Search results

Showing 1 – 15 of 15 results.

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

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

Simple Crosstabs

Baby's First Years (BFY), New York City, New Orleans, Omaha, and Twin Cities, 2018-2023 (ICPSR 37871)

Released/updated on: 2025-01-30

Geographic coverage: New York City, Omaha, Minneapolis, United States, St. Paul, Louisiana, New Orleans, Minnesota, New York (state), Nebraska

Time period: 2018-05-01--2019-06-30, 2019-07-01--2020-06-30, 2020-07-01--2021-06-30, 2021-07-01--2022-06-30, 2022-07-01--2023-08-16

The overall goal of the Baby's First Years study is to assess the causal role played by household income in affecting children's early cognitive, socio-emotional, and brain development. Recent advances in developmental neuroscience suggest that experiences early in life have profound and enduring impacts on the developing brain. Family economic resources shape the nature of many of these experiences, yet the extent to which they affect children's development is unknown. The Baby's First Years project is the first randomized controlled trial to provide estimates of the causal impacts of unconditional cash gifts on the cognitive, socio-emotional, and brain development of infants and young children in low-income U.S. families.

Specifically, 1,000 recruited mothers of infants with incomes below the federal poverty line from four diverse U.S. communities are receiving monthly cash gift payments by debit card. Mothers were initially told the gifts would last for the first 40 months of their child's life, but we have secured funding to continue the payments for three additional years (i.e., for a total of 76 months). Parents in the high cash gift group (n=400 in the study sample) are receiving a cash gift of $333 per month ($4,000 per year), while parents in the low cash gift group (n=600) are receiving a nominal monthly gift payment of $20 ($240 per year), also for 76 months.

In order to measure the impacts of the unconditional cash gift income on children's cognitive and behavioral development, we are assessing high and low cash gift group differences at ages 4, 6, and 8 (and, for a subset of measures, we capture interim development at ages 1, 2, and 3) in measures of cognitive, language, memory, self-regulation, and socio-emotional development. In order to understand the processes by which child impacts emerge, we are measuring a host of family process measures summarized in our pre-registration chart. Our data collection points are referred to as: "baseline", "age 1", "age 2," "age 3", "age 4", "age 6", and "age 8".

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, variables, and COVID-19 pandemic adjustments are available from:

The User Guides for Baseline, Age 1, Age 2, Age 3, and Age 4, which are included under the "Data and Documentation" tab
The project's website: babysfirstyears.com

The researchers request that all peer-reviewed papers using BFY Data:

be submitted to PubMed https://publicaccess.nih.gov immediately upon acceptance for publication
include the following citation to the data in their bibliography:

Citation

Magnuson, Katherine A., Kimberly Noble, Greg J. Duncan, Nathan A. Fox, Lisa A. Gennetian, Hirokazu Yoshikawa, and Sarah Halpern-Meekin. Baby's First Years (BFY), New York City, New Orleans, Omaha, and Twin Cities, 2018-2023. ICPSR37871-v8. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], YYYY-MM-DD. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37871.v8

and include the following in their acknowledgements:

Acknowledgement

This research uses data from the Baby's First Years study. Research reported in this publication was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01HD087384 and 2R01HD087384. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. This research was additionally supported by the US Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation; Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research-Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health; Andrew and Julie Klingenstein Family Fund; Annie E. Casey Foundation; Arnold Ventures; Arrow Impact; BCBS of Louisiana Foundation; Bezos Family Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Bill Hammack and Janice Parmelee, Brady Education Fund; Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (Silicon Valley Community Foundation); Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Philanthropies; Child Welfare Fund; Esther A. and Joseph Klingenstein Fund; Ford Foundation; Greater New Orleans Foundation; Heising-Simons Foundation; Holland Foundation; Jacobs Foundation; JPB Foundation; J-PAL North America; Lozier Foundation; New York City Mayor's Office for Economic Opportunity; Perigee Fund; Robin Hood Foundation; Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; Russell Sage Foundation; Sherwood Foundation; Valhalla Foundation; Weitz Family Foundation; W.K. Kellogg Foundation; and three anonymous donors.

Principal Investigators

Katherine Magnuson, PhD; University of Wisconsin-Madison, lead PI social and behavioral science

Kimberly Noble, MD, PhD; Teachers College, Columbia University, lead PI neuroscience

In alphabetical order:

Greg Duncan, PhD; University of California, Irvine

Nathan A. Fox, PhD; University of Maryland

Lisa A. Gennetian, PhD; Duke University Sanford School of Public Policy

Hirokazu Yoshikawa, PhD; New York University

Principal Investigators of Qualitative Substudy

Sarah Halpern-Meekin, PhD; University of Wisconsin-Madison

Katherine Magnuson, PhD; University of Wisconsin-Madison

Study Management

Lauren Meyer, Teachers College, Columbia University; National Project Director

Andrea Karsh, University of California, Irvine; Administrative Director

Matthew Maury, Duke University, Production and Retention Management

Study Co-Investigators

Sarah Black, PhD; University of New Orleans

William Fifer, PhD; Sackler Institute for Developmental Psychobiology, Columbia University Medical Center

