Search results

Showing 1 – 39 of 39 results.

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 and Housing, 1980 [United States]: Special Tabulations of Population 60 Years and Over (ICPSR 8533)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1979-01-01--1980-01-01

These data, which correspond to tables provided in the documentation, summarize information on the United States population aged 60 years and over that was collected in the 1980 Census of Population and Housing. The tables were prepared by the Bureau of the Census at the request of the National Institute on Aging. Variables appearing in one or more of the tables are age (in single years or five-year intervals), sex, race (black/white), living arrangements (institutionalization status, household/group quarters, living in families/alone, relationship to householder, persons per room), income (source, personal level, family level, household level, poverty status), veteran status, educational attainment, urban/rural residence, marital status, nativity status, and Spanish origin. In some of the tables totals that exclude amounts allocated for missing data are provided for purposes of comparison. The variables for which non-allocated figures are included are age, race, institutionalization status, income, veterans status, educational attainment, marital status, and Spanish origin. The file contains a complete set of tables for the United States as a whole, for each of the four Census regions, and for each of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and five territories.

Curated

Census of Population and Housing, 1980 [United States]: Summary Tape File 5, Special Tabulations of Population 60 Years and Over (ICPSR 8658)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1979-01-01--1980-01-01

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

Chinese Household Income Project, 1995 (ICPSR 3012)

Released/updated on: 2010-07-28

Geographic coverage: China (Peoples Republic)

The purpose of this project was to measure and estimate the distribution of personal income in both rural and urban areas of the People's Republic of China. The principal investigators based their definition of income on cash payments and on a broad range of additional components: payments in kind valued at market prices, agricultural output produced for self-consumption valued at market prices, the value of food and other direct subsidies, and the imputed value of housing services. The rural component of this collection consists of two data files, one in which the individual is the unit of analysis (Part 1) and a second in which the household is the unit of analysis (Part 2). Individual rural respondents reported on their employment status, level of education, Communist Party membership, type of employer (e.g., public, private, or foreign), type of economic sector in which they were employed, occupation, whether they held a second job, retirement status, monthly pension, monthly wage, and other sources of income. Demographic variables include relationship to householder, gender, age, and student status. Rural households reported extensively on the character of the household and residence. Information was elicited on type of terrain surrounding the house, geographic position, type of house, and availability of electricity. Also reported were sources of household income (e.g., farming, industry, government, rents, and interest), taxes paid, value of farm, total amount and type of cultivated land, financial assets and debts, quantity and value of various crops, amount of grain purchased or provided by a collective, use of chemical fertilizers, gasoline, and oil, quantity and value of agricultural machinery, and all household expenditures (e.g., food, fuel, medicine, education, transportation, and electricity). The urban component of this collection also consists of two data files, one in which the individual is the unit of analysis (Part 3) and a second in which the household is the unit of analysis (Part 4). Individual urban respondents reported on their economic status within the household, Communist Party membership, sex, age, nature of employment, and relationship to the household head. Information was collected on all types and sources of income from each member of the household whether working, nonworking, or retired, all revenue received by owners of private or individual enterprises, and all in-kind payments (e.g., food, durable goods, and nondurable goods). Urban households reported total income (including salaries, interest on savings and bonds, dividends, rent, leases, alimony, gifts, and boarding fees), all types and values of food subsidies received, and total debt. Information was also gathered on household accommodations and living conditions, including number of rooms, total living area in square meters, availability and cost of running water, sanitary facilities, heating and air-conditioning equipment, kitchen availability, location of residence, ownership of home, and availability of electricity and telephone. Households reported on all their expenditures including amounts spent on food items such as wheat, rice, edible oils, pork, beef and mutton, poultry, fish and seafood, sugar, and vegetables by means of coupons in state-owned stores and at free market prices. Information was also collected on rents paid by the households, fuel available, type of transportation used, and availability and use of medical and child care.

