, and city law enforcement agencies have a full-time public 

affairs unit that deals with public education and outreach. In some smaller organizations 

the traffic unit takes responsibility for keeping the public informed. 

Public awareness of the speed enforcement program can be amplified through the 

methods of enforcement. For example, all of the jurisdictions participating in a centrally 

coordinated statewide program may use the same type of vehicle – dark sedans with the 

agency’s name on the side and the statewide logo emblazoned in fiery letters – which 

enhances the impact by presenting a large unified force throughout the State. Some 

traffic enforcement units conduct enforcement in groups (sometimes known as a wolf 

pack) in order to raise visibility and enhance the effects of traffic enforcement. 

The message that an officer presents when conducting a traffic stop, possibly including a 

handout on the risks of speeding, can effectively communicate the goals and objectives 

of the speed enforcement program and have a lasting impact on driver behavior. 

DEFLECTING A NEGATIVE IMAGE IN THE MEDIA 

Often a law enforcement agency will receive a negative response from the community 

regarding speed enforcement, especially if speed enforcement is viewed as a source of 

revenue. Any media campaign regarding speed enforcement should include an 

explanation of the rationale for setting speed limits, the risks of speeding, and the 

importance of increasing public safety. The message should be clear that speed 

enforcement is not conducted to generate revenue but rather to balance safety and 

mobility. In fact, the goal is not to detect and punish speeders but to deter speeding in 

the first place (NHTSA, 2005a). 

Maintaining a constructive relationship with the local media outlets is another method to 

raise the level of positive messaging. Successful speed enforcement programs invite 

the press to learn more about the program, involve them in plans for future campaigns, 

and are receptive to traffic reporters and other media representatives about ideas for a 

media campaign. 

MAINTAINING A MEDIA AND COMMUNICATION PROGRAM 

A community may maintain the media campaign by publicizing evaluations of the 

program and releasing new information and statistics on a periodic basis. Information 

can be updated on a weekly, monthly, or annual basis via press releases, newsletters, 
33

emails, Web sites, and school campaigns. It is important to make contact with the press 

on a regular basis and keep them focused on the topic. 
34

CHAPTER 7. LEGISLATION, REGULATION AND POLICY 

An effective speed enforcement program depends on the support of local policy makers, 

elected officials, judges, and prosecutors. Speed enforcement needs to be an integral 

part of the public policy agenda. 

COORDINATING WITH POLICY MAKERS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS 

The leadership and support of policy makers are critical to establishing the program’s 

direction and emphasis, establishing a legal basis for the program, obtaining funding, 

and gaining support within the community. 

The local city council or civic association often has input regarding the speed 

enforcement program. Council committees or civic organizations should include 

representatives from law enforcement, judiciary and prosecutors, the transportation 

department, schools, traffic safety engineers, healthcare, and the community. Regular 

meetings of statewide or local traffic safety organizations or committees are the best 

way for the various stakeholders to learn about the program successes and share ideas 

and information. 

Policy makers and elected officials often feel a need to respond to complaints made 

by residents. One way to encourage policy makers to support the speed enforcement 

program is to invite them to local resident or community board meetings where 

community members will openly discuss their concerns regarding traffic safety in 

their neighborhood. 

Local, regional, and statewide decision makers should be educated about the 

importance of enforcing speeds and the role of traffic safety in the realm of public health. 

The media officer or liaison might use public meetings of elected officials to brief them 

on the benefits traffic safety will have on the overall safety and welfare of the community. 

ESTABLISHING A LEGAL BASIS FOR SPEED ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM 

Some communities have enacted resolutions or ordinances that establish a legal basis 

for the speed enforcement program. When the program is established by resolution or 

statute in the local laws and ordinances of the community, it provides a solid foundation 

for the program and legitimizes it to the stakeholders. The resolution represents a clear 

statement that the governmental leaders recognize the seriousness of the speed-related 

safety problem and the need to address it by means of a speed enforcement program. It 

underscores the need for cooperation within the community and among agencies to 

accomplish the program’s objectives. The governing body resolution or statutory basis 

is likely to include the following components: 

•

•

•

•

•

title, 

statements recognizing the problem and its characteristics, 

statements of the approach to countermeasures, 

statements of the desire to establish a program and guidelines for its 

management, 

resolution incorporating and approving the speed enforcement program, and 
35

• an attachment containing the detailed speed enforcement operation plan. 

An example of a model resolution and a list of key elements for a program plan are 

shown in Appendix F. 

COORDINATING WITH JUDGES AND PROSECUTORS 

Speeding violations need to be dealt with seriously and expediently to support law 

enforcement’s focus on speed management. The judiciary and the prosecutorial branch 

in a community are responsible for adjudicating the citations issued by law enforcement. 

When establishing an enhanced speed enforcement program it is important to inform 

local judges and prosecutors regarding the potential for a temporary increase in number 

of citations issued and to educate them on the value of the program as well as the need 

to uphold the citations in the courts. Program managers can use the following 

approaches with judges and other court officials to ensure their buy-in and support: 

Invite the local hearing officer to join the officers in the field to see firsthand that 

the enforcement principles are sound and the citations are handled correctly. 

Provide the chief judge with an annual informational report that reviews various 

traffic enforcement issues, including fatalities, crashes, top 10 intersections, etc. 