Michael Georgieff, MD; University of Minnesota

Joseph Isler, PhD; Columbia University Medical Center

Debra Karhson, PhD; University of New Orleans

Alicia Kunin-Batson, PhD, University of Minnesota

Connie Lamm, PhD; University of Arkansas

Dennis Molfese, PhD; University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Victoria Molfese, PhD; University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Jennifer Mize Nelson, PhD; University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Timothy Nelson, PhD; University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Sonya Troller-Renfree, PhD; Teachers College, Columbia University

Study Data Collectors

The Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, is responsible for recruitment and baseline, age-1, age-2, and age-3 data collection waves. Starting at age-4 through age-8, SRC is responsible for tracking families and assisting site-based staff in locating families. SRC data collection operations are overseen by: Stephanie Chardoul, Director of Survey Research Operations and Piotr Dworak, Senior Survey Specialist, Survey Research Operations.

Contact

To contact the study investigators, email them at [email protected]

Website: babysfirstyears.com

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

Great Plains Population and Environment Data: Agricultural Data, 1870-1997 [United States] (ICPSR 4254)

Released/updated on: 2005-06-22

Geographic coverage: Montana, United States, Wyoming, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Minnesota, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, New Mexico, Texas, Colorado, North Dakota

Time period: 1870-01-01--1997-01-01

The data in this series of studies were assembled by an interdisciplinary research team led by Myron Gutmann of the University of Michigan between 1995 and 2004, as part of a research project funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (Grant Number R01HD033554 to the University of Michigan). The goal of the project was to amass information about approximately 500 counties in 12 states of the Great Plains of the United States, and then to analyze those data in order to understand the relationships between population and environment that existed between the years of about 1870 and 2000. The data distributed here are all data about counties. They fall into four broad categories: about the counties, about agriculture, about demographic and social conditions, and about the environment. The information about counties (name, area, identification code, and whether the project classified the county as part of the Great Plains in a given year) is embedded in each of the other data files, so that there will be three series of data (agriculture, demographic and social conditions, and environment), containing individual data files for each year for which data are available. The United States Census of Agriculture has been conducted since 1850 on a regular schedule that was decennial until 1920, and more frequently thereafter (every five years from 1925 to 1950, then in 1954, 1959, 1964, 1978, and every five years since 1982). The agricultural data included in this collection consist of a single data file for each agricultural census year between 1870 and 1997 that includes selected material compiled as part of the United States Agricultural Census. The county-level agricultural data produced by the United States government as part of the census constitute a consistent series of measures of changing agriculture and land use.

Curated

Helping Young Smokers Quit: Identifying Best Practices for Tobacco Cessation, Phase II National Program Evaluation, 2003-2006 (ICPSR 33161)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14

Geographic coverage: Oregon, New York, United States, Kentucky, Minnesota, California, Utah, Washington, Michigan, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Colorado, Missouri, Louisiana, Ohio, Maryland, Wisconsin, Nevada

Time period: 2003-01-01--2006-01-01

The Helping Young Smokers Quit (HYSQ) initiative was a multi-phase project that addressed the critical need to disseminate effective, developmentally appropriate cessation programs for young smokers. Phase I identified and described tobacco treatment programs available for youth in the United States, Phase II evaluated smoking secession programs tailored for youth to help understand what works, and Phase III identified factors associated with program sustainability. Phase II collected data from five sources: (1) program participants, (2) program providers, (3) program curricula, (4) organizational leaders, and (5) community leaders and community ordinances.

Program participants were interviewed at baseline, end-of program, 6-month follow-up, and 12-month follow-up. Topics covered by the interviews include age, gender, race, Hispanic origin, language spoken at home, employment, income, religiosity, school enrollment, education level, school grades, height, weight, extracurricular activities, recreation, sports, exercise, aspirations after high school, psychological well-being, alcohol consumption, cigarette use and use of other tobacco products, attitudes about smoking, plans to stop/continue smoking, attempts to quit smoking, reasons for participating in the program, topics/issues covered by the program, opinions about the program, and smoking experience since the beginning of the program. In addition, for each follow-up survey, the participants provided a breath sample for carbon monoxide analysis to validate self-reported quit status.

After the last session of each program delivery, the program providers, such as program leaders and cessation counselors, were interviewed about the content and delivery of the program and the reactions of the participants and themselves to the program as delivered. The program providers also kept attendance records.

Curriculum content was abstracted from program manuals and other materials used in each program.

Organizational leaders of the organizations that offered the programs were surveyed about various aspects of each organization, including the organization's smoking cessation program and the organization's mission, general operations, and smoking-related policies and practices.

Community-level information was collected in two ways: (1) interviews of community leaders representing local health departments, school boards, and juvenile justice offices, and (2) archival research of public ordinances relevant to tobacco and control policies.

