nmm 22 4500 ICPSR03688 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2003 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR03688 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 2001 [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2003 ICPSR 3688 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The goal of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program is to determine the extent and correlates of illicit drug use in the population of booked arrestees in local areas. Data were collected in 2001 at four separate times (quarterly) during the year in 33 metropolitan areas in the United States. The ADAM program adopted a new instrument in 2000 in adult booking facilities for male (Part 1) and female (Part 2) arrestees. Data from arrestees in juvenile detention facilities (Part 3) continued to use the juvenile instrument from previous years, extending back through the DRUG USE FORECASTING series (ICPSR 9477). The ADAM program in 2001 also continued the use of probability-based sampling for male arrestees in adult facilities, which was initiated in 2000. Therefore, the male adult sample includes weights, generated through post-sampling stratification of the data. For the adult files, variables fell into one of eight categories: (1) demographic data on each arrestee, (2) ADAM facesheet (records-based) data, (3) data on disposition of the case, including accession to a verbal consent script, (4) calendar of admissions to substance abuse and mental health treatment programs, (5) data on alcohol and drug use, abuse, and dependence (6) drug acquisition data covering the five most commonly used illicit drugs, (7) urine test results, and (8) weights. The juvenile file contains demographic variables and arrestee's self-reported past and continued use of 15 drugs, as well as other drug-related behaviors. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03688.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 3688 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03688.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR03815 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2004 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR03815 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 2002 [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2004 ICPSR 3815 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The goal of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program is to determine the extent and correlates of illicit drug use in the population of booked arrestees in local areas. Data were collected in 2002 at four separate times (quarterly) during the year in 36 metropolitan areas in the United States. The ADAM program adopted a new instrument in 2000 in adult booking facilities for male (Part 1) and female (Part 2) arrestees. Data from arrestees in juvenile detention facilities (Part 3) continued to use the juvenile instrument from previous years, extending back through the DRUG USE FORECASTING series (ICPSR 9477). The ADAM program in 2002 also continued the use of probability-based sampling for male arrestees in adult facilities, which was initiated in 2000. Therefore, the male adult sample includes weights, generated through post-sampling stratification of the data. For the adult files, variables fell into one of eight categories: (1) demographic data on each arrestee, (2) ADAM facesheet (records-based) data, (3) data on disposition of the case, including accession to a verbal consent script, (4) calendar of admissions to substance abuse and mental health treatment programs, (5) data on alcohol and drug use, abuse, and dependence, (6) drug acquisition data covering the five most commonly used illicit drugs, (7) urine test results, and (8) weights. The juvenile file contains demographic variables and arrestee's self-reported past and continued use of 15 drugs, as well as other drug-related behaviors. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03815.v1 ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 3815 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03815.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR04020 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2004 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR04020 MiAaI MiAaI Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 2003 [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2004 ICPSR 4020 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The goal of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program is to determine the extent and correlates of illicit drug use in the population of booked arrestees in local areas. Data were collected in 2003 up to four separate times (quarterly) during the year in 39 metropolitan areas in the United States. The ADAM program adopted a new instrument in 2000 in adult booking facilities for male (Part 1) and female (Part 2) arrestees. The ADAM program in 2003 also continued the use of probability-based sampling for male arrestees in adult facilities, which was initiated in 2000. Therefore, the male adult sample includes weights, generated through post-sampling stratification of the data. For the adult male and female files, variables fell into one of eight categories: (1) demographic data on each arrestee, (2) ADAM facesheet (records-based) data, (3) data on disposition of the case, including accession to a verbal consent script, (4) calendar of admissions to substance abuse and mental health treatment programs, (5) data on alcohol and drug use, abuse, and dependence, (6) drug acquisition data covering the five most commonly used illicit drugs, (7) urine test results, and (8) for males, weights. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04020.v1 demographic characteristics icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug related crimes icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr drug use icpsr drugs icpsr substance abuse icpsr trends icpsr urinalysis icpsr drug dependence icpsr ADAM/DUF Program icpsr alcohol abuse icpsr arrests icpsr crime patterns icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 4020 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04020.