Meet with local judges on a regular basis and provide them with measurable 

results of the traffic enforcement program. 

Meet with any newly assigned judges and prosecutors to educate them on the 

goals and progress of the program, stressing the importance of judiciary and 

prosecutorial participation in future success. 

•

•

•

•

ESTABLISHING A PENALTY STRUCTURE FOR SPEEDING VIOLATIONS 

The penalty structure may be established via the local legislature or within the courts; 

however, maintaining a consistent penalty structure for speeding violations enhances the 

validity of a speed enforcement program. Residents of the community should be wellinformed regarding the penalties for different levels of violations. Licensing point demerit 

systems with graduated penalties for speeding, excessive speeding, and aggressive 

driving have helped reduce inconsistencies in treatment of violators (TRB, 1998). In 

some States the types of charges and penalties are structured on the basis of the level 

of speeding over the posted speed limit, with lower speeds resulting in civil charges and 

fines and higher speeds charged as criminal offenses. 

Unlike traditional speed enforcement, ASE programs often treat speeding violations as 

civil infractions, like parking tickets, and this allows for more efficient administrative 

processing of the violations. In some jurisdictions the owner of the vehicle is held 

responsible, while in others the driver must be identified. 
36

CHAPTER 8. PROGRAM EVALUATION 

Program evaluation requires effort and commitment. Results identify successes and 

limitations of the program and can direct future actions. 

The effectiveness of any speed enforcement program can be appraised by examining 

changes in driving behavior and speeding-related crash rates. The evaluation should 

review all aspects of the program (engineering, enforcement, and marketing and media) 

and address questions such as: 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

To what extent were crashes reduced overall and at the high-priority locations? 

To what extent have speeds been reduced at high-priority locations and 

in general? 

Was staffing sufficient? 

Were the various agencies cooperative and responsive to the needs of 

the program? 

Was the choice of speed measurement equipment appropriate? 

Were the strategies for outreach and enforcement countermeasures effective? 

What changes are needed for current strategies and approaches? 

REGULAR MONITORING OF SPEEDS, CRASHES, AND OTHER MEASURES 

Speeds 

Speed data collection should be ongoing throughout the course of the program. If 

possible, speed data should be collected seasonally and for complete 24-hour periods to 

account for variations in traffic patterns due to changes in weather patterns and by time 

of day. Measuring speeds at enforcement sites on a regular basis will assist the speed 

management team in recognizing whether enforcement needs to revisit a location 

periodically in order to maintain safe speeds. Of particular interest would be measured 

changes in the mean and 85th percentile speeds as well as dispersion of speeds along 

the enforced roadways throughout the course of the program. Collecting speed data will 

also allow program managers to calculate the percentages of vehicles traveling a certain 

speed over the speed limit. That is, program managers might be able to identify the 

percentage of vehicles exceeding various thresholds (e.g., 5, 10, or 15 mph over the 

posted speed limits). Tracking changes in these percentages will allow an assessment 

of how the program is reaching the most aggressive drivers and whether different 

strategies need to be adopted. 

In addition to measuring speeds along the enforced roadways, program managers may 

periodically measure speeds along other roadways in the community to identify the 

presence of halo effects throughout the jurisdiction. Analysis of all these speed 

measures over time will provide law enforcement agencies with the information needed 

to make decisions regarding where to enforce and the level of enforcement required. 
37

Crashes 

Program managers may track crash and fatality rates for the selected roadways in the 

community to determine the percentage of increase or decrease in crashes at the 

enforcement sites prior to, during, and following enforcement activity. Tracking fatal 

crash rates (i.e., crashes per hundred or thousand daily vehicles at each site) might 

provide program managers with the tangible evidence needed to show policy makers 

and other interested stakeholders that enforcing speeds saves lives. 

Citations 

Although changes in speeds and crashes are the most objective measures of the 

effectiveness of a speed enforcement program, citation data could be used to support 

the statistical findings from the crash and speed analyses. At the onset of a speed 

enforcement program, speeding citations might increase on selected roadways or 

throughout the entire jurisdiction. As the program takes hold and the driving public 

becomes more aware of the program’s objectives, it is expected that drivers will slow 

down and the need to write speeding citations will decrease. However, care should be 

taken when interpreting this change in the number of citations written over time. This 

change may reflect changes in program resources or priorities. 

Crime Rates 

If the budget allows, program managers may track the level of crime in the community 

prior to, during, and after an extended period of traffic and speed enforcement. The 

conspicuous presence of law enforcement within the community for speed enforcement 

might indirectly affect the overall crime rate. This type of information might play a key 

role in outlining the overall benefits of the program when communicating with policy 

makers and other stakeholders. 

Although much of the statistics required for the speed and crash analyses is 

rudimentary, more advanced analyses of the data might require the use of special 

computer programs that calculate traffic statistics or require the services of a 

professional statistician or analyst. Agencies lacking in-house analysts may be able to 

get assistance from State or county police agencies, the Governor’s Highway Safety 

Office, a local college or university, or a consultant. 

GATHERING INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY 

Public perception of the speed enforcement program is crucial to its success, thus it is 

important to be aware of residents’ knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and concerns and to 

address them in the design and evaluation of the program. Residents should be able to 

convey their comments and concerns to speed enforcement program managers and 

believe that their opinions are being heard. Conversely, program managers might be 

able to use information and suggestions gleaned from the public to modify the program 

and increase its effectiveness. 

