Search results

Curated

Adjusting the National Crime Victimization Survey's Estimates of Rape and Domestic Violence for Gag Factors, 1986-1990 (ICPSR 6558)

Released/updated on: 1996-10-01

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1986-01-01--1990-01-01

The purpose of this project was to use statistical modeling techniques to estimate rape and domestic assault rates, adjusting for interviewing conditions under which the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) was administered. Data for women 16 years of age and older interviewed in the NCVS (see NATIONAL CRIME SURVEYS: NATIONAL SAMPLE, 1986-1990 [NEAR-TERM DATA] [ICPSR 8864]) were analyzed. The researchers considered whether the type of interview (personal or telephone) and the presence of another person (particularly a spouse) influenced or "gagged" the reporting of rape and domestic violence in the NCVS. The researchers also investigated correlates, primarily demographic in nature, of reporting rape, domestic violence, other assaults, and breaking and entry. In total, the data file contains reports of 434 rapes, 1,973 incidents of domestic violence, 13,459 other assaults, and 88,950 incidents of breaking and entry. The binary-coded variables provide information on whether the respondent was alone during the interview, others who were present, whether the interview was by telephone, whether the respondent refused a telephone interview, the number of persons who lived in the household, whether the respondent owned her home, whether the land use was urban, whether the household the respondent was living in was the same household from the last interview, whether the respondent had moved more than three times in the last five years, and whether an assault, domestic violence incident, rape, breaking and entry, or no crime was reported. Demographic information includes the respondent's education, income, employment during the last six months, marital status at the time of the interview, and whether the respondent was white (or non-white) or Hispanic (or non-Hispanic). Variables coded the same as the NCVS variables include age, respondent's relationship to the offender, type of crime, year and quarter of interview, NCVS control number, and person weight.

Curated

Automated Reporting System Pilot Project in Los Angeles, 1990 (ICPSR 9969)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12

Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles

Time period: 1990-04-01--1990-12-01

The purpose of this pilot project was to determine if preliminary investigation report (PIR) data filed by patrol officers could be collected via laptop computers to allow the direct input of the data into the Los Angeles Police Department Crime and Arrest Database without adversely affecting the personnel taking or using the reports. This data collection addresses the following questions: (1) Did officers and supervisors prefer the automated reporting system (ARS) or the handwritten version of the PIR? (2) Did the ARS affect the job satisfaction or morale of officers and supervisors? (3) Did the ARS reduce the amount of time that patrol officers, supervisors, and clerks spent on paperwork? (4) Did the ARS affect the accuracy of information contained in the PIRs? (5) Did detectives and prosecuting attorneys find the ARS a more reliable source than handwritten PIRs? Officers and supervisors in two divisions of the Los Angeles Police Department, Wilshire and Hollywood, participated as control and experimental groups. The control group continued using handwritten ("existing") PIRs while the experimental group used the automated PIRs (ARS). The General Information Questionnaire collected information on each officer's rank, assignment, watch, gender, age, years with the Los Angeles Police Department, education, job morale, job demands, self-esteem, computer anxiety, and relationship with supervisor and other officers. The Job Performance Rating Form gathered data on work efforts, depth of job knowledge, work quality, oral and written skills, and capacity to learn. The Time Study Sheets collected data on investigation time, writing and editing time, travel time, approval and correction time, review time, errors by type, and data input time for both the handwritten and automated forms. The Evaluation of the Existing Form and the Evaluation of the Automated Form both queried respondents on ease of use, system satisfaction, and productivity loss. The ARS Use Questionnaire asked about ease of use, typing skills, computer skills, comfort with the system, satisfaction with training, and preference for the system. The Hollywood Detective Division ARS Use Questionnaire surveyed detectives on the system's ease of use, task improvement, support for continued use, and preference for the system. The PIR Content Evaluation Form collected data on quality of officers' observations, organization and writing skills, physical evidence, statements of victims, witnesses, and suspects, and offense classification. The Caplan Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity subscales were used in the design of the questionnaires.

Curated

British Crime Survey, 1982 (ICPSR 8672)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18

Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global

The primary purpose of the British Crime Survey was to estimate how many of the public in England and Wales are victims of selected types of crime over a year, describing the circumstances under which people become victims, and the consequences of crime for victims. Other aims included providing background information on fear of crime among the public and on public contact with the police. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether or not they or their households had been victims of relevant crimes during the one-year reference period. They were then asked a series of very detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information on respondents and their households was collected to allow analysis of the sorts of people who do and do not become victims. Information was also collected on other areas which were of intrinsic interest and which could usefully be related to experience as a victim, namely, fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending.

Curated

British Crime Survey, 1988 (ICPSR 9850)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12

Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global

This 1988 survey, the third in a series of surveys instituted by the Home Office in 1982, examines levels of victimization in Great Britain and offers attitudinal data on issues relating to crime. The 1988 survey was intended to replicate the 1982 and 1984 surveys (ICPSR 8672 and 8685) as much as possible. However, in 1988 an additional sample of ethnic minority respondents was included. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether they had been the victims of crime during the reference period, and another series of detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information, such as sex, age, employment, education, and number of children, was also collected on the respondents and their households. Other information was collected on fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending. Part 1 consists of data captured on the Demographic Questionnaire. Parts 2 and 3 represent data collected via Follow-Up Questionnaire A and Follow-Up Questionnaire B, respectively. Each respondent completed one of the two Follow-Up Questionnaires, with all respondents in the ethnic minority sample completing Follow-Up Questionnaire B. Part 4 consists of data from the Main Questionnaire. Each respondent completed a Main Questionnaire that included a large number of screening questions to identify crime victims, and some attitudinal questions. Data in Part 5 were collected from the Victim Form. Only respondents reporting incidents of victimization on the Main Questionnaire have Victim Forms, with up to four Victim Forms per respondent. The unit of analysis for this collection is the individual.

Curated

British Crime Survey, 1992 (ICPSR 6717)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18

Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global

The fourth in a series of surveys instituted by the Home Office in 1982, this survey examines levels of victimization in Great Britain and offers attitudinal data on issues relating to crime. The 1992 survey was intended to replicate the 1982, 1984, and 1988 surveys (ICPSR 8672, 8685, and 9850) in methodology and content as much as possible. In 1992, a "core" sample of 10,059 adults along with booster samples of 1,650 ethnic minority adults and 1,350 young people aged 12-15 resident in the same households as adult respondents were interviewed. The 1988 survey had also included an ethnic minority booster sample employing the same sampling method. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether they had been the victims of crime during the reference period, and another series of detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information, such as sex, age, employment, education, and number of children, was also collected on the respondents and their households. Other information was elicited on fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending. Part 1, Demographic File, consists of data captured on the Demographic Questionnaire. Parts 2 and 3 represent data collected via Follow-Up Questionnaire A and Follow-Up Questionnaire B, respectively. Each respondent completed one of the two Follow-Up Questionnaires, with all respondents in the ethnic minority booster sample completing Follow-Up Questionnaire A. Part 4, Main File, consists of data from the Main Questionnaire. Each respondent completed a Main Questionnaire that included some attitudinal questions and a large number of screening questions to identify crime victims. Data in Part 5, Victim File, were collected from the Victim Form. Only respondents reporting incidents of victimization on the Main Questionnaire have Victim Forms, with up to four Victim Forms per respondent. The unit of analysis for this collection is the individual.

Curated

British Crime Survey, 1992: Teenage Booster Sample (ICPSR 6834)

Released/updated on: 1997-02-13

Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global

This survey was conducted in parallel with the BRITISH CRIME SURVEY, 1992 (ICPSR 6717) in the same households among the age group 12-15. The survey covers victimization out of the home, contacts with the police, and self-reported offending. The questions replicate the adult version as much as possible. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether they had been victims of crime during the reference period, and another series of detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information was also collected on the respondent. Other information was elicited on fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending. The unit of analysis for this collection is the individual.