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR04278 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2007 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR04278 MiAaI MiAaI Assessing Trends and Best Practices of Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Programs in the United States, 2003 [electronic resource] Patrick Curtin , David Thomas , Daniel Felker , Eric Weingart 2007-09-27 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2007 ICPSR 4278 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This trends and best practices evaluation geared toward motor vehicle theft prevention with a particular focus on the Watch Your Car (WYC) program was conducted between October 2002 and March 2004. On-site and telephone interviews were conducted with administrators from 11 of 13 WYC member states. Surveys were mailed to the administrators of auto theft prevention programs in 36 non-WYC states and the 10 cities with the highest motor vehicle theft rates. Completed surveys were returned from 16 non-WYC states and five of the high auto theft rate cities. Part 1, the survey for Watch Your Car (WYC) program members, includes questions about how respondents learned about the WYC program, their WYC related program activities, the outcomes of their program, ways in which they might have done things differently if given the opportunity, and summary questions that asked WYC program administrators for their opinions about various aspects of the overall WYC program. The survey for the nonmember states, Part 2, and cities, Part 3, collected information about motor vehicle theft prevention within the respondent's state or city and asked questions about the respondent's knowledge of, and opinions about, the Watch Your Car program. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04278.v1 stolen property icpsr stolen vehicles icpsr auto theft icpsr crime control programs icpsr crime prevention icpsr crime reduction icpsr property crimes icpsr NACJD I. Attitude Surveys ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Curtin, Patrick Thomas, David Felker, Daniel Weingart, Eric Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 4278 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04278.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR02729 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s1999 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR02729 MiAaI MiAaI Changing Patterns of Homicide and Social Policy in Philadelphia, Phoenix, and St. Louis, 1980-1994 [electronic resource] Margaret A. Zahn 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1999 ICPSR 2729 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study sought to assess changes in the volume and types of homicide committed in Philadelphia, Phoenix, and St. Louis from 1980 to 1994 and to document the nature of those changes. Three of the eight cities originally studied by Margaret Zahn and Marc Riedel (NATURE AND PATTERNS OF HOMICIDE IN EIGHT AMERICAN CITIES, 1978 [ICPSR 8936]) were revisited for this data collection. In each city, police records were coded for each case of homicide occurring in the city each year from 1980 to 1994. Homicide data for St. Louis were provided by the St. Louis Homicide Project with Scott Decker and Richard Rosenfeld as the principal investigators. Variables describing the event cover study site, year of the case, date and time of assault, location of fatal injury, method used to kill the victim, and circumstances surrounding the death. Variables pertaining to offenders include total number of homicide and assault victims, number of offenders arrested, number of offenders identified, and disposition of event for offenders. Variables on victims focus on whether the victim was killed at work, if the victim was using drugs or alcohol, the victim's blood alcohol level, and the relationship of the victim to the offender. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, and marital status of victims and offenders. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02729.v1 crime patterns icpsr homicide icpsr offenders icpsr police records icpsr victims icpsr NACJD VII. Crime and Delinquency NACJD XIV. Homicide Studies ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Zahn, Margaret A. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 2729 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02729.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR29202 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2011 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR29202 MiAaI MiAaI Crime in Boomburb Cities [electronic resource] 1970-2004 [United States] John Hipp 2011-08-10 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2011 ICPSR 29202 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study focused on the effect of economic resources and racial/ethnic composition on the change in crime rates from 1970-2004 in United States cities in metropolitan areas that experienced a large growth in population after World War II. A total of 352 cities in the following United States metropolitan areas were selected for this study: Atlanta, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Las Vegas, Miami, Orange County, Orlando, Phoenix, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Silicon Valley (Santa Clara), and Tampa/St. Petersburg. Selection was based on the fact that these areas developed during a similar time period and followed comparable development trajectories. In particular, these 14 areas, known as the "boomburbs" for their dramatic, post-World War II population growth, all faced issues relating to the rapid growth of tract-style housing and the subsequent development of low density, urban sprawls. The study combined place-level data obtained from the United States Census with crime data from the Uniform Crime Reports for five categories of Type I crimes: aggravated assaults, robberies, murders, burglaries, and motor vehicle thefts. The dataset contains a total of 247 variables pertaining to crime, economic resources, and race/ethnic composition. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR29202.v1 aggravated assault icpsr auto theft icpsr burglary icpsr crime patterns icpsr crime rates icpsr economic conditions icpsr homicide icpsr income distribution icpsr metropolitan areas icpsr race icpsr racial integration icpsr racial segregation icpsr robbery icpsr trend analysis icpsr urban crime icpsr wealth icpsr NACJD VII. Crime and Delinquency ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XIV. Homicide Studies Hipp, John Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 29202 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR29202.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR02706 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2000 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR02706 MiAaI MiAaI Differences in the Validity of Self-Reported Drug Use Across Five Factors in Indianapolis, Fort Lauderdale, Phoenix, and Dallas, 1994 [electronic resource] Andre B. Rosay , University of Maryland at College Park , Denise C. Herz 2000-09-11 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2000 ICPSR 2706 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study investigated the accuracy of self-reported drug use in three ways. First, the researchers examined differences in the accuracy of self-reported drug use across five factors: gender, race, age, type of drug, and offense seriousness. Second, an attempt was made to determine the specific sources of inaccurate self-reports in terms of differences in underreporting and overreporting. Third, the researchers sought to explain differences in underreporting and overreporting in terms of true differences or differences in opportunity to underreport or overreport. This study used data collected in 1994 as part of the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) Program [DRUG USE FORECASTING IN 24 CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES, 1987-1997 (ICPSR 9477)]. The DUF drug testing and measurement methodology allows the accuracy of self-reported drug use to be checked with a biological criterion, namely urine tests. The sample for this study consisted of 4,752 white and Black adults from Indianapolis, Ft. Lauderdale, Phoenix, and Dallas. The five exogenous measures included in this study were type of drug (marijuana vs. crack/cocaine), age (18 through 30 vs. 31 or over), offense seriousness (misdemeanor vs. felony), race (Black vs. white), and gender (male vs. female). The endogenous measures were accuracy (self-report and drug test both positive or both negative vs. otherwise), underreporting (self-report negative but drug test positive vs. otherwise), and overreporting (self-report positive but drug test negative vs. otherwise). Variables include result of marijuana urine test, result of cocaine/crack urine test, marijuana self-report, cocaine/crack self-report, age group, sex, race, offense category, and ethnic/gender group. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02706.v1 African Americans icpsr age icpsr crack cocaine icpsr drug law offenses icpsr drug offender profiles icpsr drug testing icpsr drug use icpsr gender icpsr marijuana icpsr race icpsr urinalysis icpsr White Americans icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System RCMD I. Crime NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program Rosay, Andre B. University of Maryland at College Park Herz, Denise C. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 2706 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02706.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR06235 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s1995 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR06235 MiAaI MiAaI Drugs and Crime in Public Housing, 1986-1989 [electronic resource] Los Angeles, Phoenix, and Washington, DC Terence Dunworth , Aaron Saiger 2006-01-12 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1995 ICPSR 6235 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study investigates rates of serious crime for selected public housing developments in Washington, DC, Phoenix, Arizona, and Los Angeles, California, for the years 1986 to 1989. Offense rates in housing developments were compared to rates in nearby areas of private housing as well as to city-wide rates. In addition, the extent of law enforcement activity in housing developments as represented by arrests was considered and compared to arrest levels in other areas. This process allowed both intra-city and inter-city comparisons to be made. Variables cover study site, origin of data, year of event, offense codes, and location of event. Los Angeles files also include police division. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06235.v1 arrest rates icpsr arrests icpsr cities icpsr crime rates icpsr drug traffic icpsr public housing icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime Dunworth, Terence Saiger, Aaron Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 6235 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06235.