StatusInsurance Institute for Highway Safety | Highway Loss DataReport Institute Family matters 2 of 3 earn acceptable or good rating in passenger-side test

4Risk of noncrash fires ALSO IN drops after recalls THIS ISSUE Vol. 53, No. 5 4Red light camera program August 16, 2018 guidelines spotlight safety Chrysler Pacifica, Honda Odyssey outperform Toyota Sienna in passenger-side small overlap test; LATCH ratings are mixed

he Toyota Sienna stumbled, the Chrysler Pacifica turned in we saw some structural deficiencies on the right side that still need an acceptable performance and the Honda Odyssey finished addressing.” T strong in the Institute’s passenger-side small overlap front The Pacifica earns an acceptable rating in the passenger-side small crash test. overlap front test, and the Odyssey earns a good rating. Results for The 2018–19 model minivans are the latest group to be put through the Odyssey first were released in September 2017. The Sienna earns the passenger-side small overlap test. A small overlap crash occurs a marginal rating in the passenger-side small overlap test. when just the front corner of the vehicle strikes another vehicle or an object such as a tree or utility pole. IIHS began rating vehicles for oc- Safety cage shortcomings cupant protection in a driver-side small overlap front crash in 2012 Starting with 2015 models, Toyota modified the structure of the and added the passenger-side test last year to make sure occupants Sienna to improve driver-side protection but didn’t make the same on both sides of the vehicle get equal protection. changes to the passenger side. As a result, the Sienna’s structure rates Manufacturers are making fast improvements to secure a good or poor in the passenger-side test. acceptable rating in the passenger-side test, one of the requirements “A safety cage must be strong enough to resist intrusion in a crash to earn a 2018 TOP SAFETY PICK+ award. to protect the people inside, no matter where they sit in the vehicle,” “In our latest passenger-side tests, we didn’t find any perfor- Zuby says. mance issues with safety belts or airbags like we did when we evalu- In the Sienna’s case, the structure allowed as much as 20 inches ated small and midsize SUVs earlier this year and midsize last of intrusion in the lower occupant compartment and more than 16 year,” says David Zuby, the Institute’s chief research officer. “Instead, inches of intrusion at the dashboard.

2 | Status Report — Vol. 53, No. 5 Small overlap front crash ratings for 2018–19 minivans

DRIVER SIDE PASSENGER SIDE Passenger Passenger injury measures

restraints & Head & Hip & Lower leg Overall Overall Structure kinematics neck Chest thigh & foot

Honda Odyssey G G A G G G G G

Chrysler Pacifica G A M G G G G G

Toyota Sienna A M P G G G A A

Good G Acceptable A Marginal M Poor P

A strong safety cage resists in- trusion in a crash to protect occu- pants. The Sienna (far left) rates poor for struc- ture in the pas- senger-side test due to as much as 20 inches of in- trusion into the lower occupant compartment. In the Odyssey, the occupant com- partment held up reasonably well to earn an accept- able rating for Toyota Sienna Honda Odyssey structure.

“The intruding structure crumpled around the test dummy’s legs. front crash prevention and have acceptable-rated headlights. Better A real right front passenger would sustain possible injuries to the headlights would have secured TOP SAFETY PICK+ awards for right hip and lower leg in a crash of this severity,” Zuby says. these minivans. Intrusion also was an issue for the Pacifica. Marginal ratings for To earn a 2018 TOP SAFETY PICK, a vehicle must have good rat- structure held this back from achieving the top rating in ings in all IIHS crashworthiness tests except the passenger-side test. the passenger-side small overlap test. Measures from dummy sen- Other requirements are a front crash prevention system that earns sors indicated low risk of injury, helping to offset the less-than-stel- an advanced or superior rating and headlights that earn an accept- lar structural rating. able or good rating. Fiat Chrysler introduced the Pacifica in the 2017 model year to To qualify for TOP SAFETY PICK+, a vehicle also must earn an replace the Chrysler Town & Country and upgraded protection in acceptable or good rating in the passenger-side small overlap front small overlap front crashes on both the driver and passenger sides, test and a good headlight rating. beginning with 2017 models built after August 2016. The Pacifica’s passenger-side rating is based on two crash tests, LATCH ratings one by IIHS and the other by Fiat Chrysler as part of the IIHS fron- “Since minivans often serve as family haulers, parents in the market tal crash test verification program. for a new one also should keep in mind where their kids will sit, es- The Pacifica and Odyssey are 2018 TOP SAFETY PICKs. They pecially if more than one needs a child restraint,” Zuby says. were among the qualifiers when IIHS announced initial winners of Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children (LATCH) is a system of the 2018 awards in December 2017. Both earn a superior rating for attachment hardware for child restraints that is intended to simplify

