Showing 1 – 18 of 18 results.
Curated
Advanced Cognitive Training for Independent and Vital Elderly (ACTIVE), United States, 1999-2001 (ICPSR 4248)
Released/updated on: 2010-06-30
Geographic coverage: Indiana, United States, Massachusetts, Alabama, Florida, Maryland, Michigan
Time period: 1999-01-01--2001-01-01
The data producers have recompiled the ACTIVE data into a new study which is available as of December 2023, ICPSR 38821; data users should plan to use study 38821 instead.
ACTIVE (Advanced Cognitive Training for Independent and Vital Elderly), 1999-2001 [United States] was a multisite randomized controlled trial conducted at six field sites with New England Research Institutes (NERI) as the coordinating center. The field sites included the University of Alabama at Birmingham, Hebrew Rehabilitation Center for the Aged in Boston, Indiana University, Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Pennsylvania State University, and the University of Florida/Wayne State University (Detroit). The primary aim of the trial was to test the effects of three distinct cognitive interventions -- previously found to be successful in improving elders' performance on basic measures of cognition under laboratory or small-scale field conditions -- on measures of cognitively demanding daily activities. Trainings consisted of an initial series of ten group sessions followed by four-session booster trainings at one and three years. The three cognitive interventions focused on memory, executive reasoning, and speed of processing. The design included a no-contact control group. Participants were assessed at baseline, immediately after training, and annually thereafter. A total of 2,832 older adults were enrolled in the trial, and 2,802 were included in the analytical sample. Twenty-six percent of the participants were African American.
Curated
American Community Survey (ACS): Three-Year Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS), 2005-2007 (ICPSR 25042)
Released/updated on: 2010-02-04
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Indiana, Wyoming, Utah, Arizona, Montana, Kentucky, California, Kansas, Florida, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Connecticut, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Idaho, Oregon, Vermont, Puerto Rico, United States, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Maine, Alabama, Arkansas, Washington, South Carolina, Nebraska, West Virginia, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, Alaska, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Nevada, District of Columbia, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Hawaii, Minnesota, New York (state), New Jersey, Michigan, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Louisiana, Ohio
Time period: 2005-11-01--2007-12-01
The American Community Survey (ACS) is a part of the Decennial Census Program, and is designed to produce critical information about the characteristics of local communities. The ACS publishes social, housing, and economic characteristics for demographic groups covering a broad spectrum of geographic areas in the United States and Puerto Rico. Every year the ACS supports the release of single-year estimates for geographic areas with populations of 65,000 or more. Demographic variables include sex, age, relationship, households by type, race, and Hispanic origin. Social characteristics variables include school enrollment, educational attainment, marital status, fertility, grandparents caring for children, veteran status, disability status, residence one year ago, place of birth, United States citizenship status, year of entry, world region of birth of foreign born, language spoken at home, and ancestry. Variables focusing on economic characteristics include employment status, commuting to work, occupation, industry, class of worker, income and benefits, and poverty status. Variables focusing on housing characteristics include occupancy, units in structure, year structure was built, number of rooms, number of bedrooms, housing tenure, year householder moved into unit, vehicles available, house heating fuel, utility costs, occupants per room, housing value, and mortgage status. The American Community Survey is conducted under the authority of Title 13, United States Code, Sections 141 and 193, and response is mandatory.
Curated
American Housing Survey 2007: Metropolitan Survey (ICPSR 24501)
Released/updated on: 2009-10-13
Geographic coverage: District of Columbia, United States, Minnesota, Florida, Miami, Baltimore, Minneapolis, Texas, Massachusetts, Tampa, Maryland, Boston, Houston
The metropolitan survey is conducted in even-numbered years, cycling through a set of 41 metropolitan areas, surveying each one about once every 6 years. This data collection provides information on the characteristics of a metropolitan sample of housing units, including apartments, single-family homes, mobile homes, and vacant housing units. The data are presented in seven separate parts: Part 1, Work Done Record (Replacement or Addition to the House), Part 2, Journey to Work Record, Part 3, Mortgages (Owners Only), Part 4, Housing Unit Record (Main Record), Recodes (One Record per Housing Unit), and Weights, Part 5, Manager and Owner Record (Renters Only), Part 6, Person Record, and Part 7, Mover Group Record. Data include year the structure was built, type and number of living quarters, occupancy status, access, number of rooms, presence of commercial establishments on the property, and property value. Additional data focus on kitchen and plumbing facilities, types of heating fuel used, source of water, sewage disposal, heating and air-conditioning equipment, and major additions, alterations, or repairs to the property. Information provided on housing expenses includes monthly mortgage or rent payments, cost of services such as utilities, garbage collection, and property insurance, and amount of real estate taxes paid in the previous year. Also included is information on whether the household received government assistance to help pay heating or cooling costs or for other energy-related services. Similar data are provided for housing units previously occupied by respondents who had recently moved. Additionally, indicators of housing and neighborhood quality are supplied. Housing quality variables include privacy of bedrooms, condition of kitchen facilities, basement or roof leakage, breakdowns of plumbing facilities and equipment, and overall opinion of the structure. For quality of neighborhood, variables include use of exterminator services, existence of boarded-up buildings, and overall quality of the neighborhood. In addition to housing characteristics, some demographic data are provided on household members, such as age, sex, race, marital status, income, and relationship to householder. Additional data provided on the householder include years of school completed, Spanish origin, length of residence, and length of occupancy.