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR06214 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s1999 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR06214 MiAaI MiAaI Evaluation of the Focused Offender Disposition Program in Birmingham, Phoenix, and Chicago, 1988-1992 [electronic resource] John R. Hepburn 2006-03-30 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1999 ICPSR 6214 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Drug Testing Technology/Focused Offender Disposition (FOD) program was designed to examine two issues regarding drug users in the criminal justice system: (1) the utility of need assessment instruments in appropriately determining the level of treatment and/or supervision needed by criminal offenders with a history of drug use, and (2) the use of urinalysis monitoring as a deterrent to subsequent drug use. This data collection consists of four datasets from three sites. The FOD program was first established in Birmingham, Alabama, and Phoenix, Arizona, in December 1988 and ran through August 1990. The Chicago, Illinois, program began in October 1990 and ended in March 1992. These first three programs studied probationers with a history of recent drug use who were not incarcerated while awaiting sentencing. The subjects were assessed with one of two different treatment instruments. Half of all clients were assessed with the objective Offender Profile Index (OPI) created by the National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors (NASADAD). The other half were assessed with the local instrument administered in each site by Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime (TASC), Inc. Regardless of which assessment procedure was used, offenders were then randomly assigned to one of two groups. Half of all offenders assessed by the OPI and half of the offenders assessed by the local instrument were assigned to a control group that received only random urinalysis monitoring regardless of the drug treatment intervention strategy prescribed by the assessment instrument. The other half of offenders in each assessment group were assigned to a treatment group that received appropriate drug intervention treatment. The Phoenix pilot study (Part 4), which ran from March 1991 to May 1992, was designed like the first Phoenix study, except that the sample for the pilot study was drawn from convicted felons who were jailed prior to sentencing and who were expected to be sentenced to probation. These data contain administrative information, such as current offense, number of arrests, number of convictions, and prior charges. The need assessment instruments were used to gather data on clients' living arrangements, educational and vocational backgrounds, friendships, history of mental problems, drug use history, and scores measuring stakes in conformity. In addition, the study specifically collected information on the monitoring of the clients while in the FOD program, including the number of urinalyses administered and their results, as well as the placement of clients in treatment programs. The files also contain demographic information, such as age, race, sex, and education. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06214.v1 criminal justice system icpsr drug offenders icpsr drug testing icpsr drug treatment icpsr needs assessment icpsr probationers icpsr program evaluation icpsr treatment programs icpsr urinalysis icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD III. Corrections Hepburn, John R. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 6214 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06214.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR26081 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2011 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR26081 MiAaI MiAaI Evaluation of the Phoenix, Arizona, Homicide Clearance Initiative, 2003-2005 [electronic resource] Tom McEwen 2011-07-05 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2011 ICPSR 26081 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The purpose of the study was to conduct a process and outcome evaluation of the Homicide Clearance Project in the Phoenix, Arizona Police Department. The primary objective of the Homicide Clearance Project was to improve homicide clearance rates by increasing investigative time through the transfer of four crime scene specialists to the homicide unit. In 2004, the Phoenix Police Department received a grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance providing support for the assignment of four crime scene specialists directly to the department's Homicide Unit. Responsibilities of the crime scene specialists were to collect evidence at homicide scenes, prepare scene reports, develop scene diagrams, and other supportive activities. Prior to the project, homicide investigators were responsible for evidence collection, which reduced the time they could devote to investigations. The crime scene specialists were assigned to two of the four investigative squads within the homicide unit. This organizational arrangement provided for a performance evaluation of the squads with crime scene specialists (experimental squads) against the performance of the other squads (comparison squads). During the course of the evaluation, research staff coded information from all homicides that occurred during the 12-month period prior to the transfers (July 1, 2003 – June 30, 2004), referred to as the baseline period, the 2-month training period (July 1, 2004 – August 31, 2004), and a 10-month test period (September 1, 2004 – June 30, 2005). Data were collected on 404 homicide cases (Part 1), 532 homicide victims and survivors (Part 2), and 3,338 records of evidence collected at homicide scenes (Part 3). The two primary sources of information for the evaluation were investigative reports from the department's records management system, called the Police Automated Computer Entry (PACE) system, and crime laboratory reports from the crime laboratory's Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS). Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 each contain variables that measure squad type, time period, and whether six general categories of evidence were collected. Part 1 contains a total of 18 variables including number of investigators, number of patrol officers at the scene, number of witnesses, number of crime scene specialists at the scene, number of investigators collecting evidence at the scene, total number of evidence collectors, whether the case was open or closed, type of arrest, and whether the case was open or closed by arrest. Part 2 contains a total of 37 variables including victim characteristics and motives. Other variables in Part 2 include an instrumental/expressive homicide indicator, whether the case was open or closed, type of arrest, whether the case was open or closed by arrest, number of investigators, number of patrol officers at the scene, number of witnesses, and investigative time to closure. Part 3 contains a total of 46 variables including primary/secondary scene indicator, scene type, number of pieces of evidence, total time at the scene, and number of photos taken. Part 3 also includes variables that measure whether 16 specific types of evidence were found and the number of items of evidence that were collected for 13 specific evidence types. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR26081.v1 evidence icpsr forensic sciences icpsr homicide icpsr law enforcement icpsr law enforcement agencies icpsr outcome evaluation icpsr police icpsr police effectiveness icpsr police performance icpsr process evaluation icpsr victims icpsr clearance rates icpsr criminal investigations icpsr NACJD X. Victimization ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XIV. Homicide Studies NACJD IX. Police McEwen, Tom Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 26081 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR26081.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR09793 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s1992 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR09793 MiAaI MiAaI Evaluation of a Repeat Offender Unit in Phoenix, Arizona, 1987-1989 [electronic resource] Joan Petersilia , Allan F. Abrahamse , Patricia A. Ebener , Peter W. Greenwood 1992-10-31 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1992 ICPSR 9793 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a Repeat Offender Unit in Phoenix. Repeat Offender Programs are police-initiated procedures for patrolling and apprehending likely offenders in communities. These units typically rely on the cooperation of police and prosecutors who work together to identify, convict, and incarcerate individuals who are judged likely to commit crimes, especially serious crimes, at high rates. For this study, previous offenders were assigned either to a control or an experimental group. If an individual assigned to the experimental group was later arrested, the case received special attention by the Repeat Offender Program. Staff of the Repeat Offender Program worked closely with the county attorney's office to thoroughly document the case and to obtain victim and witness cooperation. If the individual was in the control group and was later arrested, no additional action was taken by the Program staff. Variables include assignment to the experimental or control group, jail status, probation and parole status, custody status, number of felony arrests, type of case, bond amount, number of counts against the individual, type of counts against the individual, number of prior convictions, arresting agency, case outcome, type of incarceration imposed, and length of incarceration imposed. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09793.v1 criminal justice programs icpsr criminality prediction icpsr police icpsr program evaluation icpsr prosecuting attorneys icpsr recidivists icpsr NACJD IX. Police ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Petersilia, Joan Abrahamse, Allan F. Ebener, Patricia A. Greenwood, Peter W. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 9793 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09793.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR25621 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2009 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR25621 MiAaI MiAaI Impact of Legal Advocacy on Intimate Partner Homicide in the United States, 1976-1997 [electronic resource] Laura Dugan 2009-07-10 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2009 ICPSR 25621 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. This study examined the impacts of jurisdictions’ domestic violence policies on violent behavior of family members and intimate partners, on the likelihood that the police discovered an incident, and on the likelihood that the police made an arrest. The research combined two datasets. Part 1 contains information on police, prosecution policies, and local victim services. Informants within the local agencies of the 50 largest cities in the United States were contacted and asked to complete a survey inventorying policies and activities by type and year of implementation. Data from completed surveys covered 48 cities from 1976 to 1996. Part 2 contains data on domestic violence laws. Data on state statutes from 1976 to 1997 that related to protection orders were collected by a legal expert for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25621.v1 arrests icpsr crime reporting icpsr domestic violence icpsr intimate partner violence icpsr police reports icpsr policy analysis icpsr state legislatures icpsr victim services icpsr NACJD X. Victimization NACJD XIV. Homicide Studies ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Dugan, Laura Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 25621 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25621.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR20060 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2007 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR20060 MiAaI MiAaI New Approach to Evaluating Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR) Data Imputation, 1990-1995 [electronic resource] Tim Wadsworth , John M. Roberts 2007-12-18 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2007 ICPSR 20060 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The purpose of the project was to learn more about patterns of homicide in the United States by strengthening the ability to make imputations for Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR) data with missing values. Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) and local police data from Chicago, Illinois, St. Louis, Missouri, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Phoenix, Arizona, for 1990 to 1995 were merged to create a master file by linking on overlapping information on victim and incident characteristics. Through this process, 96 percent of the cases in the SHR were matched with cases in the police files. The data contain variables for three types of cases: complete in SHR, missing offender and incident information in SHR but known in police report, and missing offender and incident information in both. The merged file allows estimation of similarities and differences between the cases with known offender characteristics in the SHR and those in the other two categories. The accuracy of existing data imputation methods can be assessed by comparing imputed values in an "incomplete" dataset (the SHR), generated by the three imputation strategies discussed in the literature, with the actual values in a known "complete" dataset (combined SHR and police data). Variables from both the Supplemental Homicide Reports and the additional police report offense data include incident date, victim characteristics, offender characteristics, incident details, geographic information, as well as variables regarding the matching procedure. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR20060.v1 arrests icpsr crime rates icpsr crime reporting icpsr crime statistics icpsr homicide icpsr murder icpsr offenders icpsr Uniform Crime Reports icpsr victims icpsr NACJD VIII. Official Statistics NACJD XIV. Homicide Studies ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Wadsworth, Tim Roberts, John M. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 20060 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR20060.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR06626 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s1996 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR06626 MiAaI MiAaI Phoenix [Arizona] Use of Force Project, June 1994 [electronic resource] Joel Garner , Tom Schade , John Hepburn , Aogan Mulcahy 2006-01-12 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 1996 ICPSR 6626 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. In 1994, the Phoenix Police Department, in conjunction with Rutgers University and Arizona State University, designed and implemented a study on the use of force by and against Phoenix police officers. This study was concerned with describing the amount of force used in different arrest situations and determining the extent to which officer, suspect, offense, and arrest situation characteristics can predict the amount of force used. Data were collected primarily through a one-page, two-sided survey instrument given to police officers. In addition, screening interviews regarding the use of force during the arrest were conducted with both officers and suspects to assess the reliability of the officer surveys. During the screening interviews, officers and suspects were asked brief questions about the use and extent of force by officers and suspects. In the officer survey form, six potential areas of force were identified: voice, motion, restraints, tactics, weapons, and injuries. Three dimensions of weapons use--possession, threatened use, and actual use--were also recorded. Basic demographic information on officers and suspects, descriptions of the arrest, and information regarding injuries were also collected. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06626.v1 police use of force icpsr arrest procedures icpsr offenders icpsr police departments icpsr police officers icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD IX. Police ICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and Behavior Garner, Joel Schade, Tom Hepburn, John Mulcahy, Aogan Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 6626 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06626.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR32881 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2013 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR32881 MiAaI MiAaI Research on Pathways to Desistance [Maricopa County, AZ and Philadelphia County, PA] [electronic resource] Collateral Measures, 2000-2004 Edward P. Mulvey 2013-01-07 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2013 ICPSR 32881 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Pathways to Desistance study was a multi-site study that followed 1,354 serious juvenile offenders from adolescence to young adulthood in two locales. Enrolled into the study were adjudicated youths from the juvenile and adult court systems in Maricopa County (Phoenix), Arizona (N=654) and Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania (N=700) from 2000 through 2010. This study looks at interviews conducted with the collateral informants who participated in the study. The collateral informants were nominated by the main study participant and represented individuals who "knew the study participant well". At the interview baseline the collateral informant was usually a biological parent. During the three follow-up interviews the majority of collaterals were a friend. Collateral informants could also be a sibling, significant other, or relative. Collaterals were asked questions in regards to the main study participant's life, allowing for comparison between responses provided by two sources. A baseline interview was conducted with the collateral after the baseline interview took place with the main participant. Additional waves of follow-up with collaterals took place at 12, 24, and 36 months. A collateral report is not present for all of the main study participant interviews across waves (see response rate below). Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR32881.v1 interpersonal relations icpsr juvenile crime icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr neighborhood conditions icpsr personal adjustment icpsr psychological evaluation icpsr psychosocial assessment icpsr religion icpsr social behavior icpsr substance abuse icpsr income icpsr academic achievement icpsr community involvement icpsr crime icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr family life icpsr friendships icpsr gangs icpsr household composition icpsr NACJD VII. Crime and Delinquency NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Mulvey, Edward P. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 32881 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR32881.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR34605 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2013 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR34605 MiAaI MiAaI Research on Pathways to Desistance [Maricopa County, AZ and Philadelphia County, PA] [electronic resource] Official Arrest Records, 2000-2010 [Restricted] Edward P. Mulvey 2013-05-01 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2013 ICPSR 34605 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Pathways to Desistance study was a multi-site study that followed 1,354 serious juvenile offenders from adolescence to young adulthood in two locales between the years 2000 and 2010. Enrolled into the study were adjudicated youths from the juvenile and adult court systems in Maricopa County (Phoenix), Arizona (N=654), and Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania (N=700). The official arrests records of all 1,354 youth were obtained from multiple sources. For arrest/petitions under the age of 18, this information is based on petitions appearing in the juvenile and adult court records in each site. In Philadelphia, this information was gathered based on a hand review of juvenile and adult court documents; in Phoenix, the information is based on reports from two computerized court tracking systems (JOLTS--Juvenile On-Line Tracking System for juvenile court information, ICIS--Maricopa County Superior Court database for adult court information). For arrests/petitions over 18, FBI arrest records are the source of information. There is no self-reported information contained in this set of data. Information from these different data sources is consolidated into the following categories: Information regarding petitions with a date that falls prior to the baseline interview date ("prior petitions"). Information regarding the study index petition (also called the "initial referring petition"; this is the adjudication that prompted study enrollment). Information regarding the study index petition can be found by accessing the "type" variable associated with the prior petitions (specific variable name: Official Record Prior PetitionXX: Petition type). Depending on the investigator's needs, this petition can remain combined with the "priors" or be used as a stand-alone petition. Information regarding arrests and court petitions with a date which falls after the baseline interview date in the Pathways study ("rearrests"). Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34605.v1 arrest records icpsr felony offenses icpsr juvenile crime icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr misdemeanor offenses icpsr property crimes icpsr sex offenses icpsr weapons offenses icpsr substance abuse icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD VII. Crime and Delinquency Mulvey, Edward P. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 34605 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34605.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR34488 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2013 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR34488 MiAaI MiAaI Research on Pathways to Desistance [Maricopa County, AZ and Philadelphia County, PA] [electronic resource] Release Measures, 2000-2010 [Restricted] Edward P. Mulvey 2013-02-19 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2013 ICPSR 34488 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Pathways to Desistance study was a multi-site study that followed 1,354 serious juvenile offenders from adolescence to young adulthood in two locales between the years 2000 and 2010. Enrolled into the study were adjudicated youths from the juvenile and adult court systems in Maricopa County (Phoenix), Arizona (N=654) and Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania (N=700). The Release data portion of the Pathways study contains information from 1,130 interviews ("release interviews") reflecting the youths' perceptions regarding various aspects of the residential experience and institutional environment (e.g., accounts of program operations and services provided, ratings regarding the participant's feelings of his or her safety in the facility). The release interview was conducted within 30 days prior to or after release from a facility and in a separate session apart from the time point interview. This was done to minimize the burden on the research participant and to ensure adequate attention to institutional ratings. The restricted time period within which to conduct the release interview reduced the likelihood that intervening events and experiences would skew the participant's recall of the stay. Study participants could contribute more than one release interview, depending upon the number of institutional placements he/she had over the seven-year follow-up period. The current release data reflects ratings from 686 unique individuals. It should be recognized that not every institutional stay for every youth produced a release interview. On