Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Highway Loss Data Institute in review and first look 2016

Transcription

1 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Highway Loss Data Institute 2015 in review and first look 2016

2 Introduction The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is an independent, nonprofit scientific and educational organization. The mission of IIHS is to reduce the losses deaths, injuries and property damage from crashes on the nation s roads. The Highway Loss Data Institute shares and supports this mission through scientific studies of insurance data representing the human and economic losses resulting from the ownership and operation of motor vehicles and by publishing insurance loss results by vehicle make and model. Contents 3 Message from the president 4 Ratings timeline 6 Crashworthiness 10 Headlights 12 Front crash prevention 14 Vehicle Research Center 18 Children & teens 20 Behavioral research 22 HLDI 24 Communications 28 Bibliography 30 HLDI reports 31 Leadership team in review

3 A message from Adrian Lund, President of IIHS and HLDI The prospect of autonomous vehicles dominates media coverage of the automotive industry. Although it might seem as if self-driving vehicles are a panacea, our research shows that not all of the automated technology available on current production vehicles performs as expected. There also is the question of driver acceptance. We know that drivers like some systems, for instance automatic braking, but not others, such as lane departure warning. While we await the gradual rollout of autonomous vehicles, it is possible to realize Vision Zero by continuing to look at roads and drivers, as well as vehicles. Many of the solutions are tried and true: Strong laws and well-publicized enforcement to encourage motorists to buckle up and to deter alcohol-impaired driving; lower speed limits; more stringent graduated driver licensing systems; automated technology to reduce red light running and speeding; and roundabouts in place of intersections. At IIHS, one important way we move the needle is through our ratings for consumer information. Adrian Lund (center) receives the Global NCAP We marked the 20th anniversary of our first crashworthiness ratings program during 2015 and began chairman (left), and David Ward, Global NCAP Innovation Award from Max Mosley, Global NCAP rating the ease of use of LATCH child restraint secretary-general. attachment hardware in vehicles. So far in 2016, we have added headlight ratings to assess how well this basic equipment illuminates the road ahead while minimizing glare for oncoming drivers. Other ratings initiatives are being explored. To make room for our growing programs, we expanded the Vehicle Research Center in Ruckersville, Va., and celebrated the project s completion in As part of the September event, IIHS and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced a historic automaker commitment to voluntarily add standard automatic braking systems to their fleets. Our work also sets the example for others. I recently was honored to accept two awards on behalf of the Institutes. Global NCAP presented us with the 2015 Innovation Award in recognition of the small overlap front crash test. SAE International honored us with the 2015 SAE Arnold W. Siegel Humanitarian Award. I am proud of all that we have accomplished in the past year and am excited by the research projects under way in We are grateful to our member companies for the support that enables us to continue to raise the bar in our research, ratings and communications programs as we work to reduce the deaths and injuries on our nation s roads. Global NCAP Adrian Lund President 2015 in review 3

4 Ratings timeline The first IIHS crashworthiness ratings program, the moderate overlap front crash test, turned 20 years old in Since that 1995 launch, we have added 8 more ratings. Our goal is to educate consumers and encourage manufacturers to make improvements to save lives and reduce injuries Moderate overlap front crash and head restraints 2003 Side impact 2004 Dynamic test to evaluate seat/head restraints added to geometric evaluations in review

5 2008 Booster seats 2009 Roof strength 2012 Small overlap front crash 2013 Front crash prevention 2015 LATCH hardware in vehicles 2016 Headlights in review 5

6 Crashworthiness in review

7 Rating vehicles for safety moderate overlap front test side test roof strength head restraints IIHS ratings help consumers pick the safest vehicles for their families and encourage auto manufacturers to refine vehicle designs to optimize protection for people in crashes and avoid collisions in the first place. These efforts have led directly to a reduction in crash deaths and injuries. Much of our work centers on crashworthiness, that is, how well a vehicle s structure and restraint systems protect occupants in a crash. IIHS rates vehicles good, acceptable, marginal or poor, based on performance in five tests: small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side impact, roof strength and head restraints. Our crashworthiness ratings program launched in 1995 with what we then called the offset frontal crash test. Today, it s known as the moderate overlap front test. IIHS research has shown that drivers of vehicles rated good in the test are about half as likely to die in a serious frontal crash 86 crash tests than drivers in poor-rated vehicles. Roughly 443 small overlap half of the vehicles we evaluated in moderate overlap earned marginal or poor ratings, and more were rated poor than good. Now, all vehicles earn good ratings for protection in a 417 roof crush 46 side impact moderate overlap frontal crash. IIHS in 1995 began rating head restraints based on their potential to protect people s necks in rear-end crashes. Vehicles with seat/head restraint combinations that we rate good have 15 percent fewer insurance claims for neck injuries than vehicles with poor ratings. Recognizing that many people were dying in side crashes, IIHS added a side crash test in Drivers of vehicles with good ratings in our side barrier test are 70 percent less likely to die in a driver-side crash compared with drivers in vehicles rated poor. The ratings encouraged manufacturers to add standard side airbags to their fleets, a move that has sharply reduced fatality risk in side crashes. Today nearly all vehicles earn good side ratings; few did when we introduced the side test. To address deaths in rollover crashes, we began publishing roofstrength ratings in March The ratings were based on a 2008 IIHS study indicating that strong roofs reduce the risk of fatal or incapacitating injury when vehicles roll over. This was confirmed by a second IIHS study using a different set of vehicles. These were the first studies to demonstrate the link between roof strength and injury risk. They showed that stronger roofs reduce the risk of ejection and the risk of injury for occupants remaining in the vehicle in review 7