Curated
Census of Population, 1910 [United States]: Oversample of Black-headed Households (ICPSR 9453)
Released/updated on: 2010-09-01
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, United States, Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisiana, Florida, Virginia, Arkansas, Maryland
Designed to facilitate analysis of the status of Blacks around the turn of the century, this oversample of Black-headed households in the United States was drawn from the 1910 manuscript census schedules. The sample complements the 1/250 Public Use Sample of the 1910 census manuscripts collected by Samuel H. Preston at the University of Pennsylvania: CENSUS OF POPULATION, 1910 [UNITED STATES]: PUBLIC USE SAMPLE (ICPSR 9166). Part 1, Household Records, contains a record for each household selected in the sample and supplies variables describing the location, type, and composition of the households. Part 2, Individual Records, contains a record for each individual residing in the sampled households and includes information on demographic characteristics, occupation, literacy, nativity, ethnicity, and fertility.
Curated
Census Tract Data, 1950: Elizabeth Mullen Bogue File (ICPSR 2931)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Milwaukee, Indiana, Kalamazoo, Berkeley, Fort Worth, Cincinnati, Austin, Spokane, San Jose, San Diego, Columbus (Ohio), Syracuse, Springfield (Massachusetts), Boston, Providence, Seattle, Kentucky, Nashville, California, Florida, New Haven, Illinois, Connecticut, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Norfolk, Duluth, Flint, United States, Oklahoma, Kansas City (Kansas), Louisville, Washington, Rome (New York), Wichita, Pawtucket, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Orleans, Denver, Dallas, St. Louis, Wisconsin, Augusta, Rochester (New York), Passaic, Chicopee, Birmingham, Michigan, Baltimore, Paterson, Louisiana, Toledo, Philadelphia, Oklahoma City, Akron, Greensboro, Detroit, Utica, Bridgeport, Memphis, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Chattanooga, Sacramento, Clifton, Kansas, Pennsylvania, Texas, Portland (Oregon), Durham, Portsmouth, Indianapolis, Richmond, Oregon, Holyoke, Tennessee, Alabama, Cleveland, Dayton, Nebraska, Superior, Omaha, Tacoma, Colorado, District of Columbia, Rhode Island, Chicago, Minnesota, New York (state), New Jersey, Miami, Ohio, Hartford, Trenton, Houston
The 1950 Census Tract files were originally created by keypunching the data from the printed publications prepared by the Bureau of the Census. The work was done under the direction of Dr. Donald Bogue, whose wife, Elizabeth Mullen Bogue, completed much of the data work. Subsequently, the punchcards were converted to data files and transferred to the National Archive and Records Administration (NARA). ICPSR received copies of these files from NARA and converted the binary block-length records to ASCII format.
