Showing 1 – 50 of 55 results.
Curated
Restricted
Incarceration and Subsequent Psychosocial Outcomes: A 16-Year Longitudinal Study of Youth After Detention, Chicago, Illinois, 2011-2015 (ICPSR 39578)
Released/updated on: 2026-07-29
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
This study contains data from the Northwestern Juvenile Project (NJP) series, a prospective longitudinal study of the mental health needs and outcomes of youth in detention.
The purpose of this study was to examine the dose of incarceration and subsequent psychiatric and psychosocial functioning in 1,829 justice-involved youths in Chicago, Illinois 16 years after detention.
The study publication, "Incarceration and Subsequent Psychosocial Outcomes: A 16-Year Longitudinal Study of Youth After Detention", was published in April 2025 in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2023 (ICPSR 39364)
Released/updated on: 2025-12-09
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2022-10-01--2023-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2023. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, D.C.) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute through 2012. Data from 2013 and on were prepared by Abt Associates.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Boston Reentry Study, Massachusetts, 2012-2014 (ICPSR 39307)
Released/updated on: 2025-03-31
Geographic coverage: United States, Massachusetts, Boston
Time period: 2012-01-01--2014-12-31
The Boston Reentry Study (BRS) was a mixed-methods, longitudinal study of 122 men and women released from Massachusetts state prisons to the Boston area, that focused on the transition into the community during participants' first year after prison release. The original data collection combined a panel survey, qualitative interviews, interviews with family members, and administrative records on criminal history. The BRS examined the complexity of integration after incarceration drawing from participants' life histories, including childhood experiences, to understand how individual biographies shape the transition into the community. This collection includes responses to 5 survey waves: (1) baseline, about one week before release from prison, (2) 1 week after prison release, (3) 2 months after prison release, (4) 6 months after prison release, and (5) 12 months after prison release. The survey collected information on housing, employment, income, health, family relationships, and criminal justice system contact.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2022 (ICPSR 38982)
Released/updated on: 2024-05-28
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2021-10-01--2022-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2022. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, D.C.) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute through 2012. Data from 2013 and on were prepared by Abt Associates.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2020 (ICPSR 38615)
Released/updated on: 2023-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2019-10-01--2020-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2020. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, D.C.) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute through 2012. Data from 2013 and on were prepared by Abt Associates.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2021 (ICPSR 38632)
Released/updated on: 2023-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2020-10-01--2021-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2021. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, D.C.) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute through 2012. Data from 2013 and on were prepared by Abt Associates.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2017 (ICPSR 38214)
Released/updated on: 2022-11-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2016-10-01--2017-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2017. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, D.C.) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute through 2012. Data from 2013 and on were prepared by Abt Associates.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2018 (ICPSR 38234)
Released/updated on: 2022-11-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2017-10-01--2018-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2018. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, D.C.) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute through 2012. Data from 2013 and on were prepared by Abt Associates.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2019 (ICPSR 38512)
Released/updated on: 2022-10-31
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2018-10-01--2019-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2019. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, D.C.) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute through 2012. Data from 2013 and on were prepared by Abt Associates.
Self-published
Long-Run Incarceration Rates for Australia, Canada, England & Wales, New Zealand and the United States (ICPSR 118144)
Released/updated on: 2020-03-09
Geographic coverage: New Zealand, Canada, United States, Australia, England, United Kingdom
Time period: 1850-01-01--2018-12-31
These data contain historical incarceration rates, from the mid-1800 to the present day, for Australia, Canada, England & Wales, New Zealand & the United States The data are for two papers: * Andrew Leigh, "Estimating Long-Run Incarceration Rates for Australia, Canada, England & Wales, New Zealand and the United States", Australian Economic History Review, 2020 * Andrew Leigh, "The Second Convict Age: Explaining the Return of Mass Imprisonment in Australia", Economic Record, 2020
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2016 (ICPSR 37400)
Released/updated on: 2019-12-16
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2015-10-01--2016-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2016. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, D.C.) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute through 2012. Data from 2013 and on were prepared by Abt Associates.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2015 (ICPSR 37378)
Released/updated on: 2019-09-23
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2014-10-01--2015-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2015. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt.
Curated
Predicting Crime through Incarceration: The Impact of Prison Cycling on Crime in Communities in Boston, Massachusetts, Newark, New Jersey, Trenton, New Jersey, and Rural New Jersey, 2000-2010 (ICPSR 35014)
Released/updated on: 2017-03-22
Geographic coverage: Massachusetts, Newark, Trenton, New Jersey, Boston
Time period: 2000-01-01--2010-12-31, 2007-01-01--2010-12-31, 2009-01-01--2010-12-31, 2003-01-01--2010-12-31
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.
Researchers compiled datasets on prison admissions and releases that would be comparable across places and geocoded and mapped those data onto crime rates across those same places. The data used were panel data. The data were quarterly or annual data, depending on the location, from a mix of urban (Boston, Newark and Trenton) and rural communities in New Jersey covering various years between 2000 and 2010.
The crime, release, and admission data were individual level data that were then aggregated from the individual incident level to the census tract level by quarter (in Boston and Newark) or year (in Trenton). The analyses centered on the effects of rates of prison removals and returns on rates of crime in communities (defined as census tracts) in the cities of Boston, Massachusetts, Newark, New Jersey, and Trenton, New Jersey, and across rural municipalities in New Jersey.
There are 4 Stata data files. The Boston data file has 6,862 cases, and 44 variables. The Newark data file has 1,440 cases, and 45 variables. The Trenton data file has 66 cases, and 32 variables. The New Jersey Rural data file has 1,170 cases, and 32 variables.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2014 (ICPSR 36710)
Released/updated on: 2017-03-22
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2013-10-01--2014-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2014. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database, as well as "SAF" variables that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, Tables 7.9-7.16. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2013 (ICPSR 36328)
Released/updated on: 2016-02-22
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2012-10-01--2013-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2013. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database, as well as "SAF" variables that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, Tables 7.9-7.16. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt.
Curated
Restricted
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Offenders Admitted to Prison, 2012 (ICPSR 35493)
Released/updated on: 2015-02-04
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2011-10-01--2012-09-30
The data contain records of sentenced offenders committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2012. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database, as well as "SAF" variables that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, Tables 7.9-7.16. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated
Restricted
Health Consequences of Long-Term Injection Heroin Use Among Aging Mexican American Men in Houston, Texas, 2008 - 2011 [Restricted-use Files] (ICPSR 34896)
Released/updated on: 2015-01-21
Geographic coverage: United States, Texas
Time period: 2008-01-01--2011-12-31
The study is comprised of interviews from 227 Hispanic males aged 45 or older living in the area of Houston, Texas to address the gaps in knowledge on the social factors and health consequences of injection heroin use among aging Mexican American males. Specifically, the study investigated how the life course transitions of incarceration and drug treatment and drug abuse and family trajectories affect both the heroin career status and health consequences of these aging Mexican American men.
The study used a cross-sectional, field-intensive outreach methodology augmented with respondent-driven sampling. Recruitment was focused in two Houston neighborhoods that are predominantly Mexican American areas with high rates of crime, poverty, and psychosocial challenges. Trained Outreach Specialists familiar with these communities identified community gatekeepers and gained their trust through continued presence in the community and ongoing dialogue about the study. These gatekeepers then helped identify individuals meeting the inclusion criteria: Mexican American men aged 45 years or older with a history of injection drug use for at least 3 years. The men were then classified into one of three groups: current injectors (current group), former injectors not in treatment (former group), or former injectors currently enrolled in methadone maintenance treatment programs (MMTP group).
