Search results

Showing 1 – 15 of 15 results.

Curated

Comparison of Drug Control Strategies in San Diego, 1989 (ICPSR 9990)

Released/updated on: 2000-03-21

Geographic coverage: San Diego, United States, California

This study assesses the consequences for offenders of various drug enforcement strategies employed by the San Diego Police Department and profiles the factors that characterize street-level and mid-level dealers, drug users, and the drug market. The drug enforcement strategies examined include the use of search warrants, body wires, police decoys, surveillance, officer buys and sells, wiretaps, and sweeps. Measures of the consequences of arrests include drug and property seizures, convictions, and sentences. The data were drawn from police and court records of drug arrests made by three special sections of the police department in San Diego, California. Additionally, data were collected through personal interviews conducted at the time of arrest with a subsample of persons arrested for drug charges. The arrest tracking file, Part 1, contains demographic information about the offenders, including criminal history and gang membership, as well as data on each arrest through final disposition, charges, and sentencing. The interview portion of the study, Part 2, provides information about the demographics and characteristics of drug users and dealers, criminal history and drug use history, current arrest information, and offenders' opinions about drug use, drug sales, police strategies, and the drug market.

Curated

Restricted

A Comprehensive Evaluation of a Drug Market Intervention Training Cohort in Roanoke, Virginia; Jacksonville, Florida; and Guntersville, Alabama, 2011-2013. (ICPSR 36322)

Released/updated on: 2016-09-27

Geographic coverage: United States, Guntersville, Alabama, Florida, Roanoke, Virginia, Jacksonville

Time period: 2011-01-01--2012-01-01, 2011-01-01--2012-01-01

The Drug Market Intervention (DMI) has been identified as a promising practice for disrupting overt-drug markets, reducing the crime and disorder associated with drug sales, and improving police-community relations. Montgomery County, Maryland; Flint, Michigan; Guntersville, Alabama; Lake County, Indiana; Jacksonville, Florida; New Orleans, Louisiana; and Roanoke, Virginia applied for and received DMI training and technical assistance from Michigan State University in 2010 and 2011. This study followed the seven sites that were trained in the program to determine how the program was implemented, how the DMI affected the targeted drug market, whether the program affected crime and disorder, whether the program improved police-community relations, and how much the program cost.

Curated

Restricted

Cross-Border Multi-Jurisdictional Task Force Evaluation, San Diego and Imperial Counties, California, 2007-2012 (ICPSR 34904)

Released/updated on: 2016-11-30

Geographic coverage: San Diego County, California, Imperial County, California

Time period: 2007-01-01--2012-01-01, 2007-01-01--2012-01-01, 2011-10-01--2012-04-01, 2007-01-01--2012-01-01

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 study involved a three-year evaluation of two efforts to target crime stemming from the Southern Border of the United States - one which funded greater participation by local officers on four FBI-led multi-jurisdictional task forces (MJTFs) and another that created a new multi-jurisdictional team. As part of this evaluation, researchers documented the level of inter-agency collaboration and communication when the project began, gathered information regarding the benefits and challenges of MJTF participation, measured the level of communication and collaboration, and tracked a variety of outcomes specific to the funded MJTFs, as well as three comparison MJTFs. Multiple methodologies were used to achieve these goals including surveys of task forces, law enforcement stakeholders, and community residents; law enforcement focus groups; program observations; and analysis of archival data related to staffing costs; task force activities; task force target criminal history; and prosecution outcomes.

The study is comprised of several data files in SPSS format:

Imperial County Law Enforcement Stakeholder Survey Data (35 cases and 199 variables)
Imperial County Resident Survey (402 cases and 70 variables)
Imperial Task Force Survey (6 cases and 84 variables)
Prosecution Outcome Data (1,973 cases and 115 variables)
San Diego County Resident Survey (402 cases and 69 variables)
San Diego Law Enforcement Stakeholder Survey (460 cases and 353 variables)
San Diego Task Force Survey (18 cases and 101 variables)
Staff and Cost Measures Data (7 cases and 61 variables)
Criminal Activity Data (110 cases and 50 variables)

Additionally, Calls for Service Data, Countywide Arrest Data, and Data used for Social Network Analysis are available in Excel format.