Curated
Census Tract Data, 1960: Elizabeth Mullen Bogue File (ICPSR 2932)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, Indiana, Kalamazoo, Cincinnati, Austin, Spokane, San Jose, Syracuse, Springfield (Massachusetts), Providence, Seattle, St. Petersburg, Bethlehem, Nashville, California, Laredo, Fresno, Beaumont, Texarkana, Illinois, Newark, Georgia, Little Rock, Maryland, Norfolk, Oklahoma, Louisville, Arkansas, Washington, Albany (New York), Fall River, Pawtucket, Missouri, Winston-Salem, Davenport, Scranton, Dallas, Wisconsin, Nevada, Des Moines, Schenectady, Muskegon, Lawrence, St. Paul, Hawaii, Rochester (New York), Sioux City, Birmingham, Michigan, Baltimore, Paterson, New Mexico, Orlando, Canton, Philadelphia, Steubenville, Atlantic City, Akron, Topeka, Greensboro, Detroit, Charlotte, High Point, Erie, Waterloo, Bakersfield, Odessa, Abilene, Worchester, Jacksonville, Buffalo, Chattanooga, Stamford, Sacramento, Baton Rouge, Clifton, Kansas, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Texas, Fort Wayne, Indianapolis, Richmond, Holyoke, Newport News, Alabama, Nebraska, Shreveport, Superior, Omaha, Texas City, West Virginia, Elyria, Minneapolis, Youngstown, Columbia (South Carolina), Colorado, Honolulu, Phoenix, Portland (Maine), Gary, District of Columbia, Wilkes-Barre, Lancaster, Monroe, Minnesota, New Jersey, Miami, Brockton, San Francisco, Charleston (South Carolina), Lowell, Ohio, South Bend, Waco, North Carolina, Johnstown, Fort Worth, San Diego, Lincoln, Arizona, Springfield (Ohio), Boston, San Bernardino, Savannah, Macon, Montgomery, Kentucky, Florida, Hampton, Delaware, Troy, New Haven, Connecticut, Rockford, Virginia, Duluth, Flint, United States, Grand Rapids, South Carolina, Muncie, Rome (New York), Wichita, New Britain, Massachusetts, New Orleans, Denver, Salt Lake City, Harrisburg, St. Louis, Saginaw, Lubbock, Corpus Christi, Augusta, San Angelo, Allentown, Raleigh, San Antonio, Passaic, Chicopee, Pittsfield, Mobile, Gadsden, Louisiana, Toledo, Colorado Springs, Evansville, Oklahoma City, Tucson, Albuquerque, Columbus (Georgia), Utica, Tyler, Lexington, Bridgeport, Wichita Falls, Peoria, Memphis, Ogden, Pittsburgh, El Paso, Pueblo, Greenville, Haverhill, Lansing, Tulsa, Green Bay, Lorain, Hazleton, Tampa, Durham, Portsmouth, Oregon, Madison, Jackson (Michigan), York, Ann Arbor, Tennessee, Maine, Weirton, Altoona, Cleveland, Dayton, Decatur, Tacoma, Atlanta, Lima, Hamilton, Fort Smith, Middletown, Wilmington (Delaware), Rhode Island, Chicago, Waterbury, Kansas City (Missouri), New York (state), Wheeling, Santa Barbara, Galveston, Reading, Jersey City, Springfield (Missouri), Norwalk, Long Beach, New Hampshire, Easton, Manchester, Binghamton, Los Angeles, Hartford, Trenton, Stockton, Houston, New Bedford
The 1960 Census Tract files were originally created by keypunching the data from the printed publications prepared by the Bureau of the Census. The work was done under the direction of Dr. Donald Bogue, whose wife, Elizabeth Mullen Bogue, completed much of the data work. Subsequently, the punchcards were converted to data files and transferred to the National Archive and Records Administration (NARA). ICPSR received copies of these files from NARA and converted the binary block-length records to ASCII format.
Curated
Census Tract Data, 1970: Elizabeth Mullen Bogue File (ICPSR 2933)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, Biloxi, Indiana, Kalamazoo, Austin, Spokane, Lewiston, Columbus (Ohio), Syracuse, Colonial Heights, Racine, Kenosha, Bryan, Danbury, Providence, Bethlehem, Nashville, Laredo, Knoxville, Mississippi, Beaumont, Midland, Texarkana, Illinois, Denison, Georgia, Little Rock, Maryland, Idaho, Port Arthur, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Washington, Albany (New York), Pawtucket, Bay City, Missouri, Winston-Salem, Scranton, Dallas, Wisconsin, Sioux Falls, Nevada, Des Moines, Muskegon, Lawrence, Bloomington, Hawaii, Normal, Michigan, Baltimore, New Mexico, Orlando, Lacrosse, Canton, Rochester (Minnesota), Atlantic City, Akron, Topeka, Greensboro, Charlotte, High Point, Harlingen, Erie, Waterloo, Charleston (West Virginia), Odessa, Abilene, Bristol, Worchester, Terre Haute, Provo, Jacksonville, Buffalo, Chattanooga, Baton Rouge, Oshkosh, Kansas, Great Falls, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Texas, Fort Wayne, Indianapolis, Richmond, Newport News, St. Joseph, Lafayette (Indiana), Lynchburg, Roanoke, Columbia (Missouri), Nebraska, Shreveport, Superior, Texas City, Warren, West Virginia, Amarillo, Youngstown, Columbia (South Carolina), Colorado, Honolulu, Phoenix, Cedar Rapids, Portland (Maine), District of Columbia, Fayetteville, Boise City, Wilkes-Barre, Salem (Oregon), South Dakota, Lancaster, Monroe, Minnesota, New Jersey, Brockton, Charleston (South Carolina), Lowell, Ohio, South Bend, Waco, North Carolina, Johnstown, Fort Worth, Orange, Utah, San Benito, Lincoln, Arizona, Las Vegas, Springfield (Ohio), Montana, Savannah, Macon, Kentucky, Florida, Hampton, Delaware, Gainesville, Connecticut, Rockford, Virginia, Gulfport, Duluth, Flint, United States, Grand Rapids, Kansas City (Kansas), South Carolina, Muncie, Rome (New York), Tallahassee, Wichita, Nashua, New Britain, Massachusetts, New Orleans, Denver, Salt Lake City, Harrisburg, St. Louis, Saginaw, Lubbock, Corpus Christi, Augusta, San Angelo, Allentown, Raleigh, San Antonio, Springfield (Illinois), Pittsfield, Reno, Louisiana, Toledo, Colorado Springs, Pensacola, Leominster, Albuquerque, Brownsville, Champaign-Urbana, College Station, Utica, Tyler, Lexington, Bridgeport, Billings, Petersburg, Peoria, Memphis, Ogden, Pittsburgh, El Paso, Pueblo, Greenville, Auburn, Haverhill, Lansing, Meriden, Lawton, Tulsa, Green Bay, Pine Bluff, West Palm Beach, Hazleton, Eugene, Tampa, Durham, Hollywood (Florida), Oregon, Madison, Mansfield, Jackson (Michigan), York, Ann Arbor, Tennessee, Maine, Altoona, Cleveland, Dayton, Orem, Decatur, Tacoma, Atlanta, Lima, Hamilton, Fort Smith, Middletown, Sherman, Wilmington (Delaware), Rhode Island, Fitchburg, Fort Lauderdale, Kansas City (Missouri), New York (state), Anderson, Galveston, Lake Charles, Reading, Springfield (Missouri), New Hampshire, Easton, Manchester, Hartford, Trenton, Asheville, Houston, Appleton
The 1970 Census Tract files were originally created by keypunching the data from the printed publications prepared by the Bureau of the Census. The work was done under the direction of Dr. Donald Bogue, whose wife, Elizabeth Mullen Bogue, completed much of the data work. Subsequently, the punchcards were converted to data files and transferred to the National Archive and Records Administration (NARA). ICPSR received copies of these files from NARA and converted the binary block-length records to ASCII format.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study (CILS), San Diego, California, Ft. Lauderdale and Miami, Florida, 1991-2006 (ICPSR 20520)
Released/updated on: 2018-12-12
Geographic coverage: San Diego, United States, California, Florida, Ft. Lauderdale, Miami
Time period: 1991-01-01--2006-01-01
Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study (CILS) was designed to study the adaptation process of the immigrant second generation which is defined broadly as United States-born children with at least one foreign-born parent or children born abroad but brought at an early age to the United States. The original survey was conducted with large samples of second-generation immigrant children attending the 8th and 9th grades in public and private schools in the metropolitan areas of Miami/Ft. Lauderdale in Florida and San Diego, California. Conducted in 1992, the first survey had the purpose of ascertaining baseline information on immigrant families, children's demographic characteristics, language use, self-identities, and academic attainment. The total sample size was 5,262. Respondents came from 77 different nationalities, although the sample reflects the most sizable immigrant nationalities in each area. Three years later, corresponding to the time in which respondents were about to graduate from high school, the first follow-up survey was conducted. Its purpose was to examine the evolution of key adaptation outcomes including language knowledge and preference, ethnic identity, self-esteem, and academic attainment over the adolescent years. The survey also sought to establish the proportion of second-generation youths who dropped out of school before graduation. This follow-up survey retrieved 4,288 respondents or 81.5 percent of the original sample. Together with this follow-up survey, a parental survey was conducted. The purpose of this interview was to establish directly characteristics of immigrant parents and families and their outlooks for the future including aspirations and plans for the children. Since many immigrant parents did not understand English, this questionnaire was translated and administered in six different foreign languages. In total, 2,442 parents or 46 percent of the original student sample were interviewed. During 2001-2003, or a decade after the original survey, a final follow-up was conducted. The sample now averaged 24 years of age and, hence, patterns of adaptation in early adulthood could be readily assessed. The original and follow-up surveys were conducted mostly in schools attended by respondents, greatly facilitating access to them. Most respondents had already left school by the time of the second follow-up so they had to be contacted individually in their place of work or residence. Respondents were located not only in the San Diego and Miami areas, but also in more than 30 different states, with some surveys returned from military bases overseas. Mailed questionnaires were the principal source of completed data in this third survey. In total, CILS-III retrieved complete or partial information on 3,613 respondents representing 68.9 percent of the original sample and 84.3 percent of the first follow-up.Relevant adaptation outcomes measured in this survey include educational attainment, employment and occupational status, income, civil status and ethnicity of spouses/partners, political attitudes and participation, ethnic and racial identities, delinquency and incarceration, attitudes and levels of identification with American society, and plans for the future.