The Chinese Household Income Project collected data in 1988, 1995, 2002, and 2007. ICPSR holds data from the first three collections, and information about these can be found on the series description page. Data collected in 2007 are available through the China Institute for Income Distribution.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Detroit Area Study and Chicago Area Study, 2004 (ICPSR 23820)

Released/updated on: 2016-04-01

Geographic coverage: Detroit, United States, Chicago, Illinois, Michigan

The 2004 Detroit Area Study (DAS) is a face-to-face survey of adults in the Detroit, Michigan tri-county area. The 2004 Chicago Area Study (CAS) is a parallel survey conducted in Chicago, Illinois. Topics in this survey addressed racial issues, residence and housing, neighborhood evaluations, racial attitudes, labor market issues, and racial segregation in the Detroit and Chicago areas. Respondents were asked for opinions on their local and surrounding communities, their experiences searching for housing, feelings about possible relocation, and opinions on the redevelopment of neighborhoods in the city of Detroit and the city of Chicago. Other questions addressed the household's financial situation, home ownership, amount of household debts and assets, and history of receiving public assistance. Information was also collected on the types of schools children in the household attended, whether respondents and their parents were born in the United States, and languages spoken at home. Interviewer observations about the condition of the respondent's neighborhood were also included. Demographic variables include respondent's sex, age, marital/cohabitation status, United States citizenship status, political philosophy, household income, number of children in the household, and the race, ethnicity, education level, and employment status of respondents and their spouses or partners.

Curated

Displaced New Orleans Residents Pilot Study (DNORPS) (ICPSR 29523)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-24

Geographic coverage: United States, Louisiana, New Orleans

Time period: 2005-08-01--2006-11-01

The Displaced New Orleans Residents Pilot Study was designed to examine the current location, well-being, and plans of people who lived in the city of New Orleans when Hurricane Katrina struck on August 29, 2005. The study is based on a representative sample of pre-Katrina dwellings in New Orleans. Fieldwork focused on tracking respondents wherever they currently resided, including back to New Orleans. Respondents were administered a short paper-and-pencil interview by mail, by telephone, or in person. The pilot study was fielded in the fall of 2006, approximately one year after Hurricane Katrina. The goal of DNORPS was to assess the feasibility of the study design and thereby to lay the groundwork for launching a major longitudinal study of displaced New Orleans residents.

ICPSR only holds the public data for the pilot study. The main study (DNORS) was carried out 2009-2010. These data are not yet publicly available, but for more information, visit the RAND Corporation website.

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Restricted Neighborhood Observations Data, 2000-2001 (ICPSR 37272)

Released/updated on: 2019-04-08

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2000-01-01--2001-01-01

This study is a restricted data file of data from the L.A.FANS Neighborhood Observation Study, an in-person observational by trained L.A.FANS interviewers of the census blocks on which L.A.FANS respondents lived during L.A.FANS Wave 1. Interviewers were trained to walk each block face and record social and physical observations on precoded check sheets. Each block face was observed by several different interviewers working independently at different times of the day and week. These data are designed to be used with L.A.FANS Wave-1 survey interview data restricted versions 2.5 or 3 to provide data on the census block and census tract in which individual respondents lived.

Users who apply for these restricted data must also be approved for using restricted version 2.5 or 3. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

The study is described in detail in the L.A.FANS Neighborhood Observations Codebook.

Further information is available in:

Jones, M., Pebley, A. R., and Sastry, N. (2011). Eyes on the block: Measuring urban physical disorder through in-person observation. Social Science Research, 40(2), 523-537.

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 1, Public Data, 2000-2001 (ICPSR 37279)

Released/updated on: 2019-07-22

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2000-01-01--2001-01-01

This study includes public user data files of two waves of interviews with L.A.FANS respondents. There often are multiple respondents in L.A.FANS households and Wave 2 includes both panel respondents and a new sample. Users' Guides which explain the design and how to use the sample are available for Wave 1 and Wave 2 at the RAND website.

The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS) is a two-wave study of adults and children in Los Angeles County and of the neighborhoods in which they live. The first wave (L.A.FANS-1), which was fielded between April 2000 and January 2002, interviewed adults and children living in 3,085 households in a stratified probability sample of 65 neighborhoods throughout Los Angeles County. The samples of neighborhoods and individuals were representative of neighborhoods and residents of Los Angeles County. Poorer neighborhoods and households with children were oversampled. In Wave 2 of L.A.FANS (L.A.FANS-2), Wave 1 respondents living in Los Angeles County were reinterviewed and updated information was collected on Wave 1 respondents who had moved away from Los Angeles County. A sample of individuals who moved into each sampled neighborhood between Waves 1 and 2 was also interviewed, for a total of 2,319 adults and 1,382 children (ages less than 18 years). Additional information on the project is available at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
RAND Documentation Reports page

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 1, Restricted Data Version 1, 2000-2001 (ICPSR 37242)