Curated

Drugs and Police Response: Survey of Public Housing Residents in Denver, Colorado, 1989-1990 (ICPSR 6482)

Released/updated on: 1995-08-16

Geographic coverage: United States, Colorado, Denver

Time period: 1989-01-01--1990-01-01

This data collection is the result of an evaluation of the NEPHU program, conducted by the Police Foundation under the sponsorship of the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). In August 1989, the Bureau of Justice Assistance supported a grant in Denver, Colorado, to establish a special Narcotics Enforcement in Public Housing Unit (NEPHU) within the Denver Police Department. The goal of the Denver NEPHU was to reduce the availability of narcotics in and around the city's public housing areas by increasing drug arrests. NEPHU's six full-time officers made investigations and gathered intelligence leading to on-street arrests and search warrants. The unit also operated a special telephone Drug Hotline and met regularly with tenant councils in the developments to improve community relations. The program worked in cooperation with the Denver Housing Authority and the uniformed patrol division of the Denver Police Department, which increased levels of uniformed patrols to maintain high visibility in the project areas to deter conventional crime. Using a panel design, survey interviews were conducted with residents in the Quigg Newton and Curtis Park public housing units, focusing on events that occurred during the past six months. Respondents were interviewed during three time periods to examine the onset and persistence of any apparent program effects. In December 1989, interviews were completed with residents in 521 households. In June 1990, 422 respondents were interviewed in Wave 2. Wave 3 was conducted in December 1990 and included 423 respondents. In all, 642 individuals were interviewed, 283 of whom were interviewed for all three waves. Because of the evaluation's design, the data can be analyzed to reveal individual-level changes for the 283 respondents who were interviewed on all three occasions, and the data can also be used to determine a cross-section representation of the residents by including the 359 "new" persons interviewed during the course of the evaluation. Information collected includes years and months lived in the development, assessments of changes in the neighborhood, whether the respondent planned to stay in the development, interactions among residents, awareness of anti-drug programs, ranking of various problems in the development, concerns and reports of being a victim of various crimes, perceived safety of the development, assessment of drug use and availability, assessment of police activity and visibility, and personal contacts with police. The unit of analysis is the individual.

Curated

Evaluation of Multi-Jurisdictional Task Forces in the United States, 1999-2000 (ICPSR 3865)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1999-01-01--2000-01-01

Since the inception of the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program in 1988, a large proportion of formula grant program funds has been allocated by state administrative agencies (SAA) to support multi-jurisdictional drug task forces (MJTFs). MJTFs are a subset of law enforcement task forces that were created in order to target the illegal distribution of drugs at the local and regional levels. While many policymakers, researchers, and practitioners express confidence in the task force approach generally, there remains insufficient understanding of the possible community and organizational impact of individual MJTFs and the kinds of evaluation methodologies that can elicit such information. The goal of this project was to identify several methodologies that could be used by state planning agencies, task forces, and others to assess the work of MJTFs. This project consisted of two surveys that were designed to ascertain the extent to which state administrative agencies (SAAs) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces (MJTFs) collected various kinds of process and outcome information and conducted evaluations of task forces.

Curated

Evaluation of the Maricopa County [Arizona] Demand Reduction Program, 1989-1991 (ICPSR 9977)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12

Geographic coverage: United States, Arizona

Time period: 1989-03-01--1991-05-01

These data were collected to evaluate the Demand Reduction Program, a program initiated in Maricopa County, Arizona, in 1989 to combat drug abuse. A consortium of municipal, county, state, and federal law enforcement agencies developed the program, which stressed user accountability. The Demand Reduction Program had two objectives: (1) to create community-wide awareness of the severity of the drug problem and to alert drug users to the increased risk of legal sanctions, and (2) to adopt a zero-tolerance position of user accountability through an emphasis on increased and coordinated law enforcement activities directed against individual offenders and special treatment programs in lieu of prosecution. Part 1 of the collection, Demand Reduction Program Data, provides information on prosecutor's disposition, arrest date, submitted charges, filed charges, prior charges, disposition of charges, drugs offender used in last three months, information on prior drug treatment, type of attorney, and arrestee's age at arrest, sex, marital status, income, and living arrangement. Part 2 is a Citizen Survey conducted in January 1990, ten months after the implementation of the Demand Reduction Program. Adult residents of Maricopa County were asked in telephone interviews about their attitudes toward drug use, tax support for drug treatment, education, and punishment, their knowledge of the Demand Reduction Program, and demographic information. Parts 3 and 4 supply data from surveys of Maricopa County police officers, conducted in March 1990 and April 1991, to measure attitudes regarding the Demand Reduction Program with respect to (1) police effort, (2) inter-agency cooperation, (3) the harm involved in drug use, and (4) support for diversion to treatment. The two police surveys contained identically-worded questions, with only a small number of different questions asked the second year. Variables include officer's rank, years at rank, years in department, shift worked, age, sex, ethnicity, education, marital status, if officer was the primary or secondary wage earner, officer's perception of and training for the Demand Reduction Program, and personal attitudes toward drug use. Part 5 provides arrest data from the Maricopa County Task Force, which arrested drug users through two methods: (1) sweeps of public and semi-public places, and (2) "reversals," where drug sellers were arrested and replaced by police officers posing as drug sellers, who then arrested the drug buyers. Task Force data include arrest date, operation number, operation beginning and ending date, operation type, region where operation was conducted, charge resulting from arrest, Demand Reduction Program identification number, and arrestee's sex, race, and date of birth.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Examining the Multifaceted Impacts of Drug Decriminalization on Public Safety, Law Enforcement, and Prosecutorial Discretion, Oregon, 2008-2024 (ICPSR 39669)