Curated

British Crime Surveys, 1984 (ICPSR 8685)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16

Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global

In 1982 the Home Office conducted the first British Crime Survey, a major study with the aim of discovering levels of victimization in Britain, and of producing attitudinal data on issues relating to crime. The survey was repeated in 1984 and was restricted to England and Wales, whereas the previous study had included Scotland. The survey set out to replicate the previous one as far as possible. Other than questions having to do with victimization and basic demographic details, the topics covered in the questionnaire were: general opinion of the local area, fear of crime and precautions taken, likelihood of crime occurring, extent of "incivilities" in the area, seriousness of various crimes, attitudes towards punishment and prison reform, victim support schemes, neighborhood watch schemes, and self-reported offending.

Curated

Capturing Human Trafficking Victimization Through Crime Reporting, United States, 2013-2016 (ICPSR 37907)

Released/updated on: 2021-08-16

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2013-01-01--2016-12-31

Despite public attention to the problem of human trafficking, it has proven difficult to measure the problem. Improving the quality of information about human trafficking is critical to developing sound anti-trafficking policy. In support of this effort, in 2013 the Federal Bureau of Investigation incorporated human trafficking offenses in the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program. Despite this achievement, there are many reasons to expect the UCR program to underreport human trafficking. Law enforcement agencies struggle to identify human trafficking and distinguishing it from other crimes. Additionally, human trafficking investigations may not be accurately classified in official data sources. Finally, human trafficking presents unique challenges to summary and incident-based crime reporting methods. For these reasons, it is important to understand how agencies identify and report human trafficking cases within the UCR program and what part of the population of human trafficking victims in a community are represented by UCR data. This study provides critical information to improve law enforcement identification and reporting of human trafficking.

Coding criminal incidents investigated as human trafficking offenses in three US cities, supplemented by interviews with law and social service stakeholders in these locations, this study answers the following research questions:

How are human trafficking cases identified and reported by the police?
What sources of information about human trafficking exist outside of law enforcement data?
What is the estimated disparity between actual instances of human trafficking and the number of human trafficking offenses reported to the UCR?

Curated

Restricted

A Case Study of K-12 School Employee Sexual Misconduct: Lessons Learned from Title IX Policy Implementation, United States, 1984-2014 (ICPSR 36870)

Released/updated on: 2018-09-14

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1984-01-01--2014-01-01

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 was designed to examine how districts that experienced an incident of school employee sexual misconduct in 2014 defined, interpreted, and implemented key elements of Title IX before, during, and after an incident. The study used a qualitative case study design with a purposeful sample of five districts recruited from a database of 459 districts who experienced a case of school employee sexual misconduct in 2014. The study was conducted between January 2016 and September 2017.

Data collected included: 1) various district documents, 2) 41 interviews with primary actors (school employees and county officials directly involved in responding to the incident), 3) 10 focus groups with 51 secondary actors (school employees who were not directly involved with the incident but who might have been indirectly affected by it), and 4) offender, victim and district characteristics. Documents reviewed included written policies and protocols, training materials and handbooks for staff and students, case documents, and other guiding documents as applicable. In interviews and focus groups, participants were asked to discuss their knowledge of district policies and procedures, to describe the dissemination of and any changes to these policies and procedures, and to provide recommendations for improvement. To protect the confidentiality all district and participant identifying information is confidential and has been removed from any reporting.

Curated

CBS News/New York Times Monthly Poll, April 1992 (ICPSR 6076)

Released/updated on: 2010-07-23

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1992-04-20--1992-04-23

This poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked to comment on what they thought was the most important problem facing the country, and to give their approval rating of George Bush with respect to his handling of the presidency, foreign policy, and the economy. Questions were posed regarding respondents' vote intentions for the 1992 presidential election, their opinions of potential 1992 presidential candidates, the likelihood of their voting in either a Republican or Democratic presidential primary or caucus, their candidate preferences for the Democratic and Republican presidential nominations, and issues presidential candidates should emphasize. Those surveyed were asked whether most members of Congress deserved reelection, whether particular representatives deserved reelection, and whether Bill Clinton had told the truth when answering charges about his personal life. Questions on the Bush administration evaluated its performance in dealing with illegal drugs, education, the economy, and the development of policies. Respondents were asked whether Bush, Clinton, and Ross Perot were liberal, moderate, or conservative, whether they had strong qualities of leadership, and who had more honesty and integrity. The poll also posed a series of questions about the media including whether the names of people accused of crimes and those who were victims of crimes should be made public, whether the media had gone too far in disclosing details of presidential candidates' private lives, and whether the media had been harder on Bush and Clinton than on the other presidential candidates. Respondents were also asked whether the government was in such bad shape that it needed a strong leader who would take charge, whether the federal government should run like a business with one person in charge, and whether it was better for people to take the law into their own hands rather than wait for the government to act. Those surveyed were asked if there was a connection between what a politician says and what he or she does after being elected, whether who was elected made any difference, whether the government would work better if all new people were elected, and whether a politician's methods mattered as long as he or she managed to get the right thing done. Additional questions dealt with the state of the economy, drug testing in the workplace, the respondent's financial situation, organized labor, the national economy, big business, the First Lady's working outside the White House, television news coverage of the presidential campaign, the most important quality the next president should have, call-in polls and programs on radio and television, and the amount of attention the government and Congress pay to what people think. Background information on respondents includes involvement in a labor union, sex, race, age, education, religious preference, family income, political orientation, and party preference.

Curated

CBS News/New York Times New York City Survey Monthly Poll #5, October 2010 (ICPSR 33184)

Released/updated on: 2012-03-19

Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York (state)

This poll, fielded October 26-28, 2010, is a part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicits public opinion on a range of political and social issues. Respondents were asked whether they approved of the way Michael Bloomberg was handling his job as mayor, whether they thought New York City was safer from crime than it was a year ago, and how they would rate the job the police in New York City were doing. Respondents were also asked whether they or anyone in their family had been the victim of a crime in New York City in the past year or any time since 2002, whether they reported this crime or not, and whether the police accepted the report or they were discouraged by the police from filing a report. Demographic information includes sex, age, race, marital status, education level, household income, type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural), political party affiliation, political philosophy, and voter registration status.

Curated

CBS News/New York Times New York State Survey Monthly Poll #3, October 2010 (ICPSR 33182)

Released/updated on: 2012-03-15

Geographic coverage: United States, Massachusetts, New York (state), New Jersey, Pennsylvania

This poll, fielded October 10-15, 2010, is a part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicits public opinion on a range of political and social issues. Respondents were asked how much attention they paid to the 2010 election campaigns in New York, how likely it was that they would vote in the 2010 election in November, whether they had a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Andrew Cuomo, Carl Paladino, Charles Schumer, Jay Townsend, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Joe DioGuardi, who they would vote for in the 2010 gubernatorial and Senate elections, and whether they would vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate in the 2010 House of Representatives election. Respondents were queried on whether they approved of the way Barack Obama was handling his job as president, David Paterson as governor, Schumer and Gillibrand as senators, Cuomo as State Attorney General, and Michael Bloomberg as mayor of New York City. Respondents were also asked whether they approved of the way the New York state Legislature in Albany was handling its job, how they would rate the condition of the New York state economy, what they were most angry about, whether they thought police should have the power to request proof of citizenship in order to deal with the problem of illegal immigration, what their view was on abortion and same-sex marriage, how common they thought corruption was in the New York state government, whether they thought the Democratic party has too much power in the state government and whether they had a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the Tea Party movement. Information was collected on how serious of a problem respondents thought the current budget of New York state was, who they thought was mostly to blame for the current budget problems, what steps they thought should be taken to balance the budget, what state funded services they thought should be cut, and whether they thought it would be a good idea to layoff state employees. Respondents were asked if Cuomo or Paladino were elected governor whether they thought the economy would get better or worse, whether they thought that they would raise taxes or lower taxes, whether they thought they have the right kind of experience to be an effective governor, whether they thought they had the right temperament and personality to be a good governor, whether they thought of them as Albany insiders, and how they thought the media was treating them. Additionally respondents were asked whether they thought that New York City was more safe from crime than it was a year ago, how they would rate the job the police in New York City were doing, whether they or any member of their immediate family had been the victim of a crime in New York City, how concerned they were that they or someone in their household might lose their job, whether their family's financial situation was better or worse than it was four years ago, and whether they supported the Tea Party movement. Demographic information includes sex, age, race, marital status, education level, household income, social class, employment status, religious preference, type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural), political party affiliation, political philosophy, and voter registration status.