Released/updated on: 2019-04-08

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2000-01-01--2001-01-01

This study includes a restricted data file for Wave 1 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 1 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 1 public use files. Specifically, it adds a "pseudo-tract ID" which is a number from 1 to 65, randomly assigned to each census tract (neighborhood) in the study. It is not possible to link pseudo-tract IDs in any way to real tract IDs or other neighborhood characteristics. However, pseudo-tract IDs permit users to conduct analyses which take into account the clustered sample design in which neighborhoods (tracts) were selected first and then individuals were sampled within neighborhoods. Pseudo-tract IDs do so because they identify which respondents live in the same neighborhood. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 1 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 1 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 1 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
RAND Documentation Reports page

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 1, Restricted Data Version 2, 2000-2001 (ICPSR 37269)

Released/updated on: 2019-04-08

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2000-01-01--2001-01-01

This study includes restricted data file, version 2, for Wave 1 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 2 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 1 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract number for the tract each respondent lives in. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 1 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 2 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 1 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
RAND Documentation Reports page

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 1, Restricted Data Version 2.5, 2000-2001 (ICPSR 37270)

Released/updated on: 2019-04-08

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2000-01-01--2001-01-01

This study includes restricted data version 2.5, for Wave 1 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 2.5 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 1 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract and block number for the tract each respondent lives in. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 1 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 2.5 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 1 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
RAND Documentation Reports page

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 1, Restricted Data Version 3, 2000-2001 (ICPSR 37271)

Released/updated on: 2019-04-08

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2000-01-01--2001-01-01

This study includes restricted data version 3, for Wave 1 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 3 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 1 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract and block number for the tract each respondent lives in and geographic coordinates data for a number of locations reported by the respondent (including home, grocery store, place of work, place of worship, schools, etc.). It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 1 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 3 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 1 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
RAND Documentation Reports page

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 2, Public Data, 2006-2008 (ICPSR 37278)

Released/updated on: 2019-07-22

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2006-01-01--2008-01-01

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
RAND Documentation Reports page

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 2, Restricted Data Version 1, 2006-2008 (ICPSR 37259)

Released/updated on: 2019-04-08

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2006-01-01--2008-01-01

This study includes a restricted data file for Wave 2 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 1 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 2 (study 2). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 2 public use files. Specifically, it adds a "pseudo-tract ID" which is a number from 1 to 65, randomly assigned to each census tract (neighborhood) in the study. It is not possible to link pseudo-tract IDs in any way to real tract IDs or other neighborhood characteristics. However, pseudo-tract IDs permit users to conduct analyses which take into account the clustered sample design in which neighborhoods (tracts) were selected first and then individuals were sampled within neighborhoods. Pseudo-tract IDs do so because they identify which respondents live in the same neighborhood. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 2 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 1 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 2 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
RAND Documentation Reports page

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 2, Restricted Data Version 2, 2006-2008 (ICPSR 37265)

Released/updated on: 2019-04-08

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2006-01-01--2008-01-01

This study includes a restricted data file, version 2, for Wave 2 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 2 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 2 (study 2). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 2 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract number for the tract each respondent lives in. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 2 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 2 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 2 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
RAND Documentation Reports page

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 2, Restricted Data Version 2.5, 2006-2008 (ICPSR 37266)

Released/updated on: 2019-04-08

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2006-01-01--2008-01-01

This study includes a restricted data file, version 2.5, for Wave 2 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 2.5 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 2 (study 2). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 2 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract and block number for the tract each respondent lives in. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 2 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 2.5 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 2 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
RAND Documentation Reports page

Curated

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 2, Restricted Data Version 3, 2006-2008 (ICPSR 37267)

Released/updated on: 2019-04-08

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2006-01-01--2008-01-01

This study includes a restricted data file, version 3, for Wave 2 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 3 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 2 (study 2). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 2 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract and block number for the tract each respondent lives in and geographic coordinates data for a number of locations reported by the respondent (including home, grocery store, place of work, place of worship, schools, etc.). It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 2 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 3 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 2 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
RAND Documentation Reports page

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 3, Public Data | Mixed Income Project (MIP), 2011-2013 (ICPSR 37845)

Released/updated on: 2021-03-04

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California

Time period: 2011-01-01--2013-01-01

This study includes one public use data file of follow-up interviews, conducted between 2011 and 2013, with respondents to Wave 2 of L.A.FANS (Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey). This follow-up data collection effort (hereafter called L.A.FANS-3 or Wave 3) was part of the broader Mixed Income Project (MIP), which was designed to allow for detailed examination of neighborhood context, residential mobility, and mixed-income housing in Los Angeles and Chicago. The two anchor studies for the MIP are L.A.FANS and the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN).