Released/updated on: 2026-03-11

Geographic coverage: Oregon, United States

Time period: 2008-01-01--2024-01-01

This project sought to understand the effects of successive drug policy reforms in the state of Oregon. These include three changes since 2013 to reduce the enforcement and punishment of low-level drug possession. House Bill 3194 passed in 2013, which reduced mandatory minimum sentences for marijuana offenses and diverted more driving and drug-related offenses to probation. House Bill 2355 passed in 2017, which reclassified Schedule I and II possession of controlled substance (PCS), reducing these from a moderate felony to a misdemeanor. Then in 2021, M110 was implemented, downgrading certain quantities of PCS from a misdemeanor to a citation, resulting in a maximum 100 dollar fine or completed health assessment.

The researchers conducted a retrospective longitudinal analysis using statewide administrative data to assess the impacts of these drug law reforms. Measures included police stops, PCS arrests, court filings, convictions, jail and prison admissions, crime rates, drug seizures, and drug-related overdose deaths.

Curated

Mandatory Drug offender Processing Data, 1986: Alaska, California, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, and Virginia (ICPSR 9420)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12

Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Iowa, United States, Alaska, Minnesota, California, New York (state), Virginia, Nebraska

The National Consortium for Assessing Drug Control Initiatives, funded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance and coordinated by the Criminal Justice Statistics Association, collected drug offender processing data from eight states: Alaska, California, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, and Virginia. The purpose of the project was to track adult drug offenders from the point of entry into the criminal justice system (typically by arrest) through final court disposition, regardless of whether the offender was released without trial, acquitted, or convicted. These data allow researchers to examine how the criminal justice system processes drug offenders, to measure the changing volume of drug offenders moving through the different segments of the criminal justice system, to calculate processing time intervals between major decision-making events, and to assess the changing structure of the drug offender population. For purposes of this project, a drug offender was defined as any person who had been charged with a felony drug offense. The data are structured into six segments pertaining to (1) record identification, (2) the offender (date of birth, sex, race, ethnic origin), (3) arrest information (date of arrest, age at arrest, arrest charge code), (4) prosecution information (filed offense code and level, prosecution disposition and date), (5) court disposition information (disposition offense and level, court disposition, final disposition date, final pleading, type of trial), and (6) sentencing information (sentence and sentence date, sentence minimum and maximum). Also included are elapsed time variables. The unit of analysis is the felony drug offender.

Curated

Modern Policing and the Control of Illegal Drugs: Testing New Strategies in Oakland, California, and Birmingham, Alabama, 1987-1989 (ICPSR 9962)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: California, Alabama, Oakland, Birmingham