August 16, 2018 | 3 Toyota Sienna

The Sienna’s airbags cushioned the dum- must have good or acceptable LATCH there my's head, but the dashboard pushed against (with or without borrowing). its knees in the test. An IIHS engineer (right) The good+ designation is intended to measures a second-row seat in the Honda encourage manufacturers to give parents Odyssey as part of the LATCH rating program. greater flexibility when seating children in a vehicle. How 2018-19 minivans rate for LATCH “The Odyssey is a good example of the steady improvements we have seen in Good+ Honda Odyssey LATCH ratings in just three years,” Zuby Acceptable Dodge Grand Caravan, says. “Honda factored in LATCH when Kia Sedona, Toyota Sienna redesigning the Odyssey for 2018, boost- Marginal Chrysler Pacifica ing the minivan’s rating from accept- able to good+ by making the second-row Honda Odyssey For more information go to iihs.org/ratings tether anchors easy to find and the lower anchors easy to maneuver around. In ad- The Odyssey is a good example of the steady improvements IIHS has seen in LATCH rat- dition, the Odyssey model we tested has ings in just three years. Honda factored in LATCH when redesigning the minivan for 2018. two good LATCH seating positions in the second row and two acceptable positions in installation. Child restraints installed with Sedona and Sienna rate acceptable, and the the third row.” LATCH are more likely to be put in correct- Pacifica rates marginal. The LATCH ratings are an indicator of ly than restraints installed using the vehicle The good+ rating is for vehicles that meet how easy it is to achieve a correct, tight safety belt, IIHS research has shown. the criteria for a good rating and provide installation of a child restraint in a given Even with LATCH, installation errors are additional seating positions with easy-to- vehicle when using the dedicated child re- common. The Institute’s LATCH ratings use LATCH hardware. straint attachment hardware. While child are based on key ease-of-use criteria that Minivans and other three-row vehicles restraints need to be properly installed, have been shown to minimize mistakes in must have a third additional good or ac- the LATCH rating doesn’t have any direct installing lower attachment straps and top ceptable LATCH seating position (without bearing on safety. Although it is difficult to tethers. The top tether keeps the child seat “borrowing” an anchor from another posi- achieve a good installation in a poor-rated from pitching forward in a crash, and all tion) and tether anchors in all rear seating vehicle, it is generally not impossible. In ad- forward-facing restraints need them. positions to earn a good+ rating. The ad- dition, children are just as safe in restraints Among 2018 minivans evaluated, the ditional tether anchors must meet at least that have been properly installed with vehi- Odyssey earns a good+ rating for LATCH 1 of 2 tether anchor criteria. If the vehicle cle belts as in restraints that have been prop- ease of use. The Dodge Grand Caravan, Kia has a second-row center seating position, it erly installed with LATCH. n

4 | Status Report — Vol. 53, No. 5 Risk of noncrash fires drops after recalls but persists, suggesting unmade repairs