The second part is a second survey asking questions about social networks the respondent participates in. Questions ask the respondent to answer on one individual in their network and answer questions about that person and their interaction with them. Questions include basic demographics, history injecting drugs and sexual contact with the person.
Curated
Restricted
Undiagnosed Trichomoniasis Infection in the Population of Baltimore, MD: Data from the 2006 - 2009 Monitoring STIs Survey Program (ICPSR 35066)
Released/updated on: 2014-11-25
Geographic coverage: Baltimore, United States, Maryland
Time period: 2006-09-05--2009-08-15
The Monitoring STIs Survey Program (MSSP) monitored sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevalence among probability samples of adolescents and young adults aged 15 to 35 with landline phones in Baltimore, Maryland from 2006 to 2009. The MSSP collected survey data using telephone audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (TACASI) and biospecimens which were tested using nucleic acid amplification tests to monitor trichomonaiasis and other STIs. Respondents provided information about their sexual practices, sexual history, information about incarceration of themselves or their partners, and information about sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), STIs, and respective treatments. Demographic variables collected include gender, race, educational attainment, age, employment status, and marital status.
Curated
Restricted
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II in the United States, 2013 (Restricted Use) (ICPSR 35169)
Released/updated on: 2014-08-01
Geographic coverage: New York City, Sacramento, United States, Chicago, Atlanta, Illinois, Colorado, Denver, California, Georgia, New York (state)
Time period: 2013-05-05--2013-07-28
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II, 2013 is a collection of interview and bioassay data provided by over 3000 arrestees from five county sites within the United States. Under the sponsorship of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), the ADAM II program monitors drug use and related behaviors (treatment experiences, housing stability, drug market activity, age at first use, employment, etc.) in a probability based sample of male adult arrestees within 48 hours of their arrest. The five ADAM II sites for 2013 were: Atlanta, GA (Fulton County and the City of Atlanta); Chicago, IL (Cook County); Denver, CO (Denver County); New York, NY (Borough of Manhattan); and Sacramento, CA (Sacramento County). The 2013 survey represents the seventh year of ADAM II and includes data from 1,900 interviews and 1,681 urine tests that were conducted at the five ADAM II sites over a 21-day period, between May 5, 2013 and July 28, 2013. ADAM II data include official records, arrestee responses from a 20-minute face-to-face interview, and results from voluntary urine samples which tested for the presence of nine different drugs. Identifying information on the arrestees was not retained or shared with law enforcement. Demographic variables include age, gender, race, citizenship, marital status, arrest date and time, county of arrest, number and type(s) of offense(s), education, work status, and language of interview.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
An Institutionalization Effect: The Impact of Mental Hospitalization and Imprisonment on Homicide in the United States, 1934 - 2001 (ICPSR 34986)
Released/updated on: 2014-05-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1934-01-01--2001-12-31
This data set explored the effect of imprisonment on violent crime rates prior to 1991. Previous research focused exclusively on rates of imprisonment, rather than using a measure that combines institutionalization in both prisons and mental hospitals. Using state-level panel-data regressions over the 68-year period from 1934 to 2001 and controlling for economic conditions, youth population rates, criminal justice enforcement, and demographic factors, this study found a large, robust, and statistically significant relationship between aggregated institutionalization (in mental hospitals and prisons) and homicide rates. This finding provided strong evidence of what should now be called an institutionalization effect -- rather than an imprisonment or incapacitation effect. Demographic information collected include national unemployment rates and institutional race and age composition.
Curated
Restricted
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II in the United States, 2012 (Restricted Use) (ICPSR 34821)
Released/updated on: 2013-08-29
Geographic coverage: New York City, Sacramento, United States, Chicago, Atlanta, Illinois, Colorado, Denver, California, Georgia, New York (state)
Time period: 2012-04-30--2012-07-29
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II, 2012 is a collection of interview and bioassay data provided by over 3000 arrestees from five county sites within the United States. Under the sponsorship of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), the ADAM II program monitors drug use and related behaviors (treatment experiences, housing stability, drug market activity, age at first use, employment, etc.) in a probability based sample of male adult arrestees within 48 hours of their arrest. The five ADAM II sites for 2012 were: Atlanta, GA (Fulton County and the City of Atlanta); Chicago, IL (Cook County); Denver, CO (Denver County); New York, NY (Borough of Manhattan); and Sacramento, CA (Sacramento County). The 2012 survey represents the sixth year of ADAM II and includes data from 1,938 interviews and 1,736 urine tests that were conducted at the five ADAM II sites over a 21-day period, between April 30 and July 29, 2012. The samples from these sites were weighted to represent over 14,000 arrests of adult males in the five counties. ADAM II data include official records, arrestee responses from a 20-minute face-to-face interview, and results from voluntary urine samples which tested for the presence of nine different drugs. Identifying information on the arrestees was not retained or shared with law enforcement. Demographic variables include age, gender, race, arrest date and time, county of arrest, number and type(s) of offense(s), education, work status, and language of interview.
Curated
Restricted
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II in the United States, 2011 (ICPSR 34362)
Released/updated on: 2013-06-13
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Oregon, District of Columbia, Charlotte, Sacramento, Indiana, United States, Chicago, Minnesota, California, New York (state), New York City, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Illinois, Colorado, Portland (Oregon), Denver, Georgia, Indianapolis
Time period: 2011-04-01--2011-09-30
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II, 2011, is a collection of interview and bioassay data on over 5000 arrestees in 10 United States counties within 48 hours of their arrest. The collection took place between April 1 and September 30, 2011 and represents the fifth year of ADAM II data collection under the sponsorship of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. The 10 current ADAM II sites are: Atlanta, GA (Fulton County); Charlotte, NC (Mecklenburg County); Chicago, IL (Cook County); Denver, CO (Denver County); Indianapolis, IN (Marion County); Minneapolis, MN (Hennepin County); New York, NY (Borough of Manhattan); Portland, OR (Multnomah County); Sacramento, CA (Sacramento County); and Washington, DC (District of Columbia). In 2011, 5,051 interviews and 4,412 urine tests were conducted in the 10 ADAM II sites over 14 consecutive days in each of two calendar quarters between April 1 and September 30. The samples across these sites represent 35,459 adult males arrested in the 10 sites during the data collection period. Demographic variables include arrest date and time, gender, date of birth, number and types of offenses, county of arrest, race, education, work status, and language of interview.
