Evaluation Of The National Impaired Driving High .
Evaluation of the National ImpairedDriving High-Visibility EnforcementCampaign: 2003 - 2005DOT HS 810 789July 2007BackgroundFigure 2As a result, alcohol-related traffic fatalities fellsubstantially, declining by more than 33%, from 26,173in 1982 to 17,308 in 1994.In the years that followed, however, progress stalled. Infact, there were over 200 more alcohol-related trafficdeaths in 2002 than there had been in 1994. Similarly,the alcohol-related crash rate (per 100 million VMT) hasdeclined only slightly since the early 1990s (seeFigure 2).Figure 1Alcohol-Related Fatalities (1982-2005)40,000# of s report describes a National program, initiated in2003 and conducted through 2005, that focused onenhanced efforts to reduce impaired driving through theuse of highly visible, well publicized impaired drivingenforcement.The National Highway Traffic Safety Administrationinitiated a National Impaired Driving Law EnforcementCrackdown program in 2003, in which the agencyencouraged States to increase their use of high-visibilityimpaired driving enforcement, (i.e. sobriety checkpointsor saturation patrols), bolstered by a national paid andearned media campaign, and supported through technicalassistance. Also, for the first time, in 2003 Congressappropriated funds for a national paid media campaignto combat impaired driving.10,000YearU. S. Department of 1986198419825,000NHTSA’s National Impaired Driving High-VisibilityEnforcement program was based on previous researchshowing that well-publicized, high-visibilityenforcement could reduce alcohol-related crashes,fatalities and injuries and was modeled on the success ofthe national program to increase seat belt use. The seatbelt program, known as Click It or Ticket (CIOT) ,includes short-duration, intensive law enforcement,supported by paid and earned media that emphasizesheightened enforcement efforts and is a proven methodNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration1Office of Behavioral Safety 019820.5Rationale for NHTSA’s High-Visibility EnforcementImpaired Driving Campaign15,0000Alcohol-Related Motor Vehicle Crash FatalityRateFatality Rate per 100 million VMTImpaired driving has proven to be a problem that is noteasy to remediate. In the 1980s and early 1990s, thePresidential Commission Against Drunk Driving wasconvened, and Mothers Against Drunk Driving and othergrassroots organizations were formed. These groupsplayed a significant role in galvanizing public opinionabout the carnage caused by impaired drivers. Alsoduring this time, States strengthened their impaireddriving laws, there was a significant increase inenforcement activities focused on impaired driving, andconsiderable media attention was paid to the problem.
to raise seat belt use within a short period of time(Solomon, Ulmer, & Preusser, 2002). Although impaireddriving is a complex problem with many factors otherthan enforcement that influence the number ofalcohol-related crashes, high-visibility enforcementcrackdowns are one strategy that NHTSA could readilyimplement to address this problem.A high-visibility seat belt enforcement strategy was firsttested in Elmira, New York, in 1985, and belt useincreased by 28 percentage points after the program(Williams, Lund, Preusser, & Blomberg, 1987). Basedon that approach, the Click It or Ticket campaign wasdeveloped in North Carolina in 1993, and belt useincreased from 63% to 79% during the first wave ofenforcement (Williams, Reinfurt, & Wells, 1996). Overa period of years, CIOT was expanded to additionalStates and regions of the country.Eventually, and with the support of dedicated Federalfunding from Congress under the Transportation EquityAct for the 21st Century (TEA-21), CIOT was adoptedacross the country, and seat belt use increased steadily,rising to 82%. The CIOT campaign took a number ofyears of slow and steady progress over a decade to getall States on board. The national CIOT campaign occurseach year around the Memorial Day holiday period.The success of the CIOT campaign is associated with thesteady increases in national seat belt use rates followingwidespread adoption of the program in the late 1990’s.Safety Belt Use 414 14144242454645 4662627573 757171 7369 6769 6968 6968 686767 686666 67807979 8082824949212100838587899193959799010305Short History of Impaired Driving EnforcementCampaignsHigh-visibility enforcement campaigns have been shownto be effective in also reducing impaired driving.Evidence for this comes as early as 1967, when theU. S. Department of TransportationBritish Road Safety Act established a BAC of .08 g/dLas illegal