There are a variety of ways to seek out the public’s knowledge and opinion of the 

program. At the most rudimentary level, officers can knock on doors to speak with 

residents and gather feedback from the community. Program managers might also 

establish telephone hotlines for residents. Comments and concerns may also be 

expressed at public meetings, by email, or by postal mail. 

Program managers or representatives from the law enforcement agency are encouraged 

to attend community events, and law enforcement agencies may also hold an open 
38

house, allowing the public to interact with program managers, line officers, and various 

other agencies involved. Neighborhood association meetings can be used to give the 

program managers a chance to meet with and educate the public, assess their opinion 

of the program, and address questions. At these events a brief questionnaire can be 

distributed addressing the key evaluation issues associated with the public’s perception 

of the program. 

Conducting public attitude and awareness surveys is a more formal approach to 

assessing the effects of the speed enforcement program in the community and the 

public’s opinion of the program. The surveys should be carefully designed to 

collect information regarding the effectiveness of the enforcement activity and the 

media campaign in terms of changes in knowledge, attitudes, and behavior of the 

driving public. 

The number of respondents will vary depending on how the survey is administered. For 

example, an online multiple-choice questionnaire can be periodically posted on the law 

enforcement’s Web site so that residents can use the link at their leisure. Alternatively, 

random phone surveys can periodically engage residents of the community, or one-page 

printed surveys can be distributed to residents at the local DMV customer service 

centers. Questions should focus on: 

the frequency of the respondent’s travel throughout the jurisdiction; 

awareness of speed enforcement throughout the jurisdiction; 

opinion regarding the fairness of the enforcement level; 

awareness of the marketing and media campaign focusing on the speed 

enforcement program (knowledge of slogan, media spots, news print ads, 

etc.); and 

changes in the respondent’s own driving behavior. 

•

•

•

•

•

By distributing a survey of this type periodically, program managers can continually 

assess the success and limitations of the program in terms of public awareness. 

If the budget allows, program managers may contract out to a market research firm or 

local university to conduct surveys on behalf of the speed management program. In this 

situation the topics are chosen by program management but the actual phrasing of the 

questions, methodology, administration, and analyses are performed by the contractor. 

Finally, a focus group can provide a structured method to delve deeply into people’s 

opinions and knowledge regarding the program. This method is labor intensive and, 

because it can only be conducted with up to 10 individuals per session, does not provide 

a broad representative sample of the community. 

ANALYZING AND REPORTING PROGRESS 

Periodic progress reports allow program managers another way to communicate with 

participating agencies and disseminate information to the residents of the community. 

Depending on its intended audience, a progress report can vary in length and level of 

detail but might include the following elements: 

• Introduction – Identify program objectives and describe the program. 
39

•

•

•

Procedures – Describe the program procedures and identify responsibilities of 

agencies and key stakeholders. 

Findings – Present descriptive statistics of the findings regarding speeds, crashes, 

citations, citizen complaints, public attitudes and opinions, and feedback from any 

of the key stakeholders. 

Lessons Learned – Include details on any approaches that were not deemed 

successful and any infor

interpret findings. 

mation that can be used to improve the program or help to 

Program managers might also want to include information regarding media hits, 

numbers of officers actively involved in the enforcement effort, and hours spent on 

enforcement for the period of time reflected in the report. Although objective statistics 

are important, it is important to note that raw numbers are not always a clear indication 

of the success of the program. For example, a rise in the number of crashes may be the 

result of changes in traffic patterns (increased vehicle miles of travel) or growth in the 

community. In reporting progress it is important to assess performance on the basis of 

the objectives and goals initially identified in the enforcement plan. If objectives are not 

met, a clear explanation of why the goals were not achieved should be included in any 

report documentation. It is important to include information on those activities that were 

attempted but did not succeed so that the same actions will not be repeated. A wellorganized progress report will not only provide statistical evidence of the program’s 

progress but will also provide a basis for decisions regarding future changes to the 

speed management strategies or marketing and media campaigns. 

PROVIDING FEEDBACK TO PARTNER AGENCIES AND PARTICIPANTS 

To effectively provide feedback to program team members as well as the residents of the community, a variety of outlets should be used in order to reach the 

greatest numbers. 

The simplest approach is to occasionally call an individual or one of the cooperative 

agencies to recognize their contribution to the program and provide the agency with 

some results. In addition, regular team meetings can be used to provide team members 

and agencies with program information. Meetings with cooperating agencies might be 

the best way to review the various components of the program, disseminate findings, 

trade information, and plan strategies and events. Program managers can also make 

presentations regarding the program at community, neighborhood association, or other 

public meetings. 

Progress reports can also be a very effective device for providing feedback. Law 

enforcement agencies can post the entire report on their Web sites, but it may also be 

useful for program managers to develop a one-page fact sheet highlighting key aspects 

of the program. This fact sheet can also be posted on the cooperating agencies’ Web 

sites or distributed to the residents of the community as a brochure, in a community 

paper, or through the postal service. 

Information regarding the status of the program can periodically be published via a 

media packet distributed to the local TV/radio stations and print media. This is an 

effective tool for distributing information at the beginning of any program as well as 

reviving interest later. 
40

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Aarts, L., and van Schagen, I. (2006). Driving speed and the risk of road crashes: A 

review. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38 215-24. 