Curated
Enhanced Services for the Hard-to-Employ Center for Employment Opportunities (CEO), New York City (ICPSR 33783)
Released/updated on: 2012-10-17
Geographic coverage: New York City, New York (state)
Time period: 2004-01-01--2008-12-31
The Enhanced Services for the Hard-to-Employ (HtE) Demonstration and Evaluation Project was a 10-year study (taken on by the MDRC) that evaluated innovative strategies aimed at improving employment and other outcomes for groups who faced serious barriers to employment. The Enhanced Services for the Hard-to-Employ is the first comprehensive attempt to understand the diverse low-income population and to test interventions aimed at the most common barriers that are encountered in this population's employment. The HtE demonstration was designed to evaluate a variety of innovative ways to boost employment, reduce welfare receipt, and promote well-being in low-income populations. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the Center for Employment Opportunities (CEO), which is an employment program for former prisoners based in New York City. The CEO evaluation aimed to determine whether CEO's transitional jobs and other services are more effective than basic job search assistance. Enrollment for this study was conducted between January 2004 and October 2005 and resulted in a sample of 977 former prisoners (568 in the program group and 409 in the control group). Individuals assigned to the program group were eligible for all of CEO's services, including the pre-employment class, the transitional job, job coaching, job development, a fatherhood program, and post-placement services. Individuals assigned to the control group began with a shorter version of the pre-employment class and were given access to a resource room with basic job search equipment such as computers and fax machines. Evaluation of the CEO program found that the CEO operated as intended and substantially increased employment for the full study sample early in the follow-up period; however, that effect faded over time. The study also found that CEO significantly reduced recidivism, with the most promising impacts occurring among a subgroup of former prisoners who enrolled shortly after release from prison. Among the subgroup that enrolled within three months after release, program group members were less likely than their control group counterparts to be arrested, convicted of a new crime, and reincarcerated. The program's impacts on these outcomes represent reductions in recidivism of 16 percent to 22 percent. In general, CEO's impacts were stronger for those who were more disadvantaged or at higher risk of recidivism when they enrolled in the study. The evaluation of the CEO program included a benefit-cost analysis, which showed that CEO's financial benefits outweighed its costs under a wide range of assumptions. Respondents were asked about their employment history, recidivism history, time spent on parole, parole violations, and arrest history, including prior convictions, types of convictions, and length of incarceration. Information was collected about respondents' work experience with and without the assistance of the CEO; this information included whether respondents participated in group or individual job searches, vocational or educational training, received referrals to job openings, help with their resumes, advice about filing out job applications, job interviews, or how to behave on the job, help with child support issues and whether they participated in father discussion groups or parenting programs. Respondents were also asked about their current living situation, work schedule, hourly wage, job benefits, health coverage, whether they had a mentor, how often they saw their children, and the type of relationship they had with their children. Demographic information includes age, race, marital status, education, employment status, and home ownership status.
Curated
Systematic Review of the Effects of Parental Imprisonment on Child Antisocial Behavior and Mental Health, 1960-2008 (ICPSR 31704)
Released/updated on: 2012-05-07
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Tennessee, United Kingdom, California, Global, Washington, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Netherlands, Sweden, Brisbane, Illinois, Texas, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Denmark, London, Georgia, Australia, Virginia, Boston, Richmond
Time period: 1960-01-01--2008-12-31
The two main aims for the review were to assess evidence on whether parental imprisonment is a risk factor for undesirable child outcomes and to assess evidence on whether parental imprisonment is a causal risk factor. A third aim of the review was to investigate whether associations between parental imprisonment and child outcomes differ according to child, parent, and environmental characteristics. Between June and September 2008, researchers searched for studies that met the eligibility criteria. Several strategies were used to conduct an exhaustive search for eligible studies. Researchers started with an existing set of documents collected by Joseph Murray during his previous research on the effects of parental imprisonment on children and then used three methods to search for additional studies. First, researchers searched 23 electronic databases for the years 1960-2008. The same keywords were used to search each database. Second, researchers examined bibliographies of previous reviews of studies on the effects of parental imprisonment on children. Third, researchers contacted experts in the field. Two groups of researchers and practitioners were emailed and asked to inform researchers of any studies they thought might be eligible for the review. The 16 studies included in the review were coded for the following key features: reference information, sample characteristics, details about the measure of parental imprisonment, details of subsamples, and multiple comparisons made in the study, details of the comparison group(s) used to derive effect sizes, types of outcome measured, and measurement details, methods used to control for confounding variables to estimate causal effects, methodological quality of the study for drawing conclusions about risk factors and causal risk factors, and statistical information used to derive an effect size.
Curated
Restricted
Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing in Michigan, Minnesota, and Virginia, 2001-2002, 2004 (ICPSR 22642)
Released/updated on: 2009-11-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Minnesota, Virginia, Michigan
Time period: 2002-01-01--2002-12-31, 2004-01-01--2004-12-31, 2001-07-01--2002-06-30, 2001-07-01--2002-06-30
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the integrity of sentencing outcomes under alternative state guideline systems and to investigate how this variation in structure impacted actual sentencing practice. The research team sought to address the question, to what extent do sentencing guidelines contribute to the goals of consistency, proportionality, and a lack of discrimination. The National Center for State Courts conducted an examination of sentencing patterns in three states with substantially different guidelines systems: Minnesota, Michigan, and Virginia. The three states vary along critical dimensions of the presumptive versus voluntary nature of guidelines as well as basic mechanics. There are differences in the formal design, administration, and statutory framework of the Michigan, Minnesota, and Virginia sentencing systems. For the 2004 Michigan Sentencing Outcomes Data (Part 1), the Michigan Department of Corrections Offender Management Network Information System (OMNI) provided sentencing guideline data for 32,754 individual offenders sentenced during calendar year 2004. For the 2002 Minnesota Sentencing Outcomes Data (Part 2), the Minnesota Sentencing Commission provided data for 12,978 individual offenders sentenced in calendar year 2002. The Virginia Sentencing Commission provided the Fiscal Year 2002 Virginia Assault Sentencing Outcomes Data (Part 3) and the Fiscal Year 2002 Virginia Burglary Sentencing Outcomes Data (Part 4). The Assault and Burglary/Dwelling crime groups have 1,614 and 1,743 observations, respectively. Variables in the four datasets are classified into the broad categories of conviction offense severity, prior record, offense seriousness, grid cell type, habitual/modifiers, departure, and extra guideline variables.
Curated
Restricted
Impact of Institutional Placement on the Recidivism of Delinquent Youth in New York City, 2000-2003 (ICPSR 20347)
Released/updated on: 2009-08-10
Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)
Time period: 2000-04-01--2003-06-30
The primary research goal of this study was to explore the effects of juvenile incarceration on future recidivism using social and legal history data about adjudicated juvenile delinquents in New York City. The secondary research goal of this study was to explore family court decision-making and the nature of family court processing. Study subjects were chosen by examining Family Court calendars in all five New York City boroughs for each day in April, May, and June of 2000, which identified every youth who received a disposition during this period. Research staff located case files for each subject in probation department file rooms in the five family courts, using personal and numeric identifiers taken from court calendars. Using a standardized data collection instrument that was developed by the research team, coded information was derived for 698 total cases by examining documents in each subject's probation case file. Coded data from probation case files offered a baseline portrait of this sample of delinquent youth. In order to measure recidivism, the principal investigator linked baseline records, using personal and numeric identifiers, to arrest and incarceration information provided by other city and state agencies. In this dataset, each record is essentially a snapshot of a particular youth at the time of his or her disposition. Variables about the sampled youth include: demographic profile, case processing, legal history, characteristics of present and past family environments, school performance indicators, community and peer relationships, history of alcohol and drug use, mental health history, and history of victimization.
Curated
Restricted
Exploring Factors Influencing Family Members Connections to Incarcerated Individuals in New Jersey, 2005-2006 (ICPSR 22460)
Released/updated on: 2008-12-23
Geographic coverage: United States, New Jersey
Time period: 2005-05-01--2006-07-31
In order to develop a better understanding of the factors that influence whether a male prisoner's family stays involved in his life during incarceration, researchers conducted face-to-face interviews with inmates from two New Jersey prisons and their family members between May 2005 and July 2006. A total of 35 (25 from one prison and 10 from the other) inmates and 15 family members were interviewed, comprising 13 inmate and family dyads, 1 inmate and family triad, and an additional 21 inmate interviews. The data include variables that explore the family's relationship with the incarcerated individual in the following areas: the inmate's relationship with the family prior to the incarceration, the strain (emotional, economic, stigma) that the incarceration has placed on the family, the economic resources available to the family to maintain the inmate, the family's social support system, and the inmate's efforts to improve or rehabilitate himself while incarcerated.