8 To help drive further improvements in crash protection, IIHS in 2012 introduced the small overlap front test. It replicates what happens when the front corner of a vehicle collides with another vehicle or an object like a tree or utility pole. Manufacturers have responded to the challenge in two ways. One is by taking the test into account when models are redesigned. The other is by making smaller modifications to beef up the front structure and improve airbags even before a Subaru and Volkswagen displays at the 2016 Detroit auto show model gets a full overhaul. The test is based on IIHS research showing the need for improved occupant protection in small overlap crashes. In a 2009 IIHS study of vehicles with good ratings for frontal crash protection, small overlap crashes accounted for nearly a quarter of the frontal crashes involving serious or fatal injury to front-seat occupants in review

9 Awards honor safest vehicles Each year, we recognize the highest-rated vehicles with a TOP SAFETY PICK+ or TOP SAFETY PICK award. Winners of the plus award must meet extra criteria. The idea is to encourage manufacturers to reach for ever-higher levels of safety. To do this, we aim to raise the bar each year. Winners of our 2016 awards earn good ratings in the small overlap front, moderate overlap Advertising mentions front, side, roof strength 596 ads approved to use and head restraint TOP SAFETY PICK/TOP tests, as well as have SAFETY PICK+ claims a basic-rated standard 4130 online or optional front crash 4118 print prevention system. Winners of the plus award 466 miscellaneous 490 TV also have a superior- 423 radio or advanced-rated front crash prevention 415 social media system with automatic 493 direct marketing braking capabilities. 456 Canadian market We plan to toughen the criteria for the markets 45 other foreign 2017 accolades. To earn TOP SAFETY PICK, models must have good crashworthiness ratings across-the-board and earn an advanced or superior rating for front crash prevention. To earn the plus award, models also must earn a good or acceptable rating for headlight performance in review 9

10 Headlights in review

11 New ratings show need to improve Technologies to prevent crashes from happening at all continue to be a growing focus of our vehicle research and ratings programs. We now have two crash avoidance evaluations: front crash prevention and headlights. Headlights are the newest addition to our battery of vehicle evaluations. We laid the ground- Headlights 4116 tests work for the program during 2015 and published the first ratings in March Headlights are very basic but essential equipment. With about half of traffic deaths occurring either in the dark or in dawn or dusk conditions, improved vehicle lighting has the potential to bring about substantial reductions in fatalities. The new ratings fill an important gap because government standards for headlights, based on laboratory tests, allow huge variation in the amount of illumination that headlights provide in actual on-road driving. IIHS engineers measure the illumination provided by headlights as vehicles travel straight and on four different curves on the test track at night. They also measure glare for oncoming drivers to make sure it is not excessive. Additional credit is given for high-beam assist, a feature which automatically switches between high beams and low beams, depending on the presence of other vehicles. IIHS research shows that most drivers don t use their high beams enough. Out of 31 midsize cars evaluated, only one the Toyota Prius v is available with headlights that earn a good rating. The best available headlights on 11 cars earn an acceptable rating, while nine only reach a marginal rating. Ten of the vehicles can t be purchased with anything other than poor-rated headlights in review 11

12 Front crash prevention in review

13 Quick progress for autobrake Our front crash prevention ratings program entered its third year in 2015, and progress has been quick and substantial. The goal of the program is to help consumers pinpoint the most effective technologies and encourage automakers to offer them on their vehicles. We rate the autobrake capability of models equipped with a Autobrake front crash prevention system to prevent or mitigate 428 tests certain frontal crashes. Vehicles earn an advanced or superior rating, depending on how they perform in our tests. Models with a forward collision warning system earn a basic rating. Front crash prevention is becoming more prevalent, but in most cases it is optional equipment. About 50 of the winners of the 2016 TOP SAFETY PICK+ award have an available superior- or advanced-rated front crash prevention system. A historic public-private commitment forged during 2015 raises the likelihood that new car buyers soon won t have to request the technology as an extra because it will be standard on virtually all new models by September David Zuby, IIHS executive vice president and chief research officer, and Nathaniel Beuse, director of the Office of Crash Avoidance for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), collaborated to seek a voluntary commitment from manufacturers to adopt standard autobrake. IIHS and NHTSA announced the plan in September 2015 and revealed the timetable in March Twenty automakers representing more than 99 percent of the U.S. auto market have signed on in review 13