Association of Chief Police Officers of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland (2004). 

Speed enforcement guidelines: Joining forces for safer roads. London, England: 

Association of Chief Police Officers of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. 

Blincoe, L., Seay, A., Zaloshnja, E., Miller, T., Romano, E., Luchter, S., and Spicer, R. 

(2000). The economic impact of motor vehicle crashes. Report DOT HS 809 446, 

Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 

Bowie, N.N., and Walz, M. (1994). Data analysis of the speed-related crash issue. Auto 

and Traffic Safety, 2, 31-38. 

Cameron, M., Newstead, S., Diamantopoulou, K., and Oxley, P. (2003). The interaction 

between speed camera enforcement and speed-related mass media publicity in 

Victoria. Report No. 201. Australia: Accident Research Centre, Monash University. 

Cirillo, J.A. (1968). Interstate System Accident Research- Study II- Interim Report II. 

Public Roads, Vol. 35, No. 3. 

Delaney, A., Diamantopoulou, K., and Cameron, M. (2003). MUARC's Speed 

enforcement research: Principles learnt and implications for practice. Report No. 

200. Melbourne, Australia: Accident Research Centre, Monash University. 

Elliot, M., and Broughton, J. (2004). How methods and levels of policing affect road 

casualty rates. Project 476. London, England: TRL for Transport for London. 

Elvik, R. (2001). Cost-benefit analysis of police enforcement. Working Paper 1. Finland: 

The Escape Project. 

Global Road Safety Partnership (2002). Road safety publicity campaigns. Geneva, 

Switzerland: GRSP Focus. 

Governors Highway Safety Association (2005). Survey of the States: Speeding. 

Washington, DC: Governors Highway Safety Association. 
41

International Association of Chiefs of Police (2004). Highway safety desk book. 

Alexandria, Virginia: International Association of Chiefs of Police. 

Liu, C., Chen, C.-L., Subramanian, R., and Utter, D. (2005). Analysis of speeding related 

fatal motor vehicle traffic crashes. Technical Report, DOT HS 809 839. 

Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (1992). Beyond the limits: A law 

enforcement guide to speed enforcement. Report DOT HS 807 802. Washington, 

DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2000). Guidelines for developing a 

municipal speed enforcement program. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration. 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2005a). National forum on speeding: 

Strategies for reducing speeding-related fatalities and injuries. Summary Report. 

Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2005b). Speed management strategic 

initiative. Report DOT HS 809 924. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration. 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2006a). Traffic safety facts 2005: 

Speeding. Report DOT HS 810 629. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration. 

New Zealand Police (2005). Speed enforcement guide. Wellington, New Zealand: 

National Road Safety Manager, Office of the Commissioner. 

Newstead, S. V., Cameron, M. H., and Leggett, L. M. W. (2001).The crash reduction 

effectiveness of a network-wide traffic police deployment system. Accident 

Analysis and Prevention, 33, 393-406. 

Orrick, D. (2004) Practical technology for smaller agencies. Police Chief, 71(10). 

Povey, L.J., Frith, W.J., and Deall, M.D. (2003). An investigation of the relationship 

between speed enforcement, vehicle speeds, and injury crashes in New 

Zealand. Wellington, New Zealand: Institution of Professional Engineers, 

Transportation Group. 
42

Royal, D. (2003). National survey of speeding and unsafe driving attitudes and behavior: 

2002.Report DOT HS 809 688. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration. 

Scott, M. S. (2001). Speeding in residential areas. Problem Oriented Guides for Police 

Series No. 3. Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Department of Justice. 

Solomon, D. (1964). Accidents on Main Rural Highways Related to Speed, Driver, 

and Vehicle. Bureau of Public Roads. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department 

of Commerce.

Smith, D., McIntyre, J., Anderson-Wilk, M., and Moreau, S. (2002). Handbook of 

Simplified Practice for Traffic Studies. Iowa DOT Project TR-455, CTRE Project 01-

80. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University. 

Transportation Research Board (1998). Managing speed: Review of current practice for 

setting and enforcing speed limits. Special Report 254. Washington, DC: 

Transportation Research Board.
A-1

Appendix A 

Acknowledgments 
A-2

Acknowledgments

Westat wishes to thank representatives of law enforcement agencies and highway safety 

professionals who participated in the Expert Panel on Effective Speed Enforcement Programs 

held on April 3, 2006. The objective of the workshop was to explore in depth the objectives, 

planning, implementation steps and obstacles, program components, and ongoing requirements 

for successful speed enforcement programs. 

Agency Representatives

Major Christopher K. Minter 

Joe Farrow Commander, Office of Field Operations 

Deputy Commissioner Ohio State Highway Patrol 

California Highway Patrol Ohio 

California 

Lieutenant Mark Kruger 

Sergeant Lee Vitgenos Traffic Division 

Supervisor, Traffic Unit Portland Police Bureau 

Thornton Police Department Oregon 

Colorado 

Captain Jesse Bowman 

Officer John Flynn Commander, Traffic Division 

Motorcycle Unit Fairfax County Police 

Kissimmee Police Department Virginia 

Florida 

Captain Dave Moyer 

Ricky Rich Stafford County Sheriff 

Special Operations Director Virginia 

Governor's Office of Highway Safety 

Georgia 

Lieutenant Sean Hartsock 

Sergeant Scott Kristiansen Field Operations Bureau 

Supervisor, Traffic Division Washington State Patrol 

Buffalo Grove Police Department Washington 

Illinois 
B-1

Appendix B 

Resources 
B-2

RESOURCES 

Literature: 

Beyond the Limits: A Law Enforcement Guide to Speed Enforcement - This National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration publication provides information on speed 

enforcement techniques and program guidelines. Report DOT HS 807 802, 1992. 