Nine data files/datasets constitute the data. Datasets 1-4 contain the participant questionnaire data, carbon monoxide measurement data, and program attendance data. Dataset 5 comprises information about each program and its curriculum, some information about the community in which the program was located, and summary data about enforcement of tobacco-related ordinances. Dataset 6 contains information about about the program providers and each program delivery, including recruitment, logistics, content, and the reactions of providers and participants. Dataset 7 covers administrative aspects of the smoking cessation programs and each offering organization's mission, general operations, and smoking-related policies and norms. Dataset 8 contains information about local and state-level tobacco-related ordinances for every state and local jurisdiction where each program was located, and Dataset 9 condenses the information in Dataset 8 into one summary record for each community. The unit of observation for Datasets 1-4 is the participant, for Datasets 5 and 7 the smoking cessation program/offering organization, for Dataset 6 the program delivery/program cohort, for Dataset 8 the ordinance, and for Dataset 9 the community.

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

Simple Crosstabs

Twin Cities Metropolitan Area 1982 Travel Behavior Inventory (Home Interview Survey) (ICPSR 34738)

Released/updated on: 2013-08-07

Geographic coverage: Minneapolis, United States, St. Paul, Minnesota

Time period: 1982-09-01--1983-02-27

The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area 1982 Travel Behavior Inventory (Home Interview Survey) was intended to document how Twin Cities residents use the streets, highways, and transit services in the region. Respondents were asked to record their travel and activities for a 24-hour period. They were also asked for detailed information regarding their trips, including mode of transportation, trip purpose, departure and arrival times, and number of passengers. Demographic variables include gender, age, employment status, household size, number of children under five years old in the household, whether household members were students on their given travel day, household income, and whether respondents had a valid drivers license at the time of the survey.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Youth Development Study, 1988-2020 [St. Paul, Minnesota] (ICPSR 24881)

Released/updated on: 2023-09-28

Geographic coverage: United States, St. Paul, Minnesota

Time period: 1988-01-01--2020-12-31

The Youth Development Study (YDS) was initiated as a school-based study of adolescent children and their parents to examine the consequences of formative experiences in adolescence for mental health, value formation, educational achievement, and multiple facets of behavioral adjustment. Particular attention was directed to the impacts of early work experience. Data were also obtained about parent-child and peer relationships and experiences in school. As the study continued, the focus shifted to adult development and attainment and, most recently, mid-life adjustment and health. This comprehensive longitudinal study now encompasses three generations: the initial cohort studied from adolescence to mid-life (G2), their parents (G1), and their adolescent children (G3). Data from three generations in the same families enable study of intergenerational relationships and differences in the experience of adolescence and transition to adulthood across parent and child cohorts. The YDS covers a wide range of topics of interest to sociologists, social psychologists, developmental psychologists, and life course scholars, including the development and impacts of agentic resources, socioeconomic attainment, processes of inter- and intra-generational mobility, objective and subjective work conditions, family relationships, intergenerational relationships, mental and physical health, and well-being.

In-school administration of paper surveys during the first four years of the study was supplemented by mailed surveys. Subsequent data collection took place entirely by mail, with 19 surveys conducted between 1988 and 2011. A final survey was conducted on-line in 2019. Survey data was obtained from the parents (G1) of this cohort during the first and fourth waves of the study (1988 and 1991). Surveys of the children (G3) began in 2009, continued in 2010 and 2011 (by mail) and in 2019-2020 (online).

The Youth Development Study measures a wide range of formative experiences and both psychological and behavioral variables, using survey methodology.

The G1 surveys obtained information about socioeconomic background as well as attitudes toward teenage employment, the parents' own employment as teenagers, their current work experiences, and educational expectations for their children.

The G2 surveys during the high school years included detailed questions about students' work and volunteer experiences, as well as experiences in their family, school, and peer groups, with an emphasis on the ways that working affected other life domains, mental health, and well-being. Shorter surveys containing many of the same topics were administered to students in 1992, 1993, and 1994, and included questions about current family and living arrangements. In 1995, a full survey was administered covering the wide range of topics included in previous surveys as well as information about career plans and life events that had occurred in the past five years. G2 Waves 9 through 19 (1997-2011) included many of the same questions contained in earlier surveys and additional sections that focused on the respondents' educational experiences, family relationships, sources of living expenses, and health and well-being. The most recent G2 survey (2019), administered on-line, included questions about support of aging parents. The YDS is unique in its coverage of both objective and subjective work experiences from adolescence to mid-life.

The topics covered by the G3 surveys are very similar to the G2 variables described above. Variables in each G2 and G3 wave are included in cross-wave codebooks, available at the Data Archive Codebook website.

For an overview of the Youth Development Study, see Mortimer, Jeylan T. (2012) "The Evolution, Contributions, and Prospects of the Youth Development Study: An Investigation in Life Course Social Psychology." Social Psychology Quarterly 75(1, March):5-27.