14 Vehicle Research Center More room for research In 2015, we celebrated completion of the expanded research facilities on our 135-acre campus in central Virginia. The Vehicle Research Center, known as the VRC, is a world-class research and testing facility. It is the hub for our crashworthiness and crash avoidance ratings programs for consumer information. More than 3,000 people visited the facility during IIHS opened the VRC in 1992 and in the intervening years has conducted more than 1,000 vehicle crash tests in the 22,000-square-feet test hall. Evaluating how well vehicles protect people in crashes has comprised the bulk of our work at the VRC. During recent years, studying how to prevent crashes from happening in the first place and evaluating new technologies has become a bigger focus. Needing more room for these endeavors, we embarked on a $30 million expansion during March 2013 with the support of our member companies. Since much of our work in crash avoidance takes place outside of the test lab, we need a lot of space in review

15 VRC visitors/ groups hosted 43,285 visitors 4140 groups, including 52 insurer groups, 87 nonmember groups to put vehicles through their paces in controlled areas. We now have 15 acres of track, both covered and open, to do that. The most striking addition is a 5-acre covered test track, one of the largest fabric-covered structures in the United States. The iconic dome is easily seen as drivers approach Ruckersville on U.S. Route 29 and from various high points throughout the mountainous Charlottesville region. The weather-resistant covering allows us to conduct tests and demonstrations year-round. Seven steel spans arc over the 700-by-300-foot asphalt area 2015 in review 15

16 below. The spans contain 1,000 tons of steel fastened together with more than 10,000 nuts and bolts. The six composite-membrane panels weigh 36 tons and are made of 100 percent recyclable LEED-compliant fabric. Supporting the steel spans and fabric panels are 18 massive concrete piers, which contain more than 4,000 cubic yards of concrete, plus more than 39 miles of embedded steel reinforcement bars. Our newly expanded open track is where our engineers conduct the tests for our new headlight evaluations. A driving course marked with a series of reflectors secured to the asphalt to simulate various straightaway and curved approaches helps us measure headlight illumination and glare. We are working with Perrone Robotics on drop-in autonomy kits and target robot vehicles for use in crash avoidance tests. Indoors, we gained office and conference facilities and freed up space in the original building for research use. In early 2015, staff moved into the new three-story building, and we were pleased to host several insurer and industry meetings. Our members are invited to reserve the Thomas C. Morrill Conference Center for their own gatherings. In 2016, we will complete a high-tech broadcast center for on-site interviews and satellite media tours to expand our outreach to journalists worldwide in review

17 2015 in review 17

18 Children & teens Boosters and LATCH IIHS helps fill gaps in consumer knowledge when it comes to selecting appropriate booster seats and installing child restraints using the Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children (LATCH) hardware in vehicles. In 2008, IIHS was first to compare booster seats and rate their potential effectiveness based on how well they fit children too old for child restraints but too young for adult lap/shoulder belts. We started the booster ratings program because our research indicated that many booster seats weren t doing a good job of fitting safety belts correctly and consistently on children in a variety of vehicles. Until IIHS began evaluating boosters, parents couldn t be sure that the seat they were buying would provide safe belt fit for their child in their vehicle. Our ratings removed this guesswork by providing scientific criteria for assessing how well boosters do the job they were meant to do. For 2015, 20 of 23 newly introduced models earn the highest rating of BEST BET, and three earn the second-highest rating of GOOD BET. When we first introduced the ratings in 2008, only 10 of 41 models earned BEST BET, and there were 13 seats that we couldn t recommend buying. A BEST BET rating means that the booster seat provides good belt fit for typical 4 to 8 year-olds in almost any car, minivan or SUV. A GOOD BET booster provides acceptable belt fit in most cars, minivans or SUVs. Not recommended boosters don t provide in review

19 Boosters 423 boosters rated 48 paid evaluations for manufacturers LATCH 4131 LATCH ratings, including multiple trim levels and/or running changes for given make/model 4115 vehicle models rated (not counting multiple trim levels within a model) good belt fit and should be avoided. The LATCH ratings we introduced in 2015 provide parents with information on how easy or hard it is to install child restraints using LATCH hardware in more than 100 vehicles. Child restraints are notoriously tricky to install. Some frustrated parents have blamed themselves when they can t locate the anchors in the vehicle or struggle with attaching the seats. Our ease-of-use ratings indicate that oftentimes the blame lies with the vehicle and not the parent. Only 3 vehicles of more than 100 earn a good rating in the first round of evaluations. More than half are rated poor or marginal. Since the initial release in June 2015, some manufacturers have made design improvements to their vehicle LATCH systems. One is Toyota, which implemented a running change on the Sienna to move this minivan s rating to marginal from poor. We plan to release more ratings in summer in review 19

