Your drivers aren't

waiting for a

collision. Neither

should you.

The Crash Proof Fleet Program™ measures and changes the driving habits that predict crashes - before your next one is already in motion.

Why conventional

safety training doesn't

reduce collisions

The problem isn't that your drivers lack information. Most of them have sat through safety training before. They completed it, passed the assessment, and drove home unchanged. That's not a training delivery problem. It's a belief problem. Experienced drivers - especially those with clean records - arrive at safety training already convinced they are above average. Years behind the wheel and a spotless history feel like proof. From inside that belief system, safety training isn't useful guidance. It's an implication that they aren't as good as they know themselves to be. So they endure it. And nothing changes. Collision risk isn't visible in a driver's record. It's visible in their habits - how they scan, where they position, how much space they manage, and how early they recognize developing hazards. Drivers can carry high-risk habits for years before the specific conditions arrive that expose them. By the time your collision history tells you something, it's already too late. The Crash Proof Fleet Program was built around that problem specifically. Before it asks drivers to change anything, it gives them a reason to want to.

A structured system

that runs in cycles

The program doesn't run as a one- time event. It runs in repeating cycles - each one building on the last. This is the only structure capable of producing lasting habit change rather than temporary compliance. Step 1: Announce the competition window Fleet managers inform drivers that a driving evaluation - framed as a competition or assessment, depending on your culture - will take place in eight weeks. Drivers are told what they're competing for: recognition as the fleet's top driver, and meaningful prizes. They're told they'll be assessed on their application of advanced crash- avoidance tactics in real traffic. This announcement does something conventional training can't: it opens a motivation window before a single piece of content is delivered. Drivers who want to perform well - and most do - begin thinking about their driving before the program has technically started. Step 2: Drivers choose what to review Between the announcement and the evaluation, drivers access the DHA training library: more than twenty videos, each built around a real- world crash scenario. Each video shows why a specific collision type happens, what it looks like in actual traffic, and the specific tactic that eliminates or minimizes that risk. Drivers choose which videos to study based on where they think they can improve. That autonomy matters. Drivers who choose their own development path don't experience it as mandatory training. They experience it as preparation to win. Step 3: Structured driving evaluations Evaluations are conducted in real traffic by trained evaluators using a consistent framework. Evaluators assess four observable behaviours: scanning patterns, space management, vehicle positioning, and timing decisions. These are the behaviours that reveal whether a driver is managing developing hazards early - or reacting after the situation has already become dangerous. Because traffic patterns repeat, these habits also predict crash type. A trained evaluator can identify the specific collision scenarios a driver is most vulnerable to based on their current habits - before any incident occurs. Evaluations can be conducted by La Velle Goodwin directly, or by supervisors trained in the DHA evaluation framework - allowing fleets to run subsequent cycles entirely in-house. Step 4: Recognition and results Once evaluations are complete, fleet managers structure recognition based on their culture. Top drivers are acknowledged internally, entered into a formal competition, or both. The program is designed to fit your organization - not require a culture change before it can work. The competitive element isn't decoration. It's the core mechanism. The desire to be recognized as genuinely skilled is a powerful motivator that compliance-based training has never been able to reach. When drivers are preparing to be evaluated, they're not resisting training - they're using it. Step 5: The cycle continues When the first cycle closes, the next competition window is announced. Training videos remain permanently accessible so drivers can continue developing at their own pace between cycles. This ongoing structure is designed to do something single-session training cannot: build safety culture over time. Each cycle, drivers are more familiar with the evaluation criteria, more practised in the tactics, and more engaged in the competition. Supervisors become more consistent and more confident in their evaluations. Recognition of skilled driving becomes a normal part of how the organization talks about performance rather than an occasional event. The intention is a safety culture that up-spirals with each cycle: one where the standard rises, the habits deepen, and the gap between where drivers are and where a collision could occur continues to widen.