Time period: 1987-01-01--1989-01-01

These data were collected in Oakland, California, and Birmingham, Alabama, to examine the effectiveness of alternative drug enforcement strategies. A further objective was to compare the relative effectiveness of strategies drawn from professional- versus community-oriented models of policing. The professional model emphasizes police responsibility for crime control, whereas the community model stresses the importance of a police-citizen partnership in crime control. At each site, experimental treatments were applied to selected police beats. The Oakland Police Department implemented a high-visibility enforcement effort consisting of undercover buy-bust operations, aggressive patrols, and motor vehicle stops, while the Birmingham Police Department engaged in somewhat less visible buy-busts and sting operations. Both departments attempted a community-oriented approach involving door-to-door contacts with residents. In Oakland, four beats were studied: one beat used a special drug enforcement unit, another used a door-to-door community policing strategy, a third used a combination of these approaches, and the fourth beat served as a control group. In Birmingham, three beats were chosen: Drug enforcement was conducted by the narcotics unit in one beat, door-to-door policing, as in Oakland, was used in another beat, and a police substation was established in the third beat. To evaluate the effectiveness of these alternative strategies, data were collected from three sources. First, a panel survey was administered in two waves on a pre-test/post-test basis. The panel survey data addressed the ways in which citizens' perceptions of drug activity, crime problems, neighborhood safety, and police service were affected by the various policing strategies. Second, structured observations of police and citizen encounters were made in Oakland during the periods the treatments were in effect. Observers trained by the researchers recorded information regarding the roles and behaviors of police and citizens as well as police compliance with the experiment's procedures. And third, to assess the impact of the alternative strategies on crime rates, reported crime data were collected for time periods before and during the experimental treatment periods, both in the targeted beats and city-wide.

Curated

Multi-Site Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE), 2003-2009 (ICPSR 30983)

Released/updated on: 2012-11-05

Geographic coverage: North Carolina, New York, United States, Illinois, Georgia, Florida, Washington, South Carolina, Pennsylvania

Time period: 2004-02-01--2004-06-01, 2005-03-01--2006-06-01, 2005-08-01--2006-12-01, 2006-09-01--2008-01-01, 2006-09-01--2008-01-01

The Multi-Site Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE) study included 23 drug courts and 6 comparison sites selected from 8 states across the country. The purpose of the study was to: (1) Test whether drug courts reduce drug use, crime, and multiple other problems associated with drug abuse, in comparision with similar offenders not exposed to drug courts, (2) address how drug courts work and for whom by isolating key individual and program factors that make drug courts more or less effective in achieving their desired outcomes, (3) explain how offender attitudes and behaviors change when they are exposed to drug courts and how these changes help explain the effectiveness of drug court programs, and (4) examine whether drug courts generate cost savings.

Offenders in all 29 sites were surveyed in 3 waves, at baseline, 6 months later, and 18 months after enrollment. The research comprises three major components: process evaluation, impact evaluation, and a cost-benefit analysis. The process evaluation describes how the 23 drug court sites vary in program eligibility, supervision, treatment, team collaboration, and other key policies and practices. The impact evaluation examines whether drug courts produce better outcomes than comparison sites and tests which court policies and offender attitudes might explain those effects. The cost-benefit analysis evaluates drug court costs and benefits.

Curated

New York Drug Law Evaluation Project, 1973 (ICPSR 7656)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16

This data collection contains the results of a study created in response to New York State's 1973 revision of its criminal laws relating to drug use. The Association of the Bar of the City of New York and the Drug Abuse Council jointly organized a joint committee and a research project to collect data, in a systematic fashion, (1) to ascertain the repercussions of the drug law revision, (2) to analyze, to the degree possible, why the law was revised, and (3) to identify any general principles or specific lessons that could be derived from the New York experience that could be helpful to other states as they dealt with the problem of illegal drug use and related crime. This data collection contains five files from the study. Part 1 contains information gathered in a survey investigating the effects of the 1973 predicate felony provisions on crime committed by repeat offenders. Data include sex, age at first arrest, county and year of sampled felony conviction, subsequent arrests up to December 1976, time between arrests, time incarcerated between arrests, and number and type of short-span arrests and incarcerations. Part 2 contains data gathered in a survey meant to estimate the number and proportion of felony crimes attributable to narcotics users in Manhattan. Case records for male defendants, aged 16 and older, who were arraigned on at least one felony charge in Manhattan's Criminal Court, in 1972 and 1975, were sampled. Data include original and reduced charges and penal code numbers, and indicators of first, second, third, and fourth drug status. Part 3 contains data gathered in a survey designed to estimate the number and proportion of felony crimes attributable to narcotics users in Manhattan. Case records for male defendants, aged 16 and older, who were arraigned on at least one felony charge in Manhattan's Criminal Court or Manhattan's Supreme Court, were sampled from 1971 through 1975. Eighty percent of the sample was drawn from the Criminal Court while the remaining 20 percent was taken from the Supreme Court. Data include date of arraignment, age, number of charges, penal code numbers for first six charges, bail information (e.g., if it was set, amount, and date bail made), disposition and sentence, indications of first through fourth drug status, first through third drug of abuse, and treatment status of defendant. Part 4 contains data gathered in a survey that determined the extent of knowledge of the 1973 drug law among ex-drug users in drug treatment programs, and to discover any changes in their behavior in response to the new law. Interviews were administered to non-randomly selected volunteers from three modalities: residential drug-free, ambulatory methadone maintenance, and the detoxification unit of the New York City House of Detention for Men. Data include sources of knowledge of drug laws (e.g., from media, subway posters, police, friends, dealers, and treatment programs), average length of sentence for various drug convictions, maximum sentence for such crimes, the pre-1974 sentence for such crimes, type of plea bargaining done, and respondent's opinion of the effects of the new law on police activity, the street, conviction rates, and drug use. Part 5 contains data from a survey that estimated the number and proportion of felony crimes attributable to narcotics users in Manhattan. Detained males aged 16 and older in Manhattan pre-trial detention centers who faced at least one current felony charge were sampled. Data include date of admission and discharge, drug status and charges, penal code numbers for first through sixth charge, bail information, and drug status and treatment.

