Search results

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.

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements), and detailed questions about mental health, substance abuse, and educational services provided to young persons.

In 2022, the JRFC was divided into seven sections:

1. General facility information
2. Mental health services
3. Educational services
4. Substance abuse services
5. Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date
6. Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date
7. Space shared with other facilities

Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October (October 26, 2022).

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements), and detailed questions about mental health, substance abuse, and educational services provided to young persons.

In 2020, the JRFC was divided into eight sections:

1. General facility information
2. Mental health services
3. Educational services
4. Substance abuse services
5. Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date
6. Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date
7. Space shared with other facilities
8. Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)

Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October (October 28, 2020).

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned to a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2019, the reference date was Wednesday, October 23 (the fourth Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g., placing agency), the judicial process (e.g., court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g., age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g., facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children. Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction.

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2021, the reference date was Wednesday, October 27 (the fourth Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g. placing agency), the judicial process (e.g. court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g. age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g. facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children. Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction.

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 nonfatal firearm injury and firearm mortality in 1,829 youths in Chicago, Illinois who were involved with the juvenile justice system and to compare incidence rates of firearm mortality with the general population.

The study publication is available for download.

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

This is a quasi-experimental, observational study using administrative data to assess whether time in juvenile placement was associated with the acquisition of social-emotional skills and subsequent felony recidivism. Concurrent with a change in juvenile sentencing policy in Washington State a comprehensive risk and needs assessment tool (R-PACT) was piloted to investigate the impact that therapeutically oriented incarceration had on youth. This tool was made up of 12 domains of risk and needs, including a section on dynamic factors related to therapeutic skills. Youth were admitted into the study in two cohorts, a main study cohort and a replication study cohort.

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 research team interviewed participants from the Northwestern Juvenile Project (NJP) (originally enrolled as they entered the Cook County Juvenile Temporary Detention Center from 1995 to 1998, and now parents ages 34-43 years) and their oldest child age 10 to 17 years when sampled, and leveraged data already collected on parents' firearm involvement--during their own adolescence and young adulthood for the NJP.

The National Survey of Youth in Custody (NSYC) is part of the BJS National Prison Rape Statistics Program to gather mandated data on the incidence of prevalence of sexual assault in juvenile facilities under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA; P.L. 108-79). The Act requires a 10 percent sample of juvenile facilities to be listed by incidence of sexual assault. Data are collected directly from youth in a private setting using audio computer-assisted self-interview (ACASI) technology with a touch-screen laptop and an audio feed to maximize inmate confidentiality and minimize literacy issues. The NSYC-3 was administered to 6,910 youth in 332 state operated and locally or privately operated juvenile facilities within the United States. Youth were randomly assigned to either a sexual victimization questionnaire (90%) or an alternative questionnaire (10%).

Sexual victimization questionnaire: Youth selected for this questionnaire received one of two versions, based on their age. The Older Youth questionnaire was administered to youths ages 15 and up, and the Younger Youth questionnaire was administered to those 14 and younger. The survey was divided into six sections. Section A collected background information, such as details of admission to facility and demographics including education, height, weight, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and history of any forced sexual contact. Section B, Facility Perceptions and Victimization, included respondents' opinions of the facility and staff, any incidence of gang activity, and any injuries that had occurred. Section C, Sexual Activity Within Facility, captured the types of sexual contact that occurred and the circumstances of sexual contact. Section D, Description of Event(s) with Youth, and Section E, Description of Event(s) with Staff, focused on when and where the contact occurred, the race and gender of the other youths or staff members, if threats or coercion were involved, and outcomes, including whether or not the sexual contact was reported. Section F collected additional information about the youth, such as disability and mental health conditions, and the facility, including living conditions and use of restrictive housing.

Alternative questionnaire: A random selection of youth were assigned to an alternative questionnaire to "mask" which questions an individual might have been asked. In addition to Sections A, B, and F from the sexual victimization questionnaire, this questionnaire included sections on facility living conditions, mental health, grievance procedures, substance use, treatment programs, living arrangements, youth education and aspirations, communication with family, and post-release plans.

A Facility Questionnaire (FQ) collected in-depth information on each sampled facility via an online questionnaire. Topics included number of facility staff by race/ethnicity, job category, age, and length of service; staff turnover/vacant positions; personnel screening; staff training; number of youth, admissions, and discharges; rated capacity (i.e., number of beds), occupancy, and crowding; youth disabilities; grievance process; special housing; and youth education on PREA.

