Explain what is wrong the following objectives of : Decrease death due to automobile accidents…

Explain what is wrong the following objectives of : Decrease death due to automobile accidents caused by texting ,revise them to reflect objevtives that are SMART. Include references.
Problems with the objective as written
Not specific: “Decrease death due to automobile accidents caused by texting” does not define who, where, or what specific behavior or population is targeted.
Not measurable: No baseline, target value, or metric is provided (how many deaths, what percent reduction?).
Not achievable/realistic: Without scope, resources, or interventions described, it is unclear whether the goal is attainable.
Not relevant (partly): While reducing deaths is relevant to traffic safety, the statement does not connect to a specific program, jurisdiction, or stakeholder responsibility.
Not time-bound: There is no deadline or timeframe for achieving the reduction.
How to convert the statement into SMART objectives
Specific
– identify the population, behavior, location, and intervention.
Measurable
– include baseline numbers and the exact amount or percent of reduction.
Achievable
– set realistic targets based on evidence, capacity, and planned strategies.
Relevant
– tie the objective to the agency or program that will implement it.
Time-bound
– include a clear deadline for achieving the objective.
Example SMART objectives (revised)
State-level example:
Reduce fatalities from texting-while-driving crashes among drivers aged 16–24 in State X by 30% (from 120 deaths in 2023 to 84 or fewer) by December 31, 2026, as measured by state crash reports, through a combined strategy of targeted enforcement, school-based education campaigns, and public media outreach.
County/community example:
Reduce the number of police-reported crashes in County Y attributed to driver cellphone use by 20% within 24 months (from 500 crashes in 2024 to 400 or fewer by 12/31/2026) by implementing high-visibility enforcement waves, installing signage at high-risk corridors, and partnering with employers on distracted-driving policies.
Organizational (employer or university) example:
Achieve a 90% self-reported compliance rate with a no-texting-while-driving policy among employees who drive for work within 12 months (baseline: 45% self-reported compliance in baseline survey), measured via anonymous quarterly surveys and vehicle telematics, and supported by policy enforcement and in-service training.
For each SMART objective include:
Baseline data (e.g., number of deaths or crashes last year)
Specific numeric target (absolute number or percent)
Timeframe and deadline
Responsible parties (agency, department, or partners)
How progress will be measured and data sources (police crash reports, hospital records, telematics, surveys)
Planned interventions (enforcement, education, engineering, policy changes, technology)
Notes on measurement and validity
Use standardized crash reporting fields to identify distraction/texting-related crashes; clarify coding criteria and train coders to improve data quality.
Report both absolute counts and rates (e.g., fatalities per 100,000 population or per vehicle miles traveled) to account for exposure changes.
Complement administrative data with observational surveys or telematics where feasible to estimate behavior change (texting prevalence while driving).
References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) — Distracted Driving
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) — Distracted Driving
World Health Organization (WHO) — Road traffic injuries
AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety — Research on distracted driving