Search results

Showing 1 – 14 of 14 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

Agricultural and Demographic Records for Rural Households in the North, 1860: [Instructional Materials] (ICPSR 3463)

Released/updated on: 2002-10-17

Geographic coverage: Vermont, Indiana, United States, Minnesota, Kansas, New York (state), New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Illinois, Connecticut, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, Maryland, Wisconsin

These instructional materials were prepared for use with AGRICULTURAL AND DEMOGRAPHIC RECORDS FOR HOUSEHOLDS IN THE NORTH, 1860 (ICPSR 7420), compiled by Fred Bateman and James D. Foust. The data file and accompanying documentation are provided to assist educators in (an SPSS portable file) instructing students about the history of agriculture and rural life in the North, just prior to the Civil War. An instructor's handout has also been included. This handout contains the following sections, among others: (1) General goals for student analysis of quantitative datasets, (2) Specific goals in studying this dataset, (3) Suggested appropriate courses for use of the dataset, (4) Tips for using the dataset, and (5) Related secondary source readings. Demographic, occupational, and economic information for over 21,000 rural households in the northern United States in 1860 are presented in the dataset. The data were obtained from the manuscript agricultural and population schedules of the 1860 United States Census and are provided for all households in a single township from each of the 102 randomly-selected counties in 16 northern states. Variables in the dataset include farm values, livestock, and crop production figures for the households that owned or operated farms (over half the households sampled), as well as value of real and personal estate, color, sex, age, literacy, school attendance, occupation, place of birth, and parents' nationality of all individuals residing in the sampled townships.

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

Simple Crosstabs

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), 2003 (ICPSR 34085)

Released/updated on: 2013-08-05

Geographic coverage: Oregon, Vermont, Puerto Rico, Indiana, United States, Oklahoma, Maine, Utah, Nebraska, West Virginia, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada, District of Columbia, Rhode Island, Montana, Hawaii, Kansas, New York (state), New Jersey, Michigan, Iowa, New Mexico, Illinois, Texas, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Louisiana, Ohio, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland

The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) is a state-based system of health surveys that collects information on health risk behaviors, preventive health practices, and health care access primarily related to chronic disease and injury. For many states, the BRFSS is the only available source of timely, accurate data on health-related behaviors. BRFSS was established in 1984 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); currently data are collected monthly in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, and Guam. More than 350,000 adults are interviewed each year, making the BRFSS the largest telephone health survey in the world. States use BRFSS data to identify emerging health problems, establish and track health objectives, and develop and evaluate public health policies and programs. The BRFSS is a cross-sectional telephone survey conducted by state health departments with technical and methodologic assistance provided by CDC. States conduct monthly telephone surveillance using a standardized questionnaire to determine the distribution of risk behaviors and health practices among adults. Responses are forwarded to CDC, where the monthly data are aggregated for each state, returned with standard tabulations, and published at the year's end by each state. The BRFSS questionnaire was developed jointly by CDC's Behavioral Surveillance Branch (BSB) and the states. When combined with mortality and morbidity statistics, these data enable public health officials to establish policies and priorities and to initiate and assess health promotion strategies.

Curated

Census Tract Data, 1940: Elizabeth Mullen Bogue File (ICPSR 2930)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12

Geographic coverage: Atlantic City, Milwaukee, Oklahoma City, Akron, Detroit, Indiana, Berkeley, Cincinnati, Austin, Oakland, Cambridge, New York City, Columbus (Ohio), Syracuse, Memphis, Buffalo, Boston, Pittsburgh, Camden, Providence, Seattle, Savannah, Macon, Kentucky, Yonkers, Clifton, Nashville, California, Kansas, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Elizabeth, New Haven, Illinois, Texas, Connecticut, Portland (Oregon), Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Indianapolis, Richmond, Oregon, Duluth, Flint, United States, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kansas City (Kansas), Louisville, Alabama, Cleveland, Washington, Dayton, Superior, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Pawtucket, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, New Orleans, Denver, Dallas, St. Louis, Wisconsin, Des Moines, Augusta, District of Columbia, Rhode Island, Chicago, St. Paul, Rochester (New York), Passaic, Minnesota, New York (state), Birmingham, New Jersey, Michigan, San Francisco, Baltimore, Paterson, Jersey City, Long Beach, Ohio, Los Angeles, Toledo, Hartford, Trenton, Philadelphia, Houston

The 1940 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, 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

Demography in Frontier Indiana, 1820 (ICPSR 7504)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16

Geographic coverage: Indiana, United States

Social and demographic characteristics of over 23,000 families living in Indiana in 1820 are contained in this dataset. These data were obtained from the manuscript schedules of the 1820 United States Census. They were initially recorded on punch cards by the Geneological Section of the Indiana Historical Society, the cards were donated to John Modell, at the University of Minnesota, who corrected some discrepancies which he found in them. Included in the dataset are variables describing the age, sex, and racial composition of each household, as well as the location of the households and characteristics of nearly every household located in Indiana in 1820, except for those in Daviess county, whose manuscript census schedules for that year were destroyed.

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

Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation-Strong Start (MIHOPE-Strong Start), United States, 2012-2017 (ICPSR 37847)

Released/updated on: 2021-12-07

Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Indiana, Tennessee, California, Kansas, New York (state), New Jersey, Washington, South Carolina, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Illinois, Massachusetts, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada

Time period: 2011-01-01--2017-05-01

Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation-Strong Start (MIHOPE-Strong Start) was a large-scale evaluation that rigorously tested the effectiveness of evidence-based home visiting in improving birth and health outcomes during pregnancy and in the year after birth. Local programs included in the study's analysis implemented one of two evidence-based models: Healthy Families America (HFA) or Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP). These models were chosen because earlier evaluations found some evidence of their having positive impacts on birth outcomes.

The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) partnered with the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB) of the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) to sponsor the study. MIHOPE-Strong Start was part of the CMMI's Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns Initiative, which evaluated whether enhanced, nonmedical prenatal interventions, when provided in addition to routine medical care, have the potential to improve birth outcomes and reduce health care costs for women enrolled in Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Under contract with OPRE, MDRC conducted MIHOPE-Strong Start in collaboration with James Bell Associates, Johns Hopkins University, Mathematica, and New York University.

The analysis for MIHOPE-Strong Start included 2,899 women and 66 local programs (37 HFA and 29 NFP programs) operating across 17 states: California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Washington, and Wisconsin. Women were eligible for MIHOPE-Strong Start if they were pregnant and at least 8 weeks from their due date.

The MIHOPE-Strong Start analysis included a subset of families and local programs that were recruited for MIHOPE, the national evaluation of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program. Specifically, the MIHOPE-Strong Start impact analysis included information on 46 local home visiting programs and 1,845 families that were initially recruited for MIHOPE but met the MIHOPE-Strong Start eligibility criteria. An important distinction between MIHOPE-Strong Start and MIHOPE is that MIHOPE included only programs receiving MIECHV funding, while MIHOPE-Strong Start included both MIECHV and non-MIECHV-funded programs.

In both studies, families were randomly assigned either to an evidence-based home visiting program or to a control group who was given information on other services available in the community. The random assignment design was intended to create program and control groups that were similar when women entered the study, so that systematic differences in the outcomes of interest observed between the two groups can be attributed to the home visiting services rather than to the preexisting characteristics of the women.

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.