hen a vehicle not involved in a compared with not subject to fires for the microcar than other compara- crash catches fire, oftentimes an a fire recall. After being recalled, the fre- ble vehicles. W electrical issue or fuel system quency of claims fell to 15 percent. NHTSA’s investigation led to Mercedes- defect is to blame. When things go awry, “Our work shows that recalls reduce the Benz in May issuing a recall for the 2008–09 the results can be costly in terms of prop- risk of a noncrash fire, but they don’t elim- ForTwo, affecting 42,781 vehicles. NHTSA erty damage and potential injuries, so it is inate the risk. Much risk remains because says the rear insulation mat in the ForTwo’s crucial that vehicle owners heed recall no- not all recalled vehicles­ are repaired,” says engine compartment may deform, deterio- tices and service bulletins and get repairs Matt Moore, HLDI senior vice president. rate, and loosen over time, allowing the mat done as soon as possible. The National Highway Traffic Safety Ad- to contact hot exhaust system components. For 2017 through Aug. 8, 2018, there ministration (NHTSA) estimates that a Consumers can check for recalls at nhtsa. have been 62 noncrash fire-related recalls quarter of recalled vehicles don’t get fixed. gov/recalls by entering the 17-digit vehicle affecting 6.8 million vehicles, HLDI esti- HLDI has been working with the agency identification number in the lookup tool. mates. Recalls span manufacturers and a to help identify vehicles that may have fire- When buying a used vehicle, it also is a range of issues, from incorrectly installed related defects and need to be recalled. good idea to notify the manufacturer, so fuel-line hoses to faulty alternators. NHTSA, for example, in 2017 requested the company can make sure the new owner Vehicles with known fire-related defects noncrash fire claims data from HLDI on receives future recall notices. have a significantly higher risk of noncrash fire insurance losses, compared with vehi- cles without such defects, prior HLDI anal- Effect of fire-related defects on passenger vehicle and yses indicate. After a recall is issued, the noncrash fire claim frequencies, before and after recalls risk decreases but remains higher than for 40% vehicles without any fire-safety recalls. In an updated report, HLDI found that 30% the frequency of noncrash fire claims for ■ Before recall 2007–17 model passenger vehicles recalled ■ After recall for a fire-related defect was 14 percent 20% higher than the frequency of claims for ve- hicles without a recall. Claim frequency is 10% expressed in claims per 10,000 insured ve- hicle years for noncrash fire recalls. An in- 0% sured vehicle year is one vehicle insured Passenger vehicles Motorcycles for one year or two vehicles insured for six months each. For motorcycles, the frequency of non- crash fire claims was 18 percent higher than for comparable models without non- crash fire recalls. Insurance losses for noncrash fire damage are covered under comprehen- sive insurance, which pays for vehicle theft, physical damage due to animal strikes and noncrash-related reasons. The frequency of noncrash fire claims for passenger vehicles subsequently recalled the 2008–09 ForTwo amid consumer To obtain a copy of HLDI Bulletin Vol. was 19 percent higher, compared with non- reports of engine compartment fires while 34, No. 38, “Noncrash fire safety recall recalled models. Post-recall, the difference driving or shortly after turning off the losses – for automobiles and motorcycles: in noncrash fire claim frequency narrowed ignition. 2007–17” and HLDI Bulletin Vol. 34, No. to 11 percent. A subsequent HLDI analysis of 2008– 27, “Noncrash fire insurance losses for the For motorcycles, the frequency of claims 09 models found a sharply 2008–09 Smart ForTwo,” email publica- was 32 percent higher before being recalled, higher frequency of claims for noncrash [email protected]. n

August 16, 2018 | 5 New automated enforcement guidelines urge localities to sharpen safety focus

o encourage cities and localities to use automated enforcement, four na- T tional safety organizations developed a red light camera checklist to provide practical instructions for planning, imple- menting and evaluating camera programs. AAA, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, IIHS and the National Safety Coun- cil released the checklist in July. “We developed the guidelines to help communities avoid the problems that have undermined programs in the past,” says IIHS President David Harkey. “We know turning off cameras results in more crashes, injuries and deaths, so it’s important that camera programs succeed.” More than 800 people died in crashes in- volving red light running in 2016, an in- crease of 17 percent since 2012, an IIHS analysis shows. The increase comes as fewer U.S. communities are using red light cam- eras to enforce the law and reduce crashes. “Red light cameras can play a role in im- proving traffic safety for all road users and “Intersections are some of the most dan- or perceived to be centered on generating should be placed where they can benefit a gerous places on our roadways,” says Deb- revenue rather than on preventing crashes. community, like at intersections with high orah A.P. Hersman, president and CEO of First steps include assessment of inter- numbers of fatalities,” says Jill Ingrassia, the National Safety Council. “Automated sections where red light running is a prob- AAA’s managing director of Government enforcement technology saves lives, and lem. Communities need to ensure that road Relations and Traffic Safety Advocacy. this checklist helps put communities on a design and signal timing are evaluated. Ad- “When properly implemented, red light road to zero deaths.” equate yellow light phases have been shown cameras can help save lives and can serve to As of July, 421 communities had red light to reduce red light running and crashes. supplement law enforcement efforts, rather camera programs, down from 533 that had Public input is essential. The checklist than generate revenue for governments. This a program at any time during 2012. Al- recommends that policymakers organize new set of guidelines is an excellent starting though new camera programs continue to a community advisory committee to make point in ensuring adequate safeguards are be added, the total number of camera pro- suggestions on program development. put in place to maintain the public’s trust.” grams declined because more programs Programs that focus on safety and trans- Red light running is one of the most were discontinued than were initiated. parency are successful. Including stake- common factors in urban crashes. More As the number of programs has declined, holders in the planning phase, establishing than half the people killed in red-light-run- deaths in red-light-running crashes rose a strong system for data collection and ning crashes are pedestrians, bicyclists and from 696 in 2012 to 811 in 2016, the most monitoring, and targeting only the viola- people in other vehicles red light runners hit. recent year available. Fewer camera pro- tions with the greatest safety consequences “Red light cameras are proven lifesavers,” grams aren’t the sole reason for the increase. are steps that build public confidence. says Cathy Chase, president of Advocates Many factors, especially the economic re- The recommendations are based on input for Highway and Auto Safety. “As states and covery, are likely playing a significant role. from law enforcement and community lead- cities consider ways to reduce motor vehi- The red light camera checklist includes ers who attended a red light camera forum cle crash deaths and injuries, the new red recommendations for planning, oversight organized by IIHS in 2016 and subsequent light camera checklist will be a vital tool to and sustained public engagement. Surveys research on best practices. Recommenda- reinvigorate waning programs, restart dis- consistently show that the public supports tions have also been drawn from best prac- continued programs and revolutionize new red light camera enforcement, but support tice guidelines published by the National successful programs.” can erode when programs are poorly run, Cooperative Highway Research Program. n