per se and authorized police to screen motoristssuspected of having alcohol in their blood (Coding &Samson, 1974), and from crackdowns conducted in NewZealand (Hurst & Wright, 1980). In the United States,the effectiveness of well-publicized impaired drivingenforcement was first demonstrated in some of theAlcohol Safety Action Projects of the 1970s (Levy et al.,1978).In the 1980s, law enforcement agencies in variouslocales around the country began to use sobrietycheckpoints as a tool for creating impaired drivinggeneral deterrence. Surveys of residents in areas wherecheckpoints were being conducted showed that theywere highly visible undertakings (Williams & Lund,1984). More recently, checkpoints along withenforcement-based media campaigns have been shownto be effective in reducing alcohol-related crashes atlocal (Wells, Preusser, & Williams, 1992) as well asstatewide levels (Lacy, Jones, & Smith, 1999 andZwicker, Chaudhary, Maloney, & Squeglia, 2007).An excellent example of the high-visibility impaireddriving enforcement approach is Checkpoint Tennessee,a program conducted on a statewide basis in 1994.Checkpoint Tennessee was a year-long heightened,impaired driving enforcement program in whichcheckpoints were conducted throughout the State everyweekend of the year. There was a 20.4% reduction overthe projected number of impaired driving fatal crashesthat would have occurred with no intervention, and thiseffect remained present 21 months after the initial yearhad concluded (Lacey, Jones & Smith, 1999).NHTSA’s Impaired Driving Campaign in 2003-2005In 2002, in light of the lack of progress in reducingalcohol related traffic deaths at that time, NHTSAsought to encourage States across the Nation to step uptheir impaired driving enforcement efforts, using acombined CIOT and Checkpoint Tennessee model.The agency called it a National Impaired DrivingCrackdown. The first National Crackdown, in 2003,centered around the July 4th holiday period. In 2004 and2005, at the request of the States, a Labor DayCrackdown period replaced the 4th of July crackdown.The National Crackdowns continue to serve a centralrole in NHTSA’s overall impaired driving program.This report focuses specifically on the crackdown effortsin 2003-2005.This high-visibility impaired driving enforcementprogram encouraged law enforcement agencies acrossthe country to conduct active, highly visible lawNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration2Office of Behavioral Safety Research
enforcement activities during the crackdown period andto sustain high-visibility enforcement throughout theyear, especially during high-risk times.Law enforcement agencies were encouraged to conducttheir enforcement activities in a highly visible way, byusing sobriety checkpoints where they are permitted, aswell as saturation patrols, signage, and other activitiesthat would be highly visible to the driving public.Highly visible law enforcement was to occur on 18consecutive nights during the holiday crackdownperiods. In 2005, for example, intensive impaireddriving enforcement began on August 19, and continuedthrough Labor Day, September 5.The impaired driving law enforcement efforts weresupported with paid and earned media. The impaireddriving campaign used the slogan You Drink & Drive.You Lose, which was designed to convey the messagethat law enforcement was cracking down on impaireddriving.Congress appropriated 11 million for the paid media in2003, and 14 million for the media in both 2004 and2005. The You Drink & Drive. You Lose paid mediacampaign aired during three weekends in June and Julyin 2003, and during the three weekends leading into theLabor Day holiday in 2004 and 2005. Paid ads wereplaced on national television and radio programs thatwere most likely to be seen by the target audience, 21- to34-year-old males.The primary purpose of the high-visibility enforcementNational Impaired Driving Crackdown was notnecessarily to increase the number of impaired drivingarrests, but rather to create general deterrence byincreasing the perception of the risk of being arrested ifdriving while impaired by alcohol.Focus on High-Alcohol-Related-Fatality StatesThe NHTSA program focused especially on States witha worse than average alcohol fatality problem. Inparticular, NHTSA identified States with high numbersor rates of alcohol-related fatalities. To participate in theprogram, these States had to express a willingness towork closely with NHTSA and make a commitment tofollow the CIOT and Checkpoint Tennessee model.Initially, 13 States were selected to participate in theprogram, and were referred to as the