Wave 3 targeted a random probability sample of approximately 1,000 randomly selected adults and children from the prior wave of L.A.FANS, which was fielded between 2006 and 2008, who still resided within Los Angeles County. The Los Angeles field operation first assigned selected respondents to a telephone survey center for interviews. Cases that were not interviewed by telephone were transferred to experienced field interviewers in the Los Angeles area. The final response rate was 75 percent of eligible participants (i.e., residents who still resided in Los Angeles County and who were not institutionalized, incapacitated, or deceased) for a combined sample of 1,032. Two-hundred and two (202) of these respondents were reached during a preliminary Field Test in 2011, after which point the survey was slightly revised. After making these revisions, 830 respondents were reached during the Main Study. For more details on sampling procedures for the Field Test and Main Study, see Methodology section below.

For context, the L.A.FANS is a study of adults and children in Los Angeles County, and of the neighborhoods in which they live. The first wave (L.A.FANS-1 or Wave 1), which was fielded between April 2000 and January 2002, interviewed adults and children living in 3,085 households in a stratified probability sample of 65 neighborhoods throughout Los Angeles County. The samples of neighborhoods and individuals were representative of neighborhoods and residents of Los Angeles County. Poorer neighborhoods and households with children were oversampled. In Wave 2 of L.A.FANS (L.A.FANS-2), Wave 1 respondents still living in Los Angeles County were re-interviewed, while updated information was collected on Wave 1 respondents who had moved away from Los Angeles County. A sample of individuals who moved into each sampled neighborhood between Waves 1 and 2 was also interviewed, for a total of 2,319 adults and 1,382 children (ages less than 18 years). Additional information on the project is available at the RAND website.

Curated

The Mexican American Study Project II (MASP II), 1998-2000 (ICPSR 28481)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-29

Geographic coverage: San Antonio, United States, Texas, Los Angeles, California

In an original study conducted in 1965, Leo Grebler, Joan Moore, and Ralph Guzman surveyed Mexican Americans in San Antonio, Texas, and Los Angeles, California. The first survey provided a rich cross-sectional view of this population's demographics and attitudes, Ortiz and Telles' 35 year follow-up now allows for a longitudinal view of the behavior and ethnic identification of first- through fourth-generation Mexican Americans in these areas. The new survey was used to test hypotheses related to Mexican Americans' social mobility, their ethnic identity and behavior, their experiences with discrimination, and the relationship between socioeconomic status and ethnic identity. Data includes birth dates, citizenship information, education, income, housing, language, medical, religious affiliations, immediate and extended family demographic information, and self perception in regards to ethnicity. There are four versions of the survey, "Child Respondents" in English and Spanish and "Informant Respondents" in English and Spanish. Additionally each survey includes an interviewer questionnaire, which asks interviewers to document their observations of the respondent's home (interior and exterior), cooperation, behavior, language proficiency, and gender.

Curated

Moving to Opportunity: Final Impacts Evaluation Science Article Data, 2008-2010 (ICPSR 34860)

Released/updated on: 2013-10-04

Geographic coverage: New York City, Baltimore, United States, Chicago, Illinois, Massachusetts, Los Angeles, California, New York (state), Maryland, Boston

Time period: 1994-01-01--2010-01-01

The Moving to Opportunity (MTO) program was a randomized housing experiment administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that gave low-income families living in high-poverty areas the chance to move to lower-poverty areas. This Restricted Access Dataset (RAD) includes data from the 3,273 adults interviewed as part of the MTO long-term evaluation and is comprised of variables analyzed for the article "Neighborhood Effects on the Long-Term Well-Being of Low-Income Adults" that was published in the journal Science on September 21, 2012. The article focused on subjective well-being, physical and mental health, social networks, neighborhoods, housing, and economic self-sufficiency. Families were tracked from the baseline survey (1994-1998) through the long-term evaluation survey fielding period (2008-2010) with the purpose of determining the effects of "neighborhood" on participating families from five United States cities. Households were randomly assigned to one of three groups:

The low-poverty voucher (LPV) group (also called the experimental group) received Section 8 rental assistance certificates or vouchers that they could use only in census tracts with 1990 poverty rates below 10 percent. The families received mobility counseling and help in leasing a new unit. One year after relocating, families could use their voucher to move again if they wished, without any special constraints on location.
The traditional voucher (TRV) group (also called the Section 8 group) received regular Section 8 certificates or vouchers that they could use anywhere; these families received no special mobility counseling.
The control group received no certificates or vouchers through MTO, but continued to be eligible for project-based housing assistance and other social programs and services to which they would otherwise be entitled.