Curated
Effect of Procedural Justice in Spouse Assault in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1987-1989 (ICPSR 20343)
Released/updated on: 2008-04-17
Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, United States, Wisconsin
Time period: 1987-01-01--1989-12-31
The purpose of the research project was to examine the extent to which the perception of procedural fairness by suspects arrested for spouse assault effectively inhibited their subsequent violence. The data for this study were collected for the MILWAUKEE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE EXPERIMENT, 1987-1989 (ICPSR 9966), which was conducted from April 1987 to August 1988. In this experiment, all cases of misdemeanor domestic battery where probable cause to arrest existed were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (1) warning with no arrest, (2) arrest with a brief detention period (average of 3 hours), and (3) arrest with a longer detention period (average of 11 hours). Variables include demographic and background information, as well as descriptive variables pertaining to the domestic violence incident.
Curated
Impact of State Sentencing Policies on Incarceration Rates in the United States, 1975-2002 (ICPSR 4456)
Released/updated on: 2007-09-27
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1975-01-01--2002-12-31
In order to assess the impacts of state-level sentencing and corrections policies in the United States implemented between 1975 and 2002 on state incarceration rates during that same time period, researchers conducted a two-phase study between November 2002 and March 2004. The first phase of the research involved building a framework for understanding the types of state-level sentencing and corrections policies in use between 1975 and 2002. Phase two of the project consisted of state-level data collection for all 50 states for all study years, 1975 to 2002. The researchers produced a dataset containing outcome variables that focus on the change and growth in state incarceration rates, non-policy control variables that were found in previous studies to be associated with changes in incarceration rates, and policy variables regarding sentencing structure, drug policy, time served requirements, habitual offender laws (HOL), and mandatory sentences.
Curated
Restricted
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Life History Calendar, Wave 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13635)
Released/updated on: 2006-05-12
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
Time period: 1997-01-01--2000-12-31
The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Longitudinal Cohort Study, which was a series of coordinated longitudinal studies that followed over 6,000 randomly selected children, adolescents, and young adults, and their primary caregivers over time to examine the changing circumstances of their lives, as well as the personal characteristics, that might lead them toward or away from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Numerous measures were administered to respondents to gauge various aspects of human development, including individual differences, as well as family, peer, and school influences. One such instrument was the Life History Calendar. This was a structured interview utilizing a grid-like format to facilitate rapid and accurate recall of life events experienced by young adults. It was administered to Cohort 18.
Curated
National Evaluation of the Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth-in-Sentencing Incentive Grant Program, 1996-1999 (ICPSR 3336)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1996-01-01--1999-12-31
This study evaluated the Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth-in-Sentencing (VOI/TIS) incentive grant program enacted in 1994. The program provided grants to states to be used to increase the capacity of state correctional systems to confine serious and violent offenders. This national evaluation addressed four broad areas: (1) How had the federal government implemented the law? How much money had been made available and what were the criteria for disbursement? (2) How had the states reacted legislatively to the law? Did states adopt truth-in-sentencing or statutes having equivalent effect? (3) How had the state VOI/TIS money been spent and for what? How much did it increased prison capacities? (4) Did the law increase the number of admissions, length of sentences, and terms served for violent offenders? In addition to these four major areas, the study looked at related areas of interest, such as the impact of VOI/TIS and other "get tough" legislation on prosecutorial and judicial attitudes, policies, and practices. It also examined state spending on corrections, particularly for construction. The researchers collaborated with the American Correctional Association (ACA), the American Prosecutors Research Institute (APRI), and the Justice Management Institute (JMI) to conduct special surveys among state correctional officials, prosecutors, and judges. The ACA surveyed state departments of correction in the summer of 1998. States were asked to indicate the extent of changes in a number of prison operations and activities since 1996, when VOI/TIS funds became available. In the summer of 1999 the APRI surveyed prosecutors nationwide to ascertain their perceptions of the effects of "get tough" legislation (including TIS) on a number of dimensions. In the fall of 1999, the JMI surveyed judges nationwide on their impressions of the effectiveness of several "get tough" measures in their states, including VOI/TIS. In Part 1, American Correctional Association Survey Data, state correction departments were questioned on the amount of VOI/TIS funds spent by their state since 1996, number of beds added using VOI/TIS funds and in what types of facilities, how VOI/TIS funds were used to increase number of beds, average prison sentences in 1993 and 1998 for different types of offenses, average time actually served in 1993 and 1998 for those offenses, the effects of VOI/TIS on prison and jail admissions for different types of offenders, and its effects on the composition of the prison population, prison inmate activities and programs, prison staffing, and prison operations. In Part 2, American Prosecutors Research Institute Survey Data, prosecutors were questioned about what "get tough" policies their states had enacted, the efficacy of "get tough" policies in achieving their goals, whether these policies had unanticipated or negative consequences, expected results of these policies, the percentage of cases to which these policies applied, the extent to which these policies had helped accomplish their office's goals, the effects of "get tough" policies on budget and resources, sentences and time actually served, and the criminal justice process, the size of their jurisdiction, and the number of staff in their office. In Part 3, Justice Management Institute Survey Data, judges were questioned about whether their state had enacted "get tough" policies in the past ten years, what kinds of policies were adopted, their effect on the efficiency of case processing, the formal positions of the Judicial Council and Judges Association on the policies, whether the respondent or other judges had input into the policies, how likely "get tough" policies were to achieve certain goals, what results the respondent expected from the policies, the impact of the policies on the criminal justice process, years experience on the bench, the percentage of their caseload that involved criminal cases, whether they handled civil, family law/domestic relations, or juvenile cases, and the population of their jurisdiction.
Curated
Validation of the Los Angeles County [California] Probation Department's Risk and Needs Assessment Instruments, 1997-1999 (ICPSR 3715)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California
Time period: 1997-04-01--1999-06-30
In 1996, the Los Angeles County Probation Department developed a set of six instruments to better assess offender risks and needs. Each instrument was intended to serve a specific purpose, with separate instruments used for adult and juvenile populations and release and placement decisions. The instruments were to be completed by probation staff. These instruments were tested in a pilot project by probation field staff in 1997. The probation department then asked RAND to re-examine the six instruments for instrument integrity, use of overrides, and relationship to long-term recidivism outcomes. The probation department's research staff had completed the instruments between April and December 1997 using available reports and case file information. RAND's involvement in the study began after all samples had been selected and instruments completed. The probation department gave RAND the data on instrument scores. Recidivism data were gathered at 6, 12, and 18 months after the instruments' administration. For juveniles data on the nature and date of arrest were available from the Juvenile Automated Information files. Data on adult re-arrests were unavailable, but the Adult Probation System provided the date, nature, and disposition of offenses referred to probation.