Curated

Crime Commission Rates Among Incarcerated Felons in Nebraska, 1986-1990 (ICPSR 9916)

Released/updated on: 1994-02-17

Geographic coverage: United States, Nebraska

Time period: 1986-01-01--1990-01-01

These data focus on rates of criminal offending obtained through the use of self-report surveys. Specifically, the study investigates whether two different types of self-report surveys produce different estimates of lambda, an individual's frequency of criminal offending. The surveys, which were administered during personal interviews with inmates in Nebraska prisons, differed in how respondents were asked about their frequency of criminal offending. The more detailed survey asked respondents to indicate their offenses on a month-by-month basis for the reporting period. The less detailed survey only asked respondents to indicate their offending for the entire reporting period. These data also provide information on the relationship between race and offending frequencies, the rates of offending over time and by crime category, and the individual's subjective probability of punishment and offending frequency. The specific crimes targeted in this collection include burglary, business robbery, personal robbery, assault, theft, forgery, fraud, drug dealing, and rape. All respondents were asked questions on criminal history, substance abuse, attitudes about crime and the judicial system, predictions of future criminal behavior, and demographic information, including age, race, education, and marital status.

Curated

Criminal Victimization in Contemporary Urban China: A Multi-Level Analysis of Survey Data for the City of Tianjin, 2004 (ICPSR 21740)

Released/updated on: 2016-07-05

Geographic coverage: China (Peoples Republic), Global, Tianjin

The Chinese Criminal Victimization Survey collected information regarding demographic, lifestyle, and neighborhood characteristics, and criminal victimization from respondents in six traditional districts located in the central urban area of Tianjin: Heping, Nankai, Hongxiao, Hexi, Hebei, and Hedong. The primary objective of the survey was to study the relationship between lifestyles, neighborhood characteristics, and personal safety among residents of Tianjin, so that improvements can be made in policy-making for public safety and the protection of residents. First, the survey collected demographic information including sex/gender, year of birth, highest completed level of education, employment status, marital status, owner of household, residential status, distance between residence and police station, length of time at current address, household composition, average household income, physical strength, and self-defense capability. The next major focus, lifestyle characteristics, asked respondents about their enrollment in schools, employment, grocery shopping, dining out, and the frequency, mode of travel, and time spent traveling to these activities. Respondents were also asked about alcohol consumption, frequency of travel outside of Tianjin for leisure or work, how often they wore expensive jewelry, safety precautions when leaving home, security at their residence, and the durable goods they owned. The next topic, neighborhood characteristics, queried respondents about their relationship between themselves and their neighbors and the level of trust among these individuals, their involvement in the community and cooperation of neighbors during disputes or emergencies, the frequency of incidents in the last 6 months (i.e. burglaries and fights), and the respondents' perception of safety when walking alone at night. Questions were also asked whether a mediation committee existed and if so, how active it was. For the final section, the survey collected information on the following crimes: theft of bicycles, burglary, swindling, robbery (both armed and unarmed), personal theft, assaults, and sexual offenses (interviewing women only). Respondents were asked whether any incident had occurred to them in the last five years prior to the survey, when and where the most recent incident occurred, whether they reported it to the police, the cost of damages or how much was stolen, the number of offenders involved, whether the offenders had a weapon, and if so, what type and whether they were used, and the respondents' relationships to the offenders.

Curated

Domestic Violence Experience in Omaha, Nebraska, 1986-1987 (ICPSR 9481)

Released/updated on: 2006-07-24

Geographic coverage: Omaha, United States, Nebraska

Time period: 1986-01-01--1987-01-01

The purpose of this data collection was to corroborate the findings of SPECIFIC DETERRENT EFFECTS OF ARREST FOR DOMESTIC ASSAULT: MINNEAPOLIS, 1981-1982 (ICPSR 8250) that arrest is an effective deterrent against continued domestic assaults. The data addressed the following questions: (1) To what extent does arrest decrease the likelihood of continued violence, as assessed by the victim? (2) To what extent does arrest decrease the likelihood of continued complaints of crime, as assessed by police records? (3) What are the differences in arrest recidivism between cases that involved arrest versus cases that involved mediation, separation, warrant issued, or no warrant issued? Domestic violence cases in three sectors of Omaha, Nebraska, meeting established eligibility criteria, were assigned to one of five experimental treatments: mediation, separation, arrest, warrant issued, or no warrant issued. Data for victim reports were collected from three interviews with the victims conducted one week, six months, and 12 months after the domestic violence incident. Arrest, charge, and complaint data were collected on the suspects at six- and twelve-month intervals following the original domestic violence incident. The investigators used arrest recidivism, continued complaints of crime, and victim reports of repeated violence (fear of injury, pushing/hitting, and physical injury) as outcome measures to assess the extent to which treatments prevented subsequent conflicts. Other variables include victim's level of fear, self-esteem, locus of control, and welfare dependency, changes in the relationship between suspect and victim, extent of the victim's injury, and extent of drug use by the victim and the suspect. Demographic variables include race, age, sex, income, occupational status, and marital status.

Curated

Effectiveness of a Joint Police and Social Services Response to Elder Abuse in Manhattan [New York City], New York, 1996-1997 (ICPSR 3130)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)

Time period: 1996-01-01--1997-01-01

This project consisted of an evaluation of an elder abuse program run by the New York Police Department and Victim Services Research. The focus of the study was domestic elder abuse, which generally refers to any of several forms of maltreatment, physical abuse, sexual abuse, psychological abuse, neglect, and/or financial exploitation of an older person. The program, conducted in New York City public housing, had two complementary parts. First, public housing projects in Manhattan were assigned to one of two levels of public education (i.e., to receive or not to receive educational materials about elder abuse). Once the public education treatment had been implemented, 403 older adult residents of the housing projects who reported elder abuse to the police during the next ten months were assigned to one of two levels of follow-up to the initial police response (i.e., to receive or not to receive a home visit) as the second part of the project. The home visit intervention consisted of a strong law enforcement response designed to prevent repeat incidents of elder abuse. A team from the Domestic Violence Intervention and Education Program (DVIEP), consisting of a police officer and a social worker, followed up on domestic violence complaints with a home visit within a few days of the initial patrol response. Victims were interviewed about new victimizations following the intervention on three occasions: six weeks after the trigger incident, six months after the trigger incident, and twelve months after the trigger incident. Interviews at the three time points were identical except for the omission of background information on the second and third interviews. Demographic data collected during the first interview included age, gender, ethnicity, education, employment, income, legal relationship with abuser, living situation, number of people in the household, and health. For each time point, data provide measures of physical, psychological, and financial abuse, knowledge of elder abuse, knowledge and use of social services, satisfaction with the police, assessment of service delivery, and self-esteem and well-being. The DVIEP databases maintained on households at each of the three participating Police Service Areas (PSAs) were searched to identify new police reports of elder abuse for households in the sample within 12 months following the trigger incident. Variables from the DVIEP databases include age, race, ethnicity, and sex of the victim and the perpetrator, relationship of perpetrator to victim, type of abuse reported, charge, whether an arrest was made, if an order of protection had been obtained, if the order of protection was violated, use of weapons, if the victim had been injured, and if the victim was taken to the hospital. Several time lapse variables between different time points are also provided.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