20 Behavioral research Research matrix IIHS research is guided by the Haddon Matrix, pioneered by William Haddon Jr., M.D., the nation s first federal highway safety chief and IIHS president from 1969 until his death in The matrix recognizes a range of possible motor vehicle crash interventions. The rows of Haddon matrix crash phase changes in... before during after people vehicles environment the matrix people, vehicles and environment contribute to the likelihood that a crash will occur or the consequences of the crashes that do occur. The columns are the before, during and after phases of every crash or potential crash. Each cell in the matrix represents an opportunity to prevent a crash or change its outcome for the better. Research on people addresses driver attitudes, behaviors and mistakes that often lead to crashes. Vehicle and equipment research focuses on both crash avoidance and crashworthiness. Physical environment research includes assessment of roadway designs to reduce run in review

21 off-the-road crashes and eliminate roadside hazards, for example. During 2015, the bulk of our nonvehicle research focused on behavioral research. We published studies on bicycle crashes, driver assistance systems, driver distraction, driver s education training for teenagers, older drivers, sobriety checkpoints and speed cameras It is well-established that speed cameras can get drivers to slow down, but do the effects hold up over time? IIHS researchers returned to the site of an earlier study and found that yes, the safety gains are entrenched. More than seven years after it began, the speed camera program in Montgomery County, Md., has led to long-term changes in driver behavior and substantial reductions in deaths and injuries. Cameras have reduced by 59 percent the likelihood of a driver exceeding the speed limit by more than 10 mph, compared with similar roads in two nearby Virginia counties that don t have speed cameras. Cameras resulted in a 19 percent reduction in the likelihood that a crash would involve a fatality or incapacitating injury, relative to comparison roads in Virginia. 2. We continue to study the problem of driver distraction. Figuring out the role that cellphone use and other distracting behaviors plays in crashes is a challenge for researchers. In most cases, there is no reliable record of what a driver was doing in the moments leading up to a crash. A 2015 IIHS analysis of data from a recent large naturalistic study provides new evidence that using cellphones, eating or drinking, and interacting with an in-vehicle system all increase the odds of a crash. 3. Well-publicized sobriety checkpoints are a proven way to reduce alcohol-impaired driving and crashes, yet results of a study we published in May indicate that many agencies don t conduct them often enough. What s more, many agencies aren t using passive alcohol sensors to help officers identify alcohol-impaired drivers once stopped. Passive sensors unobtrusively identify alcohol in the exhaled breath near a driver s mouth and give officers an objective basis for further evaluation in review 21

22 HLDI Data analyses help uncover loss patterns HLDI collects data from companies representing about 85 percent of the market for private passenger auto insurance. HLDI s database of loss information for nearly 430 million automobiles the largest repository of its kind enables analysts to identify patterns of losses by vehicle make and model. HLDI also analyzes motorcycle losses and has information on more than 9 million bikes. Analyzing this wealth of claims data helps HLDI determine if crash avoidance and other safety features are making a difference. Consumers consult HLDI s findings to help guide their purchasing decisions. HLDI published a number of reports in 2015 on the loss experience of crash avoidance features from Honda, Mazda, Subaru and Volvo. During late 2015, for instance, HLDI reported that the combination of forward collision warning and lane departure warning is preventing crashes among Honda Accord drivers of all ages. Drivers younger than age 25 benefit the most. Another HLDI analysis looked at the relationship between insurance injury claim rates and IIHS head restraint ratings. HLDI found that seat/head restraint combinations that earn the top rating of good in IIHS tests reduce injury claim in review

23 VIN decodes 44.7 million passenger vehicles 4541,790 motorcycles iihs-hldi.org website 42.2 million views Published reports 454 rates by 11 percent compared with vehicles with poor-rated seats/head restraints. HLDI in 2015 updated its estimates of the prevalence of such vehicle features as electronic stability control, front crash prevention and adaptive headlights in the registered vehicle fleet and predicted future uptake. Analysts also looked for patterns in claims data to help explain trends in vehicle thefts, vehicle mileage by vehicle and rated-driver characteristics, teenage driver exposure, hail-related claims, animal-strike losses and noncrash fire-related recalls, among others. One popular narrative in the media has focused on teenagers seeming reluctance to become licensed drivers. Speculation has swirled that the proliferation of cellphones and social media has made driving less attractive to teens. In 2013, HLDI showed that there was a strong relationship between the decline in teen driving and rising teen unemployment. A follow-up study in 2015 found that teenage drivers returned to the roads as the economy improved in review 23

