Search results

Showing 1 – 37 of 37 results.
Curated

Adolescent Health and Development in Context (AHDC) Study, Franklin County, Ohio, Wave 1, 2014-2016 (ICPSR 39045)

Released/updated on: 2024-07-23
Geographic coverage: United States, Columbus (Ohio), Ohio
Time period: 2014-01-01--2016-01-01
The overarching objective of the Adolescent Health and Development in Context (AHDC) Project is to collect multilevel, multi-contextual data on a large sample of 1,405 youth ages 11 to 17 years in Franklin County, Ohio. The study emphasizes the interplay of social, psychological, and biological processes in shaping youth developmental outcomes such as risk behavior and victimization, mental and physical health, and educational outcomes. The study employs a prospective cohort design in which the data on youth and caregivers were collected at two time-points, approximately one year apart. The Wave 1 field period began in spring 2014 and was completed in summer 2016. Wave 2 was conducted between January and December 2016. Within each wave, participant data were collected over a weeklong period. An Entrance Survey with both a focal youth and his or her caregiver was followed by a seven-day smartphone-based Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking and EMA data collection period (EMA Week), and a final Exit Survey at the end of the week.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study (CILS), San Diego, California, Ft. Lauderdale and Miami, Florida, 1991-2006 (ICPSR 20520)

Released/updated on: 2018-12-12
Geographic coverage: San Diego, United States, California, Florida, Ft. Lauderdale, Miami
Time period: 1991-01-01--2006-01-01
Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study (CILS) was designed to study the adaptation process of the immigrant second generation which is defined broadly as United States-born children with at least one foreign-born parent or children born abroad but brought at an early age to the United States. The original survey was conducted with large samples of second-generation immigrant children attending the 8th and 9th grades in public and private schools in the metropolitan areas of Miami/Ft. Lauderdale in Florida and San Diego, California. Conducted in 1992, the first survey had the purpose of ascertaining baseline information on immigrant families, children's demographic characteristics, language use, self-identities, and academic attainment. The total sample size was 5,262. Respondents came from 77 different nationalities, although the sample reflects the most sizable immigrant nationalities in each area. Three years later, corresponding to the time in which respondents were about to graduate from high school, the first follow-up survey was conducted. Its purpose was to examine the evolution of key adaptation outcomes including language knowledge and preference, ethnic identity, self-esteem, and academic attainment over the adolescent years. The survey also sought to establish the proportion of second-generation youths who dropped out of school before graduation. This follow-up survey retrieved 4,288 respondents or 81.5 percent of the original sample. Together with this follow-up survey, a parental survey was conducted. The purpose of this interview was to establish directly characteristics of immigrant parents and families and their outlooks for the future including aspirations and plans for the children. Since many immigrant parents did not understand English, this questionnaire was translated and administered in six different foreign languages. In total, 2,442 parents or 46 percent of the original student sample were interviewed. During 2001-2003, or a decade after the original survey, a final follow-up was conducted. The sample now averaged 24 years of age and, hence, patterns of adaptation in early adulthood could be readily assessed. The original and follow-up surveys were conducted mostly in schools attended by respondents, greatly facilitating access to them. Most respondents had already left school by the time of the second follow-up so they had to be contacted individually in their place of work or residence. Respondents were located not only in the San Diego and Miami areas, but also in more than 30 different states, with some surveys returned from military bases overseas. Mailed questionnaires were the principal source of completed data in this third survey. In total, CILS-III retrieved complete or partial information on 3,613 respondents representing 68.9 percent of the original sample and 84.3 percent of the first follow-up.Relevant adaptation outcomes measured in this survey include educational attainment, employment and occupational status, income, civil status and ethnicity of spouses/partners, political attitudes and participation, ethnic and racial identities, delinquency and incarceration, attitudes and levels of identification with American society, and plans for the future.
Curated
Partially restricted
Simple Crosstabs

Chitwan Valley Family Study: Changing Social Contexts and Family Formation, Nepal, 1995-2019 (ICPSR 4538)