Curated
Restricted
Unintended Impacts of Sentencing Reforms and Incarceration on Family Structure in the United States, 1984-1998 (ICPSR 3662)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Minnesota
Time period: 1984-01-01--1998-12-31
This project sought to investigate a possible relationship between sentencing guidelines and family structure in the United States. The research team developed three research modules that employed a variety of data sources and approaches to understand family destabilization and community distress, which cannot be observed directly. These three research modules were used to discover causal relationships between male withdrawal from productive spheres of the economy and resulting changes in the community and families. The research modules approached the issue of sentencing guidelines and family structure by studying: (1) the flow of inmates into prison (Module A), (2) the role of and issues related to sentencing reform (Module B), and family disruption in a single state (Module C). Module A utilized the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program data for 1984 and 1993 (Parts 1 and 2), the 1984 and 1993 National Correctional Reporting Program (NCRP) data (Parts 3-6), the Urban Institute's 1980 and 1990 Underclass Database (UDB) (Part 7), the 1985 and 1994 National Longitudinal Survey on Youth (NLSY) (Parts 8 and 9), and county population, social, and economic data from the Current Population Survey, County Business Patterns, and United States Vital Statistics (Parts 10-12). The focus of this module was the relationship between family instability, as measured by female-headed families, and three societal characteristics, namely underclass measures in county of residence, individual characteristics, and flows of inmates. Module B examined the effects of statewide incarceration and sentencing changes on marriage markets and family structure. Module B utilized data from the Current Population Survey for 1985 and 1994 (Part 12) and the United States Statistical Abstracts (Part 13), as well as state-level data (Parts 14 and 15) to measure the Darity-Myers sex ratio and expected welfare income. The relationship between these two factors and family structure, sentencing guidelines, and minimum sentences for drug-related crimes was then measured. Module C used data collected from inmates entering the Minnesota prison system in 1997 and 1998 (Part 16), information from the 1990 Census (Part 17), and the Minnesota Crime Survey (Part 18) to assess any connections between incarceration and family structure. Module C focused on a single state with sentencing guidelines with the goal of understanding how sentencing reforms and the impacts of the local community factors affect inmate family structure. The researchers wanted to know if the aspects of locations that lose marriageable males to prison were more important than individual inmate characteristics with respect to the probability that someone will be imprisoned and leave behind dependent children. Variables in Parts 1 and 2 document arrests by race for arson, assault, auto theft, burglary, drugs, homicide, larceny, manslaughter, rape, robbery, sexual assault, and weapons. Variables in Parts 3 and 4 document prison admissions, while variables in Parts 5 and 6 document prison releases. Variables in Part 7 include the number of households on public assistance, education and income levels of residents by race, labor force participation by race, unemployment by race, percentage of population of different races, poverty rate by race, men in the military by race, and marriage pool by race. Variables in Parts 8 and 9 include age, county, education, employment status, family income, marital status, race, residence type, sex, and state. Part 10 provides county population data. Part 11 contains two different state identifiers. Variables in Part 12 describe mortality data and welfare data. Part 13 contains data from the United States Statistical Abstracts, including welfare and poverty variables. Variables in Parts 14 and 15 include number of children, age, education, family type, gender, head of household, marital status, race, religion, and state. Variables in Part 16 cover admission date, admission type, age, county, education, language, length of sentence, marital status, military status, sentence, sex, state, and ZIP code. Part 17 contains demographic data by Minnesota ZIP code, such as age categories, race, divorces, number of children, home ownership, and unemployment. Part 18 includes Minnesota crime data as well as some demographic variables, such as race, education, and poverty ratio.
Curated
Restricted
White-Collar Criminal Careers, 1976-1978: Federal Judicial Districts (ICPSR 6540)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1976-01-01--1978-12-31
This study examined the criminal careers of 1,331 offenders convicted of white-collar crimes in the United States District Courts to assess the relative effectiveness of court-imposed prison sanctions in preventing or modifying future criminal behavior. The white-collar crime event that was the central focus of this study, the "criterion" offense, provided the standard point of entry for sample members. Researchers for this study supplemented the data collected by Wheeler et al. in their 1988 study (NATURE AND SANCTIONING OF WHITE COLLAR CRIME, 1976-1978: FEDERAL JUDICIAL DISTRICTS [ICPSR 8989]) with criminal history data subsequent to the criterion offense through to 1990. As in the 1988 study, white-collar crime was considered to include economic offenses committed through the use of some combination of fraud, deception, or collusion. Eight federal offenses were examined: antitrust, securities fraud, mail and wire fraud, false claims and statements, credit fraud, bank embezzlement, income tax fraud, and bribery. Arrests were chosen as the major measure of criminal conduct. The data contain information coded from Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) criminal history records ("rap sheets") for a set of offenders convicted of white-collar crimes in federal courts in fiscal years 1976 to 1978. The seven federal judicial districts from which the sample was drawn were central California, northern Georgia, northern Illinois, Maryland, southern New York, northern Texas, and western Washington. To correct for a bias that can be introduced when desistance from criminality is confused with the death of the offender, the researchers examined the National Death Index (NDI) data to identify offenders who had died between the date of sentencing for the criterion offense and when data collection began for this study in 1990. This data collection contains three types of records. The first record type (Part 1, Summary Data) contains summary and descriptive information about the offender's rap sheet as a whole. Variables include dates of first entry and last entry on the rap sheet, number of separate crimes on the rap sheet, whether the criterion crime was listed on the rap sheet, whether the rap sheet listed crimes prior to or subsequent to the criterion crime, and date of death of offender. The second and third record types are provided in one data file (Part 2, Event and Event Interim Data). The second record type contains information about each crime event on the rap sheet. Variables include custody status of offender at arrest, type of arresting agency, state of arrest, date of arrest, number of charges for each arrest, number of charges resulting in no formal charges filed, number of charges dismissed, number of charges for white-collar crimes, type of sanction, length of definite sentence, probation sentence, and suspended probation sentence, amount of fines, amount of court costs, and restitution ordered, first, second, and third offense charged, arrest and court disposition for each charge, and date of disposition. The third record type contains information about the interim period between events or between the final event and the end of the follow-up period. Variables include date of first, second, and third incarceration, date discharged or transferred from each incarceration, custody/supervision status at each incarceration, total number of prisons, jails, or other institutions resided in during the interval, final custody/supervision status and date discharged from incarceration for the interval, dates parole and probation started and expired, if parole or probation terms were changed or completed, amount of fines, court costs, and restitution paid, whether the conviction was overturned during the interval, and date the conviction was overturned. A single offender has as many of record types two and three as were needed to code the entire rap sheet.
Curated
Techniques for Assessing the Accuracy of Recidivism Prediction Scales, 1960-1980: [Miami, Albuquerque, New York City, Alameda and Los Angeles Counties, and the State of California] (ICPSR 9988)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New Mexico, Albuquerque, California, Florida, New York (state), Miami
Time period: 1960-01-01--1980-12-31
The purpose of this data collection was to measure the validity or accuracy of four recidivism prediction instruments: the INSLAW, RAND, SFS81, and CGR scales. These scales estimate the probability that criminals will commit subsequent crimes quickly, that individuals will commit crime frequently, that inmates who are eligible for release on parole will commit subsequent crimes, and that defendants awaiting trial will commit crimes while on pretrial arrest or detention. The investigators used longitudinal data from five existing independent studies to assess the validity of the four predictive measures in question. The first data file was originally collected by the Vera Institute of Justice in New York City and was derived from an experimental evaluation of a jobs training program called the Alternative Youth Employment Strategies Project implemented in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Miami, Florida, and New York City, New York. The second file contains data from a RAND Corporation study, EFFECTS OF PRISON VERSUS PROBATION IN CALIFORNIA, 1980-1982 (ICPSR 8700), from offenders in Alameda and Los Angeles counties, California. Parts 3 through 5 pertain to serious juvenile offenders who were incarcerated during the 1960s and 1970s in three institutions of the California Youth Authority. A portion of the original data for these parts was taken from EARLY IDENTIFICATION OF THE CHRONIC OFFENDER, [1978-1980: CALIFORNIA] (ICPSR 8226). All files present demographic and socioeconomic variables such as birth information, race and ethnicity, education background, work and military experience, and criminal history, including involvement in criminal activities, drug addiction, and incarceration episodes. From the variables in each data file, standard variables across all data files were constructed. Constructed variables included those on background (such as drug use, arrest, conviction, employment, and education history), which were used to construct the four predictive scales, and follow-up variables concerning arrest and incarceration history. Scores on the four predictive scales were estimated.