Curated
Partially restricted
Simple Crosstabs
Latino National Survey (LNS), 2006 (ICPSR 20862)
Released/updated on: 2013-06-05
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, United States, Fort Worth, Arkansas, Washington, San Diego, Atlanta, Colorado, Denver, Dallas, Arizona, Nevada, New York, District of Columbia, Seattle, San Antonio, Chicago, California, Florida, New Jersey, Miami, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Los Angeles, Georgia, Houston
The Latino National Survey (LNS) contains 8,634 completed interviews (unweighted) of self-identified Latino/Hispanic residents of the United States. Interviewing began on November 17, 2005, and continued through August 4, 2006. The survey instrument contained approximately 165 distinct items ranging from demographic descriptions to political attitudes and policy preferences, as well as a variety of social indicators and experiences. All interviewers were bilingual, English and Spanish. Respondents were greeted in both languages and were immediately offered the opportunity to interview in either language. Interviewers also provided a consent script that allowed respondents to opt out of the survey. Demographic variables include age, ancestry, birthplace, education level, ethnicity, marital status, military service, number of people in the household, number of children under the age of 18 living in the household, political party affiliation, political ideology, religiosity, religious preference, race, and sex.
Curated
Latino National Survey (LNS) Focus Group Data, 2006 (ICPSR 29601)
Released/updated on: 2015-08-19
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, United States, Fort Worth, Arkansas, Washington, San Diego, Atlanta, Colorado, Denver, Dallas, Arizona, Nevada, District of Columbia, Seattle, San Antonio, Chicago, California, Florida, New York (state), New Jersey, Miami, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Los Angeles, Georgia, Houston
The focus groups conducted by the research team for the project presented here offer precisely this convergence of both breadth and depth. The team used a common protocol to guide discussion in fifteen focus groups -- with more than 150 participants in nine cities across eight states -- that were designed to include Spanish and English-speaking respondents, in different regions of the country, with differing compositions by generation and country of origin. The number and range of the participants in these Latino focus groups are unique in the social science literature. This study presents the results of a unique data set, the results of fifteen focus groups conducted across the United States with Latino residents, including foreign-born -- both legal and undocumented immigrants and native-born. These data provide more range than allowed by the typical interview-based project and not only give key insights into Latino residents' thoughts about community, language, discrimination, ties to their countries of origin, and the like, but also provide some sense of participants' explanations of their reasoning and motivations, something not achievable through structured survey data alone.
Curated
Mortality Detail and Multiple Cause of Death, 1981 (ICPSR 3874)
Released/updated on: 2007-07-12
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Indiana, Wyoming, Utah, Guam, Virgin Islands of the United States, Arizona, Montana, Kentucky, California, Kansas, Florida, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Connecticut, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Idaho, Oregon, Vermont, Puerto Rico, United States, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Maine, American Samoa, Alabama, Arkansas, Washington, South Carolina, Nebraska, West Virginia, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, Alaska, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Nevada, New York, District of Columbia, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, Michigan, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Louisiana, Ohio
This data collection presents information about the causes of deaths occurring during 1981. Part 1, the Mortality Detail file, describes every death or fetal death registered in the United States for 1981. Part 2, Multiple Cause of Death, provides information about the causes of all recorded deaths occurring in the United States, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa during 1981. Data are provided concerning underlying causes of death, multiple conditions that caused the death, place of death, residence of the deceased (e.g., region, division, state, county), whether an autopsy was performed, and the month and day of death. In addition, data are supplied on the sex, race, age, marital status, education, usual occupation, and origin or descent of the deceased. The multiple cause of death fields were coded from the MANUAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL STATISTICAL CLASSIFICATION OF DISEASES, INJURIES, AND CAUSE-OF-DEATH, NINTH REVISION (ICD-9), VOLUMES 1 AND 2.