Curated

Restricted

Optimizing Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs to Support Law Enforcement Activities, United States, 2013-2014 (ICPSR 36043)

Released/updated on: 2018-07-19

Geographic coverage: West Virginia, Indiana, United States, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Massachusetts, Kentucky, Ohio, Washington, Nevada

Time period: 2013-01-01--2014-01-01

The purpose of this study was to characterize Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs' (PDMP) features and practices that are optimal for supporting law enforcement investigations and prosecutions of prescription drug diversion cases.

The study collection includes 1 CSV data file (OptimizingPDMPsToSup_DATA_NOHDRS_2015-01-29_1235.csv, n=1,834, 204 variables). The qualitative data is not available as part of this collection at this time.

Curated

Race and Drug Arrests: Specific Deterrence and Collateral Consequences, 1997-2009 (ICPSR 34313)

Released/updated on: 2016-02-29

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1997-01-01--2009-01-01

This study examines several explanations for the observed racial/ethnic disparities in drug arrests, the consequences of drug arrest on subsequent drug offending and social bonding, and whether these consequences vary by race/ethnicity. The study is a secondary analysis of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97).

Distributed here are the codes used for the secondary analysis and the code to compile the datasets. Please refer to the codebook appendix for instructions on how to obtain all the data used in this study.

Curated

Retail-Level Heroin Enforcement and Property Crime in 30 Cities in Massachusetts, 1980-1986 (ICPSR 9667)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, Massachusetts

Time period: 1980-01-01--1986-01-01

In undertaking this data collection, the principal investigators sought to determine (1) whether police enforcement against drug crimes, specifically heroin crimes, had any influence on the rates of nondrug crimes, and (2) what effect intensive law enforcement programs against drug dealers had on residents where those programs were operating. To achieve these objectives, data on crime rates for seven successive years were collected from police records of 30 cities in Massachusetts. Data were collected for the following offenses: murder, rape, robbery, assault, larceny, and automobile theft. The investigators also interviewed a sample of residents from 3 of those 30 cities. Residents were queried about their opinions of the most serious problem facing people today, their degree of concern about being victims of crime, and their opinions of the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies in handling drug problems.

Curated

Survey of Drug Enforcement Tactics of Law Enforcement Agencies in the United States, 1992 (ICPSR 6506)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12

Geographic coverage: United States

This program evaluation study is intended to capture fully the universe of drug enforcement tactics available in the United States and to assess trends in drug enforcement. The primary objective of the study was to learn more about the application of anti-drug tactics by police: What tactics are used by police to address drug use problems? How widely are these tactics used? What new and innovative tactics are being developed and applied by police? What anti-drug tactics are most effective or show some promise of effectiveness? To answer these questions, state and local law enforcement agencies serving populations of 50,000 or more were mailed surveys. The survey was administered to both patrol and investigation units in the law enforcement agencies. This dual pattern of administration was intended to capture the extent to which the techniques of one unit had been applied by another. The questionnaire consisted primarily of dichotomous survey questions on anti-drug tactics that could be answered "yes" or "no". In each of the 14 categories of tactics, respondents were encouraged to add other previously unidentified or unspecified tactics in use in their agencies. These open-ended questions were designed to insure that a final list of anti-drug tactics would be truly comprehensive and capture the universe of drug tactics in use. In addition to questions regarding structural dimensions of anti-drug tactics, the survey also collected standardized information about the law enforcement agency, including agency size, demographic characteristics and size of the agency's service population, and a description of the relative size and nature of the jurisdiction's drug problems.