The dataset contains all outcomes and mediators analyzed for the Science article, as well as a variety of demographic and other baseline measures that were controlled for in the analysis. Demographic information includes age, gender, race/ethnicity, employment status, and education level.

Curated

National Survey of Adolescents, 2004: Burkina Faso (ICPSR 22408)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-24

Geographic coverage: Burkina Faso, Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa

Time period: 2004-04-01--2004-06-01

The National Survey Adolescents was launched in 2004 in four Sub-Saharan African countries--Burkina Faso, Ghana, Malawi, and Uganda--to provide detailed information on adolescent risk-taking and health-seeking behavior as related to HIV, STDs and unintended pregnancy. The study examined a range of factors (e.g., behavioral, sociocultural, economic) that could lead to increased vulnerability to risk. The study also encompassed knowledge of means of prevention, sources of trusted information and health care, and impediments to adolescents' abilities to apply their knowledge and take preventive action. The survey in Burkina Faso was administered between April and June 2004. Using a two-stage stratified sample design that selected households from rural and urban clusters, 5,400 households were listed for initial screening. After an initial interview in each household, individual surveys were administered in person to adolescents between the ages of 12 and 19 who were de facto or de jure members of the household. This process collected 6,489 individual interviews with adolescents. Because of the sensitive nature of questions administered in the survey, informed consent forms were obtained from both parents/guardians and the respondents, and in all possible instances interviewers and respondents were paired by gender.

Curated

National Survey of Adolescents, 2004: Ghana (ICPSR 22409)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-24

Geographic coverage: Africa, Ghana, Sub-Saharan Africa

Time period: 2004-01-01--2004-05-01

The National Survey Adolescents was launched in 2004 in four Sub-Saharan African countries--Burkina Faso, Ghana, Malawi, and Uganda--to provide detailed information on adolescent risk-taking and health-seeking behavior as related to HIV, STDs and unintended pregnancy. The study examined a range of factors (e.g., behavioral, sociocultural, and economic) that could lead to increased vulnerability to risk. The study also encompassed knowledge of means of prevention, sources of trusted information and health care, and impediments to adolescents' abilities to apply their knowledge and take preventive action. The Ghanian portion was administered between January and May 2004. Using a two-stage stratified sample design that selected households from rural and urban clusters, 9,445 households were listed for initial screening. After an initial interview in each household, individual surveys were administered in person to adolescents between the ages of 12 and 19 who were de facto or de jure members of the household. This process collected 4,430 individual interviews with adolescents. Because of the sensitive nature of questions administered in the survey, informed consent forms were obtained from both parents/guardians and the respondents, and in all possible instances interviewers and respondents were paired up by gender.

Curated

National Survey of Adolescents, 2004: Malawi (ICPSR 22410)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-24

Geographic coverage: Malawi, Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa

Time period: 2004-03-01--2004-08-01

The National Survey Adolescents was launched in 2004 in four Sub-Saharan African countries--Burkina Faso, Ghana, Malawi, and Uganda--to provide detailed information on adolescent risk-taking and health-seeking behavior as related to HIV, STDs and unintended pregnancy. The study examined a range of factors (e.g., behavioral, sociocultural, economic) that could lead to increased vulnerability to risk. The study also encompassed knowledge of means of prevention, sources of trusted information and health care, and impediments to adolescents' abilities to apply their knowledge and take preventive action. The survey in Malawi was administered between March and June 2004 and again in August 2004. Using a two-stage stratified sample design that selected households from rural and urban clusters, 7,750 households were listed for initial screening. After an initial interview in each household, individual surveys were administered in person to adolescents between the ages of 12 and 19 who were de facto or de jure members of the household. However, during the initial data collection period this process collected only 3,448 individual interviews with adolescents. Consequently, in August 2004, researchers extended the surveys to additional clusters excluded during the first round of surveys bringing the total number of individuals to 4,879. Because of the sensitive nature of questions administered in the survey, informed consent forms were obtained from both parents/guardians and the respondents, and in all possible instances interviewers and respondents were paired up by gender.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

National Survey of Adolescents, 2004: Uganda (ICPSR 22411)

