nmm 22 4500 ICPSR28921 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2012 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR28921 MiAaI MiAaI Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) National Cross-Site Evaluation [Restricted Use] [electronic resource] United States Department of Health and Human Services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Substance Abuse Prevention 2012-06-21 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2012 ICPSR 28921 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-06-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) National Cross-Site Evaluation was conducted to evaluate the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)'s SPF SIG initiative, which sought to: (1) prevent the onset and reduce the progression of substance abuse, including childhood and underage drinking; (2) reduce substance abuse-related problems in communities; and (3) build prevention capacity and infrastructure at the state and community levels. This cross-site evaluation included the 21 states and territories CSAP funded in FY2004 (Cohort 1) and an additional 5 States funded in Cohort 2 in FY2005 that were funded for up to 5 years to implement the SPF. The SPF is a five-step prevention planning model that requires states to: (1) conduct a statewide needs assessment, including the establishment of a State Epidemiological and Outcomes Workgroup (SEOW); (2) mobilize and build state and community capacity to address needs; (3) develop a statewide strategic plan for prevention; (4) implement evidence-based prevention, policies, and practices (EBPPP) to meet state and community needs; and (5) monitor and evaluate the implementation of their SPF SIG project. Under contract to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) with funding provided by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Westat, in collaboration with the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE) and The MayaTech Corporation, implemented a multilevel, multi-method quasi-experimental design to evaluate SPF SIG's impact. The scope of the evaluation encompassed national, state, and community levels. The design included comparison conditions at both the state and community levels. These data represent Phase I of the restricted use data release and contains extensive data on state-level implementation, community-level implementation, and state-level infrastructure, as well as other reference elements. A subsequent release (Phase II) will include state- and community-level outcomes, as well as data on community-level implementation, community-level implementation fidelity, state-level sustainability, and mediating variables. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR28921.v1 alcohol abuse icpsr client characteristics icpsr college students icpsr community participation icpsr community health icpsr community involvement icpsr community service programs icpsr continuing education icpsr African Americans icpsr counties icpsr crime icpsr delinquent behavior icpsr demographic characteristics icpsr drug dependence icpsr health policy icpsr human services icpsr illigal drugs icpsr intervention icpsr juveniles icpsr labor force icpsr law enforcement icpsr liquor law violations icpsr middle school icpsr Native Americans icpsr needs assessment icpsr organizational structure icpsr outcome evaluation icpsr outreach programs icpsr parents icpsr planning icpsr policies and procedures icpsr pregnancy icpsr program evaluation icpsr public health icpsr race icpsr risk factors icpsr schools icpsr skill development icpsr substance abuse icpsr substance abuse treatment icpsr tobacco use icpsr training icpsr treatment programs icpsr young adults icpsr zip code areas icpsr ICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and Behavior ICPSR IX. Health Care and Health Facilities NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program United States Department of Health and Human Services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Substance Abuse Prevention Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 28921 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR28921.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR23520 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2012 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR23520 MiAaI MiAaI Juvenile Residential Facility Census, 2002 [United States] [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 2012-02-09 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2012 ICPSR 23520 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-06-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC) collected basic information on facility characteristics, including size, structure, security arrangements, and ownership. It also collected information on the use of bedspace in the facility to indicate whether the facility was experiencing crowding. The JRFC included questions about the type of facility, such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home. This information was complemented by a series of questions about other residential services provided by the facility, such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements. In 2002, the JRFC used two modules to collect information on the substance abuse treatment and mental health treatment provided to youth in these facilities. While not evaluating the effectiveness or quality of these services, the JRFC gathered important information about the youth the services were directed toward and how the services were provided. The census indicated the use of screenings or tests conducted to determine counseling, education, health, or substance abuse needs, and also examined prominent issues about conditions of confinement, including the restraint of youth and improper absences from the facility. Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; JRFC collected information on such deaths for the one-year period just prior to the census reference date. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR23520.v1 census data icpsr correctional facilities icpsr group homes icpsr juvenile detention icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr juveniles icpsr mental health services icpsr substance abuse treatment icpsr NACJD III. Corrections ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and Behavior United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 23520 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR23520.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR04672 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2012 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR04672 MiAaI MiAaI Juvenile Residential Facility Census, 2000 [United States] [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 2012-02-09 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2012 ICPSR 4672 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-06-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC) collected basic information on facility characteristics, including size, structure, security arrangements, and ownership. It also collected information on the use of bedspace in the facility to indicate whether the facility was experiencing crowding. The JRFC included questions about the type of facility, such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home. This information was complemented by a series of questions about other residential services provided by the facility, such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements. In 2000, the JRFC used four modules to collect information on the physical health services, educational services, substance abuse treatment, and mental health treatment provided to youth in these facilities. While not evaluating the effectiveness or quality of these services, the JRFC gathered important information about the youth the services were directed toward and how the services were provided. The census indicated the use of screenings or tests conducted to determine counseling, education, health, or substance abuse needs, and also examined prominent issues about conditions of confinement, including the restraint of youth and improper absences from the facility. Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; JRFC collected information on such deaths for the one-year period just prior to the census reference date. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04672.v1 census data icpsr juvenile detention icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr juveniles icpsr mental health services icpsr pregnancy icpsr substance abuse treatment icpsr correctional education icpsr correctional facilities icpsr educational needs icpsr group homes icpsr health care services icpsr ICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and Behavior ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program NACJD III. Corrections United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 4672 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04672.