6 | Status Report — Vol. 53, No.5 Red light camera program checklist Photo enforcement is a proven, effective tool to make roads safer. Well-controlled before-and-after studies have found that red light cameras reduce violations and injury crashes, especially the violent front-into-side crashes most associated with red light running. Successful programs have a strong public information component, are transparent, and emphasize safety over revenue. In fact, communities should expect that revenue will decline over time as fewer drivers run red lights. Some, though not all, studies indicate that rear-end crashes in- crease initially, but rear-enders are typically low-severity crashes compared with the high-speed right-angle collisions targeted by red light camera programs. This checklist assumes your community is already legally authorized to set up a program. It is intended to help you operate a program to reduce crashes, prevent injuries, save lives, and maintain strong public support.

FIRST STEPS SECOND STEPS IMPLEMENTATION LONG TERM

Identify problem intersections: Select appropriate sites based Hold a kickoff event with Publicize changes, including • Assess violation and on data from first steps. advisory committee members. new camera locations. Rein- crash data. Introduce a sustained public state the probationary period • Conduct field observations. Publicize the extent of the education campaign focused on before ticketing begins at new • Collect resident input. safety problem and need for improving safety by changing locations. innovative solutions. driver attitudes and behavior. Make changes necessary to Monitor program operation ease compliance with the law: Secure a vendor and Connect the program to safety and publicize results. • Ensure the road geometry establish payment based initiatives such as Vision Zero, conforms with guidelines on the vendor’s actual costs, Toward Zero Deaths, and Require regular field reviews. from the American Associa- not the number of citations. Road to Zero. Verify monthly camera calibra- tion of State Highway and tion and synchronization Transportation Officials or Establish a grace period Install prominent warning with signals. state road design manuals. before a vehicle is photo- signs at camera locations • Ensure that signal timing graphed of up to 1/2 second and major roadways entering Require regular program at a minimum conforms and no less than 1/8 of a sec- the jurisdiction. evaluation by collecting with the Manual on Uniform ond after the light turns red. crash and infraction data. Traffic Control Devices and Establish a probationary Avoid simple before-and-after Institute of Transportation Establish that law enforce- period during which only comparisons by using proper Engineers guidelines. ment officers or other ap- warnings are issued. control intersections. Include • Remove sightline obstruc- propriately trained personnel control intersections that are tions of signals and signage. employed by the locality will Target violations with the not subject to spillover effects. review evidence, identify vio- greatest safety consequences. If photo enforcement is ap- lations, and issue citations. Discard right-turn-on-red Regularly meet with the propriate for the problem violations when pedestrians, advisory committee and media intersections, establish an Create a website and social bicyclists, and oncoming to review program status and advisory committee comprised media plan with program vehicles are not present. sustain public support. of stakeholders, e.g., law details, such as how to pay enforcement, transportation and dispute tickets. Allow for due process. For more information on department, victim advocates, Minimize the number of days red light cameras, go to school officials, community Establish a method for an- between the violation and IIHS.ORG/RED-LIGHT-RUNNING residents, first responders, swering questions accurately citation issuance. Establish health officials, and the courts. and in a timely manner. and publicize the available Outline the committee’s role to procedures for contesting an Partner organizations advise on the development and Develop an emergency action alleged violation. implementation of the program. plan for handling problems, Insurance Institute for such as system malfunctions. To the extent feasible, al- Highway Safety Meet with the media and locate fines in excess of newspaper editorial boards program costs to traffic Insurance Institute for to build support and educate safety programs. Highway Safety the public.