Guidelines for Developing a Municipal Speed Enforcement Program - The National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration developed a short how to guide on developing a 

municipal speed enforcement program. 

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/enforce/program.htm 

Handbook of Simplified Practice for Traffic Studies - Developed by the Center for 

Transportation Research and Education (CTRE) at Iowa State University this handbook 

describes simplified step-by-step procedures for conducting traffic studies including: 

Spot Speed, Traffic Volume Counts, Sight Distance, Crash Analysis, and School Zone 

Program. http://www.ctre.iastate.edu/pubs/traffichandbook/ 

Managing speed: Review of current practice for setting and enforcing speed limits - This 

Transportation Research Board Special Report Number 254 reviews practices for setting 

and enforcing speed limits on all types of roads and provides guidance to State and local 

governments on appropriate methods of setting speed limits and related enforcement 

strategies. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr254.pdf 

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices - The MUTCD defines the standards used by 

road managers nationwide to install and maintain traffic control devices on all streets 

and highways. The MUTCD is published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 

under 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 655, Subpart F. 

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/ 

Web sites: 

Center for Problem-Oriented Policing - A private nonprofit corporation established to 

advance the practice of problem-oriented policing and supported by the Office of 

Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice.

http://www.popcenter.org/ 

Community Policing Consortium - A partnership of police organizations funded by the 

U.S. Department of Justice to deliver community policing training and technical 

assistance to police departments and sheriff's offices. http://www.communitypolicing.org/ 

Federal Highway Administration - FHWA, an agency in the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, coordinates highway transportation programs in cooperation with States 

and other partners to enhance the country's safety, economic vitality, quality of life, and 

the environment. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ 
B-3

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety - The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is a 

nonprofit research and communications organization funded by auto insurers. 

http://www.iihs.org/ 

International Association of Chiefs of Police - The IACP is a nonprofit organization of 

police executives and serves as a source for exchange of information among police 

administrators. http://www.iacp.org/ 

IACP Technology Clearinghouse - Source for technology related information that 

addresses all aspects of public safety. http://www.iacptechnology.org/ 

National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives - NOBLE represents State, 

local and federal law enforcement executives and provides training, research and 

consultation on criminal justice issues. http://www.noblenational.org/ 

National Center for Rural Law Enforcement - A division of the Criminal Justice Institute, 

University of Arkansas System provides many services to law enforcement, and 

primarily to the rural law enforcement community. One of the services provided to rural 

law enforcement is no cost Internet access and e-mail. http://www.ncrle.net/ 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration - NHTSA, an agency in the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, sets and enforces safety performance standards for 

motor vehicles and equipment, provides grants to State and local governments as well 

as other partners to enable them to conduct effective local highway safety programs, 

and conducts research on traffic safety issues. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ 

National Sheriffs’ Association - A nonprofit organization dedicated to raising the level of 

professionalism among law enforcement leaders across the Nation. 

http://www.sheriffs.org/ 

National Traffic Law Center - Designed by the American Prosecutors Research Institute 

this site is a resource for legal and technical information and training and reference 

services on highway safety issues. http://www.ndaaapri.org/apri/programs/traffic/ntlc_home.html 

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services - A Federal office in the U.S. 

Department of Justice dedicated to advancing community policing. Information on 

grants, technical assistance, and numerous publications on problem-solving policing are 

available. http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/ 

Police Foundation - Conducts research on police behavior, policy, and procedure, and 

works to transfer to local agencies the best new information about practices for dealing 

effectively with a range of important police operational and administrative concerns. 

http://www.policefoundation.org/ 
B-4

NHTSA’s Marketing and Communications Web Site – The Web site contains a toolkit 

with up-to-date information on the latest communications news, materials, and marketing 

techniques. The resources available to you can be used in several capacities and are 

built on two message platforms: 

•

•

Social-Norming - Stop Speeding Before It Stops You 

Enforcement - Obey the Sign or Pay the Fine

These messages were developed by a major marketing and research firm and target 

audience demographics of men and women ages 21 – 49. The toolkit was developed 

through the use of focus groups and state-of-the-art marketing research. 

The NHTSA Communications Toolkit seeks to address speeding on two fronts. The 

enforcement message communicates the need to comply with posted speed limits and 

the real and appropriate penalties exist for non-compliance. Social-norming messages 

communicate the consequences that can occur in speeding-related collisions. The 

two messages work together to reduce the incidents of speeding and speedingrelated crashes. The toolkit is available at: http://trafficsafetymarketing.gov
C-1

Appendix C 

Checklist for Sustaining a 

Long-Term Speed Enforcement Program 
C-2

CHECKLIST FOR SUSTAINING A 

LONG-TERM SPEED ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM 

Deterrence based on a single enforcement campaign will diminish over time. 