Curated
Natality Detail File, 2006 [United States] (ICPSR 24941)
Released/updated on: 2009-08-19
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Indiana, Wyoming, Northern Mariana Islands, Utah, Guam, Virgin Islands of the United States, Arizona, Montana, Kentucky, California, Kansas, Florida, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Connecticut, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Idaho, Oregon, Vermont, Puerto Rico, United States, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Maine, American Samoa, Alabama, Arkansas, Washington, South Carolina, Nebraska, West Virginia, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, Alaska, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Nevada, Rhode Island, Hawaii, Minnesota, New York (state), New Jersey, Michigan, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Louisiana, Ohio
This collection provides information on live births in the United States during calendar year 2006. The natality data in these files are a component of the vital statistics collection effort maintained by the federal government. Birth data is limited to births occurring in the United States to United States residents and nonresidents. Births occurring to United States citizens outside of the United States are not included in this data collection. Part 1 contains data on births occurring within the United States, while Part 2 contains data on births occurring in the United States territories of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Beginning in 2005, the United States file no longer includes geographic detail (e.g., mother's state of residence). Geographic variables for the United States Territories file include the territory and county in which the birth occurred and in which the mother resided. Other variables describe the place of delivery, who was in attendance, and medical and health data such as the method of delivery, prenatal care, tobacco and alcohol use during pregnancy, pregnancy history, medical risk factors, and infant health characteristics. Birth and fertility rates and other statistics related to this study can be found in the National Vital Statistics Report in the codebook documentation. Demographic variables include the child's sex and month and year of birth, the parent's age, race, and ethnicity, as well as the mother's marital status, education level, and residency status.
Curated
Population Redistribution and Economic Growth in the United States: Population Data, 1870-1960 (ICPSR 7753)
Released/updated on: 2011-08-31
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Indiana, Wyoming, Utah, Arizona, Montana, Kentucky, California, Kansas, Florida, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Connecticut, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Idaho, Oregon, Vermont, United States, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Maine, Alabama, Arkansas, Washington, South Carolina, Nebraska, West Virginia, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, Alaska, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Nevada, New York, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, Michigan, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Louisiana, Ohio
Time period: 1870-01-01--1960-01-01
Detailed demographic characteristics of the population of the United States from 1870 to 1960 are contained in this data collection. Included are state-level estimates of the nation's inhabitants by sex, race, nativity and age, as well as intercensal migration calculated by age, race, and sex. The basic information recorded in this collection was obtained from the decennial censuses of the United States or estimated by the principal investigators from material collected by the decennial censuses. The collection is comprised of thirteen separate data files. Each contains information for every state in the nation. All parts have a rectangular file structure with one record per case, with the number of cases ranging from 50 to 2,891, and the record length from 203 to 2,930 per part. Standard geographic identifying codes used in all of the files permit the combination of two or more of the files as research interests dictate.
Curated
Pretrial Release of Latino Defendants in the United States, 1990-2004 (ICPSR 25521)
Released/updated on: 2009-07-30
Geographic coverage: Indiana, United States, Tennessee, Alabama, Utah, Washington, Massachusetts, Missouri, Wisconsin, Arizona, New York, District of Columbia, Kentucky, Hawaii, California, Florida, New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Texas, Connecticut, Ohio, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland
Time period: 1990-01-01--2004-01-01
The purpose of the study was to assess the impact of Latino ethnicity on pretrial release decisions in large urban counties. The study examined two questions:
- Are Latino defendants less likely to receive pretrial releases than non-Latino defendants?
- Are Latino defendants in counties where the Latino population is rapidly increasing less likely to receive pretrial releases than Latino defendants in counties where the Latino population is not rapidly increasing?
The study utilized the State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS) Database (see STATE COURT PROCESSING STATISTICS, 1990-2004: FELONY DEFENDANTS IN LARGE URBAN COUNTIES [ICPSR 2038]). The SCPS collects data on felony cases filed in state courts in 40 of the nation's 75 largest counties over selected sample dates in the month of May of every even numbered year, and tracks a representative sample of felony case defendants from arrest through sentencing. Data in the collection include 118,556 cases.