August 16, 2018 | 7 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Highway Loss Data Institute Status Report

2 of 3 minivans serve up safety in IIHS is an independent, nonprofit scientific and educational organization dedicated to reducing the losses — deaths, injuries and passenger-side small overlap test42 property damage — from motor vehicle crashes. HLDI shares and supports this mission through scientific studies of insurance data representing the human and economic losses Risk of noncrash fires drops after recalls resulting from the ownership and operation of different types of vehicles and by publishing insurance loss results by vehicle make but persists, suggesting unmade repairs45 and model. Guidelines for automated enforcement Both organizations are wholly supported by the following auto insurers and funding associations: programs spotlight safety46 MEMBER GROUPS The Main Street America Group AAA Carolinas Mercury Insurance Group Acceptance Insurance MetLife Auto & Home Alfa Alliance Insurance Corporation Mississippi Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company Alfa Insurance MMG Insurance Vol. 53, No. 5 Allstate Insurance Group Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. American Agricultural Insurance Company Mutual Benefit Group August 16, 2018 American Family Insurance Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance Company American National Nationwide Ameriprise Auto & Home NJM Insurance Group Amica Mutual Insurance Company Nodak Insurance Company Auto Club Enterprises Norfolk & Dedham Group Auto Club Group North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Auto-Owners Insurance Northern Neck Insurance Company Bitco Insurance Companies NYCM Insurance Inquiries/print subscriptions: California Casualty Group Ohio Mutual Insurance Group Celina Insurance Group Oregon Mutual Insurance Company [email protected] Censtat Casualty Company Paramount Insurance Company CHUBB Pekin Insurance Colorado Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company PEMCO Mutual Insurance Company Copy may be republished with attribution. Concord Group Insurance Companies Plymouth Rock Assurance Images require permission to use. COUNTRY Financial Progressive Insurance CSAA Insurance Group PURE Insurance Desjardins General Insurance Group Qualitas Insurance Company Editor: Kim Stewart ECM Insurance Group Redpoint County Mutual Insurance Company Writer: Sarah Karush Elephant Insurance Company The Responsive Auto Insurance Company EMC Insurance Companies Rider Insurance Art Director: Steve Ewens Erie Insurance Group Rockingham Insurance Photographers: Craig Garrett, Esurance RSA Canada Farm Bureau Financial Services Safe Auto Insurance Company Dan Purdy, Kim Stewart Farm Bureau Insurance of Michigan Safeco Insurance Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company of Idaho Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Company Farmers Insurance Group SECURA Insurance Farmers Mutual of Nebraska Selective Insurance Company of America Florida Farm Bureau Insurance Companies Sentry Insurance Frankenmuth Insurance Shelter Insurance Companies Gainsco Insurance Sompo America /iihs.org GEICO Corporation South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company The General Insurance Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company Georgia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company State Farm Insurance Companies @IIHS_autosafety Goodville Mutual Casualty Company Stillwater Insurance Group Grange Insurance Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company Grinnell Mutual Texas Farm Bureau Insurance Companies @iihs_autosafety Hallmark Financial Services, Inc. The Travelers Companies The Hanover Insurance Group United Educators IIHS The Hartford USAA Haulers Insurance Company, Inc. Utica National Insurance Group Horace Mann Insurance Companies Virginia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance iihs.org/rss Imperial Fire & Casualty Insurance Company West Bend Mutual Insurance Company Indiana Farm Bureau Insurance Western National Insurance Group Indiana Farmers Insurance Westfield Insurance iihs.org Infinity Property & Casualty Kemper Corporation FUNDING ASSOCIATIONS Kentucky Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Companies American Insurance Association Liberty Mutual Insurance Company National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies Louisiana Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Property Casualty Insurers Association of America

This publication is printed on recycled paper.