the basis of the number of reported institutional stays in the sample, it is estimated that a release interview was obtained for approximately 54 percent of the total number of residential stays experienced by study participants. Release interviews were missed if the research interviewer was not aware of the institutional stay (e.g. it occurred between time point interviews) or if the interviewer only became aware of the institutional stay at a point that was too late to schedule a release interview within the required window surrounding the release date. The 686 individuals reflected in the release data represent 51 percent of the Pathway study participants (n=1,354) and 56 percent of Pathways participants who had a least one institutional stay (n=1,234; 120 Pathways youths had no institutional stays). On average, these 686 youths had 1.6 interviews. The number of interviews per unique person ranges from one to eight. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34488.v1 academic achievement icpsr community involvement icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr friendships icpsr gangs icpsr juvenile crime icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr medications icpsr religion icpsr social behavior icpsr substance abuse icpsr treatment facilities icpsr treatment outcome icpsr vocational education icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program NACJD VII. Crime and Delinquency ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Mulvey, Edward P. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 34488 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34488.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR29961 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130519s2012 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR29961 MiAaI MiAaI Research on Pathways to Desistance [Maricopa County, AZ and Philadelphia County, PA] [electronic resource] Subject Measures, 2000-2010 Edward P. Mulvey 2013-01-07 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2012 ICPSR 29961 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-05-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Pathways to Desistance study was a multi-site study that followed 1,354 serious juvenile offenders from adolescence to young adulthood in two locales between the years 2000 and 2010. Enrolled into the study were adjudicated youths from the juvenile and adult court systems in Maricopa County (Phoenix), Arizona (N=654) and Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania (N=700). Respondents were enrolled and baseline interviews conducted from November 2000 to January 2003. Follow-up interviews were then scheduled with the respondents at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60, 72 and 84 months past their baseline interview. The enrolled youth were at least 14 years old and under 18 years old at the time of their committing offense and were found guilty of a serious offense (predominantly felonies, with a few exceptions for some misdemeanor property offenses, sexual assault, or weapons offenses). The baseline interview was conducted within 75 days of the youth's adjudication hearing. For youths in the adult system, the baseline interview was conducted within 90 days of either (a) the decertification hearing in Philadelphia, a hearing at which it is determined if the case will remain in adult court or if it will be sent back to juvenile court; or (b) the adult arraignment hearing in Phoenix, the point in the Arizona adult system at which charges have been formally presented. The aims of the investigation were to identify initial patterns of how serious adolescent offenders stop antisocial activity, to describe the role of social context and developmental changes in promoting these positive changes, and to compare the effects of sanctions and interventions in promoting these changes. The larger goals of the Pathways to Desistance study were to improve decision-making by court and social service personnel and to clarify policy debates about alternatives for serious adolescent offenders. The study relied primarily on self-report information from study participants. Each wave of data collection covered six domains: (1) background characteristics (e.g., demographics, academic achievement, psychiatric diagnoses, offense history, neurological functioning, psychopathy, personality), (2) indicators of individual functioning (e.g., work and school status and performance, substance abuse, mental disorder, antisocial behavior), (3) psychosocial development and attitudes (e.g., impulse control, susceptibility to peer influence, perceptions of opportunity, perceptions of procedural justice, moral disengagement), (4) family context (e.g., household composition, quality of family relationships), (5) personal relationships (e.g., quality of romantic relationships and friendships, peer delinquency, contacts with caring adults), and (6) community context (e.g., neighborhood conditions, personal capital, and community involvement). Information about the measures used to capture this information can be found on the Pathways to Desistance website. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR29961.v2 family life icpsr friendships icpsr gangs icpsr household composition icpsr income icpsr interpersonal relations icpsr juvenile crime icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr neighborhood conditions icpsr personal adjustment icpsr psychological evaluation icpsr psychosocial assessment icpsr religion icpsr social behavior icpsr substance abuse icpsr academic achievement icpsr community involvement icpsr crime icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program NACJD VII. Crime and Delinquency ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System Mulvey, Edward P. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 29961 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR29961.v2