24 Communications IIHS and HLDI in the news A multifaceted communications program puts IIHS and HLDI in a strong position to secure media coverage of our research and reports. This approach was incorporated in the Institute s founding principles. Our newsletter, Status Report, marked its 50th anniversary in We also share our findings with the public via print and video news releases, brochures, advisories, iihs.org, Twitter and YouTube. IIHS scientists and communicators are favorite contacts for journalists covering transportation and consumer issues. Reporters rely on us to provide objective insights. In 2015, we faced strong headwinds gaining media coverage. Several releases coincided with major breaking news events, including two mass shootings and the Volkswagen emissions scandal. Still, we significantly increased our social media and YouTube presence, along with our website traffic compared with Media highlights 1. Automotive News features the Institute in its March 2, 2015, issue with an article about our leading role in testing crash prevention technology. 2. Motor Trend magazine names Adrian Lund, IIHS and HLDI president, to its Power List for the third time. 3. Popular Mechanics features the Institute in its November 2015 issue with a story headlined: "Welcome to the smash lab: where cars die so you can live." 4. Jessica Jermakian, senior research scientist, is interviewed by David Kerley of ABC News on booster seat ratings. 5. Adrian Lund is interviewed by CBS News about TOP SAFETY PICK winners. 6. Adrian Lund appears on CBS This Morning to discuss speed cameras. 7. David Zuby, executive vice president, is interviewed by CNBC on small overlap ratings for midsize SUVs in review

25 Broadcast and print media 4508 print or online media interviews 456 radio interviews 430 on-air television interviews Publications and video 431 news releases 410 Status Reports Neal Menefee, 2015 chairman of the IIHS Board of Directors, is interviewed at the September celebration of the VRC expansion. 46 video news releases 44 brochures 43 videos 41 annual report Video news release audience (in millions) Midsize SUV small overlap results (May 5) LATCH ratings (June 18) 73.5 Ford F-150 ratings (July 30) 58.9 TOP SAFETY PICK awards (Dec. 10) 37.7 Booster ratings (Nov. 10) 33.1 Teen vehicle recommendations (Oct. 1) 20.8 Audience per video news release and overall total for year: 4384 million viewers of 8,865 broadcasts in 2015 vs million viewers of 14,793 broadcasts in 2014 David Zuby, executive vice president, talks to a documentary film crew from HBO s VICE at the VRC. Average per release: 464 million viewers of 1,478 broadcasts vs.110 million viewers of 2,113 broadcasts in in review 25

26 New media 8,264 followers up 28% from million views up 27% from % originate outside U.S ,000 audience impressions on average per month, up 34% from December 2015 was biggest month ever, with 444,700 audience impressions 4 155,665 total suscribers, up 60% from uploads; 15 uploads with more than 1 million views each million minutes total watch time, up 27% from in review

27 Website 7 million sessions for year, up 14% from million unique page views; 73% of pages viewed were vehicle safety ratings Traffic by device 57% desktop 30% mobile 13% tablet Top 10 news releases Results are for 1-day periods; however, web traffic typically remained higher than normal for several days following each major release. sessions 85,022 Dec TOP SAFETY PICK awards 49,660 May 12 Midsize SUV small overlap results 37,824 Jan. 29 Driver death rates 35,427 Nov. 10 Booster ratings 33,285 Oct. 1 Teen vehicle recommendations 25,071 June 18 LATCH ratings 24,637 Feb Kia Sorento is TOP SAFETY PICK winner 23,005 Feb SUVs from GM earn TOP SAFETY PICK 22,105 July 30 Ford F-150 crew cab earns TOP SAFETY PICK 21,699 Feb. 26 Nissan Sentra earns TOP SAFETY PICK Traffic by country 474% U.S. 47% Canada 419% Rest of world combined Top 10 countries after U.S. and Canada, in order: 4 Taiwan 4 South Korea 4 China 4 Japan 4 United Kingdom 4 Germany 4 Turkey 4 Mexico 4 Russia 4 Australia Top 15 referring sites sessions sessions 1. babycenter.com 61, facebook.com (desktop and mobile) 53, autoblog.com 50, mobile01.com 47, audiusa.com 24, forbes.com 24, parents.com 21, carcomplaints.com 17, dmv.org 14, consumerreports.org 14, theblaze.com 12, msn.com 12, edmunds.com 12, ghsa.org 11, reddit.com 20, in review 27