Curated
Predicting Recidivism in North Carolina, 1978 and 1980 (ICPSR 8987)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, United States
This data collection examines the relationship between individual characteristics and recidivism for two cohorts of inmates released from North Carolina prisons in 1978 and 1980. The survey contains questions on the background of the offenders, including their involvement in drugs or alcohol, level of schooling, nature of the crime resulting in the sample conviction, number of prior incarcerations and recidivism following release from the sample incarceration. The data collection also contains information on the length of time until recidivism occurs.
Curated
Evaluating the Incapacitative Benefits of Incarcerating Drug Offenders in Los Angeles and Maricopa [Arizona] Counties, 1986 and 1990 (ICPSR 6374)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States, California, Arizona
The objective of this study was to examine the observable offending patterns of recent and past drug offenders to assess the crime control potential associated with recent increases in the incarceration of drug offenders. The periods examined were 1986 (representing the second half of the 1980s, when dramatic shifts toward increasing incarceration of drug offenders first became evident), and 1990 (after escalating sentences were well under way). Convicted offenders were the focus, since these cases are most directly affected by changes in imprisonment policies, particularly provisions for mandatory prison terms. Offending patterns of convicted and imprisoned drug offenders were contrasted to patterns of convicted robbers and burglars, both in and out of prison. The researchers used data from the National Judicial Reporting Program (NJRP), sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), for information on the court processing of individual felony convictions. The National Association of Criminal Justice Planners (NACJP), which maintains data for the approximately 50 counties included in the NJRP, was contracted to determine the counties to be sampled (Los Angeles County and Maricopa County in Arizona were chosen) and to provide individual criminal histories. Variables include number of arrests for robbery, violent crimes, property crimes, and other felonies, number of drug arrests, number of misdemeanor arrests, rate of violent, property, robbery, weapons, other felony, drug, and misdemeanor arrests, offense type (drug trafficking, drug possession, robbery, and burglary), total number of incarcerations, total number of convictions, whether sentenced to prison, jail, or probation, incarceration sentence in months, sex, race, and age at sampled conviction, and age at first arrest (starting at age 17).
Curated
Management of Death Row Inmates, 1986-1987: [United States] (ICPSR 9917)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1986-01-01--1987-12-31
These data offer objective and subjective information about current death row inmates and the management policies and procedures related to their incarceration. The major objectives of the study were to gather data about the inmate population and current management policies and procedures, to identify issues facing correctional administrators in supervising the growing number of condemned inmates, and to offer options for improved management. Four survey instruments were developed: (1) a form for the Department of Corrections in each of the 37 states that had a capital punishment statute as of March 1986, (2) a form for each warden of an institution that housed death-sentenced inmates, (3) a form for staff members who worked with such inmates, and (4) a form for a sample of the inmates. The surveys included questions about inmate demographics (e.g., date of birth, sex, race, Hispanic origin, level of education, marital status, and number of children), the institutional facilities available to death row inmates, state laws pertaining to them, training for staff who deal with them, the usefulness of various counseling, medical, and recreational programs, whether the inmates expected to be executed, and the challenges in managing the death row population. The surveys did not probe legal, moral, or political arguments about the death penalty itself.
Curated
Milwaukee Domestic Violence Experiment, 1987-1989 (ICPSR 9966)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, United States
Time period: 1987-01-01--1989-12-31
This study represents a modified replication of the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment (SPECIFIC DETERRENT EFFECTS OF ARREST FOR DOMESTIC ASSAULT: MINNEAPOLIS, 1981-1982 [ICPSR 8250]). The Minneapolis study found arrest to be an effective deterrent against repeat domestic violence. The two key purposes of the current study were (1) to examine the possible differences in reactions to arrest, and (2) to compare the effects of short and long incarceration associated with arrest. Research protocol involved 35 patrol officers in four Milwaukee police districts screening domestic violence cases for eligibility, then calling police headquarters to request a randomly-assigned disposition. The three possible randomly assigned dispositions were (1) Code 1, which consisted of arrest and at least one night in jail, unless the suspect posted bond, (2) Code 2, which consisted of arrest and immediate release on recognizance from the booking area at police headquarters, or as soon as possible, and (3) Code 3, which consisted of a standard Miranda-style script warning read by police to both suspect and victim. A battered women's shelter hotline system provided the primary measurement of the frequency of violence by the same suspects both before and after each case leading to a randomized police action. Other forms of measurement included arrests of the suspect both before and after the offense, as well as offenses against the same victim. Initial victim interviews were attempted within one month after the first 900 incidents were compiled. A second victim interview was attempted six months after the incident for all 1,200 cases. Data collected for this study included detailed data on each of the 1,200 randomized events, less detailed data on an additional 854 cases found ineligible, "pipeline" data on the frequency of domestic violence in the four Milwaukee police districts, official measures of prior and subsequent domestic violence for both suspects and victims, interviews of arrested suspects for eligible and ineligible cases, criminal justice system dispositions of the randomized arrests, results of urinalysis tests of drug and alcohol use for some arrestees, and log attempts to obtain interviews from suspects and victims. Demographic variables include victim and suspect age, race, education, employment status, and marital status. Additional information obtained includes victim-offender relationships, alcohol and drug use during incident, substance of conflict, nature of victim injury and medical treatment as reported by police and victims, characteristics of suspects in the Code 1 and 2 arrest groups, victim and suspect reports of who called police, and victim and suspect versions of speed of police response.
Curated
Effects of Determinant Sentencing on Institutional Climate and Prison Administration: Connecticut, Minnesota, Illinois, 1981-1983 (ICPSR 8278)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States, Illinois, Connecticut, Minnesota
Time period: 1981-01-01--1983-12-31
This data collection examines the effects of determinant sentencing on prison climate and administration. Three data collection periods are covered in the dataset. Parts 1-3 contain data taken from a total random sample of offenders housed at five prisons over all three data collection periods. Part 4 is an additional sample from the state of Connecticut of inmates serving determinate sentences, collected during the third period of data collection. Parts 5 and 6 comprise indeterminate sample data from all three data collection periods, while Parts 7-9 contain determinate panel sample data from all three collection periods. There were six questionnaires used in collecting these data, covering inmates' feelings about their arrest, court case, and conviction, their feelings about the law, physical problems developed during their prison term, how their time was spent in prison, family contacts outside prison, relationships with other prisoners and guards, involvement in prison programs, and criminal history.