Strategic EvaluationStates (SES). They were Alaska, Arizona, California,Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, NewMexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and West Virginia.U. S. Department of TransportationTwo additional States, Missouri and South Carolina,joined the program in 2005.A portion of the funding that Congress appropriated forpaid advertising was used to place ads in markets in theStates participating in the SES program. Of the 14million in paid advertising in 2004, 5 million was spentin the SES, while 4 million of the 14 million in 2005was spent in the SES. In addition, Congressappropriated a small amount of additional funding in2004 ( 2.75 million) and 2005 ( 6 million), to help theseStates enhance their law enforcement efforts. The Stateswere expected to fund most of their impaired drivingenforcement activities using State and other TEA-21grant funds.In all three years covered by this report, NHTSA offeredtechnical assistance to these States. Each Statedeveloped a year-long enforcement and communicationsplan, designed to cover either 85% of each State’spopulation or geographic areas where 85% of the State’salcohol-related traffic fatalities occur. The enforcementplans outlined where and how often high-visibilitysobriety checkpoints or saturation patrols were to takeplace. The communications plans outlined the State’splans to use the slogan You Drink & Drive. You Losethrough State-funded paid media and earned media.Each of the SES invested State or TEA-21 dollars foradvertising in addition to the national airtime andtargeted SES airtime that NHTSA purchased onbroadcast TV, cable TV, and radio programs likely toreach the target audience. The SES spent approximately 2 million on additional advertising in both 2004 and2005. The paid ads ran from August 19 to September 5,2005, and during comparable periods in 2003 and 2004.In 2005, for example, there were 5,319 spots onbroadcast TV, 22,599 spots on cable TV, and 14,972radio spots in the SES. These ads reached more than92% of the target audience, for an average of 8 timeseach (a gross rating point of 968 across the Nation).Young Adult Males Received the Media MessageSchulman, Ronca, and Bucuvalas, Inc., conductednational telephone surveys in the 15 SES (500respondents per State, per survey wave), in threecomparison States that did not employ State-fundedmedia (500 respondents per wave in New York, NorthCarolina, and Wisconsin), and nationally (1,250respondents per wave). They spoke to respondents whoin the past year reported having driven and havingconsumed alcohol at least once.The telephone surveys showed that the impaired drivingmessage reached the general public, and especiallyNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration3Office of Behavioral Safety Research
drivers 18 to 34 years old. Figure 3 shows that thenational awareness of messages encouraging people toavoid drinking and driving increased after eachcrackdown, and that awareness about the messagereached four out of five in this age group following eachFigure 3. Seen or Heard Messages in Past 30 Days EncouragingPeople to Avoid Drinking and Driving (Drivers 18 to 8%76%74%June '03 &July '03Dec '03 &Jan '04Aug '04 &Sept '04Aug '05 &Sept '05campaign period. However, awareness did not seem tocarry over from crackdown to crackdown. In fact, theawareness levels preceding each crackdown declinedover the three-year period.DWI EnforcementSES reporting of law enforcement activity during thecrackdowns, including DWI arrests and the number ofcheckpoints conducted, was incomplete and insufficientto permit an analysis, so an examination was conductedof estimated impaired driving arrests from the annualFBI Uniform Crime Reporting system. Analysis of theFBI data showed that the overall DWI arrest rate overthe period 2001 to 2005 was quite stable in both the SESand the non-SES.Figure 4. Seen or Heard of Any Special Effort by Police in Past 30Days to Reduce Drunk Driving (Drivers 18 to 34)Pre50%44%30%37%34%29%24%23%21%20%10%0%June '03 &July '03Dec '03 &Jan '04Aug '04 &Sept '04Aug '05 &Sept '05As with awareness of the message, the nationaltelephone surveys showed a significant increase aftereach crackdown in the number of drivers 18 to 34 whoreported seeing or hearing about special efforts by policein the past 30 days to reduce drunk driving. AwarenessU. S. Department of TransportationDrinking Drivers Involved in Fatal CrashesTable 1 shows the number of alcohol-impaired driversinvolved in fatal crashes, and the average number offatal alcohol-impaired related crashes for two years priorto the beginning of the