Other variables in the datasets include debriefing questions about respondents' experiences completing the survey, interviewer observations, created variables to summarize victimization reports (due to the complex routing in Section C), weight and stratification data, and administrative data about the facilities.

This study is a redesign study of the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP) Series and the Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC) Series.

As part of this study's redesign, a pilot test was conducted that included new questions, topics, and methods that were reviewed and approved by a panel of 12 juvenile justice experts. The experts provided feedback about questions and topics that should be removed from the current surveys or added to the questionnaires in future waves. Additionally, two survey methodologists reviewed the questionnaires for wording, visual design, and other survey methodology best practices that should be incorporated. Eight cognitive interviews were conducted to review the recommended additions and changes. See the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memo for a detailed list of changes.

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2017, the reference date was Wednesday, October 25 (the fourth Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g. placing agency), the judicial process (e.g. court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g. age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g. facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children. Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction.

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements), and detailed questions about mental health, substance abuse, and educational services provided to young persons.

In 2018, the JRFC was divided into seven sections:

1. General facility information
2. Mental health services
3. Educational services
4. Substance abuse services
5. Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date
6. Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date
7. Space shared with other facilities

Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October.

This study was conducted to address the dropping rates in residential placements of adjudicated youth after the 1990s. Policymakers, advocates, and reseraches began to attirbute the decline to reform measures and proposed that this was the cause of the drop seen in historic national crime. In response, researchers set out to use state-level data on economic factors, crime rates, political ideology scores, and youth justice policies and practices to test the association between the youth justice policy environment and recent reductions in out-of-home placements for adjudicated youth.

This data collection contains two files, a multivariate and bivariate analyses. In the multivariate file the aim was to assess the impact of the progressive policy characteristics on the dependent variable which is known as youth confinement. In the bivariate analyses file Wave 1-Wave 10 the aim was to assess the states as they are divided into 2 groups across all 16 dichotomized variables that comprised the progressive policy scale: those with more progressive youth justice environments and those with less progressive or punitive environments. Some examples of these dichotomized variables include purpose clause, courtroom shackling, and competency standard.

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.

This study examined the following goals: (1) firearm involvement (access, ownership, and use) during adolescence and young adulthood; (2) perpetration of firearm violence over time; and (3) patterns of firearm victimization (injury and mortality) over time. This study addressed the association between early involvement with firearms and firearm-firearm perpetration and victimization in adulthood.

The original sample included 1,829 randomly selected youth, 1,172 males and 657 females, then 10 to 18 years old, enrolled in the study as they entered the Cook County Juvenile Temporary Detention Center from 1995 to 1998. Among the sample were 1,005 African Americans, 524 Hispanics, and 296 non-Hispanic white respondents. Participants were tracked from the time they left detention. Re-interviews were conducted regardless of where respondents were living when their follow-up interview was due: in the community, correctional settings, or by telephone if they lived farther than two hours from Chicago.

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements), and detailed questions about mental health, substance abuse, and educational services provided to young persons.

In 2016, the JRFC was divided into seven sections:

1. General facility information
2. Mental health services
3. Educational services
4. Substance abuse services
5. Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date
6. Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date
7. Space shared with other facilities

Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October.

This collection includes data collected from a subsample of participants interviewed near the end of the thirteenth follow-up of the Northwestern Juvenile Project (NJP). NJP is a longitudinal assessment of alcohol, drug, and mental health service needs and outcomes of juvenile detainees. The thirteenth follow-up occurred approximately 16 years after the baseline interview. The subsample of participants received two additional modules that were added to the interview. These interview modules, the Juvenile Justice Experiences module and the Weapons-Related Injury module, retrospectively assessed behaviors and experiences during adolescence.

The original NJP sample included 1,829 randomly selected youth recruited at intake to the Cook County Juvenile Temporary Detention Center (CCJTDC) in Chicago, Illinois from 1995 to 1998. The sample was stratified by gender, race/ethnicity, age, and legal status (for a total of 13 strata) to obtain enough participants to examine key subgroups. Both additional modules were administered at follow-up thirteen to a subsample 389 participants.

The Juvenile Justice Experiences module assessed experiences with corrections in the juvenile justice system. Items were drawn from the Survey of Youth in Residential Placement (SYRP) which ask a series of questions covering an individual's emotion and mental states among youth who are in custody. NJP utilized a modified SYRP to assess juvenile justice experiences retrospectively among the sample.

The Weapons-Related Injury module was created for the NJP, and assesses gunshot-related and stabbing-related victimization during adolescence.

This study contains data from the sixth follow-up interview of the Northwestern Juvenile Project (NJP), a longitudinal assessment of alcohol, drug, or mental service treatment needs of juvenile detainees. The sixth follow-up occurred approximately 8 years after the baseline interview and focused on studying the development and persistence of psychiatric disorders, related predictive variables, patterns of drug use, and other risk behaviors.

The project's aims included studying (1) development and persistence of alcohol, drug, and mental disorders and (2) pathways and patterns of risky behaviors. Changes in disorders over time were studied (including onset, remission, and recurrence), comorbidity, associated functional impairments, and the risk and protective factors related to these disorders and impairments. This study addressed patterns and sequences of the development of drug use and related variables, focusing on gender differences, racial/ethnic differences, the antecedents of these risky behaviors (risk and protective factors), and how these behaviors were interrelated.

The original sample included 1829 randomly selected youth, 1172 males and 657 females, then 10 to 18 years old, enrolled in the study as they entered the Cook County Juvenile Temporary Detention Center from 1995 to 1998. Among the sample were 1005 African Americans, 524 Hispanics, and 296 non-Hispanic white respondents. Participants were tracked from the time they left detention. All participants were eligible for the sixth follow-up interview. Re-interviews were conducted regardless of where respondents were living when their follow-up interview was due: in the community, correctional settings, or by telephone if they lived farther than two hours from Chicago.

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

This study examined differences in youth's mental health and substance abuse needs in seven different racial/ethnic groups of justice-involved youth. Using de-identified data from the Survey of Youth in Residential Placement (SYRP), it was assessed whether differences in mental health and substance abuse needs and services existed in a racially/ethnically diverse sample of youth in custody. Data came from a nationally representative sample of 7,073 youth in residential placements across 36 states, representing five program types. An examination of the extent to which there were racial/ethnic disparities in the delivery of services in relation to need was also conducted. This examination included assessing the differences in substance-related problems, availability of substance services, and receipt of substance-specific counseling.

One SAS data file (syrp2017.sas7bdat) is included as part of this collection and has 138 variables for 7073 cases, with demographic variables on youth age, sex, race and ethnicity. Also included as part of the data collection are two SAS Program (syntax) files for use in secondary analysis of youth mental health and substance use.

The National Survey of Youth in Custody (NSYC) is part of the BJS National Prison Rape Statistics Program to gather mandated data on the incidence of prevalence of sexual assault in juvenile facilities under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA; P.L. 108-79). The Act requires a 10 percent sample of juvenile facilities to be listed by incidence of sexual assault. Data are collected directly from youth in a private setting using audio computer-assisted self interview (ACASI) technology with a touch-screen laptop and an audio feed to maximize inmate confidentiality and minimize literacy issues. The first year of collection includes nearly 200 juvenile facilities, with an estimated 10,000 completed interviews with youth.

The National Survey of Youth in Custody Alternate (NSYC-A) is a supplement to NSYC that collected information on drug and alcohol use by youth in juvenile facilities. The survey was divided into six sections. Section A collected background information, such as age, gender, education level, and whether respondent had stayed overnight in a facility or had forced sexual contact prior to current incarceration. Section B, Facility Perceptions and Victimization, is not included in this dataset. Section C, Drug Use, included whether the respondent had ever used specific types of drugs, frequency of use in the past and immediately before being taken into custody, source of drugs, and symptoms of drug abuse and dependence. Section D, Alcohol Use, captured alcohol dependence and abuse symptoms. Section E, Treatment, focused on drug or alcohol treatment programs respondent had attended prior to being taken into custody. Section F, Family and Peer Background is not included in this dataset.

Other items include weights variables and derived variables regarding DSM IV drug dependence symptoms, alcohol and drug use/dependence/abuse status, outliers/illogical responses, and categorized demographic variables.

The Evaluation of Florida's Avon Park Youth Academy and STREET Smart Program, 2002-2008 contains data gathered on youth involved in programs which aim to increase educational outcomes, increase labor force participation, and reduce recidivism.

Avon Park Youth Academy (APYA) is a secure custody residential facility that provides specialized, remedial education and intensive vocational training to moderate risk youth committed to the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). The STREET Smart program (SS) was the reentry component of the program, which provided community support and educational and vocational services to APYA participants on a voluntary basis after their release to the community. In the last several years, APYA/SS has received national and international recognition as a "Promising Program" for juvenile offenders. Both the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) determined that a rigorous evaluation was required to assess whether APYA/SS could progress from a "Promising Program" to an "Evidence-based Practice."

To conduct this evaluation, the National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD) designed and conducted a field trial that randomly assigned youth committed to DJJ to the APYA/SS program or a control group. This experimental design permitted a rigorous test of the hypothesis that compared to the control group, APYA/SS participants would demonstrate more positive educational achievement, increased labor force participation, and reduced recidivism outcomes after community release.

The 360 youth assigned to the experimental control group stayed at APYA for an average of 9.7 months from 2002-2005. Of these, 301 youth completed participation in the SS program by March 2006. The youth were observed for a three-year period after their community release dates. This included an interview following release from incarceration to collect data on educational achievements, employment, and justice system program experiences. All subjects had reached the 36-month follow-up threshold as of May 2008.

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

This study compared the adult criminal justice and child welfare system outcomes of four pathways through the juvenile justice system - Traditional Probation, Intensive Probation, Specialty Court Docket (Crossroads Program), and commitment to state youth correction services (Department of Youth Services). The study compared the effectiveness of a continuum of services and supervision in improving public safety, including re-arrest and re-incarceration, and in improving outcomes in engagement with child welfare as parents, including child welfare complaints and dispositions.

The core research question is: "what is the relative effectiveness of four different juvenile justice interventions on improving public safety and child welfare outcomes?" The study population is all youths (n=2581) who entered the juvenile court from 2004-2008. It then included 7-10 years of follow-up in the adult justice and child welfare systems for all youths. The four interventions are on a continuum of intensity of services and supervision with Traditional Probation having the fewest services followed by Intensive Probation, Crossroads, and Division of Youth Services commitment.

The study's deposits include 14 SPSS data files:

• arrest_final.sav
• CW_Custody_Adult_final.sav
• CW_Custody_child_final.sav
• CW_Intakes_Adult_final.sav
• CW_Intakes_child_final.sav
• CW_Placements_adult_final.sav
• CW_Placements_child_final.sav
• General_final.sav
• Jail_final.sav
• JC_charges_final.sav
• JC_detention_final.sav
• JC_disposition_final.sav
• JC_Gal_final.sav
• prison_final.sav

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

This study examined the validity, reliability, equity and cost of nine juvenile justice risk assessment instruments. It was designed to provide a comprehensive examination of how several risk assessments perform in practice. This study posed the following questions:

1. Is each risk assessment instrument sufficiently reliable (i.e., inter-rater reliability) to ensure that decisions regarding level of risk and identified service needs are consistent across the organization?
2. What specific risk assessment items are associated with less reliability? What items are rated reliably by staff?
3. Is each risk assessment instrument valid? Specifically, what degree of discrimination is attained between assigned risk levels? Could the instrument be improved by adding or deleting specific factors and/or altering cut-off scores?
4. Is each risk assessment instrument valid for population subgroups: White/Caucasian, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, females, probationers, and youth in aftercare status? Could equity be improved by adding or deleting specific factors or altering cut-off scores?
5. What costs are associated with each risk assessment instrument?

The study collection includes 31 SPSS data files

1. all_jais_combined.sav (n=1,141; 6 variables)
2. ar_fire_final_file_ojjdp-ICPSR.sav (n=119; 205 variables)
3. AR_yls_irr_FINAL-ICPSR.sav (n=155; 136 variables)
4. azaoc_FINALFILE-ICPSR.sav (n=7,589; 438 variables)
5. AZAOC_irr_FINAL-ICPSR.sav (n=458; 101 variables)
6. AZDJC_FINAL_FILE-ICPSR.sav (n=1,265; 1,290 variables)
7. AZDJC_irr_FINAL-ICPSR.sav (n=55; 120 variables)
8. COMMITMENT_FINAL_SAMPLE2-ICPSR.sav (n=11,154; 719 variables)
9. FinalDJJReleasesWithRecid_BothYears2-ICPSR.sav (n=90,818; 31 variables)
10. FIRE_NE_COMM_FINAL_FILE_OJJDP-ICPSR.sav (n=597; 174 variables)
11. fire_ne_probation_final-ICPSR.sav (n=1,077; 237 variables)
12. FL_irr_FINAL-ICPSR.sav (n=519; 140 variables)
13. GA_irr_FINAL-ICPSR.sav (n=509; 263 variables)
14. gafire_boyscommunityALL_FINAL-ICPSR.sav (n=5,009; 781 variables)
15. gafire_communityALLforretrofit2-ICPSR.sav (n=6,943; 666 variables)
16. gafire_finalsampforanalysis_all-ICPSR.sav (n=7,412; 642 variables)
17. gafire_finalsampforanalysis_girls-ICPSR.sav (n=2,005; 768 variables)
18. jais_boys_wk_1-ICPSR.sav (n=1,989; 484 variables)
19. jais_girls_wk_1-ICPSR.sav (n=745; 484 variables)
20. NE_irr_FINAL-ICPSR.sav (n=727; 160 variables)
21. OR_irr_FINAL-ICPSR.sav (n=477; 112 variables)
22. ORE_FIRE_final-ICPSR.sav (n=12,370; 340 variables)
23. PROBATION_FINAL_BOYS_ALL-ICPSR.sav (n=20,621; 837 variables)
24. PROBATION_FINAL_GIRLS_ALL-ICPSR.sav (n=6,748; 849 variables)
25. va_boyssample-ICPSR.sav (n=1,106; 1,273 variables)
26. va_final_sample_fullscreen-ICPSR.sav (n=1,439; 1,237 variables)
27. va_girlssample-ICPSR.sav (n=333; 1,256 variables)
28. VA_irr_expert_FINAL-ICPSR.sav (n=10; 308 variables)
29. VA_irr_worker_FINAL-ICPSR.sav (n=685; 308 variables)
30. vafinalsample-ICPSR.sav (n=1,919; 1,200 variables)
31. workersurveyfinal-ICPSR.sav (n=400; 69 variables)

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2015, the reference date was Wednesday, October 28 (the fourth Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g. placing agency), the judicial process (e.g. court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g. age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g. facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children. Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction.

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2011, the reference date was Wednesday, October 26 (the last Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g. placing agency), the judicial process (e.g. court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g. age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g. facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction. The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children.

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements).

In 2012, the JRFC was divided into four sections:

1. General facility information
2. Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date
3. Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date
4. Space shared with other facilities

Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October.

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements), and detailed questions about mental health, substance abuse, and educational services provided to young persons.

In 2014, the JRFC was divided into seven sections:

1. General facility information
2. Mental health services
3. Educational services
4. Substance abuse services
5. Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date
6. Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date
7. Space shared with other facilities

Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October.

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2013, the reference date was Wednesday, October 23 (the fourth Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g. placing agency), the judicial process (e.g. court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g. age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g. facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children. Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction.

The National Survey of Youth in Custody (NSYC) is part of the BJS National Prison Rape Statistics Program to gather mandated data on the incidence of prevalence of sexual assault in juvenile facilities under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA; P.L. 108-79). The Act requires a 10 percent sample of juvenile facilities to be listed by incidence of sexual assault. Data are collected directly from youth in a private setting using audio computer-assisted self interview (ACASI) technology with a touch-screen laptop and an audio feed to maximize inmate confidentiality and minimize literacy issues. The NSYC-2 was administered to 8,707 youth in 326 state operated and locally or privately operated juvenile facilities within the United States.

The NSYC-2 utilized two questionnaires, based on the age of the respondent. The Older Youth questionnaire was administered to youths ages 15 and up, and the Younger Youth questionnaire was administered to those 14 and younger. The survey was divided into five sections. Section A collected background information, such as details of admission to facility and demographics including education, height, weight, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and history of any forced sexual contact. Section B, Facility Perceptions and Victimization, included respondents' opinions of the facility and staff, any incidence of gang activity, and any injuries that had occurred. Section C, Sexual Activity Within Facility, captured the types of sexual contact that occurred and the circumstances of sexual contact. Section D, Description of Event(s) with Youth, and Section E, Description of Event(s) with Staff, focused on when and where the contact occurred, the race and gender of the other youths or staff members, if threats or coercion were involved, and outcomes, including whether or not the sexual contact was reported.

Other variables include debriefing questions about respondents' experiences completing the survey, interviewer observations, created variables to summarize victimization reports (due to the complicated routing in Section C), weight and stratification data, and administrative data about the facilities.

Established in 1995, the Northwestern Juvenile Project assessed alcohol, drug, or mental (ADM) service needs of juvenile detainees. The study took place between the years of 1995 and 1998, sampling 1,829 male and female juvenile detainees within Cook County, Illinois. This study had two specific aims:

1. To assess the juvenile detainees ADM service needs (including psychiatric disorder, comorbidity and functional impairment); and,
2. To determine the extent that juvenile detainees who need ADM services received them while in the custody of the criminal justice system.

This study has four methodological advantages over prior research:

1. Stratified random sampling;
2. Sufficiently large N (approximately 600 females and 1200 males);
3. Reliable instruments; and
4. Comorbidity data.

Questions for respondents generally pertain to demographics, medical and sexual history, criminal history, aptitude and mental health assessment, familial and social relations, drug abuse, and education.

The National Survey of Youth in Custody (NSYC) is part of the BJS National Prison Rape Statistics Program to gather mandated data on the incidence of prevalence of sexual assault in juvenile facilities under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA; P.L. 108-79). The Act requires a 10 percent sample of juvenile facilities to be listed by incidence of sexual assault. Data are collected directly from youth in a private setting using audio computer-assisted self interview (ACASI) technology with a touch-screen laptop and an audio feed to maximize inmate confidentiality and minimize literacy issues. The first year of collection includes nearly 200 juvenile facilities, with an estimated 10,000 completed interviews with youth.

The NSYC utilized two questionnaires, based on the age of the respondent. The Older Youth questionnaire was administered to youths ages 15 and older, and the Younger Youth questionnaire was administered to those 14 and younger. The survey was divided into five sections. Section A collected background information, such as details of admission to facility and demographics including education, height, weight, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and history of any forced sexual contact. Section B, Facility Perceptions and Victimization, included respondents' opinions of the facility and staff, any incidence of gang activity, and any injuries that had occurred. Section C, Sexual Activity Within Facility, captured the types of sexual contact that occurred and the circumstances of sexual contact. Section D, Description of Events with Youth, and Section E, Description of Events with Staff Member, focused on when and where the contact occurred, the race and gender of the other youths or staff members, if threats or coersion were involved, and outcomes, included whether or not the sexual contact was reported.

Other variables include debriefing questions about respondents' experiences completing the survey, interviewer observations, created variables to summarize victimization reports (due to the complicated routing in Section C), weight and stratification data, and administrative data about the facilities.

The Survey of Youth in Residential Placement (SYRP) is the only national survey that gathers data directly from youth in the juvenile justice system. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) designed the survey in 2000 and 2001 to survey offender youth between the ages of 10 and 20. SYRP asks the youth about their backgrounds, offense histories and problems; the facility environment; experiences in the facility; experiences with alcohol and drugs; experiences of victimization in placement; medical needs and services received; and their expectations for the future. SYRP research provides answers to a number of questions about the characteristics and experiences of youth in custody including:

• Who are the youth in placement?
• What are their offenses?
• What are their family backgrounds?
• What are their expectations for the future?
• How are youth grouped in living units and programs?
• What activities are available in each facility?
• How accessible are social, emotional, and legal supports?
• What is the quality of the youth-staff relationships?
• How clear are the facility's rules?
• How clear is the facility's commitment to justice and due process?
• What methods of control and discipline do staff use?

SYRP's findings are based on anonymous interviews with a nationally representative sample of youth in custody during the spring of 2003 using audio computer-assisted self-interview (ACASI) technology. SYRP is the latest addition to two ongoing data collections that OJJDP designed and implemented in the 1990s. It joins the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement and the Juvenile Residential Facility Census to provide updated statistics on youth in custody in the juvenile justice system.

SYRP bulletins, reports, and a simplified online analysis tool are available from the SYRP Project Web site.