Curated
Treatment of Incarcerated Women with Substance Use Disorder and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Providence, Rhode Island, 1999-2001 (ICPSR 3416)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: Rhode Island, United States
Time period: 1999-10-01--2001-11-30
The goal of this study was to evaluate the initial efficacy, feasibility, and acceptability of Seeking Safety (SS) treatment in a sample of incarcerated women with comorbid substance use disorder (SUD) and comorbid post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Seeking Safety, a cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy treatment, is a psychosocial treatment for women with comorbid PTSD and SUD and, at the time this study was conducted, it was the treatment with the most efficacy data for this population. SS treatment appears to be a promising intervention for incarcerated women with PTSD and SUD because (1) the treatment targets many of the deficits found in this population that may interfere with their recovery and place these women at risk for reoffending (such as impulsiveness, anger dyscontrol, and maladaptive lifestyle activities), and (2) it teaches skills to manage these problematic behaviors. This study aimed to conduct an open feasibility trial of Seeking Safety treatment in a sample of six incarcerated women with SUD and PTSD and to conduct a randomized controlled pilot study to evaluate the initial efficacy, feasibility, and acceptability of the proposed treatment as an adjunct to treatment as usual (TAU), compared to a TAU control group in a sample of 22 incarcerated women with comorbid PTSD and SUD. The primary hypothesis was that, compared to the TAU condition, women in the SS treatment condition would have less severe drug and alcohol use as well as fewer PTSD symptoms and legal problems after intervention, and at six weeks and three months after release. The first six participants recruited for the study received SS group treatment as an adjunct to the treatment provided by the Discovery Program, the substance abuse treatment program in the minimum security arm of the Women's Facility of the Adult Correctional Institution in Providence, Rhode Island. The remaining participants were randomly assigned to either the control group (TAU) or to a group that received SS treatment as an adjunct to TAU. The treatment groups were conducted by clinicians who worked as substance abuse therapists in the Discovery Program and a clinical psychologist from Brown University. All SS therapists received training in delivering SS therapy from Dr. Lisa Najavits, who developed SS treatment. Assessments were conducted at pretreatment, post-treatment during incarceration, and three and six months postrelease for PTSD-related measures. Measures of severity of substance abuse and legal problems were taken at pretreatment, as well as at the six- and 12-week postrelease intervals. Measures were taken with a variety of clinical instruments, including the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) module on substance use, the Clinician Administered Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Scale-I (CAPS-I), the Trauma History Questionnaire (THQ), the Helping Alliance Questionnaire-II (HAQ-II), the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, and the End-of-Treatment Questionnaire. Basic demographic data were also collected from administrative records. Variables include alcohol, drug, and legal composite scores at pretreatment and post-treatment, number of relapses, whether the woman returned to prison, whether the woman lied about substance abuse, use of particular substances one month prior to prison and during lifetime, PTSD indicators of frequency and intensity, total client satisfaction scores, patients' ratings of therapists and treatment, and trauma scales for crime, sexual abuse, and physical abuse. Demographic variables include age, ethnic background, education, first time in prison, the nature of the current conviction, and number of arrests with convictions.
Curated
Crime Control Effects of Sentencing in Essex County, New Jersey, 1976-1997 (ICPSR 2857)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, New Jersey
Time period: 1976-01-01--1997-12-31
This study was undertaken to examine the ways in which different felony sanctions impact the future behavior of felony offenders. The study sought to determine whether the following made a difference in subsequent criminal behavior: (1) sentences of confinement, (2) the length of sentence (both the sentence imposed and that which was actually served), and (3) sentences of probation combined with jail ("split" sentences), or combined with fines, restitution, or other alternative sanctions. Data were collected from questionnaires completed by 18 judges of the Essex County, New Jersey, courts and by probation staff. Follow-up data were collected from official records provided by probation, jail, prison, and parole case files. Follow-up data were also collected from the following official records: (1) the New Jersey Offender-Based Transaction System Computerized Criminal History, (2) the New Jersey Department of Corrections Offender-Based Correctional Information System, (3) the United States Department of Justice Interstate Identification Index, (4) the National Crime Information Center Wanted Persons File, (5) the New Jersey PROMIS/GAVEL Prosecutors Case Tracking System, and (6) administrative record files of the New Jersey Department of Corrections. Variables in the data file include the most serious offense charge, most serious offense of conviction, dimension of conviction, offense type (person, property, social order, fraud, or drug offense), number of prior probations, number of probation revocations, number of prior jail and prison terms, mitigating and aggravating factors affecting the sentence, type of sentence, special conditions of probation, fines and restitutions imposed, minimum and maximum incarceration terms (in months), history of drug offenses, type of drugs used, probation and parole violations, total number of prior arrests and prior convictions, and longest arrest-free period after first arrest. The type of post-sentence offense, dimension, disposition charge, sentence, and date of arrest are provided for arresting events and charge episodes 1 through 108 for any offender. For up to 43 arrest events (for any offender), the date of lockup and date of exit from confinement are provided. The file also includes recommendations made by prosecutors and probation officers, and judges' ratings (on a scale of one to nine) with respect to the likelihood of an offender committing future property crimes, crimes against persons, or any crime. Judges also rated the arrest record length, conviction record length, and social stability of each offender. Retribution points, incapacitation points, and specific deterrence points assigned by the judges complete the file. Demographic variables include the race and sex of each convicted offender, and the age of the offender at first conviction.
Curated
Consequences of a Criminal Record for Employment Opportunity in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 2002 (ICPSR 3599)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, United States, Wisconsin
This study examined employers' policies and practices for hiring entry-level workers in the Milwaukee metropolitan area. The study consisted of telephone interviews conducted in the spring of 2002 with 177 employers who had advertised entry-level openings in the prior six months. The survey included questions about the company, such as size, industry, employee turnover, and racial composition, questions about hiring procedures, questions about the last worker hired for a position not requiring a college degree, and questions about the employer's attitude toward various kinds of marginalized workers. An emphasis in the survey was placed on assessing employers' attitudes about and experience with applicants with criminal histories.
Curated
Evaluating Anti-Gang Legislation and Gang Prosecution Units in Clark and Washoe Counties, Nevada, 1989-1995 (ICPSR 2753)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Time period: 1989-01-01--1995-12-31
In response to several high profile, violent crimes by minority males, which were reported by law enforcement officials as being gang-related, Nevada lawmakers enacted an array of anti-gang legislation, much of it drafted by law enforcement personnel. This study attempted to provide answers to the following research questions: (1) How often and under what specific conditions were the various anti-gang statutes used in the prosecution of gang members? (2) How had the passage of anti-gang statutes and the development of the gang prosecution units influenced the use of more conventional charging practices related to gang cases? and (3) Did specialized gang prosecution produce higher rates of convictions, more prison sentences, and longer prison terms for gang offenders? Court monitoring data were collected from both Clark and Washoe counties to document the actual extent and nature of gang crime in both jurisdictions over several years. Variables include the year of the court case, whether the defendant was a gang member, total number of initial charges, whether all charges were dismissed before trial, whether the defendant was convicted of any charge, the length of the prison sentence imposed, whether the defendant was charged with a gang enhancement statute, and whether the defendant was charged with murder, sexual assault, robbery, kidnapping, burglary, auto theft, larceny, a drug offense, a weapon offense, or assault. Demographic variables include the race, sex, and age of the defendant.