program (2001 and 2002) andtwo years after the implementation of the program (2004and 2005). Specifically, this refers to the drivers of cars,pickup trucks, SUVs, and motorcycles with a BAC of.08 and higher, who were involved in fatal crashes. In 7of the 13 SES (Alaska, Arizona, Louisiana, NewMexico, Ohio, Texas, and West Virginia), there was adecline in the average yearly number of crashes from the2001-2002 time period to the 2004-2005 time period.A similar trend was observed for the non-SES. In 23 ofthe 36 non-SES, there was a decline in the averageyearly number of alcohol-impaired drivers involved infatal crashes from the 2001 and 2002 time period to the2004 and 2005 time period.Post39%40%about enforcement reached one third of this age groupfollowing each period of enforcement (see Figure 4).The pre-crackdown level increased from July toDecember 2003, but declined in 2004 and 2005.A survey conducted at the Department of MotorVehicles in six of the SES (Arizona, Florida, NewMexico, Pennsylvania, Texas, and West Virginia)reported a significant increase in exposure to alcoholenforcement among male drivers (under age 40), basedon having gone through a police checkpoint targetingalcohol impaired drivers in the past 30 days. Thetelephone survey showed an increase in 8 of the SES andin the National sample (from 24 to 32%) among thetarget group, but none of these increases was significant.There were no significant changes in self-reporteddrinking and driving behavior.Table 2 shows the number of alcohol-impaired (BAC .08 and higher) male drivers of cars, pickup trucks,SUVs, and motorcycles 18 to 34 years old involved infatal crashes. This table also includes the average yearlynumber of fatal alcohol-impaired related crashes for twoyears prior to the beginning of the program (2001 and2002) and two years after the implementation of theprogram (2004 and 2005). There was a decline in theaverage yearly number of crashes from the 2001-2002time period to the 2004-2005 time period in 8 of the 13SES (Alaska, Arizona, Louisiana, New Mexico, Ohio,Pennsylvania, Texas, and West Virginia).National Highway Traffic Safety Administration4Office of Behavioral Safety Research
Table 1. Alcohol-Impaired Drivers Involved in Fatal Crashes: ageChange between01/02 and 31078410896-13Delaware443348354539401District of 071069210715New FloridaGeorgiaLouisianaMississippiMontanaNew MexicoOhioPennsylvaniaTexasWest VirginiaTotal Original SESNew SES States - 2005MissouriSouth CarolinaTotal All SESNON-SESU. S. Department of TransportationNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration5Office of Behavioral Safety Research
16001/02Average18004/05Average165Change between01/02 and 1164Rhode Island35364635273631-5South 45-11420012002200320042005New Jersey186173161171New York297293334North Carolina346403North Dakota41OklahomaTotal Non-SESTable 2. Alcohol-Impaired Drivers Involved in Fatal Crashes:Males 18 to 34 Years Old, ouisianaMississippiMontanaNew MexicoOhioPennsylvaniaTexasWest VirginiaTotal Original SESNew SES States - 2005MissouriSouth CarolinaTotal All SESNON-SESAlabamaU. S. Department of 5AverageChange between01/02 and 211451161471311331396National Highway Traffic Safety Administration6Office of Behavioral Safety Research
7301/02Average6604/05Average76Change between01/02 and w Hampshire152011221918203New Jersey98808081728976-12New York14114315319215414217332North Carolina1681911791861831801855North 444247583843485Rhode Island19202315132014-6South ecticut5346Delaware19District of ColumbiaTotal Non-SESU. S. Department of TransportationNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration7Office of Behavioral Safety Research
A similar trend is observed for the non-SES. There wasa decline in the average yearly number of alcoholimpaired male drivers 18 to 34 years old involved infatal crashes between 2001 to 2002 and 2004 to 2005 in18 of the 36 non-SES.Figure 6. Non-SES Alcohol-Related Fatalities from 2001-2005(36 States)5900585058005750The total declines in yearly average of fatal crashes foralcohol-impaired drivers from 2002 to 2005 wereslightly greater for the non-SES, as compared with theSES (a 5% drop in non-SES compared to a 2% declinein SES). In the target group of 18- to 34-year-old maledrivers, there was also a greater decline in non-SEScompared to SES (8.7% in non-SES and 3.8% in SES).A two-way analysis of variance compared the effect ofState Status (SES/non-SES) and Enforcement Period(Pre Crackdown/Crackdown) on alcohol-related fatalityrates (i.e. fatalities/100k licensed drivers). The alcoholrelated fatality rate by month for the years 2001 and2002 was used as