Enforcement alone will change short-term behavior but will not change underlying 

attitudes of the driving public. Maintaining the deterrent effect and making permanent 

changes to driver behavior requires long term and sustained enforcement activity which 

needs to be driven by hard evidence (speed and crash data) and educating the public on 

the dangers associated with speeding. 

Communities that have succeeded in establishing and maintaining effective speed 

enforcement programs have indicated a number of key elements that contribute to 

the success: 



















Emphasize the importance of traffic enforcement starting at the top of the chain of 

command. The head of the law enforcement agency must demonstrate to the line 

officers the importance of the traffic safety and the speed enforcement program 

within the agency’s agenda and the surrounding community. 

Develop a strategic plan in writing that engages all levels of your law enforcement 

agency. A comprehensive plan includes clearly stated goals. Program results are 

evaluated on the basis of the terms stated in the strategic plan. 

Integrate the speed enforcement program goals and objectives with other law 

enforcement initiatives within the agency. 

Use speed and crash data to help assign resources to target locations in need of 

increased law enforcement. 

Bolster the foundations of the speed enforcement program by gaining the buy-in and 

cooperation of all constituents, including your local government, judges and 

prosecutors, legislature, and community stakeholders. Consider starting with 

popular issues such as school zones or construction zones and at locations where 

the safety risks are well documented. 

Coordinate with other agencies to enhance the effectiveness and reach of the speed 

enforcement program. 

Encourage the initiative and participation of line officers while planning and executing 

the speed enforcement program. The most effective campaigns involve input from 

line officers. 

Recognize individuals who contribute to the speed enforcement program. Evaluate 

the actions of your personnel and award those who excel. 

Encourage voluntary compliance within your community. Engage residents, keep 

the public informed, and educate the community to drive safely. 
C-3









Sustain the speed enforcement program by making it innovative, creative, and 

engaging for your staff and the community. Change the program’s approach to 

reflect the changes within the community. 

Stay committed and focused. Once a program is in place, follow through on 

reaching your goals. 

Continuously evaluate your speed enforcement program using crash and speed 

data, review the results of the program in terms of your action plan, and determine 

what did and did not succeed. 

Agencies that are interested in establishing a speed enforcement program need not 

reinvent the wheel. Use the lessons learned from other communities. 
D-1

Appendix D 

Overcoming Obstacles to Implementing 

An Effective Program 
D-2

OVERCOMING OBSTACLES TO IMPLEMENTING 

AN EFFECTIVE PROGRAM 

ESTABLISHING A PROGRAM 

A variety of obstacles may arise during the planning, coordination, and implementation 

phases of a speed enforcement program. Some of the difficulties an agency may 

encounter include obstacles to establishing a program, resistance from key participants, 

difficulties developing and sustaining an effective media and marketing program, issues 

with day to day field operations, and obstacles to program evaluation. Examples of 

common obstacles to establishing a program include: 

• Insufficient funding to purchase equipment – An effective speed enforcement 

program requires a steady amount of funding for equipment and manpower. 

Often resources are set aside at the start of the program; however, the levels of 

funding do not always suffice. There are various methods by which a community 

could save on equipment purchases. 

-

-

-

-

Consider carefully the types of equipment that will be useful for your 

agency and community. Consult with other experienced agencies and 

make purchases based on informed decisions. 

The budgetary plan can be designed so that purchases are made in 

phases on an annual basis. 

Equipment can be purchased in partnership with nearby communities to 

take advantage of volume discounts resulting in lower prices. 

There are a variety of funding sources, including grant monies, for 

equipment purchases. 

• Trouble getting buy-in from local elected officials – Engaging and educating 

local decision makers on the importance of the speed enforcement program to 

the community early and often can encourage support from elected officials. 

-

-

-

-

Include local policy makers in the planning process. 

Keep elected officials informed of the plan’s progress. 

Provide detailed information, preferably in writing, supported by data on 

speeds and crashes, on the benefits of the program. 

Leverage the support of partner organizations and residents in the 

community on behalf of the speed enforcement program. Policy makers 

and elected officials often feel a need to respond to complaints made 

by residents. 

• Patrol officers think that traffic enforcement is not important – Make traffic 

enforcement part of your agency’s culture. Traffic enforcement is recognized as 

an important law enforcement component to prevent crime and promote safety in 

the community. 

- Obtain the support of the head of the law enforcement agency. If the 

Chief, Sheriff, or Commissioner recognizes the importance of traffic safety 
D-3

in the community, other officers will be inspired to place the same value 

on the speed enforcement program. 

Remind your officers that small stops lead to big stops. Program 

managers should to stress to all officers the need to recognize that traffic 

enforcement is part of their duties and responsibilities in the community. 

Small traffic stops often reveal greater problems, violations or crimes, and 

the crime rate will generally drop in a community when a law enforcement 

agency intensifies its traffic enforcement campaign. 

Enlist the support of your personnel by keeping them informed about the 

plans for the speed enforcement program. 

Encourage officers’ input while developing strategies and activities on 

behalf of the program. 

-

-

-

• New judge comes to town and begins to overturn speeding citations – 

Contact the new judge personally to request support on behalf of the speed 

COORDINATING KEY PARTICIPANTS 

enforcement program. 