28 Bibliography IIHS research papers, Alcohol Impaired driving enforcement practices among state and local law enforcement agencies. Eichelberger, Angela H.; McCartt, Anne T. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety May 2015 Automated enforcement Effects of automated speed enforcement in Montgomery County, Maryland, on vehicle speeds, public opinion, and crashes. Hu, Wen; McCartt, Anne T. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety August 2015 Bicyclists Cyclist crash scenarios and factors relevant to the design of cyclist detection systems. MacAlister, Anna; Zuby, David S. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety March 2015 Child safety Rear seat safety: variation in protection by occupant, crash and vehicle characteristics. Durbin, Dennis R.; Jermakian, Jessica S.; Kallan, Michael J.; McCartt, Anne T.; Arbogast, Kristy B.; Zonfrillo, Mark R.; Myers, Rachel K. Accident Analysis and Prevention July 2015 Vehicle characteristics associated with LATCH use and correct use in real-world child restraint installations. Cicchino, Jessica B.; Jermakian, Jessica S. Journal of Safety Research June 2015 Crash avoidance technologies Toyota drivers experiences with Dynamic Radar Cruise Control, Pre-Collision System, and Lane-Keeping Assist. Eichelberger, Angela H.; McCartt, Anne T. Journal of Safety Research February 2016 Differences in glance behavior between drivers using a rearview camera, parking sensor system, both technologies, or no technology during low-speed parking maneuvers. Kidd, David G.; McCartt, Anne T. Accident Analysis and Prevention February 2016 Observed activation status of lane departure warning and forward collision warning of Honda vehicles at dealership service centers. Reagan, Ian J.; McCartt, Anne T. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety January 2016 Effectiveness of forward collision warning systems with and without autonomous emergency braking in reducing police-reported crash rates. Cicchino, Jessica B. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety January 2016 Effectiveness of Volvo s City Safety low-speed autonomous emergency braking system in reducing police-reported crash rates. Cicchino, Jessica B. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety January 2016 Effects of an integrated collision warning system on teenage driver behavior. Jermakian, Jessica S.; Bao, Shan; Buonarosa, Mary Lynn; Sayer, James. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety December 2015 The effectiveness of a rearview camera and parking sensor system alone and combined for preventing a collision with an unexpected stationary or moving object. Kidd, David G.; Hagoski, Bradly K.; Tucker, Tia G.; Chiang, Dean P. Human Factors June 2015 Experiences of model year 2011 Dodge and Jeep owners with collision avoidance and related technologies. Cicchino, Jessica B.; McCartt, Anne T. Traffic Injury Prevention April 2015 Buick Lucerne drivers experiences with rear parking sensors. Cicchino, Jessica B.; Eichelberger, Angela H.; McCartt, Anne T. Traffic Injury Prevention February 2015 Brake burnishing effect on AEB performance. Wilson, Myles; Aylor, David A.; Zuby, David S.; Nolan, Joseph M. SAE Technical Paper Consumer vehicle choice Vehicle choices for teenage drivers: A national survey of U.S. parents. Eichelberger, Angela H.; Teoh, Eric R.; McCartt, Anne T. Journal of Safety Research December 2015 Consumer response to vehicle safety ratings. Cicchino, Jessica B. Proceedings of the 24th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (CD-ROM) June 2015 Consumer safety information programs at IIHS. Zuby, David S. Proceedings of the 24th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (CD-ROM) June 2015 Crash testing and crashworthiness IIHS head restraint ratings and insurance injury claim rates. Trempel, Rebecca E.; Zuby, David S.; Edwards, Marcy A. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety November 2015 The effects of vehicle redesign on the risk of driver death. Farmer, Charles M.; Lund, Adrian K. Traffic Injury Prevention October 2015 Crashworthiness testing of electric and hybrid vehicles. O Malley, Sean; Zuby, David S.; Moore, Matthew J.; Paine, Michael; Paine, David. Proceedings of the 24th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (CD-ROM) June 2015 Occurrence of serious injury in real-world side impacts of vehicles with good side-impact protection ratings. Brumbelow, Matthew L.; Mueller, Becky C.; Arbelaez, Raul A. Traffic Injury Prevention June 2015 Comparison of HIC and BrIC head injury risk in IIHS frontal crash tests to real-world head injuries. Mueller, Becky C.; MacAlister, Anna; in review