Released/updated on: 2018-07-09

Geographic coverage: Africa, Uganda, Sub-Saharan Africa

Time period: 2004-02-01--2004-07-01

The National Survey Adolescents was launched in 2004 in four Sub-Saharan African countries--Burkina Faso, Ghana, Malawi, and Uganda--to provide detailed information on adolescent risk-taking and health-seeking behavior as related to HIV, STDs and unintended pregnancy. The study examined a range of factors (e.g., behavioral, sociocultural, economic) that could lead to increased vulnerability to risk. The study also encompassed knowledge of means of prevention, sources of trusted information and health care, and impediments to adolescents' abilities to apply their knowledge and take preventive action. The Ugandan portion was administered between February and July 2004. Using a two-stage stratified sample design that selected households from rural and urban clusters, 7,106 households were listed for initial screening. After an initial interview in each household, individual surveys were administered in person to adolescents between the ages of 12 and 19 who were de facto or de jure members of the household. This process collected 6,659 individual interviews with adolescents. Because of the sensitive nature of questions administered in the survey, informed consent forms were obtained from both parents/guardians and the respondents, and in all possible instances interviewers and respondents were paired up by gender.

Curated

Partially restricted

Pathways to Adulthood: A Three-Generation Urban Study, 1960-1994: [Baltimore, Maryland] (ICPSR 2420)

Released/updated on: 2019-11-26

Geographic coverage: Baltimore, United States, Maryland

Time period: 1960-01-01--1994-01-01

This collection incorporates both prospective and retrospective data on three generations of families initially living in inner-city Baltimore, Maryland. The prospective data were selected from data collected as part of the Johns Hopkins Collaborative Perinatal Study (JHCPS), a survey of pregnant women seeking prenatal care and delivery at Johns Hopkins Hospital during 1960-1964. JHCPS studied these women (the first-generation mothers, abbreviated as G1) and the children born to them during 1960-1965 (the second-generation children, abbreviated as G2) until the children were 8 years old. The retrospective data come from a follow-up study, conducted in 1992-1994, of G1, G2, and the children born to G2 (the third-generation children, abbreviated as G3). Data from JHCPS on G1 include obstetrical and reproductive history at registration for prenatal care, sociological/family history variables at or around delivery of G2, observations of mother with child when G2 was 4 months old and 8 months old, and family history, demographic, and sociological variables when G2 was age 7. For G2, the data from JHCPS include delivery room observations at birth, pediatric examination data at age 4 months, developmental evaluation data at age 8 months, pediatric-neurological examination data at age 12 months, language, hearing, and speech evaluation summary data at age 36 months, psychological, behavior profile, physical growth, and other tests at age 48 months, psychological, motor, behavior, neurological, vision, physical, and other tests at age 7-1/2 years, and language, hearing, and speech evaluations, physical growth, interval medical history, and other tests at age 8 years. Retrospective data from the follow-up study on G1 include variables on education, employment, family composition, health and health care usage, housing conditions, income and income sources, marital status, partnerships and changes, neighborhood characteristics at registration to JHCPS and current, and reproductive history. For G2, data from the follow-up include information on aspirations, education, schooling, employment, family composition, health and health care usage, housing conditions, income and income sources, legal problems, living arrangements, marriage, partnership and changes, neighborhood characteristics at birth, at ages 11/12 and 16/17, and current, reproductive history, social relationships, smoking, and substance abuse. Data for the assessed third-generation children, i.e., G3s who were 7-8 years old during the follow-up period, include information on cognitive development, academic achievement and behavior, prenatal care, health, day care, and parental aspirations.

Curated

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Interviewer Impressions (Primary Caregiver), Wave 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13631)

Released/updated on: 2006-06-20

Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois

Time period: 1997-01-01--2000-01-01

The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Longitudinal Cohort Study, which was a series of coordinated longitudinal studies that followed over 6,000 randomly selected children, adolescents, and young adults, and their primary caregivers over time to examine the changing circumstances of their lives, as well as the personal characteristics, that might lead them toward or away from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Numerous measures were administered to respondents to gauge various aspects of human development, including individual differences, as well as family, peer, and school influences. One such measure was the Interviewer Impressions (Primary Caregiver). This set of questions was completed by the interviewer at the end of each interview with a primary caregiver(PC). Basic demographic information was collected. Also, the interviewer was asked to rate the behavior of the PC toward the interviewer and the PC's behavior and attitude toward the subject and other household members. It was completed for Cohorts 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15.