pre-program measure, whereasalcohol-related fatality rate by month for years 2004 and2005 was used as the crackdown period measure (theyear 2003 was excluded because the crackdown startedmidway and covered a different period than in the years2004 and 2005). The analysis revealed that the numberof alcohol-related fatalities declined from the precrackdown period to the post-crackdown period. TheSES and the non-SES did not differ in their rates ofdecline. Figure 5 shows a decline across 2001-2005 inthe SES, with wide variations from year to year. Asimilar decline, but with slightly less variation from yearto year, can be observed in alcohol-related fatalities inthe non-SES (Figure 6). The analysis of varianceexcluded Missouri and South Carolina, since they onlyjoined the SES in 2005.Figure 5. SES Alcohol-Related Fatalities from 2001-2005(13 200220032004200520062007SummaryBetween 2003 and 2005, the National Impaired DrivingCrackdown Program demonstrated that a high-visibilityimpaired driving law enforcement program, supported bya paid and earned media campaign stressing lawenforcement messages can reach the general public. Inparticular, efforts to reach young adult males who are athigher risk of being involved in alcohol-related crasheswere successful.Significant increases in exposure to impaired driving lawenforcement were reported in some States. Overall, therewere increases in the number of motorists who wereaware of special efforts by police to reduce drunk drivingnationally and in the SES.While there were no significant changes in self-reporteddrinking and driving behaviors, declines in alcohol-relatedfatalities were seen over the three-year period. Thenumber of alcohol impaired drivers involved in fatalcrashes declined from 2001-2002 to 2004-2005 in 30States (7 of the 13 SES and 23 of the 36 non-SES). Of thefive years shown, the 2005 totals were the lowest in 13States (5 of the SES and 8 of the non-SES), as well as fornon-SES 0055505500The results were similar for drivers 18 to 34 years old.The number of alcohol-impaired male drivers 18 to 34involved in fatal crashes declined from 2001-2002 to2004-2005 in 26 States (8 of the 13 SES and 18 of the 36non-SES). Of the five years shown, the 2005 totals werethe lowest in 14 States (4 of the SES and 10 of the nonSES), as well as for the non-SES combined.54502001200220032004U. S. Department of Transportation200520062007A two-way analysis of variance using the factors ofenforcement and state grouping (SES/non-SES)confirmed that alcohol-related fatalities declined from2001-2002 to 2004-2005 and that this decrease did notdiffer across SES and non-SES.National Highway Traffic Safety Administration8Office of Behavioral Safety Research
Lessons LearnedFollowing four years of increases in alcohol-relatedtraffic fatalities from 1998 to 2002, the NationalImpaired Driving Crackdown program was initiated inan effort to reverse this trend. The program wasdesigned to engage the Nation in the use of highvisibility enforcement coupled with enforcementoriented media to create general deterrence.NHTSA sought to involve all States in the crackdown,but focused on a number of States with especially highnumbers or rates of alcohol-related traffic fatalities. Theagency provided these States with technical assistance, asmall amount of additional paid advertising, and funds toenhance the law enforcement efforts.During the three-year period when the program wasbeing conducted, the trend in alcohol-related fatalitiesdeclined in both SES and non-SES, and the declineswere more pronounced for male drivers 18 to 34. Whilethe declines in the SES were not significant, they couldbe considered promising, since they are directionallycorrect and follow immediately after a period ofincreased alcohol-related fatalities.The congressionally funded national media campaignappears to have been successful in reaching the targetaudience with the enforcement-oriented message.However, to make significant changes in driverbehavior, it may be necessary for the driving public toperceive that the risk of detection for driving impairedhas been increased significantly.While directionally correct, experience in CheckpointTennessee suggests that more substantial benefits willrequire a much higher level of law enforcement intensitythan was present between 2003 and 2005 among the SESor the non-SES.In addition, conducting a coordinated NationalCrackdown just once each year may not have beensufficient to build momentum. Awareness about bothenforcement activities and media messages increasedfollowing each crackdown, but did not carry over fromcampaign to campaign. Conducting