Researchers supplemented the SCPS with county-level information from several sources:
- Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reporting Program county-level data series of index crimes reported to the police for the years 1988-2004 (see UNIFORM CRIME REPORTS: COUNTY-LEVEL DETAILED ARREST AND OFFENSE DATA, 1998 [ICPSR 9335], UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM DATA [UNITED STATES]: COUNTY-LEVEL DETAILED ARREST AND OFFENSE DATA, 1990 [ICPSR 9785], 1992 [ICPSR 6316], 1994 [ICPSR 6669], 1996 [ICPSR 2389], 1998 [ICPSR 2910], 2000 [ICPRS 3451], 2002 [ICPSR 4009], and 2004 [ICPSR 4466]).
- Bureau of Justice Statistics Annual Survey of Jails, Jurisdiction-Level data series for the years 1988-2004 (see ANNUAL SURVEY OF JAILS: JURISDICTION-LEVEL DATA, 1990 [ICPSR 9569], 1992 [ICPSR 6395], 1994 [ICPSR 6538], 1996 [ICPSR 6856], 1998 [ICPSR 2682], 2000 [ICPSR 3882], 2002 [ICPSR 4428], and 2004 [ICPSR 20200]).
- Bureau of Justice Statistics National Prosecutors Survey/Census data series 1990-2005 (see NATIONAL PROSECUTORS SURVEY, 1990 [ICPSR 9579], 1992 [ICPSR 6273], 1994 [ICPSR 6785], 1996 [ICPSR 2433], 2001 census [ICPSR 3418], and 2005 [ICPSR 4600]).
- United States Census Bureau State and County Quickfacts.
- National Center for State Courts, State Court Organization reports, 1993 (see NCJ 148346), 1998 (see NCJ 178932), and 2004 (see NCJ 212351).
- Bureau of Justice Statistics Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties reports, 1992 (see NCJ 148826), 1994 (see NCJ 164616), 1996 (see NCJ 176981), 1998 (see NJC 187232), 2000 (see NCJ 202021), and 2002 (see NJC 210818).
The data include defendant level variables such as most serious current offense charge, number of charges, prior felony convictions, prior misdemeanor convictions, prior incarcerations, criminal justice status at arrest, prior failure to appear, age, gender, ethnicity, and race. County level variables include region, crime rate, two year change in crime rate, caseload rate, jail capacity, two year change in jail capacity, judicial selection by election or appointment, prosecutor screens cases, and annual expenditure on prosecutor's office. Racial threat stimuli variables include natural log of the percentage of the county population that is Latino, natural log of the percentage of the county population that is African American, change in the percentage of the county population that is Latino over the last six years and change in the percentage of the county population that is African American over the last six years. Cross-level interaction variables include percentage minority (Latino/African American) population zero percent to 15 percent, percentage minority (Latino/African American) population 16 percent to 30 percent, and percentage minority (Latino/African American) population 31 percent or higher.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Puerto Rican Maternal and Infant Health Study (PRMIHS), 1994-1995 (ICPSR 36238)
Released/updated on: 2015-11-16
Geographic coverage: New York City, Puerto Rico, United States, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Florida, New Jersey, Pennsylvania
Time period: 1994-07-01--1995-12-31
The Puerto Rican Maternal and Infant Health Study (PRMIHS) is a cross-sectional study designed to provide information on the determinants of poor infant health among Puerto Ricans. The dataset features personal interview data from 2,763 mothers of Puerto Rican infants sampled from the 1994 and 1995 birth and infant death records of six United States vital statistics reporting areas (Connecticut, Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York City, Pennsylvania) and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Mothers were contacted to participate in a Computer Assisted Personal Interview (CAPI) using the address information provided in the birth and infant death records. Respondent mothers were asked to recount their sexual history and use of contraception, age at conception, prenatal care and nutrition, substance abuse, and overall health before and during pregnancy. Details were also collected regarding migration history, family composition, partner involvement, social support structures, and receipt of any public financial assistance for food, housing, and/or medical care. Information regarding infant health and well-being was also gathered, and included respondents' reporting of recurrent health issues, required medical treatments, immunizations, and any accidents or sustained injuries. Mothers were also asked to confirm attainment of a number of infant developmental milestones, including sitting, crawling, standing, waving, and vocalization, as well as several other behaviors and abilities. Demographic information for mothers includes age, education, occupation, income, marital status, race and ethnic identity, language, and religious preference.