29 Nolan, Joseph M.; Zuby, David S. Proceedings of the 24th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (CD-ROM) June 2015 Distracted driving Considering visual-manual tasks performed during highway driving in the context of two different sets of guidelines for embedded in-vehicle electronic systems. Kidd, David G.; Dobres, Jonathan; Reagan, Ian J.; Mehler, Bruce; Reimer, Bryan. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety December 2015 Relationship of near-crash/crash risk to time spent on a cellphone while driving. Farmer, Charles M.; Klauer, Sheila G.; McClafferty, Julie A.; Guo, Feng. Traffic Injury Prevention November 2015 Secondary behavior of drivers on cellphones. Farmer, Charles M.; Klauer, Sheila G.; McClafferty, Julie A.; Guo, Feng. Traffic Injury Prevention November 2015 The relevance of crash type and severity when estimating crash risk using the SHRP2 naturalistic driving data. Kidd, David G.; McCartt, Anne T. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety November 2015 Multi-modal demands of a smartphone used to place calls and enter addresses during highway driving relative to two embedded systems. Reimer, Bryan; Mehler, Bruce; Reagan, Ian J.; Kidd, David G.; Dobres, Jonathan. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety March 2015 The influence of roadway situation, other contextual factors, and driver characteristics on the prevalence of driver secondary behaviors. Kidd, David G.; Tison, Julie; Chaudhary, Neil K.; McCartt, Anne T.; Casanova-Powell, Tara D. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety March 2015 The reliability of two roadside observers coding secondary tasks among passenger vehicle drivers in different roadway situations, during the day, and at night: a pilot study. Kidd, David G.; Chaudhary, Neil K.; Casanova-Powell, Tara D.; McCartt, Anne T.; Tison, Julie. TRB 94th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers January 2015 Multi-modal assessment of on-road demand of voice and manual phone calling and voice navigation entry across two embedded vehicle systems. Mehler, Bruce; Kidd, David G.; Reimer, Bryan; Reagan, Ian J.; Dobres, Jonathan; McCartt, Anne T. Ergonomics 2015 Motorcycles Evaluation of motorcycle antilock braking systems. Basch, Nicholas; Moore, Matthew J.; Hellinga, Laurie A. Proceedings of the 24th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (CD-ROM) June 2015 Older drivers Why have fatality rates among older drivers declined? The relative contributions of changes in survivability and crash involvement. Cicchino, Jessica B. Accident Analysis and Prevention October 2015 Critical older driver errors in a national sample of serious U.S. crashes. Cicchino, Jessica B.; McCartt, Anne T. Accident Analysis and Prevention July 2015 Teenagers History and current status of state graduated driver licensing (GDL) laws in the United States. Williams, Allan F.; McCartt, Anne T.; Sims, Laurel B. Journal of Safety Research February 2016 Effects of an integrated collision warning system on teenage driver behavior. Jermakian, Jessica S.; Bao, Shan; Buonarosa, Mary Lynn; Sayer, James. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety December 2015 Vehicle choices for teenage drivers: A national survey of U.S. parents. Eichelberger, Angela H.; Teoh, Eric R.; McCartt, Anne T. Journal of Safety Research December 2015 Crash and citation records of young drivers with skid avoidance training. Farmer, Charles M.; Wells, JoAnn K. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety September 2015 Tracking progress in teenage driver crash risk in the United States since the advent of graduated driver licensing programs. McCartt, Anne T.; Teoh, Eric R. Journal of Safety Research June 2015 Type, size, and age of vehicles driven by teenage drivers killed in crashes during McCartt, Anne T.; Teoh, Eric R. Injury Prevention April 2015 Vehicle lights A survey of horizontal road curvature for fatal nighttime crashes. Brumbelow, Matthew L. Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Automotive Lighting September 2015 Perceived discomfort glare from an adaptive driving beam headlight system compared with three low beam lighting configurations. Reagan, Ian J.; Brumbelow, Matthew L. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety April 2015 On-road experiment to assess drivers detection of roadside targets as a function of headlight system, target placement, and target reflectance. Reagan, Ian J.; Brumbelow, Matthew L.; Frischmann, Tim. Accident Analysis and Prevention March 2015 Vehicle size and weight The effects of vehicle redesign on the risk of driver death. Farmer, Charles M.; Lund, Adrian K. Traffic Injury Prevention October in review 29

30 HLDI reports HLDI reports, 2015 Advisories Special topics Insurer advisory: Marijuana and crash risk: an update, April Insurer advisory: Turbocharged engines and the hidden cost of power, January Claim advisory: noncrash fire-related recalls, April Claim advisory: noncrash fire-related recalls, September Claim advisory: noncrash fire-related recalls, December Honda Accord collision avoidance features; 32(33), December Automobile and motorcycle introduction of models; 32(23), September Collision and property damage liability losses for Ford F-150 Raptor vs. other F-150 models; 32(10), April Collision and property damage liability losses for GM pickups by model; 32(11), April Collision claim frequencies and violent crime rates an update; 32(34), December Collision insurance losses 2015 models; 32(18), September Comprehensive loss type distribution by state; 32(3), April Distribution of collision claims by point of impact for the Honda Accord and Honda Odyssey; 32(14), April Estimated PDL and BI claim frequency trends due to fitment of forward collision warning systems; 32(24), September Evaluation of changes in teenage driver exposure an update; 32(30), December Gender distribution an update; 32(21), September Geographic and exposure distribution of counties with 1,000 or more vehicles per square mile; 32(27), December Geographic distribution of Subaru exposure; 32(29), December Geographic distribution of Tesla exposure; 32(25), September Hail-related claims under comprehensive coverage an update; 32(17), September Honda Accord collision avoidance features; 32( 7), April Honda Pilot rear view camera: initial results; 32(9), April Impact of Honda Accord collision avoidance features on claim frequency by rated driver age; 32(35), December Injury rates in multiple-vehicle crashes; 32(20), September Insurance losses comparison of electric vehicles and their conventional counterparts; 32(19), September Losses due to animal strikes; 32(6), April Mazda collision avoidance features; 32(22), September Motorcycle collision losses for off-road classes, models; 32(5), April Motorcycle losses under collision coverage; 32(2), April New Jersey graduated driver licensing decal program; 32(4), April Noncrash fire safety recall losses - for automobiles and motorcycles; 32(12), April Predicted availability of safety features on registered vehicles a 2015 update; 32(16), September Subaru collision avoidance features: an update; 32(8), April Theft losses for Honda Fit vehicles; 32(32), December Vehicle mileage by county; 32(28), December Vehicle mileage by vehicle and rated driver characteristics; 32(31), December Volvo City Safety loss experience - a long-term update; 32(1), April Volvo City Safety loss experience by vehicle age; 32(13), April Vehicle 2016 Motorcycle Models Preview; (MD-15P), December descriptions Collision avoidance models; (VIC-15), December HLDI Facts and Figures, vehicle fleet; (VIF- 15), December Specifications and basic features models; (VIS- 15), December Standard reports Bodily injury liability losses: passenger cars, pickups, SUVs, and vans; (B-14), September Collision losses: motorcycles; (MR-15), December Collision losses: passenger cars, pickups, SUVs, and vans; (R-15), December Comprehensive losses: motorcycles; (MC-14), April Comprehensive losses: passenger cars, pickups, SUVs and vans; (C-14), April Hail-related claims by vehicle: passenger cars, pickups, SUVs, and vans; (A-91), September Liability and first party medical losses: motorcycles; (ML-14), September Medical payment losses: passenger cars, pickups, SUVs, and vans; (M-14), September Personal injury protection losses: passenger vars, pickups, SUVs, and vans; (I-14), September Property damage liability losses: passenger cars, pickups, SUVs and vans; (P-15), December Theft losses: passenger cars, pickups, SUVs and vans; (T-14), April Whole vehicle theft losses: passenger cars, pickups, SUVs, and vans; (WT-14), April in review