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR25981 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2012 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR25981 MiAaI MiAaI Juvenile Residential Facility Census, 2006 [United States] [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 2012-02-09 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2012 ICPSR 25981 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-06-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC) collected basic information on facility characteristics, including size, structure, security arrangements, and ownership. It also collected information on the use of bedspace in the facility to indicate whether the facility was experiencing crowding. The JRFC included questions about the type of facility, such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home. This information was complemented by a series of questions about other residential services provided by the facility, such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements. In 2006, the JRFC used four modules to collect information on the physical health services, educational services, substance abuse treatment, and mental health treatment provided to youth in these facilities. While not evaluating the effectiveness or quality of these services, the JRFC gathered important information about the youth the services were directed toward and how the services were provided. The census indicated the use of screenings or tests conducted to determine counseling, education, health, or substance abuse needs, and also examined prominent issues about conditions of confinement, including the restraint of youth and improper absences from the facility. Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; JRFC collected information on such deaths for the one-year period just prior to the census reference date. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25981.v1 census data icpsr correctional education icpsr correctional facilities icpsr educational needs icpsr group homes icpsr health care services icpsr juvenile detention icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr juveniles icpsr mental health services icpsr pregnancy icpsr substance abuse treatment icpsr vaccines icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD III. Corrections ICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and Behavior NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 25981 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25981.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR34449 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2012 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR34449 MiAaI MiAaI Juvenile Residential Facility Census, 2010 [United States] [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 2012-11-13 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2012 ICPSR 34449 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-06-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC) collected basic information on facility characteristics, including size, structure, security arrangements, and ownership. It also collected information on the use of bedspace in the facility to indicate whether the facility was experiencing crowding. The JRFC included questions about the type of facility, such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home. This information was complemented by a series of questions about other residential services provided by the facility, such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements. In 2010, the JRFC used three modules to collect information on the educational services, substance abuse treatment, and mental health treatment provided to youth in these facilities. While not evaluating the effectiveness or quality of these services, the JRFC gathered important information about the youth the services were directed toward and how the services were provided. The census indicated the use of screenings or tests conducted to determine counseling, education, health, or substance abuse needs, and also examined prominent issues about conditions of confinement, including the restraint of youth and improper absences from the facility. Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; JRFC collected information on such deaths for the one-year period just prior to the census reference date. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34449.v1 census data icpsr correctional education icpsr correctional facilities icpsr educational needs icpsr group homes icpsr health care services icpsr juvenile detention icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr juveniles icpsr mental health services icpsr substance abuse treatment icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System ICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and Behavior NACJD III. Corrections NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 34449 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34449.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR04020 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2004 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 2013-06-19. 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 NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime 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 ICPSR03815 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2004 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 2013-06-19. 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 ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program NACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and Crime 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 ICPSR03688 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2003 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 2013-06-19. 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 ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System 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) 3688 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03688.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR29961 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2012 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 2013-06-19. 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 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR34402 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2012 miu f a eng d (MiAaI)ICPSR34402 MiAaI MiAaI Juvenile Residential Facility Census, 2008 [United States] [electronic resource] United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 2012-11-13 Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2012 ICPSR 34402 Numeric Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2013-06-19. AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public. Also available as downloadable files. The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC) collected basic information on facility characteristics, including size, structure, security arrangements, and ownership. It also collected information on the use of bedspace in the facility to indicate whether the facility was experiencing crowding. The JRFC included questions about the type of facility, such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home. This information was complemented by a series of questions about other residential services provided by the facility, such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements. While not evaluating the effectiveness or quality of these services, the JRFC gathered important information about the youth the services were directed toward and how the services were provided. The census indicated the use of screenings or tests conducted to determine counseling, education, health, or substance abuse needs, and also examined prominent issues about conditions of confinement, including the restraint of youth and improper absences from the facility. Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; JRFC collected information on such deaths for the one-year period just prior to the census reference date. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October. Cf.: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34402.v1 census data icpsr correctional facilities icpsr correctional facilities (juveniles) icpsr group homes icpsr juvenile detention icpsr juvenile offenders icpsr juveniles icpsr ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NACJD III. Corrections NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program ICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and Behavior United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. ICPSR (Series) 34402 Access restricted ; authentication may be required: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34402.v1 nmm 22 4500 ICPSR32881 MiAaI m f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu 130619s2013 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 2013-06-19. 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 ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System NAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program 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