Curated
Resources for Enhancing Alzheimer's Caregiver Health, 1996-2001 (ICPSR 3253)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Tennessee, California, Alabama, Florida, Birmingham, Pennsylvania, Miami, Palo Alto, Massachusetts, Memphis, Philadelphia, Boston
Time period: 1996-09-01--2001-02-01
Resources for Enhancing Alzheimer's Caregiver Health (REACH) was established in 1995 to conduct social and behavioral research on interventions designed to enhance family caregiving, particularly in minority families, for persons with Alzheimer's Disease and related disorders. Data were collected through randomized clinical trials at six sites: University of Alabama--Birmingham, the Research and Training Institute of the Hebrew Rehabilitation Center for Aged in Boston, University of Tennessee--Memphis, University of Miami, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System and Stanford University, and Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia. Interventions studied included psychoeducational support groups, behavioral skills training programs, family-based systems interventions, environmental modifications, and technological computer-based information and communication services. Although interventions varied by site, all sites collected the same data at the same time intervals. The impact of the various intervention strategies on psychological distress, health status, health practices, and health care utilization was assessed. Parts 1 through 5 contain screening data and a short mental status questionnaire. Parts 6 through 24 contain baseline data and cover activities of daily living, anxiety, and caregiver health and behaviors along with sociodemographic information. Also included are care recipient medications and sociodemographic information. Parts 25 and 26 contain tracking data and also include an examination of interventions.
Curated
Resources for Enhancing Alzheimer's Caregiver Health, 1996-2001, Baseline and Follow-Up Data (ICPSR 3678)
Released/updated on: 2006-09-26
Geographic coverage: United States, Tennessee, California, Alabama, Florida, Birmingham, Pennsylvania, Miami, Palo Alto, Massachusetts, Memphis, Philadelphia, Boston
Time period: 1996-09-01--2001-02-01
Resources for Enhancing Alzheimer's Caregiver Health (REACH) was established in 1995 to conduct social and behavioral research on interventions designed to enhance family caregiving, particularly in minority families, for persons with Alzheimer's Disease and related disorders. Baseline data (ICPSR 3253) were collected through randomized clinical trials at six sites: University of Alabama-Birmingham, The Research and Training Institute of the Hebrew Rehabilitation Center for Aged in Boston, University of Tennessee-Memphis, University of Miami, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System and Stanford University, and Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia. Interventions such as psychoeducational support groups, behavioral skills training programs, family-based systems interventions, environmental modifications, and technological computer-based information and communication services varied by site. This collection contains baseline data along with follow-up data at 6-, 12-, and 18-month intervals from each site with focus on the impact of the various intervention strategies on psychological distress, health status, health practices, and health care utilization. Also included are follow-up batteries, transition batteries (placement, bereavement, discontinued), and data reporting missed visits. Parts 1 through 5 contain screening data and responses to a short mental status questionnaire. Parts 6 through 34 contain baseline data along with follow-up data at 6, 12, and 18-month intervals and cover activities of daily living, anxiety, and caregiver health and health behaviors along with sociodemographic information. Also included are care recipient medications and sociodemographic information. Parts 35 through 40 contain tracking data and also include an examination of interventions.
Curated
Supporting Healthy Marriage Evaluation: Eight Sites within the United States, 2003-2013 (ICPSR 34420)
Released/updated on: 2014-12-19
Geographic coverage: United States, Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas, Florida, New York (state), Washington, Pennsylvania
Time period: 2003-01-01--2014-01-01
The Supporting Healthy Marriage (SHM) evaluation was launched in 2003 to develop, to implement, and to test the effectiveness of a program aimed at strengthening low-income couples' marriages as one approach for supporting stable and nurturing family environments and parents' and children's well-being. The evaluation was led by MDRC and was sponsored by the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation in the Administration for Children and Families, United States Department of Health and Human Services.The SHM program was a voluntary yearlong marriage education program for low-income married couples who had children or were expecting a child. The program provided a series of group workshops based on structured curricula designed to enhance couples' relationships; supplemental activities to build on workshop themes; and family support services to address participation barriers, connect families with other services, and reinforce curricular themes.
The study sample consists of 6,298 couples (12,596 adult sample members) who were expecting a child or had a child under 18 years old at the time of study entry. The sample consists primarily of low-to-modest income, married couples with diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. In each family, one child was randomly selected to be the focus of any child-related measures gathered in the data collection activities. These children ranged from pre-birth to 14 years old at the time of enrollment in the study. Follow-up interviews were conducted at 12 and 30 months after baseline data collection. More detail is provided in the study documentation.