Curated

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Interviewer Impressions (Primary Caregiver), Wave 3, 2000-2002 (ICPSR 13718)

Released/updated on: 2007-04-20

Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois

Time period: 2000-01-01--2002-01-01

The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Longitudinal Cohort Study, which was a series of coordinated longitudinal studies that followed over 6,000 randomly selected children, adolescents, and young adults, and their primary caregivers over time to examine the changing circumstances of their lives, as well as the personal characteristics, that might lead them toward or away from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Numerous measures were administered to respondents to gauge various aspects of human development, including individual differences, as well as family, peer, and school influences. One such measure was the Interviewer Impressions (Primary Caregiver). This set of questions was completed by the interviewer at the end of each interview with a primary caregiver (PC). The interviewer supplied basic demographic information and rated the behavior of the PC toward the interviewer, as well as the PC's behavior and attitude toward the subject and other household members. It was completed for Cohorts 0, 3, 6, 9, and 12 and it is closely related to PROJECT ON HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHICAGO NEIGHBORHOODS (PHDCN): INTERVIEWER IMPRESSIONS (PRIMARY CAREGIVER), WAVE 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13631).

Curated

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Interviewer Impressions (Young Adult), Wave 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13633)

Released/updated on: 2006-06-20

Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois

Time period: 1997-01-01--2000-01-01

The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Longitudinal Cohort Study, which was a series of coordinated longitudinal studies that followed over 6,000 randomly selected children, adolescents, and young adults, and their primary caregivers over time to examine the changing circumstances of their lives, as well as the personal characteristics, that might lead them toward or away from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Numerous measures were administered to respondents to gauge various aspects of human development, including individual differences, as well as family, peer, and school influences. One such measure was the Interviewer Impressions (Young Adult). This set of questions was completed by the interviewer at the end of each interview with a young adult (YA). Basic demographic information was collected along with interviewer ratings of the interior and exterior of the home. It was completed for Cohort 18.

Curated

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Interviewer Impressions (Young Adult), Wave 3, 2000-2002 (ICPSR 13720)

Released/updated on: 2007-04-20

Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois

Time period: 2000-01-01--2002-01-01

The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Longitudinal Cohort Study, which was a series of coordinated longitudinal studies that followed over 6,000 randomly selected children, adolescents, and young adults, and their primary caregivers over time to examine the changing circumstances of their lives, as well as the personal characteristics, that might lead them toward or away from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Numerous measures were administered to respondents to gauge various aspects of human development, including individual differences, as well as family, peer, and school influences. One such measure was the Interviewer Impressions (Young Adult). This set of questions was completed by the interviewer at the end of each interview with a young adult (YA). The interviewer gave his or her impressions regarding the subject and the interview, itself, as well as information relating to the interior and exterior of the YA's home. It was completed for Cohorts 15 and 18 and is closely related to PROJECT ON HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHICAGO NEIGHBORHOODS (PHDCN): INTERVIEWER IMPRESSIONS (YOUNG ADULT), WAVE 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13633).

Curated

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Systematic Social Observation, 1995 (ICPSR 13578)

Released/updated on: 2005-07-18

Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois

Time period: 1995-06-01--1995-10-01

The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Systematic Social Observation (SSO). The SSO was a standardized approach for directly observing the physical, social, and economic characteristics of neighborhoods, one block at a time. In 1995, the PHDCN initiated a combined person-based and videotaped approach to collecting systematic observations of neighborhoods. Eighty of the 343 Neighborhood Clusters were used in this study. Once the sampling was complete, the block face (the block segment on one side of the street) became the unit of observation. Using videotape and observer logs, data were collected in the 80 sampled Chicago neighborhoods. Only a sample of block faces were selected for coding due to budget expenses. The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) collected the data for the SSO. Between June and October of 1995, trained observers from NORC drove a sports utility vehicle down every block within the 80 sampled neighborhoods. A videographer videotaped both sides of each block, while two observers recorded characteristics of each block face on observer logs. Further coding of the videotapes and observer logs was conducted by NORC staff.