Released/updated on: 2024-10-16
Geographic coverage: Nepal
Time period: 1995-01-01--2019-01-01

The Chitwan Valley Family Study (CVFS) is a comprehensive family panel study of individuals, households, and communities in the Chitwan Valley of Nepal. The study was initially designed to investigate the influence of changing community and household contexts on population outcomes such as marital and childbearing processes. Over time, the goals of the study expanded to investigate family dynamics, intergenerational influences, child health, migration, labor force participation, attitudes and beliefs, mental health, agricultural production, environmental change, and many other topics. The data include full life histories for more than 10,000 individuals, tracking and interviews with all migrants, continuous measurement of community change, over 25 years of demographic event registry, and many other data collections. For additional information regarding the Chitwan Valley Family Study, please visit the Chitwan Valley Family Study Website. A Data Guide for this study is available as a web page and for download.

Principal Investigators

  • William G. Axinn, University of Michigan
  • Dirgha Ghimire, University of Michigan
  • Jordan Smoller, Massachusetts General Hospital
Curated

Community Factors, HIV and Related Health Outcomes in Men Who Have Sex With Men (ICPSR 35848)

Released/updated on: 2015-05-01
Geographic coverage: United States
This project conducts a multi-level, cross sectional study to identify key neighborhood-level characteristics that may influence sexual risk behaviors, substance use and depression among men who have sex with men (MSM). To achieve these aims, the study enrolls a geographically and ethnically diverse sample of 1500 MSMs in New York City. Participants provide information via ACASI on their sexual risk behaviors and substance use and depression, perceptions of residential and social neighborhoods, and individual-level covariate data.
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

Immigration and Intergenerational Mobility in Metropolitan Los Angeles (IIMMLA), 2004 (ICPSR 22627)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-01
Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California
Time period: 2002-01-01--2008-01-01
IIMMLA was supported by the Russell Sage Foundation. Since 1991, the Russell Sage Foundation has funded a program of research aimed at assessing how well the young adult offspring of recent immigrants are faring as they move through American schools and into the labor market. Two previous major studies have begun to tell us about the paths to incorporation of the children of contemporary immigrants: The Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study (CILS), and the Immigrant Second Generation in New York study. The Immigration and Intergenerational Mobility in Metropolitan Los Angeles study is the third major initiative analyzing the progress of the new second generation in the United States. The Immigration and Intergenerational Mobility in Metropolitan Los Angeles (IIMMLA) study focused on young adult children of immigrants (1.5- and second-generation) in greater Los Angeles. IIMMLA investigated mobility among young adult (ages 20-39) children of immigrants in metropolitan Los Angeles and, in the case of the Mexican-origin population there, among young adult members of the third- or later generations. The five-county Los Angeles metropolitan area (Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside and San Bernardino counties) contains the largest concentrations of Mexicans, Salvadorans, Guatemalans, Filipinos, Chinese, Vietnamese, Koreans, and other nationalities in the United States. The diverse migration histories and modes of incorporation of these groups made the Los Angeles metropolitan area a strategic choice for a comparison study of the pathways of immigrant incorporation and mobility from one generation to the next. The IIMMLA study compared six foreign-born (1.5-generation) and foreign-parentage (second-generation) groups (Mexicans, Vietnamese, Filipinos, Koreans, Chinese, and Central Americans from Guatemala and El Salvador) with three native-born and native-parentage comparison groups (third- or later-generation Mexican Americans, and non-Hispanic Whites and Blacks). The targeted groups represent both the diversity of modes of incorporation in the United States and the range of occupational backgrounds and immigration status among contemporary immigrants (from professionals and entrepreneurs to laborers, refugees, and unauthorized migrants). The surveys provide basic demographic information as well as extensive data about socio-cultural orientation and mobility (e.g., language use, ethnic identity, religion, remittances, intermarriage, experiences of discrimination), economic mobility (e.g., parents' background, respondents' education, first and current job, wealth and income, encounters with the law), geographic mobility (childhood and present neighborhood of residence), and civic engagement and politics (political attitudes, voting behavior, as well as naturalization and transnational ties).
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