Curated
Validating Prison Security Classification Instruments in Hawaii, 1984-1985 (ICPSR 9921)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Hawaii
Time period: 1984-01-01--1985-12-31
The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a reliable and accurate method for measuring the effectiveness of offender classification systems to improve the management of correctional facilities. In the early 1980s, the state of Hawaii began classifying its prisoners with a newly developed Federal Bureau of Prisons classification instrument. This study was designed to develop a method to evaluate this form. Two prediction models were used. The first, initial classification, used the sum of four variables to arrive at a security score, which was taken to be predictive of violence. The second, reclassification, used the sum of seven different variables to obtain a custody total, which was then used as a major determinant of reclassification. Two groups of inmates were used: inmates who had committed infractions and inmates with no reported infractions. Research variables include (a) initial classification: offense (severity), expected length of incarceration (sentence), type of prior commitments, and history of violence, and (b) reclassification: percentage of time served, involvement with drugs/alcohol, mental/psychological stability, most serious disciplinary report, frequency of disciplinary reports, responsibility that the inmate demonstrated, and family/community ties. In addition, the collection supplies information on race and sex of inmates, sentence limitation, history of escapes or attempts, previous infractions, entry, reclassification, and termination dates (month and year), and custody level. There are demographic variables for sex and race. The unit of observation is the inmate.
Curated
Criminal Violence and Incapacitation in California, 1962-1988 (ICPSR 9922)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, California
Time period: 1962-01-01--1988-12-31
These data were gathered to investigate the usefulness of statistical methods, particularly multiple-regression analysis, in predicting repeat criminal activity subsequent to an individual's release from prison. The data collection consists of follow-up information, collected in 1988, on a sample of males released from California prisons. The follow-up study identified criminal activity subsequent to individuals' release from prison through 1988. Predictor variables include age, prior periods of arrest, history of drug use, seriousness of original offense, and number of arrests for nuisance, person, property, and fraud offenses.
Curated
Shock Incarceration in Louisiana, 1987-1989 (ICPSR 9926)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Louisiana
Time period: 1987-01-01--1989-12-31
These data describe the results of one component of an evaluation of the "shock incarceration" program in the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections (LDPSC). This program, formally called IMPACT (Intensive Motivational Program of Alternative Correctional Treatment), began in 1987 and consisted of two phases. In the first phase offenders spent 90 to 180 days in a medium security prison participating in a rigorous boot camp-type program. Offenders who successfully completed the program were released from prison and placed under intensive supervision in the community--the second phase of the program. Changes in offender behavior and attitudes during the prison and community supervision phases of the shock program were examined in a quasi-experimental design to determine the impact of the program on the individual offenders. Comparisons were made with similar offenders who were not in the shock program who had been sentenced to prison and parole/probation. Shock and nonshock incarcerated offenders were asked to complete self-report questionnaires. Information was also collected from LDPSC records and from monthly parole performance evaluations completed by parole and probation officers. Information collected from LDPSC records included demographics, sentence characteristics, release date, offense, criminal history, I.Q. (Beta II) and MMPI scores, and diagnostic personnel evaluations of mental health, substance abuse, general attitude, adjustment, and violence potential. Part 1 of the collection consists of inmate data collected from the incarcerated shock program participants (N = 208) and the incarcerated nonshock offenders (N = 98, with partial records for an additional 46). Information includes police record data, clinical diagnostic data, offender's self-reported demographic data, scales for self-reported attitudes and personality measures, and offender's self-reported criminal and substance abuse history. Part 2 contains demographic data collected for all samples, including police record data and clinical diagnostic data. Part 3 consists of parole and probation data for all inmates. Offenders were followed for 12 months after leaving prison or until they failed community supervision (by absconding, being jailed for a lengthy period of time, or having their parole/probation revoked). Consequently, there is monthly data for between 1 to 12 months for each offender. Information includes items relating to parolees' performance at work and school, personal adjustment, employment, substance abuse counseling, interpersonal relations, compliance with intensive supervision program requirements, and contacts with the criminal justice system.
Curated
Changing Patterns of Drug Abuse and Criminality Among Crack Cocaine Users in New York City: Criminal Histories and Criminal Justice System Processing, 1983-1984, 1986 (ICPSR 9790)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)
Time period: 1983-01-01--1984-12-31, 1986-01-01--1986-12-31
This data collection compares a sample of persons arrested for offenses related to crack cocaine with a sample arrested for offenses related to powdered cocaine. The collection is one of two parts of a study designed to examine the characteristics of crack users and sellers, the impact of large numbers of crack-related offenders on the criminal justice system, and their effects on drug treatment and community programs. Official arrest records and supplementary data bases are used to analyze the official arrest, conviction, and incarceration histories of powdered cocaine and crack defendants. Questions addressed by the collection include: (1) How are defendants charged with crack-related offenses different from defendants charged with offenses related to powdered cocaine? (2) Is there a difference between the ways the criminal justice system handles crack offenders and powdered cocaine offenders in pretrial detention, charges filed, case dispositions, and sentencing? (3) How do the criminal careers of crack offenders compare with the criminal careers of powdered cocaine offenders, especially in terms of total arrest rates, frequencies of nondrug crimes, and frequencies of violent crimes? (4) Is violence more strongly associated with crack dealing than with powdered cocaine dealing? and (5) How does the developmental history of powdered cocaine sales and possession compare with the history of crack sales and possession? Variables include demographic information such as gender, residence, and race, arrest, conviction, and incarceration histories, prior criminal record, community ties, and court outcomes of the arrests.
Curated
Use and Effectiveness of Fines, Jail, and Probation in Municipal Courts in Los Angeles County, 1981-1984 (ICPSR 9742)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, California
Time period: 1981-01-01--1984-12-31
The purpose of this data collection was to identify those attributes of offenders that are most often associated with receiving particular types of financial penalties along with probation, such as fines, restitution, and cost of probation. A further purpose was to estimate the relative effectiveness of these penalties in preventing recidivism. Variables include descriptions of the type of offense and penalties received, the location of the court where sentencing took place, and information about the individual's race, age, gender, level of education, employment, living arrangements, and financial status. Prior arrests and convictions are included, as are arrests, convictions, and penalties subsequent to the original case under study. Also provided are six sets of variables that describe all offenders within each conviction category. These six groups provide additional information about the offender's background and behavior. The conviction categories include assault, burglary, drug crimes, driving under the influence, theft, and indecent exposure.
Curated
Effects of Arrests and Incarceration on Informal Social Control in Baltimore, Maryland, Neighborhoods, 1980-1994 (ICPSR 3796)
Released/updated on: 2003-12-11
Geographic coverage: Baltimore, United States, Maryland
Time period: 1980-01-01--1994-12-31
This study examined the effects of police arrest policies and incarceration policies on communities in 30 neighborhoods in Baltimore. Specifically, the study addressed the question of whether aggressive arrest and incarceration policies negatively impacted social organization and thereby reduced the willingness of area residents to engage in informal social control, or collective efficacy. CRIME CHANGES IN BALTIMORE, 1970-1994 (ICPSR 2352) provided aggregate community-level data on demographics, socioeconomic attributes, and crime rates as well as data from interviews with residents about community attachment, cohesiveness, participation, satisfaction, and experiences with crime and self-protection. Incident-level offense and arrest data for 1987 and 1992 were obtained from the Baltimore Police Department. The Maryland Department of Public Safety and Corrections provided data on all of the admissions to and releases from prisons in neighborhoods in Baltimore City and Baltimore County for 1987, 1992, and 1994.