-

-

-

-

-

If there are other judges in the community who are supportive of 

the program, enlist their assistance in approaching the new judge to 

gain support. 

Provide the judge with the background that led to the establishment of 

the program. 

Indicate that the program is supported by objective speed, crash, and 

citation measures and that enforcement locations are selected on the 

basis of well-documented safety risks. 

Present the results of previous program evaluations. 

Keep the judge informed of the results of the enforcement program on a 

regular basis. 

• Community does not have a local traffic engineering office – Traffic 

engineers provide an essential service to a speed enforcement program because 

of their work conducting speed measurements and analysis of safety problems. 

If there is no local traffic engineering office, it is essential that you find an 

alternative method to collect this data. 

-

-

-

There may be alternative partners in nearby communities or consultants 

at the State or regional level that can also provide these services to the 

local government. 

Recruit and coordinate with citizens interested in volunteering to conduct 

speed measurements on behalf of the community. 

Train officers to conduct spot speed studies. 
D-4

OPERATIONAL COMPONENTS OF THE PROGRAM 

• Law enforcement officers are diverted to other assignments – Make traffic 

enforcement a priority within the law enforcement agency. 

-

-

-

Use data on speeds and crashes in your community to prepare reports 

and disseminate information that emphasize the importance of the speed 

enforcement program and attest to the need for sufficient personnel and 

enforcement hours. 

Make it clear to supervisors that traffic enforcement will increase safety 

and raise approval ratings in the community. 

If there is a cut in resources try to integrate speed enforcement with other 

law enforcement initiatives. Develop different strategies that may be used 

to combat crime and increase traffic safety at the same time. For 

example, in some community road segments identified with both high 

levels of crime and high numbers of crashes can be the focus for 

increased enforcement. The visibility of law enforcement on those 

roadways results in lower rates of speeding and crashes as well as lower 

levels of criminal activity, which draws favorable attention to the speed 

enforcement program. 

DEVELOPING A COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM 

•

•

Local newspaper states that the latest speed enforcement activities were 

developed in order to generate revenue – The response to this type of 

accusation is to clarify that the exclusive focus of this law enforcement effort is on 

saving lives and improving safety in the community. Demonstrate that the 

enforcement sites are located where excessive speeds are of concern, using 

information from the analysis of both crash and speed data. Responses to 

queries regarding revenue will only degrade the status of the speed enforcement program. 

Limited budget for marketing and media – In some communities there will not 

be a large budget set aside for the media and marketing component of the speed 

enforcement program. Nonetheless this is an important element of the program, 

and there are different methods by which a community might implement a 

comprehensive media plan in spite of a limited budget. 

-

-

-

-

-

Provide the local media with contact information for the individual 

assigned as the representative for the speed enforcement program. 

Information on the program objectives, results, and successes can serve 

as filler on occasions when local news is thin. 

Issue press releases using your law enforcement personnel. 

Request PSA time from local radio stations. 

Use the local government or law enforcement agency Web site to present 

the goals and objectives of the program. Submit periodic updates on the 

results of the program. 

Attend local council, civic association, and other organizational meetings 

to present information on the program. 
D-5

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Get local residents involved in grassroots activities as a method to 

increase awareness of the program in the community. 

Hold local contests or public debates on the topic to get the community involved. 

Develop low-budget brochures and flyers. 

Work with schools to increase public awareness among teen drivers 

about the dangers of speeding. 

Enlist students at local high schools, colleges, or universities to work on 

the program as part of community service or related classes. 

Work with local businesses to gain support for the program. 

Use law enforcement officers’ routine contact with the public as a 

media tool. Contacts with the public should emphasize the message 

of the program. 

PROGRAM EVALUATION 

• Difficulties in accessing data to monitor crashes on a regular basis –

Access to data requires an organized records system. Ideally, data is filed 

appropriately with cross-references to a number of key pieces of information 

including, for example, crash date, location, patrol officer, crash type, and crash 

severity. If an agency’s records system is not filed in an organized manner, 

assign resources to classify the data from a certain date forward. 

Electronic data storage should be considered. 

There may be additional sources for crash data outside of the community, 

including county or statewide databases. However, access to these 

sources might depend on coordination with the relevant agencies. 

-

-

• Difficulty reporting on progress – The primary goal of a program evaluation is 

to identify changes due to the program, identify the program successes and 

failures, and report on progress to the community. 

-

-

-

The evaluation process requires staff time; however, the report on 

program progress does not have to be voluminous. A comprehensive 

periodic evaluation includes location-by-location speed measurements 

prior to and during the program, crash data prior to and during the 

program, and an assessment of community awareness and public opinion. 

The report may be as short as a page or two depending on the size of the 

program and the community. Agencies may obtain examples of 

evaluation reports from other law enforcement agencies or use these 

guidelines as a model. 

Distribute the report to partner organizations and stakeholders to raise 

awareness in the community and ensure future support for the speed 

enforcement program.
E-1

Appendix E 

Special Considerations for 

Small or Rural Communities 
E-2

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR SMALL OR RURAL COMMUNITIES 

Small and rural communities face a number of obstacles when establishing and 

sustaining a strong speed enforcement program. Assigning personnel solely to speed 

enforcement duties is a sizable step in developing a successful program. However, in 

some communities the establishment of a specialized traffic unit will require additional 

personnel and may not be feasible with existing funds and resources. In these 

instances, including speed enforcement within routine patrol duties may be enhanced 

by demonstrating a correlation between traffic safety and other enforcement activities. 