Curated

The State and Life Chances in Urban China, 1949-1994 (ICPSR 3552)

Released/updated on: 2017-08-09

Geographic coverage: China (Peoples Republic), Global

Time period: 1949-01-01--1994-01-01

The main goal of this study was to examine life chances among urban residents of China over time. Respondents aged 25-65 provided retrospective information concerning their education, work experience, political party membership, housing, family structure, and other social indicators. Those polled were asked about the type of education they received, whether they had an educational specialty (law, medicine, etc.), and what the location of their school was. Housing information collected on respondents included number of residents in the household, number of rooms, and living space, as well as whether there was a kitchen, tap water, a toilet, and a phone in the household. Respondents were also asked when they started working, in what economic sector, what the size of their work unit was, where it was located, and the type of ownership, as well as what their occupation was, whether it was a permanent or a temporary job, and the type of official position they held (party, administrative, technical, or other position). Additionally, respondents described their satisfaction with current living conditions and their state of health, and provided information on their family background (peasants, workers, military, clerks, etc.). Other information gathered on respondents included gender, date of birth, marital status, number of children, number of siblings, Youth League and Communist Party membership, and respondents' monthly income. Basic information related to respondents' parents (age, education, occupation, Communist Party membership, and others) was also provided. The same information was collected on respondents' spouses (spousal information was provided by either the spouse or the respondent).

Curated

Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) 1984 Panel: Health-Wealth Merged File (ICPSR 8903)

Released/updated on: 1994-06-30

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1984-01-01--1984-12-01

This data collection, which contains merged data from the topical modules for Waves III and IV of Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), is especially useful for analyses on the older population. In addition to providing data on basic social and economic characteristics, sources of income, and participation in various cash and noncash transfer programs, the file also includes data on health conditions, physical limitations, health insurance coverage, pension coverage, assets and liabilities, housing conditions, costs, and energy use.

Curated

United States Microdata Samples Extract File, 1940-1980: Demographics of Aging (ICPSR 8353)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1940-01-01--1980-01-01

This is an extract of the decennial Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) released by the Bureau of the Census. Because the complete PUMS files contain several hundred thousand records, ICPSR has constructed this subset to allow for easier and less costly analysis. The collection of data at ten year increments allows the user to follow various age cohorts through the life-cycle. Data include information on the household and its occupants such as size and value of dwelling, utility costs, number of people in the household, and their relationship to the respondent. More detailed information was collected on the respondent, the head of household, and the spouse, if present. Variables include education, marital status, occupation and income.

Curated

Vietnam Longitudinal Survey, 1995-1998 (ICPSR 33506)

Released/updated on: 2015-07-14

Geographic coverage: Vietnam (Socialist Republic)

Time period: 1995-01-01--1998-01-01

The Vietnam Longitudinal Survey, 1995-1998 (VLS) sought to analyze the impact of changing household economies on demographic phenomena such as marriage, pregnancy, and family composition in Vietnam. The VLS was the first longitudinal sociological survey and one of the largest sociological surveys ever conducted in Vietnam. The study was part of a long-term collaborative research program between the Institute of Sociology (IOS), Hanoi - Vietnam, and Professor Charles Hirschman from the University of Washington-Seattle.

The VLS emerged as the result of extensive exchange between IOS researchers and Charles Hirschman following their first collaborative project, the Vietnam Life History Survey (VLHS), which was conducted in 1991 (ICPSR 31101). During the 1994-95 academic year, Hirschman and IOS jointly developed a detailed plan for the VLS based on their previous experiences from the VLHS. Ten communes in the provinces of Nam Ha and Ninh Binh were selected for the VLS survey using probability sampling methods. In July 1995, the pretest survey was carried out in the Dai Xuyen commune approximately 40km south of Hanoi. Baseline interviews were conducted from September to November of 1995, with 1,855 households and 4,464 individuals surveyed for the first round. The second round of interviewing was carried out from August to September of 1996, with 1,820 households and 4,340 individuals successfully re-interviewed. The third round was carried out in July and August of 1997, with 1811 households and 4309 individuals re-interviewed. The fourth and final round of the survey was conducted in July and August of 1998, with a final household count of 1,795 and 4,222 individual respondents.

Data were collected at the individual and household level for each survey year. Household-level variables measured several household attributes, including size of land and living space, house construction materials, number of rooms and amenities, ownership of appliances, vehicles, and livestock, types and amount of agricultural production. Individual-level variables measured traditional courtship and wedding customs, familial marriage negotiations, marital history, pregnancy and birth history, as well as experiences with abstinence, various contraceptive methods, abortion, pregnancy, and breastfeeding. Household-level demographic variables provide information on household composition, including number of members, age, sex, ethnicity, education level, marital status, and occupation of each household member, as well as total household income. Individual-level demographic variables include age, sex, ethnicity, religion, education level, occupation, job history, income, marital status, and information on children of respondents.