The Effect of Prior Police Contact on Victimization Reporting: Results From the Police-Public Contact and National Crime Victimization Surveys, United States, 2002-2011 (ICPSR 36370)

Released/updated on: 2021-11-30

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2002-01-01--2011-01-01

This study examines whether or not prior experiences with the police, both directly and indirectly through the experiences of others, can influence one's decision to report a crime. Data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) was linked with the Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) to construct a dataset of the police-related experiences of crime victims and non-victims. Variables include information on the prevalence, frequency, and the nature of respondents' encounters with the police in the prior year, as well as respondents' personal and household victimization experiences that occurred after the administration of the PPCS, including whether the crime was reported to the police. Demographic variables include age, race, gender, education, and socioeconomic status.

The ICPSR's holdings for both the NCVS and the PPCS are available in the NCVS series.

Curated

Evaluating Gunshot Detection Technology (GDT) to Aid in the Reduction of Firearms Violence, United States, 2006-2016 (ICPSR 37448)

Released/updated on: 2023-05-30

Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, United States, Colorado, Denver, California, Wisconsin

Time period: 2008-01-01--2016-04-30, 2008-01-01--2016-12-31, 2006-01-01--2015-12-31, 2015-01-08--2016-05-28, 2011-02-25--2016-05-31, 2009-06-01--2015-10-31, 2015-01-08--2016-06-15, 2011-02-25--2016-12-31, 2009-06-01--2015-10-31

In 2015, the National Institute of Justice funded the Urban Institute's Evaluation of Gunshot Detection Technology to Aid in the Reduction of Firearms Violence. This project was designed to investigate the degree to which gunshot detection technology (GDT) aids in the response, investigation, and prevention of firearms violence and related crimes. The goal of this study was to conduct a rigorous process and impact evaluation of GDT to inform policing researchers and practitioners about the impact GDT may have. To achieve this goal, the research team implemented a mixed-methods research design with police departments in Denver, Colorado; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Richmond, California.

Quantitative data collection included administrative data on calls for service (CFS), crime, and GDT alerts, as well as comprehensive case file reviews of 174 crimes involving a firearm. Quantitative analyses examined the impact of GDT by (1) comparing counts of gunshot notifications for GDT alerts to shooting-related CFS, (2) comparing response times of GDT alerts to shooting-related CFS, (3) examining the impact GDT has had on CFS and crimes, and (4) conducting a cost-benefit analysis of the GDT. Qualitative data collection included 46 interviews with criminal justice stakeholders to learn implementation processes and challenges associated with its GDT, and 6 focus groups with 49 community members to learn how residents feel about policing efforts to reduce firearm violence and its use of GDT.

Three types of files were uploaded for each site. They include quantitative data on crimes and CFS (DS1-DS3), gunshot notifications (DS4-DS6), and response times (DS7-DS9). The qualitative data are not currently available as part of this collection.

Curated

Evaluating Network Sampling in Victimization Surveys in Peoria, Illinois, 1986 (ICPSR 9968)

Released/updated on: 1993-05-13

Geographic coverage: United States, Illinois, Peoria

Time period: 1986-02-01--1986-09-01

This data collection evaluates the advantages of network sampling over traditional methods in conducting crime and victimization surveys. Network sampling links population households in specified ways, for reporting purposes, in order to increase the likelihood of locating households with particular characteristics. The investigators conducted a reverse record check survey of victims and a network survey with a random sample of the victims' relatives and close friends. The researchers compared the extent to which crime victims reported their victimization experiences in a general crime and victimization interview and the extent to which a randomly selected relative or close friend of each victim reported the same victimization in the same type of interview. In addition, they examined whether significant reporting differences were evident by type of crime and by various demographic variables.

Curated

Evaluation of a Centralized Response to Domestic Violence by the San Diego County Sheriff's Department Domestic Violence Unit, 1998-1999 (ICPSR 3488)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: San Diego, United States, California

Time period: 1998-01-01--1999-01-01

This study examined the implementation of a specialized domestic violence unit within the San Diego County Sheriff's Department to determine whether the creation of the new unit would lead to increased and improved reporting, and more filings for prosecution. In order to evaluate the implementation of the specialized domestic violence unit, the researchers conducted the following tasks: (1) They surveyed field deputies to assess their level of knowledge about domestic violence laws and adherence to the countywide domestic violence protocol. (2) They studied a sample from the case tracking system that reported cases of domestic violence handled by the domestic violence unit to determine changes in procedures compared to an earlier case tracking study with no specialized unit. (3) They interviewed victims of domestic violence by phone to explore the responsiveness of the field deputies and the unit detectives to the needs of the victims. Part 1 (Deputy Survey Data) contains data on unit detectives' knowledge about the laws concerning domestic violence. Information includes whether or not the person considered the primary aggressor was the person who committed the first act of aggression, if a law enforcement officer could decide whether or not to complete a domestic violence supplemental report, whether an arrest should be made if there was reasonable cause to believe that a misdemeanor offense had been committed, and whether the decision to prosecute a suspect lay within the discretion of the district or city attorney. Demographic variables include deputy's years of education and law enforcement experience. Part 2 (Case Tracking Data) includes demographic variables such as race and sex of the victim and the suspect, and the relationship between the victim and the suspect. Other information was collected on whether the victim and the suspect used alcohol and drugs prior to or during the incident, if the victim was pregnant, if children were present during the incident, highest charge on the incident report, if the reporting call was made at the same place the incident occurred, suspect actions described on the report, if a gun, knife, physical force, or verbal abuse was used in the incident, if the victim or the suspect was injured, and if medical treatment was provided to the victim. Data were also gathered on whether the suspect was arrested or booked, how the investigating officer decided whether to request that the prosecutor file charges, type of evidence collected, if a victim or witness statement was collected, if the victim had a restraining order, prior history of domestic violence, if the victim was provided with information on domestic violence law, hotline, shelter, transportation, and medical treatment, highest arrest charge, number of arrests for any drug charges, weapon charges, domestic violence charges, or other charges, case disposition, number of convictions for the charges, and number of prior arrests and convictions. Part 3 (Victim Survey Data) includes demographic variables such as victim's gender and race. Other variables include how much time the deputy spent at the scene when s/he responded to the call, number of deputies the victim interacted with at the scene, number of deputies at the scene that were male or female, if the victim used any of the information the deputy provided, if the victim used referral information for counseling, legal, shelter, and other services, how helpful the victim found the information, and the victim's rating of the performance of the deputy.