31 Executive leadership team Adrian Lund President David Zuby Executive Vice President and Chief Research Officer Joe Nolan Chief Administrative Officer and Senior Vice President, Vehicle Research Michael Fagin General Counsel, Secretary/Treasurer and Vice President, Government Relations Kim Hazelbaker Senior Vice President, HLDI and Insurer Relations Anne McCartt Senior Vice President, Research Russ Rader Senior Vice President, Communications Raul Arbelaez Vice President, Operations Jessica Cicchino Vice President, Research Chuck Farmer Vice President, Research and Statistical Services Pini Kalnite Vice President, Media Operations and Production Matthew Moore Vice President, HLDI Brenda O Donnell Vice President, Insurer Relations Vickie Hoover Assistant Vice President, Operations Editorial Kim Stewart Sarah Karush Annual report team Art direction and design Logo design and branding Steve Ewens Leslie Oakey Photography Matt Daly Dan Purdy Jason Shifflett 2015 in review 31

32 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Highway Loss Data Institute iihs.org iihs.org/rss MEMBER GROUPS Acceptance Insurance AIG PC Global Services, Inc. Alfa Alliance Insurance Corporation Alfa Insurance Allstate Insurance Group American Family Mutual Insurance Company American National Ameriprise Auto & Home Amica Mutual Insurance Company Auto Club Enterprises Auto Club Group Auto-Owners Insurance Bankers Insurance Group Bitco Insurance Companies California Casualty Group Censtat Casualty Company CHUBB Colorado Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Concord Group Insurance Companies COUNTRY Financial CSAA Insurance Group CSE Insurance Group Direct General Corporation Elephant Insurance Company Erie Insurance Group Esurance Farm Bureau Financial Services Farm Bureau Insurance of Michigan Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company of Idaho Farmers Insurance Group Farmers Mutual Hail Insurance Company of Iowa Farmers Mutual of Nebraska Florida Farm Bureau Insurance Companies Frankenmuth Insurance Gainsco Insurance GEICO Corporation The General Insurance Georgia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Goodville Mutual Casualty Company Grange Insurance Hallmark Financial Services Hanover Insurance Group The Hartford Haulers Insurance Company, Inc. Horace Mann Insurance Companies ICW Group Imperial Fire & Casualty Insurance Company Indiana Farmers Mutual Insurance Company Infinity Property & Casualty Kemper Corporation Kentucky Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Companies Liberty Mutual Insurance Company Louisiana Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company The Main Street America Group Mercury Insurance Group MetLife Auto & Home Mississippi Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company MMG Insurance Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. Mutual Benefit Group Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance Company Nationwide New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Group Nodak Mutual Insurance Company Norfolk & Dedham Group North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Northern Neck Insurance Company Ohio Mutual Insurance Group Old American County Mutual Fire Insurance Company Old American Indemnity Company Oregon Mutual Insurance Company Paramount Insurance Company Pekin Insurance PEMCO Insurance Plymouth Rock Assurance Progressive Insurance PURE Insurance Qualitas Insurance Company The Responsive Auto Insurance Company Rider Insurance Rockingham Group Safe Auto Insurance Company Safeco Insurance Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Company SECURA Insurance Sentry Insurance Shelter Insurance Companies Sompo America South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company State Auto Insurance Companies State Farm Insurance Companies Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company Texas Farm Bureau Insurance Companies The Travelers Companies United Educators USAA Utica National Insurance Group Virginia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance West Bend Mutual Insurance Company Western National Insurance Group Westfield Insurance XL Group plc FUNDING ASSOCIATIONS American Insurance Association National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies Property Casualty Insurers Association of America April 2016