What makes this

different from every

program you've already

tried

Drivers are shown how collisions actually develop - not just told what to do. Each training scenario demonstrates the exact moment where a different decision changes the outcome. When the physics and the pattern are visible, the tactic makes sense. Experienced drivers are far less likely to dismiss guidance they can actually see the logic behind. The evaluation structure creates a goal - not a standard to comply with. That difference - between preparing to be recognized for skill and enduring mandatory training - determines whether a driver applies themselves or simply waits for it to be over. The cycle means habits compound. What's introduced in the first cycle is more practised by the third. A safety culture built in year one is the foundation for a higher standard in year two. No single-session program can do that.

Your supervisors are

the multiplier - or the

bottleneck

Supervisors are critical to fleet safety but are rarely given a structured framework for evaluating driving behaviour in relation to crash risk. Without one, ride-along evaluations reflect general impressions, not measurable risk. The Crash Proof Fleet Program trains supervisors in the DHA evaluation framework. They learn to observe and consistently assess scanning behaviour, space management, positioning, and timing decisions across the fleet. There's a secondary benefit: experienced drivers measure the credibility of anyone coaching them against their own internal standard. A supervisor who can demonstrate real expertise in crash causation earns a level of respect that generic safety authority rarely achieves. That credibility is what makes feedback stick.

One collision is more

expensive than most

fleet managers realize

The numbers from the National Safety Council are stark: the average employer cost of a single non-fatal injury crash is $75,000 - covering vehicle damage, insurance, legal exposure, lost productivity, and driver downtime. A fatal crash exceeds $1.7 million when all cost categories are included. For a fleet of 20 drivers, the statistical question isn't whether a collision will happen - it's when, and what it will cost when it does. A program that prevents two injury crashes in a year has paid for itself many times over. The stronger argument, however, isn't the cost of the program. It's the cost of the current approach - including the consequences that never appear on an incident report. Collision history doesn't tell you where your risk is. It tells you where it was. A structured evaluation system with documented cycles, observable criteria, and performance tracking gives you something collision history can't: a defensible record that driver risk is being actively managed. That distinction matters when liability is on the table.

Now Selecting

Founding Fleet

Partners

A limited number of fleets are being selected to participate in the inaugural Crash Proof Fleet Program pilot. This is not a general enrollment - it's a structured partnership with three to five fleets who will receive direct, hands-on implementation support. Pilot partners receive: • Reduced program pricing • Supervisor training for ongoing in-house evaluation cycles • Direct implementation support from La Velle Goodwin • Assistance structuring evaluation cycles and driver improvement programs • Access to the complete DHA training framework and video library • Detailed crash-risk analysis reports In exchange, pilot partners agree to: • Share implementation feedback during the program • Provide collision reduction data as it develops • Contribute a testimonial that reflects your honest experience Applications are currently open. When the three to five founding partners are confirmed, this intake closes.

Fleet Safety FAQ

My drivers have clean records. How do I know if they're actually high risk? A clean record reflects favourable outcomes over time - not necessarily sound technique. Drivers can tailgate, scan poorly, and mismanage space for years without a collision, not because their habits are safe but because the specific condition that would expose those habits hasn't arrived yet. When it does, the crash was already determined by years of existing habits. A live driving evaluation reveals what a collision history can't. How do I get driver buy-in for safety training? The core obstacle is that most training arrives as a correction - which experienced drivers receive as an insult to their competence. Re- framing around skill recognition and competition rather than compliance changes the dynamic entirely. Drivers preparing to be evaluated and recognized for genuine skill engage very differently than drivers sitting through mandatory training. The goal is to make them want to participate - not engineer their compliance. How do I handle a driver I know is a risk, but who has a clean record? This is one of the most common - and most difficult - situations in fleet safety. The record gives you no grounds for intervention, but the behaviour is visible to anyone trained to observe it. A structured evaluation framework gives supervisors specific, documented criteria: scanning patterns, space management, positioning, timing decisions. Observable behavioural data is far more defensible than supervisor impressions, and it gives you a legitimate basis for targeted coaching before an incident occurs. How do I justify this investment to senior leadership? A single non-fatal injury crash costs an average of $75,000 - vehicle damage, insurance, legal exposure, lost productivity. A fatal crash exceeds $1.7 million. A program that prevents two injury crashes in a year has paid for itself. The stronger argument: put the full cost of the current approach on the table, including everything that doesn't appear on an incident report.

We do not wait for

crashes to reveal risk.

We measure the habits

that predict them.