Curated

Evaluation of Community Policing Initiatives in Jefferson County, West Virginia, 1996-1997 (ICPSR 2800)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: West Virginia, United States

This data collection was designed to evaluate the implementation of community policing initiatives for three police departments in Jefferson County, West Virginia: the Ranson Town Police Department, the West Virginia State Police (Jefferson County Detachment), and the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department. The evaluation was undertaken by the Free Our Citizens of Unhealthy Substances Coalition (FOCUS), a county-based group of citizens who represented all segments of the community, including businesses, churches, local law enforcement agencies, and local governments. The aim was to find answers to the following questions: (1) Can community policing have any detectable and measurable impact in a predominantly rural setting? (2) Did the police department do what they said they would do in their funding application? (3) If they were successful, what factors supported their efforts and were key to their success? and (4) If they were not successful, what problems prevented their success? The coalition conducted citizen surveys to evaluate how much of an impact community policing initiatives had in their county. In January 1996, research assistants conducted a baseline survey of 300 households in the county. Survey responses were intended to gauge residents' fear of crime and to assess how well the police were performing their duties. After one year, the coalition repeated its survey of public attitudes, and research assistants interviewed another 300 households. The research assumption was that any change in fear of crime or assessment of police performance could reasonably be attributed to these new community policing inventions. Crime reporting variables from the survey included which crime most concerned the respondent, if the respondent would report a crime he or she observed, and whether the respondent would testify about the crime in court. Variables pertaining to level of concern for specific crimes include how concerned respondents were that someone would rob or attack them, break into or vandalize their home, or try to sexually attack them/someone they cared about. Community involvement variables covered participation in community groups or activities, neighborhood associations, church, or informal social activities. Police/citizen interaction variables focused on the number of times respondents had called to report a problem to the police in the last two years, how satisfied they were with how the police handled the problem, the extent to which this police department needed improvement, whether children trusted law enforcement officers, whether police needed to respond more quickly to calls, whether the police needed improved relations with the community, and in the past year whether local police performance had improved/gotten worse. Specific crime information variables include whether the crime occurred in the respondent's neighborhood, whether he/she was the victim, if crime was serious in the respondent's neighborhood versus elsewhere, whether the respondent had considered moving as a result of crime in the neighborhood, and how personal safety had changed in the respondent's neighborhood. Variables relating to community policing include whether the respondent had heard the term "community policing" in the past year, from what source, and what community policing activities the respondent was aware of. Demographic variables include job self-classification, racial/ethnic identity, length of residency, age, gender, martial status, educational status, and respondent's town of residence.

Curated

Evaluation of the Agriculture Crime Technology Information and Operation Network (ACTION) in Nine Counties in California, 2004-2005 (ICPSR 4686)

Released/updated on: 2009-05-01

Geographic coverage: United States, California

Time period: 2004-01-01--2005-01-01

The Urban Institute and Florida State University multidisciplinary research team employed a multimethod approach to evaluate the Agricultural Crime, Technology, Information, and Operations Network (ACTION) project. The goal of the research was to provide policymakers, practitioners, program developers, and funders with empirically-based information about whether ACTION works. Two paper-and-pencil, self-administered surveys -- one in fall 2004 and the second in fall 2005 -- were sent to samples of farmers in the nine ACTION counties in California. The researchers identified farms using lists provided by Agricultural Commissioners in each county. The survey instruments asked farmers about experiences with agricultural crime victimization during the 12 months prior to the survey. It also asked questions about characteristics of their farm operations and the activities that they take to prevent agricultural crime. Advance notice of the study was given to farmers through the use of postcards, then surveys were sent to farmers in three waves at one-month intervals, with the second and third waves targeting nonrespondents. The Fall 2004 Agricultural Crime Survey (Part 1) contains data on 823 respondents (farms) and the Fall 2005 Agricultural Crime Survey (Part 2) contains data on 818 respondents (farms).

Curated

Partially restricted

Evaluation of the Target Corporation's Safe City Initiative in Chula Vista, California, and Cincinnati, Ohio, 2004-2008 (ICPSR 28044)

Released/updated on: 2010-09-29

Geographic coverage: United States, Texas, Chula Vista, Ohio, Cincinnati, California, New York (state), Buffalo, Houston

Time period: 2004-01-01--2008-11-01, 2004-01-01--2008-11-01, 2007-03-01--2008-03-01

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the implementation of the Safe City crime prevention model that was implemented in designated retail areas in jurisdictions across the United States. The model involved frequent meetings and information-sharing among the police, Target, and neighboring retailers, along with the implementation of enhanced technology. The first step in the Safe City evaluation involved selecting evaluation sites. The final sites selected were Chula Vista, California, and Cincinnati, Ohio. Next, for each of the two sites, researchers selected a site that had a potential for crime displacement caused by the intervention area, and a matched comparison area in another jurisdiction that would likely have been selected as a Safe City site. For Chula Vista, the displacement area was 2 miles east of the intervention area and the comparison area was in Houston, Texas. For Cincinnati, the displacement area was 1.5 miles north of the intervention area and the comparison area was in Buffalo, New York. In Chula Vista, the Safe City intervention activities were focused on gaining a better understanding of the nature and underlying causes of the crime and disorder problems occurring in the designated Safe City site, and strengthening pre-existing partnerships between law enforcement and businesses affected by these problems. In Cincinnati, the Safe City intervention activities centered on increasing business and citizen awareness, communication, and involvement in crime control and prevention activities. The research team collected pre- and post-intervention crime data from local police departments (Part 1) to measure the impact of the Safe City initiatives in Chula Vista and Cincinnati. The 981 records in Part 1 contain monthly crime counts from January 2004 to November 2008 for various types of crime in the retail areas that received the intervention in Chula Vista and Cincinnati, and their corresponding displacement zones and matched comparison areas. Using the monthly crime counts contained in the Safe City Monthly Crime Data (Part 1) and estimations of the total cost of crime to society for various offenses from prior research, the research team calculated the total cost of crimes reported during the month/year for each crime type that was readily available (Part 2). The 400 records in the Safe City Monthly Cost Benefit Analysis Data (Part 2) contain monthly crime cost estimates from January 2004 to November 2008 for assaults, burglaries, larcenies, and robberies in the retail areas that received the intervention in Chula Vista and Cincinnati, and their corresponding displacement zones and matched comparison areas. The research team also received a total of 192 completed baseline and follow-up surveys with businesses in Chula Vista and Cincinnati in 2007 and 2008 (Part 3). The surveys collected data on merchants' perceptions of crime and safety in and around businesses located in the Safe City areas. The Safe City Monthly Crime Data (Part 1) contain seven variables including the number of crimes in the target area, the month and year the crime was committed, the number of crimes in the displacement area, the number of crimes in a comparable area in a comparable city, the city, and the crime type. The Safe City Monthly Cost Benefit Analysis Data (Part 2) contain seven variables including the cost of the specified type of crime occurring in the target area, the month and year the cost was incurred, the cost of the specified type of crime in the displacement area, the cost of the specified type of crime in a matched comparison area, the city, and the crime type. The Safe City Business Survey Data (Part 3) contain 132 variables relating to perceptions of safety, contact with local police, experience and reporting of crime, impact of crime, crime prevention, community connections, and business/employee information.

Curated

Restricted

Examining Criminal Justice Responses to and Help-Seeking Patterns of Sexual Violence Survivors with Disabilities, United States, 2008-2013 (ICPSR 36431)

Released/updated on: 2018-08-14

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2008-01-01--2013-01-01

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they are 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 accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator if further information is needed.

This mixed methods study examined the criminal justice outcomes and help-seeking experiences of sexual assault survivors with disabilities. The specific objectives of this study were to:

Describe criminal justice reporting of sexual assault against persons with disabilities (e.g., number and source of reports, characteristics or survivors and perpetrators, case characteristics, and case outcomes)
Assess how cases of sexual assault survivors with disabilities proceeded through the criminal court system.
Describe help-seeking experiences of sexual assault survivors with disabilities from formal and informal sources, including influences on how and where they seek help, their experiences in reporting, barriers to reporting, and outcome of this reporting, drawn from interviews with community based survivors and service providers.

The study contains one data file called 'Data_Sexual Violence Survivors with Disabilities.sav'. This file has 26 variables and 417 cases.