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 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
Restricted

Michigan Study of Life After Prison, Administrative Data on 2003 Cohort of Michigan Parolees (ICPSR 32681)

Released/updated on: 2019-03-28
Geographic coverage: United States, Michigan

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

The Michigan Study of Life After Prison examined the association between neighborhood context and outcomes related to employment and recidivism among the cohort of former prisoners released on parole from Michigan state prisons in one calendar year (2003), controlling for pre-incarceration neighborhood context, local labor market conditions, and a large set of individual characteristics. The primary goals of this study were to answer two questions: (1) "Are ex-offenders who are released to more disadvantaged neighborhoods (those with greater poverty, unemployment, residential turnover, etc.) more likely to recidivate?" (2) "Are ex-offenders who are released to more disadvantaged neighborhoods less likely to gain stable employment?" This research sought to supplement available literature on prisoner reentry and criminal desistance, which the researchers posit existing literature has largely ignored the role that neighborhoods play in shaping the recidivism and employment of returning prisoners.

The 31 data files included as part of this collection are as follows:

Cleaned Data Files:

  • casenotearrestsreps1-4_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 4,932 Cases, 12 Variables
  • casenotearrestsreps5-8_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 5,302 Cases, 13 Variables
  • casenotearrestsrep9_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 2,321 Cases, 13 Variables
  • casenoteemploymentreps1-4_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 4,871 Cases, 28 Variables
  • casenoteemploymentreps5-8_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 4,754 Cases, 23 Variables
  • casenoteemploymentrep9_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 2,610 Cases, 23 Variables
  • cleanedcasenoteaddressesreps1-8_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 50,207 Cases, 72 Variables
  • cleanedcasenoteaddressesrep9_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 10,309 Cases, 69 Variables
  • preprisonaddress_all_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 5,183 Cases, 30 Variables
  • preprisonaddress_all_rep9_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 1,017 Cases, 63 Variables
  • postprisads_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 11,064 Cases, 41 Variables
  • cleaned-demographics-population_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 11,064 Cases, 57 Variables
  • simplecrimhistory.dta: 11,064 Cases, 4 Variables
  • popSAhistory.dta: 11,064 Cases, 8 Variables
  • deathdates_ICPSR-EDITED.dta: 308 Cases, 3 Variables
  • popprisonenterdates.dta: 11,064 Cases, 7 Variables
  • discharge dates.dta: 7,369 Cases, 5 Variables
  • parole and release dates for pop.dta: 11,064 cases, 3 Variables
  • mdoc_recidivism_measures.dta: 11,064 Cases, 6 Variables
  • recidivism dates from transits.dta: 11,064 Cases, 8 Variables
  • recidivism from bir.dta: 11,064 Cases, 3 Variables
  • sample marker.dta: 3,689 Cases, 2 Variables
  • samplereps.dta: 3,689 Cases, 2 Variables
  • tta_rsid_rep.dta: 1,363 Cases, 2 Variables

  • Contextual Data Files:

  • Complete.data.file.dta: 2,757 Cases, 1,055 Variables
  • countyemployment.dta: 10,956 Cases, 6 Variables
  • places.dta: 5,004 Cases, 5 Variables
  • TractDataInterpolated-long.dta: 57,036 Cases, 50 Variables
  • TractDataInterpolated-wide.dta: 2,716 Cases, 1,009 Variables
  • tractscales2000.dta: 2,716 Cases, 49 Variables
  • urbanicity + density.dta: 2,716 Cases, 9 Variables

  • Demographic variables included: gender, race, educational attainment, age, employment, and marital status.