more frequentwaves of enforcement and publicity might be moresuccessful in building a cumulative effect.Next StepsNHTSA to purchase paid advertising for two impaireddriving crackdowns during the Labor Day holiday inAugust/September and Drunk and Drugged Driving (3D)Prevention Month in December. NHTSA hopes to do thesame in 2007 and in future years.In addition, in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, EfficientTransportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users(SAFETEA-LU), Congress required that all States signassurances that they will conduct high-visibility lawenforcement during crackdown periods and on asustained basis throughout the year. Congress alsoquadrupled the level of funding available to States tocombat impaired driving through the Section 410Incentive Grant program, and provided that a portion ofthese funds be available exclusively to States with thebiggest challenges (the 10 States with the highest alcoholfatality rates). Moreover, SAFETEA-LU provided thatat least half of those funds must be spent on highvisibility enforcement.SAFETEA-LU was passed more than four years after theSES program was established. New criteria for Section410 grants require States to develop year-longenforcement plans that cover 65% of the State. Thisnewer requirement supersedes the original SES programrequirement.Using these resources, NHTSA is continuing to workwith the States to enhance their well-publicized, highvisibility enforcement efforts.ReferencesCoding, P.J., & Samson, P. (1974) Blood-Alcohol inRoad Fatalities Before and After the Road Safety Act,1967. Crowthorne, Berkshire, England: Transport andRoad Research Laboratory, Supplementary Report 45UC.Hurst, P., & Wright, R. (1980) Deterrence at Last: TheMinistry of Transport’s Alcohol Blitzes. Paper presentedto the Eighth International Conference of Alcohol, Drugsand Traffic Safety, Stockholm, Sweden.Lacy, J.H., Jones, R.K., & Smith, R.G. An Evaluation ofCheckpoint Tennessee: Tennessee’s Statewide SobrietyCheckpoint Program. DOT HS 808 841. January 1999.Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration.NHTSA will continue to make every effort to apply thelessons learned from the 2003–2005 impaired drivingcampaign to its program in 2006 and beyond.Congress appropriated additional funding to support thenational paid media campaign in 2006, which enabledU. S. Department of TransportationNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration9Office of Behavioral Safety Research
Levy, M., Compton, R., & Dienstfrey, S. PublicPerceptions of the July 2003 You Drink & Drive. YouLose Crackdown: Telephone Surveys Show the MediaCampaign Reaches Target Audience. 2004. DOT HS 809708 Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration.Levy, P., Voas, R., Johnson, P., & Klein, T.M. AnEvaluation of the Department of Transportation’s AlcoholSafety Action Projects. 1978. Journal of Safety Research,10, 162-176.Solomon, M., Ulmer, R.G., & Preusser, D.F. Evaluationof Click It or Ticket Model Programs. 2002. DOT HS 809498. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration.Wells, J.K., Preusser, D.K., & Williams, A.F. Enforcingalcohol-impaired driving and seat belt use laws. 1992.Binghamton, NY: Journal of Safety Research 23, 63-71.Williams, A.F., Lund, A.K., Preusser, D.F., &Blomberg, R.D. Results of a seat belt law enforcementand publicity campaign in Elmira, New York. 1987.Accident Analysis and Prevention, 19, 243-249.Williams, A.F., Preusser, D.F., Blomberg, R.D., & Lund,A.K. Seat belt use law enforcement and publicity inElmira, New York: A reminder campaign. 1987.American Journal of Public Health, 77(11), 1450-51.Williams, A.F., Reinfurt, D., & Wells, J.K. Increasingseat belt use in North Carolina. 1996. Journal of SafetyResearch, 27, 33-41Zwicker, T.J., Chaudhary, N.K., Maloney, S., & Squeglia,R. Connecticut’s Impaired Driving Publicity andEnfo
Each of the SES invested State or TEA-21 dollars for advertising in addition to the national airtime and targeted SES airtime that NHTSA purchased on broadcast TV, cable TV, and radio programs likely to reach the target audience. The SES spent approximately 2 million on addit
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
NHTSA Drug-Impaired Driving GHSA's report Drug-Impaired Driving: Marijuana and Opioids Raise Critical Issues for States GHSA's report Drug-Impaired Driving: A Guide for States, 2017 Update Drugged Driving AAA Foundation Countermeasures Against Prescription and Over-the-Counter Drug-Impaired Driving References 1. Adrian, M. (2015).
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.