Curated

Restricted

Expanding Use of the Social Reactions Questionnaire among Diverse Women, Denver, Colorado, 2013-2016 (ICPSR 36776)

Released/updated on: 2018-09-19

Geographic coverage: United States, Colorado, Denver

Time period: 2013-01-01--2016-01-01

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.

The Social Reactions Questionnaire (SRQ) is a widely used instrument designed to measure perceptions of social reactions. Studies using the SRQ have generally asked women to report on social reactions from "other persons told about the assault," without specifying which persons. The purpose of this study was to test a modified version of the SRQ that asked women to report separately on social reactions from criminal justice personnel, community-based providers, and informal supports. The researchers sought to examine changes in social reactions longitudinally as well as the impact of social reactions on criminal justice engagement and post-traumatic distress among diverse women following a recent sexual assault. The study included testing hypotheses about the inter-relationships among social reactions, victim well-being (e.g., psychological distress), and criminal justice variables (e.g., victim engagement with prosecution). Addressing the dearth of longitudinal research on social reactions, this study examined causal links among variables. In particular, researchers tested hypotheses about changes in social reactions over time in relation to criminal justice cases and victims' post-traumatic reactions.

The data included as part of this collection includes one SPSS data file (2_1-Data_Quantiative-Variables-Updated-20180611.sav) with 3,310 variables for 228 cases. Demographic variables included: respondent's age, race, ethnicity, country of origin, sexual orientation, marital status, education level, employment status, income source, economic level, religion, household characteristics, and group identity. The data also contain transcripts of qualitative interviews and one SPSS qualitative coding dataset (file7-2_4_Data_Open_ended_Codes_from_Transcripts.sav) with 19 variables and 225 cases, which are not included in this fast track release.

Curated

Partially restricted

Simple Crosstabs

Exploring Alternative Data Sources for the Study of Assault in Miami, Florida, St. Louis, Missouri, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1994 -1997 (ICPSR 4358)

Released/updated on: 2013-06-10

Geographic coverage: United States, Missouri, Florida, St. Louis, Pennsylvania, Miami, Pittsburgh

Time period: 1994-01-01--1997-01-01

The study involved the collection of data on serious assaults that occured in three cities: Miami, Florida (1996-1997), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (1994-1996), and St. Louis, Missouri (1995-1996). The data were extracted from police offense reports, and included detailed information about the incidents (Part 1) as well as information about the victims, suspects, and witnesses for each incident (Parts 2-9).

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Fatal and Non-Fatal Intimate Partner and Family Violence Against Older Women: An Exploration of Age and Police Response to Inform Research, Policy, and Practice, United States, 2011-2019 (ICPSR 39463)

Released/updated on: 2026-01-28

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2011-01-01--2019-01-01

This research project examined police response to fatal and non-fatal intimate partner violence (IPV) and family violence (FV) against older women from existing data sources, including the Uniform Crime Reporting Program's National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS). The goals of this project were to explore how existing data sources could inform a better understanding of IPV and FV against older women.

This collection includes variables derived from the publicly available NCVS (Dataset 1) and NIBRS (Datasets 2 and 3) data. The NVDRS data is only available with restricted access through the CDC and is not available with ICPSR.

Curated

Gun Density, Gun Type, and the Dallas Homicide Rate, 1980-1992 (ICPSR 3145)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, Texas, Dallas

Time period: 1980-01-01--1992-01-01

This study examined the relationships among trends in deadly gun violence, overall gun availability, and the availability of more lethal types of guns. Using firearms confiscated by the Dallas, Texas, police department from 1980 to 1992 as indicators of the types of guns circulating among criminal/high-risk groups, the project examined changes over time in Dallas' street gun arsenal and assessed the impact these changes had upon gun violence mortality in Dallas. The focus of the project was on the characteristics of the guns rather than their numbers. All confiscated firearms were analyzed and characterized according to basic weapon type and caliber groupings. Dates of confiscation were missing from the majority of the pre-1988 records, but by aggregating the gun data into bimonthly (Part 1) and quarterly (Part 2) time series databases, it was possible to estimate the bimonthly and quarterly periods of confiscation for most of the 1980-1992 records. Records that could not be assigned to bimonthly or quarterly periods were dropped. Confiscated firearms were grouped into basic categories based on stopping power (i.e., wounding potential), rate of fire, and ammunition capacity. The following measures were created for each bimonthly and quarterly period: (1) weapons with high stopping power (large guns), (2) semiautomatic weaponry (semis), (3) weapons combining high stopping power and a semiautomatic firing mechanism (large semis), (4) handguns with high stopping power (large handguns), (5) semiautomatic handguns (semi handguns), and (6) handguns combining high stopping power and semiautomatic firing (large semi handguns). Several violence measures were obtained from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Uniform Crime Reports Supplemental Homicide Reports and Return A (or Offenses Known and Clearances by Arrest) data files (see UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM DATA [UNITED STATES]: 1975-1997 [ICPSR 9028]). These measures were also aggregated at bimonthly and quarterly levels. Data from the Dallas Police Department master gun property file include total handguns, total semiautomatic handguns, total large-caliber handguns, total large-caliber semiautomatic handguns, total shotguns, total semiautomatic shotguns, total rifles, total semiautomatic rifles, and total counts and total semiautomatic counts for various calibers of handguns, shotguns, and rifles. Data that were aggregated using the FBI data include total homicides, gun homicides, total robberies, gun robberies, and gun aggravated assaults. The data file also includes the year and the bimonthly or quarterly period counter.

Curated

Hurricane Andrew: Its Impact on Law and Social Control [Florida, 1992] (ICPSR 22629)

Released/updated on: 2009-06-19

Geographic coverage: United States, Florida, Miami

This data collection examines the degree of concensus/dissensus concerning ideal and actual priorities of policing during the breakdown of formal social control directly following Hurricane Andrew in Miami, Florida. Both citizens of the damaged neighborhoods and the attending police were nonrandomly surveyed using semistructured interviews. A small sample of students were also interviewed.

Residents were asked about what happened to their neighborhood, their home, themselves, and their family before, during, and immediately after the hurricane, and in the time since the hurricane. Questions focused on precautions taken before the hurricane to guard against the storm's impact, the effects of the storm on families, the occurrence of crime and violence following the hurricane, and the actions taken by the police and military to maintain order after the storm.

Police were asked about disaster training, termination of department services during the storm, crime frequency in the aftermath of the storm, and the effectiveness of their police departments in dealing with crime immediately after the hurricane. Police were also asked about the origin of people (e.g., local vs. nonlocal) arrested for "hurricane related" crimes, such as looting.

Both citizens and police were asked to make two ratings of various police activities: (1) how much time they thought police actually spent on that activity, and (2) what priority should have been given to that activity. Respondents were then asked to reconstruct these considerations for the first day, first week (days 2-7), second and third weeks, and first month after the hurricane, as well as at the time of the survey (which was at least two months after the hurricane).

Students were asked questions concerning their family and the family's neighborhood, preparations for the hurricane, victimization experiences, formal/informal social controls prior to and after the hurricane, and the disruption/re-establishment of routines in family and neighborhood life after the event.

Curated

Immigrant Populations as Victims in New York City and Philadelphia, 1994 (ICPSR 6793)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

The purpose of this study was to examine interrelated issues surrounding the use of the criminal justice system by immigrant victims and to identify ways to improve the criminal justice response to immigrants' needs and problems. Two cities, New York City and Philadelphia, were selected for intensive investigation of victimization of immigrants. In each of these cities, three immigrant communities in a neighborhood were chosen for participation. In New York's Jackson Heights area, Colombians, Dominicans, and Indians were the ethnic groups studied. In Philadelphia's Logan section, Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Koreans were surveyed. In all, 87 Jackson Heights victims were interviewed and 26 Philadelphia victims were interviewed. The victim survey questions addressed can be broadly divided into two categories: issues pertaining to crime reporting and involvement with the court system by immigrant victims. Variables include type of crime, respondent's role in the incident, relationship to the perpetrator, whether the incident was reported to police, and who reported the incident. Respondents were also asked whether they were asked to go to court, whether they understood what the people in court said to them, whether they understood what was happening in their case, and, if victimized again, whether they would report the incident to the police.