All officers within the agency must understand that part of their daily duties and 

responsibilities should be to enforce traffic laws. 

BUDGETARY CONCERNS 

Although some enforcement agencies might not have the budget or the means to enlist 

the aid of agencies to assist with the engineering and speed studies, marketing and 

media development, or public opinion surveys, they still can develop and sustain a 

strong speed enforcement program. The program managers might enlist the aid from 

other officers within the department as well as community volunteers. If funds are 

limited, program managers may use a grassroots approach to implement the program. 

Community events where large numbers of residents might gather may be used to 

distribute information regarding the program, educate the driving public, and promote 

support for the program. Officers can develop fliers or brochures to distribute to the 

community at county or health fairs, or via the local newspaper. Program managers can 

use local print, radio, and television media to reach a broader range of residents at one 

time. Local reporters often seek an interesting story that has community impact. 

STAFFING CONCERNS 

Where separate traffic engineering functions are not available, in-house staff can be 

trained to conduct spot speed studies along the targeted roadways to gather speed data 

for problem identification of sites in the community and to track the progress of the 

programs efforts. Basic computer programs such as Excel can be set up to calculate 

means, medians, and 85th percentile speeds and to record and track crashes. 

Alternatively, officers might be able to retrieve existing data from a State or county 

Department of Transportation (DOT). Staff at the State DOT can run queries based on 

instruction from the local agency, pulling data that would reflect crash rates in their 

specific community, or along targeted roads. 

INTERJURISDICTIONAL CONCERNS 

Smaller communities can team up with nearby jurisdictions to develop a collective 

approach to speeding problems on some roadways and to conduct speed enforcement 

along the same corridor. Using this approach, departments share the responsibility 

of enforcing speeds on selected roadways and can leverage the amount of speed 

enforcement. This working relationship involves communication on a regular basis 

to select target roadways and exchange information regarding the effectiveness of 

this approach. 
E-3

Coordination may take place between State, county, and local agencies. Many States’ 

approach to traffic safety is that the various State, county, and city jurisdictions work 

interdependently. However, some State law enforcement agencies work closely with 

many local communities, especially small jurisdictions that are trying to establish traffic 

safety programs. Often, State law enforcement agencies hold meetings with the more 

local agencies to publicize what officers are doing and exchange information. These 

meetings encourage cross-jurisdictional partnerships by showing how larger agencies 

can work with smaller agencies. 

VOLUNTEERS 

Once the program is developed and implemented, officers or program managers may 

recruit members of the community and various agencies by educating them on the 

program, its goals, most recent results, and ideas to expand it efforts. Community 

volunteers can be recruited and trained on how to conduct spot speed studies, conduct 

neighborhood speed watch programs, or assist in the marketing and media campaign by 

distributing information or developing brochures or Web site pages. 
F-1 

Appendix F 

Example of Local Government Resolution 

To Establish a 

Residential Speeding Control Program 
F-2 

EXAMPLE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A 

RESIDENTIAL SPEEDING ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM 

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A POLICY PERTAINING TO A RESIDENTIAL 

SPEEDING ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM. 

WHEREAS, speeding in residential neighborhoods and through school zones is a 

concern of residents and [Local Government]; and 

WHEREAS, the [Local Government] has established a number of programs designed to 

address residential speeding through a variety of physical measures, speed reminder 

devices, and police traffic enforcement; and 

WHEREAS, while these programs have been shown to temporarily reduce speeding in 

residential neighborhoods, they are expensive, sometimes controversial within the 

neighborhoods, and often only change behavior for a short period of time; and 

WHEREAS, the [Local Government] recognizes that since most speeding in 

neighborhoods is a direct result of the driving behavior of its residents, the best way to 

slow traffic down is for the residents to take responsibility for the driving behavior within 

their neighborhood; and 

WHEREAS, the [Local Government] program policy and guidelines includes a program 

that provides a way for residents to work with the [Local Government] to address 

residential speeding in their own neighborhoods; and 

WHEREAS, the [Local Government] desires to establish a program policy and guidelines 

that outlines how the [Local Government] will respond and what resources will be used 

to address residential speeding based upon that nature and extent of the speeding 

concern. 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE [LOCAL GOVERNMENT], 

AS FOLLOWS: 

That the Residential Speeding Enforcement Program and Policy, attached hereto and 

incorporated herein, is hereby approved. 

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the [Local Government], this DATE. 

A detailed and comprehensive Residential Speeding Enforcement Program and 

Policy for the Local Government Resolution should follow the Resolution and 

include the following elements: 

•

•

•

•

•

An overview and policy statement detailing the background for developing 

the program as well as goals and objectives. 

Plans for a media and marketing campaign. 

Details on the expected contribution of community residents to the program. 

Precise description of the basis for allocations of resources by the 

local government. 

Details on the allocation of traffic engineering hours to conduct spot 

speed studies. 
F-3 

•

•

•

Details on the allocation of law enforcement patrol hours. 

Details on the basis for installation of traffic calming devices. 

Details on the basis for installation of other speed zone signs and equipment. 



DOT HS 810 915

March 2008