    • Curated
    Simple Crosstabs

    Midlife in the United States (MIDUS): Survey of Minority Groups [Chicago and New York City], 1995-1996 (ICPSR 2856)

    Released/updated on: 2018-03-21
    Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, Chicago, Illinois, New York (state)
    Time period: 1995-01-01--1996-01-01
    This survey of minority groups was part of a larger project to investigate the patterns, predictors, and consequences of midlife development in the areas of physical health, psychological well-being, and social responsibility. Conducted in Chicago and New York City, the survey was designed to assess the well-being of middle-aged, urban, ethnic minority adults living in both hyper-segregated neighborhoods and in areas with lower concentrations of minorities. Respondents' views were sought on issues relevant to quality of life, including health, childhood and family background, religion, race and ethnicity, personal beliefs, work experiences, marital and close relationships, financial situation, children, community involvement, and neighborhood characteristics. Questions on health explored the respondents' physical and emotional well-being, past and future attitudes toward health, physical limitations, energy level and appetite, amount of time spent worrying about health, and physical reactions to those worries. Questions about childhood and family background elicited information on family structure, the role of the parents with regard to child rearing, parental education, employment status, and supervisory responsibilities at work, the family financial situation including experiences with the welfare system, relationships with siblings, and whether as a child the respondent slept in the same bed as a parent or adult relative. Questions on religion covered religious preference, whether it is good to explore different religious teachings, and the role of religion in daily decision-making. Questions about race and ethnicity investigated respondents' backgrounds and experiences as minorities, including whether respondents preferred to be with people of the same racial group, how important they thought it was to marry within one's racial or ethnic group, citizenship, reasons for moving to the United States and the challenges faced since their arrival, their native language, how they would rate the work ethic of certain ethnic groups, their views on race relations, and their experiences with discrimination. Questions on personal beliefs probed for respondents' satisfaction with life and confidence in their opinions. Respondents were asked whether they had control over changing their life or their personality, and what age they viewed as the ideal age. They also rated people in their late 20s in the areas of physical health, contribution to the welfare and well-being of others, marriage and close relationships, relationships with their children, work situation, and financial situation. Questions on work experiences covered respondents' employment status, employment history, future employment goals, number of hours worked weekly, number of nights away from home due to work, exposure to the risk of accident or injury, relationships with coworkers and supervisors, work-related stress, and experience with discrimination in the workplace. A series of questions was posed on marriage and close relationships, including marital status, quality and length of relationships, whether the respondent had control over his or her relationships, and spouse/partner's education, physical and mental health, employment status, and work schedule. Questions on finance explored respondents' financial situation, financial planning, household income, retirement plans, insurance coverage, and whether the household had enough money. Questions on children included the number of children in the household, quality of respondents' relationships with their children, prospects for their children's future, child care coverage, and whether respondents had changed their work schedules to accommodate a child's illness. Additional topics focused on children's identification with their culture, their relationships with friends of different backgrounds, and their experiences with racism. Community involvement was another area of investigation, with items on respondents' role in child-rearing, participation on a jury, voting behavior, involvement in charitable organizations, volunteer experiences, whether they made monetary or clothing donations, and experiences living in an institutional setting or being homeless. Respondents were also queried about their neighborhoods, with items on neighborhood problems including racism, vandalism, crime, drugs, poor schools, teenage pregnancy, the existence of social networks, the frequency of contact with family members, social interaction with neighbors, sense of community, whether the respondent owned or rented their home, and the financial, legal, and medical problems of family members. A final set of questions sought respondents' assessments of their life and their expectations for the future. Additional background information on respondents includes age, ethnicity, and gender.
    Curated
    Simple Crosstabs

    National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health), 1994-2025 [Public Use] (ICPSR 21600)

    Released/updated on: 2026-03-03
    Geographic coverage: United States
    Time period: 1994-01-01--2025-01-01

    Downloads of Add Health require submission of the following information, which is shared with the original producer of Add Health: supervisor name, supervisor email, and reason for download. A Data Guide for this study is available as a web page and for download.

    The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health), 1994-2018 [Public Use] is a longitudinal study of a nationally representative sample of U.S. adolescents in grades 7 through 12 during the 1994-1995 school year. The Add Health cohort was followed into young adulthood with four in-home interviews, the most recent conducted in 2008 when the sample was aged 24-32. Add Health combines longitudinal survey data on respondents' social, economic, psychological, and physical well-being with contextual data on the family, neighborhood, community, school, friendships, peer groups, and romantic relationships.

    Add Health Wave I data collection took place between September 1994 and December 1995, and included both an in-school questionnaire and in-home interview. The in-school questionnaire was administered to more than 90,000 students in grades 7 through 12, and gathered information on social and demographic characteristics of adolescent respondents, education and occupation of parents, household structure, expectations for the future, self-esteem, health status, risk behaviors, friendships, and school-year extracurricular activities. All students listed on a sample school's roster were eligible for selection into the core in-home interview sample. In-home interviews included topics such as health status, health-facility utilization, nutrition, peer networks, decision-making processes, family composition and dynamics, educational aspirations and expectations, employment experience, romantic and sexual partnerships, substance use, and criminal activities. A parent, preferably the resident mother, of each adolescent respondent interviewed in Wave I was also asked to complete an interviewer-assisted questionnaire covering topics such as inheritable health conditions, marriages and marriage-like relationships, neighborhood characteristics, involvement in volunteer, civic, and school activities, health-affecting behaviors, education and employment, household income and economic assistance, parent-adolescent communication and interaction, parent's familiarity with the adolescent's friends and friends' parents.

    Add Health data collection recommenced for Wave II from April to August 1996, and included almost 15,000 follow-up in-home interviews with adolescents from Wave I. Interview questions were generally similar to Wave I, but also included questions about sun exposure and more detailed nutrition questions. Respondents were asked to report their height and weight during the course of the interview, and were also weighed and measured by the interviewer.

    From August 2001 to April 2002, Wave III data were collected through in-home interviews with 15,170 Wave I respondents (now 18 to 26 years old), as well as interviews with their partners. Respondents were administered survey questions designed to obtain information about family, relationships, sexual experiences, childbearing, and educational histories, labor force involvement, civic participation, religion and spirituality, mental health, health insurance, illness, delinquency and violence, gambling, substance abuse, and involvement with the criminal justice system. High School Transcript Release Forms were also collected at Wave III, and these data comprise the Education Data component of the Add Health study.

    Wave IV in-home interviews were conducted in 2008 and 2009 when the original Wave I respondents were 24 to 32 years old. Longitudinal survey data were collected on the social, economic, psychological, and health circumstances of respondents, as well as longitudinal geographic data. Survey questions were expanded on educational transitions, economic status and financial resources and strains, sleep patterns and sleep quality, eating habits and nutrition, illnesses and medications, physical activities, emotional content and quality of current or most recent romantic/cohabiting/marriage relationships, and maltreatment during childhood by caregivers. Dates and circumstances of key life events occurring in young adulthood were also recorded, including a complete marriage and cohabitation history, full pregnancy and fertility histories from both men and women, an educational history of dates of degrees and school attendance, contact with the criminal justice system, military service, and various employment events, including the date of first and current jobs, with respective information on occupation, industry, wages, hours, and benefits. Finally, physical measurements and biospecimens were also collected at Wave IV, and included anthropometric measures of weight, height and waist circumference, cardiovascular measures such as systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and pulse, metabolic measures from dried blood spots assayed for lipids, glucose, and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), measures of inflammation and immune function, including High sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV).

    Wave V data collection took place from 2016 to 2018, when the original Wave I respondents were 33 to 43 years old. For the first time, a mixed mode survey design was used. In addition, several experiments were embedded in early phases of the data collection to test response to various treatments. A similar range of data was collected on social, environmental, economic, behavioral, and health circumstances of respondents, with the addition of retrospective child health and socio-economic status questions. Physical measurements and biospecimens were again collected at Wave V, and included most of the same measures as at Wave IV.

    The overall goal of Wave VI was to better understand life course trajectories, determinants, and consequences of critical dimensions of aging, health, and health disparities among U.S. early midlife adults. Data collection took place from 2022 to 2025, with participants between the ages of 39 and 51, with an average age of 44. Beyond longitudinal survey measures, newly added questions included those on cumulative stress, discrimination, despair, work-life balance, memory, physical limitations, and caregiving. Continuing from previous waves, home exams collected physical measurements and biospecimens with most of the same measures as Wave V.

    Curated

    Neighborhood Effects on the Long-Term Well-Being of Low-Income Adults From All Five Sites of the Moving to Opportunity Experiment, 2008-2010 [Public Use Data] (ICPSR 34563)

    Released/updated on: 2013-03-14
    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

    Nearly 9 million Americans live in extreme-poverty neighborhoods, places that also tend to be racially segregated and dangerous. Yet, the effects on the well-being of residents of moving out of such communities into less distressed areas remain uncertain. Moving to Opportunity (MTO) is a randomized housing experiment administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development that gave low-income families living in high-poverty areas in five cities the chance to move to lower-poverty areas. Families were randomly assigned to one of three groups:

    1. 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.

    2. 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.

    3. The control group received no certificates or vouchers through MTO, but continued to be eligible for project-based housing assistance and whatever other social programs and services to which they would otherwise be entitled.

    Families were tracked from baseline (1994-1998) through the long-term evaluation survey fielding period (2008-2010) with the purpose of determining the effects of "neighborhood" on participating families. These particular files include data from the 3,273 adult interviews completed as part of the MTO long-term evaluation and are 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. Using data from the long-term evaluation, the article reports that moving from a high-poverty to lower-poverty neighborhood leads to long-term (10- to 15-year) improvements in adult physical and mental health and subjective well-being, despite not affecting economic self-sufficiency. Subjective well-being is more strongly affected by changes in neighborhood economic disadvantage than racial segregation, which is important because racial segregation has been declining since 1970, but income segregation has been increasing. The files submitted here contain all outcomes and mediators analyzed for the article as well as a variety of demographic and other baseline measures that were controlled for in the analysis.

    Curated

    New Hope Project: Income and Employment Effects on Children and Families, 1994-2003 [Restricted Use] (ICPSR 30282)

    Released/updated on: 2013-04-03
    Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, United States, Wisconsin
    Time period: 1994-08-01--2003-01-01
    The New Hope Project gathered information on respondents over eight years using several data sources. This collection consists of three datasets: (1) Adults, (2) Child and Family Study (CFS) Parents, and (3) Youth. Information was collected on respondent's employment history, job characteristics and security, other sources of income, feelings about respondent's financial situation, material hardship, respondent's access to health care, as well as experiences with the New Hope program. Furthermore, families with at least one child between the ages of 1 and 10 at initial random assignment were selected for the Child and Family Study (CFS). The CFS independently surveyed parents/primary caregivers and up to two focal children when applicable, and collected information about the parents' and the child's well-being. Additionally, teachers of school-aged children were mailed surveys and asked to rate the child's performance and behavior. Demographic variables include age, gender, race, nationality, citizenship, educational attainment, employment status, income, marital status, parent-child relations, and household composition.
    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

    Public Use Data (2008-10) on Long-Term Neighborhood Effects on Low-Income Families (Adult Data Only) from All Five Sites of the Moving to Opportunity Experiment (ICPSR 34976)

    Released/updated on: 2014-01-15
    Geographic coverage: New York City, Baltimore, United States, Chicago, Illinois, Massachusetts, Los Angeles, California, New York (state), Maryland, Boston
    Time period: 2008-01-01--2010-01-01
    Nearly 9 million Americans live in extreme-poverty neighborhoods, places that also tend to be racially segregated and dangerous. Yet, the effects on the well-being of residents of moving out of such communities into less distressed areas remain uncertain. Moving to Opportunity (MTO) is a randomized housing experiment administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development that gave low-income families living in high-poverty areas in five cities the chance to move to lower-poverty areas. Families were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) The experimental group (also called the low-poverty voucher (LPV) 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. (2) The Section 8 group (also called the traditional voucher (TRV) group) received regular Section 8 certificates or vouchers that they could use anywhere; these families received no special mobility counseling. (3) The control group received no certificates or vouchers through MTO, but continued to be eligible for project-based housing assistance and whatever other social programs and services to which they would otherwise be entitled. Families were tracked from baseline (1994-98) through the long-term evaluation survey fielding period (2008-10) with the purpose of determining the effects of "neighborhood" on participating families. This data collection contains data from the 3,273 adult interviews completed as part of the MTO long-term evaluation and are comprised of adult variables that have been analyzed. Using data from the long-term evaluation, the associated article reports that moving from a high-poverty to lower-poverty neighborhood leads to long-term (10- to 15-year) improvements in adult physical and mental health and subjective well-being, despite not affecting economic self-sufficiency. The data contain all adult outcomes and mediators analyzed for the associated article as well as a variety of demographic and other baseline measures that were controlled for in the analysis.
    Curated
    Simple Crosstabs

    Racial Neighborhood Inequality in the United States, 1980-2010 (ICPSR 36626)

    Released/updated on: 2016-11-03
    Geographic coverage: United States
    Time period: 1980-01-01--2010-01-01
    This project examined economic differences in the neighborhoods where whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Asians live in the U.S. Although it is commonly believed that blacks and Hispanics generally live in neighborhoods where poverty rates are higher than they are in the neighborhoods where whites and Asians live, very little research has tracked the change in racial disparities in neighborhood conditions over time. In prior research, this project's investigators found that racial differences in neighborhood economic conditions have diminished in the U.S. Since 1980 the decline in racial neighborhood inequality has been much faster than the decline in racial residential segregation. Because prior research on neighborhoods has focused on change in the residential segregation of different racial and ethnic groups, the trend in racial neighborhood inequality has been largely overlooked, and its causes are unknown. The objective of this project is to account for the decline in racial neighborhood inequality by investigating why it has declined faster in some metropolitan areas than in others.
    Curated

    Survey of Community, Crime, and Health, 1995, 1998 [United States] (ICPSR 4381)

    Released/updated on: 2010-09-21
    Geographic coverage: United States, Illinois
    The Survey of Community, Crime, and Health (CCH) was conducted in 1995 and 1998 in Illinois to examine the relationship between neighborhood disadvantage and physical and mental health, (over and above individual socio-economic characteristics), in order to develop a measure of perceived neighborhood disorder and to explore its role in explaining that relationship. Interviews were conducted with 2,482 respondents and covered topics such as physical health, mental health, health behaviors, use of services, and sense of control. Also examined were social support, perceived neighborhood characteristics, neighborhood social support, and personal and household demographics. In addition to individual-level variables, Wave I of the CCH contains a number of community-level variables that were created from the 1990 STF Census data. Variable names starting with T are tract-level, variables starting with C are county-level, and variables starting with P are city-level.
    Curated

    Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS): Wave 1, 2001 (ICPSR 4679)

    Released/updated on: 2026-05-13
    Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio, Toledo

    The Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) explores the relationship qualities and the subjective meanings that motivate adolescent behavior. More specifically, this study seeks to examine the nature and meaning of adolescent relationship experiences (e.g. with family, peers, and dating partners) in an effort to discover how experiences associated with age, gender, race, and ethnicity influence the meaning of dating relationships. The study further investigates the relative impact of dating partners and peers on sexual behavior and contraceptive practices, as well as involvement in other problem behaviors that can contribute independently to sexual risk-taking. The longitudinal design of the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes a schedule of follow-up interviews occurring one, three, five, ten, and about eighteen years after the initial interview. Additional waves have since been conducted.

    Wave 1 of TARS includes detailed data collected from both parents and adolescent respondents about their relationship experiences, including self-reported data from parents, parent-reported data about adolescent respondents, and self-reported data from adolescent respondents. These data are available as a combined dataset organized by adolescent respondent.

    The Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes several waves of data collection available through ICPSR. Please see the ICPSR Series page for available studies.

    Curated

    Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS): Wave 2, 2002 (ICPSR 32081)

    Released/updated on: 2026-07-08
    Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio, Toledo
    Time period: 2002-01-01--2003-01-01

    The Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) explores the relationship qualities and the subjective meanings that motivate adolescent behavior. More specifically, this study seeks to examine the nature and meaning of adolescent relationship experiences (e.g. with family, peers, and dating partners) in an effort to discover how experiences associated with age, gender, race, and ethnicity influence the meaning of dating relationships. The study further investigates the relative impact of dating partners and peers on sexual behavior and contraceptive practices, as well as involvement in other problem behaviors that can contribute independently to sexual risk-taking. The longitudinal design of the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes a schedule of follow-up interviews occurring one, three, five, ten, and about eighteen years after the initial interview. Additional waves have since been conducted.

    Wave 2 of TARS includes data from follow-up surveys of adolescent respondents conducted approximately one year after the initial TARS survey. These data are accompanied by a series of weights for use in secondary analysis.

    Curated
    Restricted

    Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS): Wave 5, 2011 (ICPSR 35486)

    Released/updated on: 2024-03-27
    Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio, Toledo
    Time period: 2011-03-01--2012-12-01

    These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

    This study explores the relationship qualities and the subjective meanings that motivate adolescent behavior. More specifically, this study seeks to examine the nature and meaning of adolescent relationship experiences (e.g., with family, peers, and dating partners) in an effort to discover how experiences associated with age, gender, race, and ethnicity influence the meaning of dating relationships. The study further investigates the relative impact of dating partners and peers on sexual behavior and contraceptive practices, as well as involvement in other problem behaviors that can contribute independently to sexual risk taking.

    The longitudinal design of the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes a schedule of follow-up interviews occurring one, three, and five years after the initial interview. Four prior waves of data have been collected (2001, 2002, 2004, and 2006). Data were collected from adolescent respondents through structured in-home interviews utilizing laptop computers.

    In addition, the fifth wave, conducted in 2011 when the participants were young adults, builds on prior waves by adding quantitative and qualitative assessments of intimate partner violence (IPV).

    Curated

    Urban Poverty and Family Life Survey of Chicago, 1987 (ICPSR 6258)

    Released/updated on: 1997-11-04
    Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
    This survey was undertaken to assemble a broad range of family, household, employment, schooling, and welfare data on families living in urban poverty areas of Chicago. The researchers were seeking to test a variety of theories about urban poverty. Questions concerned respondents' current lives as well as their recall of life events from birth to age 21. Major areas of investigation included household composition, family background, education, time spent in detention or jail, childbirth, fertility, relationship history, current employment, employment history, military service, participation in informal economy, child care, child support, child-rearing, neighborhood and housing characteristics, social networks, current health, current and past public aid use, current income, and major life events.
    Curated

    Welfare, Children, and Families: A Three-City Study (ICPSR 4701)

    Released/updated on: 2012-10-04
    Geographic coverage: San Antonio, United States, Chicago, Illinois, Texas, Massachusetts, Boston
    Time period: 1999-03-01--2006-05-01
    This data collection is the third wave of an intensive study in Boston, Chicago, and San Antonio, which was initiated to assess the well-being of low-income children and families in the post-welfare reform era. The project investigates the strategies families have used to respond to reform, in terms of employment, schooling or other forms of training, residential mobility, and fertility. Central to this project is a focus on how these strategies affect children's lives, with an emphasis on their health and development as well as their need for, and use of, social services. For the first wave of the study, between March 1999 and December 1999, a random sample of approximately 2,400 households with children in low-income neighborhoods in Boston, Chicago, and San Antonio were selected for interviews. Forty percent of the families interviewed were receiving cash welfare payments at the time of the interview. Each household had a child aged 0 to 4 or aged 10 to 14 at the time of the interview. The child and the child's primary female caregiver are the focus of the study. Extensive baseline information was gathered at the initial personal interview with the caregivers, tested younger children were assessed, and older children were interviewed. All interviews were conducted in-person using a computerized instrument. The third wave of data collection took place between February 2005 and January 2006, when the focal children were aged 5 to 10 or aged 15 to 20. Between May 2005 and May 2006, interviews were conducted with the teachers of the focal children.
    Back to top