Curated

Impact Evaluation of Youth Crime Watch Programs in Three Florida School Districts, 1997-2007 (ICPSR 26601)

Released/updated on: 2010-01-29

Geographic coverage: United States, Florida

Time period: 1997-01-01--2007-01-01

The purpose of this study was to assess both the school-level effects and the participant-level effects of Youth Crime Watch (YCW) programs. Abt Associates conducted a four-year impact evaluation of Youth Crime Watch (YCW) programs in three Florida school districts (Broward, Hillsborough, and Pinellas Counties). School-based YCW programs implement one or more of a variety of crime prevention activities, including youth patrol, in which YCW participants patrol their school campus and report misconduct and crime. The evaluation collected both School-Level Data (Part 1) and Student-Level Data (Part 2). The School-Level Data (Part 1) contain 9 years of data on 172 schools in the Broward, Hillsborough, and Pinellas school districts, beginning in the 1997-1998 school year and continuing through the 2005-2006 school year. A total of 103 middle schools and 69 high schools were included, yielding a total of 1,548 observations. These data provide panel data on reported incidents of crime and violence, major disciplinary actions, and school climate data across schools and over time. The Student-Level Data (Part 2) were collected between 2004 and 2007 and are comprised of two major components: (1) self-reported youth attitude and school activities survey data that were administered to a sample of students in middle schools in the Broward, Hillsborough, and Pinellas School Districts as part of a participant impact analysis, and (2) self-reported youth attitude and school activities survey data that were administered to a sample of YCW continuing middle school students and YCW high school students in the same three school districts as part of a process analysis. For Part 2, a total of 3,386 completed surveys were collected by the project staff including 1,319 "new YCW" student surveys, 1,581 "non-YCW" student surveys, and 486 "Pro" or "Process" student surveys. The 138 variables in the School-Level Data (Part 1) include Youth Crime Watch (YCW) program data, measures of crime and the level of school safety in a school, and other school characteristics. The 99 variables in the Student-Level Data (Part 2) include two groups of questions for assessing participant impact: (1) how the respondents felt about themselves, and (2) whether the respondent would report certain types of problems or crimes that they observed at the school. Part 2 also includes administrative variables and demographic/background information. Other variables in Part 2 pertain to the respondent's involvement in school-based extracurricular activities, involvement in community activities, attitudes toward school, attitudes about home environment, future education plans, attitudes toward the YCW advisor, attitudes about effects of YCW, participation in YCW, reasons for joining YCW, and reasons for remaining in YCW.

Curated

Impact of Legal Advocacy on Intimate Partner Homicide in the United States, 1976-1997 (ICPSR 25621)

Released/updated on: 2009-07-10

Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, Oklahoma City, Detroit, Indiana, Tucson, Albuquerque, Fort Worth, Cincinnati, Austin, Oakland, San Jose, San Diego, Columbus (Ohio), Memphis, Jacksonville, Arizona, Buffalo, Boston, Pittsburgh, Sacramento, Seattle, El Paso, Nashville, California, Florida, Pennsylvania, Tulsa, Fresno, Illinois, Texas, Portland (Oregon), Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Indianapolis, Oregon, Virginia Beach, United States, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Cleveland, Washington, Nebraska, Omaha, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Massachusetts, Colorado, Honolulu, Missouri, New Orleans, Phoenix, Denver, Dallas, St. Louis, Wisconsin, District of Columbia, San Antonio, Chicago, Hawaii, Minnesota, Kansas City (Missouri), New York (state), Michigan, Miami, San Francisco, Baltimore, New Mexico, Long Beach, Louisiana, Ohio, Los Angeles, Toledo, Philadelphia, Houston

Time period: 1976-01-01--1996-01-01, 1976-01-01--1997-01-01

This study examined the impacts of jurisdictions' domestic violence policies on violent behavior of family members and intimate partners, on the likelihood that the police discovered an incident, and on the likelihood that the police made an arrest. The research combined two datasets. Part 1 contains information on police, prosecution policies, and local victim services. Informants within the local agencies of the 50 largest cities in the United States were contacted and asked to complete a survey inventorying policies and activities by type and year of implementation. Data from completed surveys covered 48 cities from 1976 to 1996. Part 2 contains data on domestic violence laws. Data on state statutes from 1976 to 1997 that related to protection orders were collected by a legal expert for all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Curated

Information Sharing and the Role of Sex Offender Registration and Notification, United States, 2009-2017 (ICPSR 37483)

Released/updated on: 2021-08-16

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2009-01-01--2017-01-01

This study was conducted to evaluate and better improve inter-jurisdictional consistency and coordination of SORN (sex offender registration and notification) systems operating within the United States under SORNA (the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act). The study examined the progress that has been made toward SORNA's goals as envisioned in 2006, with a particular emphasis on changes in information sharing over that period. The study utilized a mixed-method approach, including nationwide analyses of official data and a series of in-depth state case studies featuring interviews with 152 federal, state, and local personnel involved in various aspects of SORN operations and policy development across 10 states. Specific areas of focus included: 1) the nature, extent, and dynamics of state implementation of SORNA requirements; 2) the scope and evolution of information-sharing practices within the states, including both areas of success and challenge; and 3) the impacts of federal initiatives, including the expanded role of the US Marshal Service and information technology initiatives, on the achievement of SORNA's goals.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Law Enforcement Agency Identifiers Crosswalk, United States, 2012 (ICPSR 35158)

Released/updated on: 2018-09-18

Geographic coverage: United States

Criminal justice research may require merging disparate data sources that have no common match keys. The Law Enforcement Agency Identifiers Crosswalk (LEAIC) file facilitates linking reported crime data with socio-economic data. It does this by having a record for each law enforcement agency, law enforcement reporting entity, and access identifier for the National Crime Information Center (NCIC). Essentially, if an entity (law enforcement agency or section of a law enforcement agency) is capable of reporting crime information, it is included in the file. The LEAIC records contain common match keys for merging reported crime data and Census Bureau data. These linkage variables include the Originating Agency Identifier (ORI) code, Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) state, county and place codes, and Governments Integrated Directory government identifier codes.

Curated

Partially restricted

Simple Crosstabs

Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Under Public Law 280, 2003-2005 [United States] (ICPSR 34557)

Released/updated on: 2013-03-27

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2003-01-01--2005-01-01

In 1953, Congress enacted Public Law 280, transferring federal criminal jurisdiction in Indian country to the state government in six states, allowing other states to join in at a later date. This study was designed to gain a better understanding of law enforcement under Public Law 280. Specifically, amid federal concerns about rising crime rates in Indian country and rising victimization rates among Indians, the National Institute of Justice funded this study to advance understanding of this law and its impact, from the point of view of tribal members as well as state and local officials.

The research team gathered data from 17 confidential reservation sites, which were selected to ensure a range of features such as region and whether the communities were in Public Law 280 jurisdictions under mandatory, optional, excluded, straggler, or retroceded status. Confidential interviews were conducted with a total of 354 reservation residents, law enforcement officials, and criminal justice personnel. To assess the quality or effectiveness of law enforcement and criminal justice systems under Public Law 280, the research team collected quantitative data pertaining to the responsiveness, availability, quality, and sensitivity of law enforcement, and personal knowledge of Public Law 280.

Curated

Local-Area Crime Survey, [United States], 2015, 2016 (ICPSR 38920)

Released/updated on: 2024-04-29

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2015-09-01--2015-12-01, 2016-09-01--2016-12-01

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) entered into a cooperative agreement with Westat to develop and evaluate a lower-cost, subnational companion survey of victimization as one piece of the subnational estimates program. The Local-Area Crime Survey (LACS) was fielded in 2015 and 2016 and is intended for use by states, municipalities, or other jurisdictions and entities to assess levels and trends in public safety. The LACS is modeled in part after the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), conducted for BJS by the U.S. Census Bureau. One of the two major statistical programs on crime produced by the U.S. Department of Justice, the NCVS is the nation's primary source of information about criminal victimization, whether reported or not reported to police. The core NCVS methodology includes a mix of in-person and telephone interviews with household members age 12 and older selected from an area probability sample to produce reliable national-level estimates. As another part of the subnational estimates program, BJS worked with the Census Bureau to enhance and reallocate the NCVS sample to support subnational estimates for the 22 most populous states and potentially substate areas within those states. For the most part, this direct estimation component of the program will not support estimates at the local level. See the NCVS Subnational Estimates webpage on the BJS website for more information.

The goals of this research were to (1) develop and test a relatively inexpensive survey design (2) that could be administered by local jurisdictions or their vendors (3) to produce cross-jurisdiction estimates and estimates of change over time within jurisdictions that may be compared with similar estimates using NCVS data. In addition to questions about victimization experiences, the LACS included questions about perceptions of community safety and police efficacy. The rationale for including these items was that they were relevant to all households, not just victims. The hope was that these items would increase survey response rates as non-victims would have important questions to answer. The LACS served as a platform for assessing the value of these questions for the planned NCVS instrument redesign. For more information, see the NCVS Instrument Redesign webpage on the BJS website.

Curated

Local Level Victimization Survey, Battle Creek, Michigan, 2016-2017 (ICPSR 39077)

Released/updated on: 2025-09-30

Geographic coverage: United States, Battle Creek, Michigan

Time period: 2016-01-01--2017-01-01

With the support of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Michigan Justice Statistics Center conducted a survey of residents of Battle Creek, Michigan as a way of learning about the victimization experiences as well as the perceptions of residents about their neighborhoods and the police. The survey employed a randomly selected, address-based sample of Battle Creek residents. Multiple methods of survey administration were used resulting in a final sample of 1,167 completed surveys. In addition to greater understanding of resident's victimization experiences and perceptions, the survey included several embedded experiments testing several survey modalities as well as incentives for participation.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Surveys [LAMAS] 3, 1971 (ICPSR 36611)

Released/updated on: 2017-01-31

Geographic coverage: Los Angeles, California

The Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Surveys [LAMAS] 3, 1971 collection reflects data gathered in 1973 as part of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Surveys (LAMAS). The LAMAS, beginning in the spring of 1970, are a shared-time omnibus survey of Los Angeles County community members, usually repeated twice annually. The LAMAS were conducted ten times between 1970 and 1976 in an effort to develop a set of standard community profile measures appropriate for use in the planning and evaluation of public policy.

The LAMAS instruments, indexes, and scales were used to track the development and course of social indicators (including social, psychological, health, and economic variables) and the impact of public policy on the community. Questions in this survey cover respondents' attitudes toward the following topics: the concept of a model neighborhood, air pollution, medical problems and health care services in the community, local government politics, police relations, crime, the Mexican-American protests, and public transportation. A sub-sample of households in the San Fernando Area were asked questions about the 1970 earthquake, rating the effectiveness of local government response and the respondents' feelings about possible future disasters.

Demographic variables included in this dataset include age, marital status, religion, sex, education, income, geographic origin, and race.

Curated

Missing Data in the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), 1977-2000 [United States] (ICPSR 32061)

Released/updated on: 2012-11-26

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1977-01-01--2000-01-01

This study reexamined and recoded missing data in the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) for the years 1977 to 2000 for all police agencies in the United States. The principal investigator conducted a data cleaning of 20,067 Originating Agency Identifiers (ORIs) contained within the Offenses-Known UCR data from 1977 to 2000. Data cleaning involved performing agency name checks and creating new numerical codes for different types of missing data including missing data codes that identify whether a record was aggregated to a particular month, whether no data were reported (true missing), if more than one index crime was missing, if a particular index crime (motor vehicle theft, larceny, burglary, assault, robbery, rape, murder) was missing, researcher assigned missing value codes according to the "rule of 20", outlier values, whether an ORI was covered by another agency, and whether an agency did not exist during a particular time period.

Curated

Multiple Imputation for the Supplementary Homicide Reports: Evaluation in Unique Test Data, 1990-1995, Chicago, Philadelphia, Phoenix and St. Louis (ICPSR 36379)

Released/updated on: 2016-03-31

Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois, Missouri, Phoenix, St. Louis, Arizona, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Time period: 1990-01-01--1995-01-01

This study was an evaluation of multiple imputation strategies to address missing data using the New Approach to Evaluating Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR) Data Imputation, 1990-1995 (ICPSR 20060) dataset.

Curated

National Crime Surveys Longitudinal File, 1988-1989: [Selected Variables] (ICPSR 6063)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1988-07-01--1989-12-01

This longitudinal file for the National Crime Surveys (NCS) contains selected variables related to whether a crime was reported to the police for households that responded to the NCS on three consecutive interviews between July 1988 and December 1989 and had experienced at least one criminal victimization during that time period. Variable names, for the most part, are identical to those used in the hierarchical files currently available for the National Crime Surveys (see NATIONAL CRIME SURVEYS: NATIONAL SAMPLE, 1986-1991 [NEAR-TERM DATA] [ICPSR 8864]). Three new variables were created, and one existing variable was altered. The TIME variable describes whether the interview was the first, second, or third for the household in the period between July 1988 and December 1989. V4410 was recoded to give the most important reason the crime was not reported to the police for all households that responded to questions V4390-V4410. RELNOFF was created from variables V4209-V4267 to reflect the closest relation any offender had to the victim, and INJURE was created from variables V4100-V4107 to indicate minor injury, serious injury, or none at all. The file is sorted by households.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey, 1992-2005: Concatenated Incident-Level Files (ICPSR 4699)

Released/updated on: 2008-12-16

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1992-01-01--2005-01-01

This data collection is an extract created from the individual years of the National Crime Victimization Survey. Each record contains information on a crime incident occurring in the given calendar year. Part 1 contains all crime incidents, and data Part 2 contains the crimes of rape and attempted rape only. The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1973. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft, and vandalism. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey, 1992 [Record-Type Files] (ICPSR 22929)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-29

Geographic coverage: United States

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Series, previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1972. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993 [Record-Type Files] (ICPSR 22928)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-29

Geographic coverage: United States

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Series, previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1972. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey, 1994 [Record-Type Files] (ICPSR 22927)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-29

Geographic coverage: United States

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Series, previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1972. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey, 1995 [Record-Type Files] (ICPSR 22926)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-29

Geographic coverage: United States

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Series, previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1972. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey, 1996 [Record-Type Files] (ICPSR 22925)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-29

Geographic coverage: United States

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Series, previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1972. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey, 1997 [Record-Type Files] (ICPSR 22924)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-29

Geographic coverage: United States

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Series, previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1972. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey, 1998 [Record-Type Files] (ICPSR 22923)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-27

Geographic coverage: United States

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Series, previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1972. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey, 1999 [Record-Type Files] (ICPSR 22922)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-27

Geographic coverage: United States

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Series, previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1972. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations.