Showing 1 – 50 of 75 results.
Curated
ARL Statistics and Salary Surveys (ICPSR 133)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-03
Geographic coverage: United States
ARL Statistics, Interactive Edition, provides access to information and trends in research libraries. Data are collected from the members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Statistics have been published annually since 1962 and include data on collections, staffing, expenditures, and library services, as well as library and university characteristics of the ARL member libraries. This site links to interactive graphics and statistics pages that allow users to manipulate data queries.
Curated
Census of Jail Facilities, 2006 (ICPSR 26602)
Released/updated on: 2010-01-26
Geographic coverage: United States
To reduce respondent burden and improve data quality and timeliness, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) split the jail census into two parts: The Census of Jail Inmates was conducted with a reference date of June 30, 2005. The following spring it was followed by this enumeration, the Census of Jail Facilities, which collected data as of March 31, 2006. Previous jail enumerations were conducted in 1970 (ICPSR 7641), 1972 (ICPSR 7638), 1978 (ICPSR 7737), 1983 (ICPSR 8203), 1988 (ICPSR 9256), 1993 (ICPSR 6648), and 1999 (ICPSR 3318). The United States Census Bureau collected the data for the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The 2006 Census of Jail Facilities gathered data from all jail detention facilities holding inmates beyond arraignment, a period normally exceeding 72 hours. Jail facilities were operated by cities and counties, by private entities under contract to correctional authorities, and by the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). Excluded from the census were physically separate temporary holding facilities such as drunk tanks and police lockups that do not hold persons after being formally charged in court. Also excluded were state-operated facilities in Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Alaska, which have combined jail-prison systems. Fifteen independently operated jails in Alaska were included in the Census. The census collected jurisdictional level information on the number of confined inmates; average daily population; number of separate jail facilities; renovation and building plans; court orders and consent decrees; staff by occupational category and race/ethnicity; jail programs; and costs of operation. The census also collected individual jail facility information on the purpose for which the jail held offenders; gender of the inmates authorized to house; functions, such as general adult population confinement, work release, and medical treatment; whether a separate temporary holding area or lockup was operated; rated capacity; number of confined inmates by gender and adult or juvenile status; year of original construction; and whether the facility ever had a major renovation.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Census of Jails, 2013 (ICPSR 36128)
Released/updated on: 2018-04-25
Geographic coverage: United States
To reduce respondent burden for the 2013 collection, the Census of Jails was combined with the Deaths in Custody Reporting Program (DCRP). The census provides the sampling frame for the nationwide Survey of Inmates in Local Jails (SILJ) and the Annual Survey of Jails (ASJ). Previous jail enumerations were conducted in 1970 (ICPSR 7641), 1972 (ICPSR 7638), 1978 (ICPSR 7737), 1983 (ICPSR 8203), 1988 (ICPSR 9256), 1993 (ICPSR 6648), 1999 (ICPSR 3318), 2005 (ICPSR 20367), and 2006 (ICPSR 26602). The RTI International collected the data for the Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2013. The United States Census Bureau was the collection agent from 1970-2006.
The 2013 Census of Jails gathered data from all jail detention facilities holding inmates beyond arraignment, a period normally exceeding 72 hours. Jail facilities were operated by cities and counties, by private entities under contract to correctional authorities, and by the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP).
Excluded from the census were physically separate temporary holding facilities such as drunk tanks and police lockups that do not hold persons after being formally charged in court. Also excluded were state-operated facilities in Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Alaska, which have combined jail-prison systems. Fifteen independently operated jails in Alaska were included in the Census.
The 2013 census collected facility-level information on the number of confined and nonconfined inmates, number of inmates participating in weekend programs, number of confined non-U.S. citizens, number of confined inmates by sex and adult or juvenile status, number of juveniles held as adults, conviction and sentencing status, offense type, number of inmates held by race or Hispanic origin, number of inmates held for other jurisdictions or authorities, average daily population, rated capacity, number of admissions and releases, program participation for nonconfined inmates, operating expenditures, and staff by occupational category.
Curated
Partially restricted
Simple Crosstabs
Census of Jails, 2019 (ICPSR 38323)
Released/updated on: 2022-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
To reduce respondent burden for the 2019 collection, the Census of Jails was combined with the Deaths in Custody Reporting Program (DCRP). The census provides the sampling frame for the nationwide Survey of Inmates in Local Jails (SILJ) and the Annual Survey of Jails (ASJ). Previous jail enumerations were conducted in 1970 (ICPSR 7641), 1972 (ICPSR 7638), 1978 (ICPSR 7737), 1983 (ICPSR 8203), 1988 (ICPSR 9256), 1993 (ICPSR 6648), 1999 (ICPSR 3318), 2005 (ICPSR 20367), 2006 (ICPSR 26602), and 2013 (ICPSR 36128). The RTI International collected the data for the Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2013 and 2019. The United States Census Bureau was the collection agent from 1970-2006.
The 2019 Census of Jails gathered data from all jail detention facilities holding inmates beyond arraignment, a period normally exceeding 72 hours. Jail facilities were operated by cities and counties, by private entities under contract to correctional authorities, and by the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP).
Excluded from the census were physically separate temporary holding facilities such as drunk tanks and police lockups that do not hold persons after being formally charged in court. Also excluded were state-operated facilities in Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Alaska, which have combined jail-prison systems. Fifteen independently operated jails in Alaska were included in the Census.
The 2019 census collected information on the number of confined inmates, number of persons supervised outside jail, number of inmates participating in weekend programs, number of confined non-U.S. citizens, number of inmates by sex and adult or juvenile status, number of juveniles held as adults, number of inmates who were parole or probation violators, number of inmates by conviction status, number of inmates by felony or misdemeanor status, number of inmates held by race or Hispanic origin, number of inmates held for other jurisdictions or authorities, average daily population, rated capacity, admissions and releases, number of staff employed by local jails, facility functions, and number of jails under court orders and consent decrees.
The 2019 census also included a module to collect data on the effects of the opioid epidemic on local jails and jail responses to the epidemic. Items included:
- Jail practices on opioid use disorder testing, screening, and treatment.
- Number of local jail admissions screened during June 2019.
- Number of positive screens.
- Number of admissions treated for opioid use disorder.
- Number of jail inmates treated for opioid withdrawal at midyear 2019.
Curated
Census of Law Enforcement Gang Units, 2007 (ICPSR 29503)
Released/updated on: 2011-03-22
Geographic coverage: United States
The 2007 Census of Law Enforcement Gang Units (CLEGU) collected data from all state and local law enforcement agencies with 100 or more sworn officers and at least one officer dedicated solely to addressing gangs and gang activities. Law enforcement agencies are often the first line of response to the gang problems experienced across the country and are a critical component of most anti-gang initiatives. One way for law enforcement agencies to address gang-related problems is to form specialized gang units. The consolidation of an agency's gang enforcement activities and resources into a single unit can allow gang unit officers to develop specific expertise and technical skills related to local gang characteristics and behaviors and gang prevention and suppression. No prior studies have collected data regarding the organization and operations of law enforcement gang units nationwide, the types of gang prevention tactics employed, or the characteristics and training of gang unit officers. This CLEGU collected data on the operations, workload, policies, and procedures of gang units in large state and local law enforcement agencies in order to expand knowledge of gang prevention and enforcement tactics. The CLEGU also collected summary measures of gang activity in the agencies' jurisdictions to allow for comparison across jurisdictions with similar gang problems.
Curated
Census of Problem-Solving Courts, 2012 (ICPSR 36717)
Released/updated on: 2017-04-06
Geographic coverage: United States
With the creation of the first drug court in Miami-Dade County, Florida in 1989, problem-solving courts emerged as an innovative effort to close the revolving door of recidivism. Designed to target the social and psychological problems underlying certain types of criminal behavior, the problem-solving model boasts a community-based, therapeutic approach. As a result of the anecdotal successes of early drug courts, states expanded the problem-solving court model by developing specialized courts or court dockets to address a number of social problems. Although the number and types of problem-solving courts has been expanding, the formal research and statistical information regarding the operations and models of these programs has not grown at the same rate. Multiple organizations have started mapping the variety of problem-solving courts in the county; however, a national catalogue of problem-solving court infrastructure is lacking. As evidence of this, different counts of problem-solving courts have been offered by different groups, and a likely part of the discrepancy lies in disagreements about how to define and identify a problem-solving court. What is known about problem-solving courts is therefore limited to evaluation or outcome analyses of specific court programs.
In 2010, the Bureau of Justice Statistics awarded the National Center for State Courts a grant to develop accurate and reliable national statistics regarding problem-solving court operations, staffing, and participant characteristics. The NCSC, with assistance from the National Drug Court Institute (NDCI), produced the resulting Census of Problem-Solving Courts which captures information on over 3,000 problem-solving courts that were operational in 2012.
Curated
Census of Public Defender Offices: County-Based and Local Offices, 2007 (ICPSR 29502)
Released/updated on: 2011-05-13
Geographic coverage: United States
The Bureau of Justice Statistics' (BJS) 2007 Census of Public Defender Offices (CPDO) collected data from public defender offices located across 49 states and the District of Columbia. Public defender offices are one of three methods through which states and localities ensure that indigent defendants are granted the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to counsel. (In addition to defender offices, indigent defense services may also be provided by court-assigned private counsel or by a contract system in which private attorneys contractually agree to take on a specified number of indigent defendants or indigent defense cases.) Public defender offices have a salaried staff of full- or part-time attorneys who represent indigent defendants and are employed as direct government employees or through a public, nonprofit organization. Public defenders play an important role in the United States criminal justice system. Data from prior BJS surveys on indigent defense representation indicate that most criminal defendants rely on some form of publicly provided defense counsel, primarily public defenders. Although the United States Supreme Court has mandated that the states provide counsel for indigent persons accused of crime, documentation on the nature and provision of these services has not been readily available. States have devised various systems, rules of organization, and funding mechanisms for indigent defense programs. While the operation and funding of public defender offices varies across states, public defender offices can be generally classified as being part of either a state program or a county-based system. The 22 state public defender programs functioned entirely under the direction of a central administrative office that funded and administered all the public defender offices in the state. For the 28 states with county-based offices, indigent defense services were administered at the county or local jurisdictional level and funded principally by the county or through a combination of county and state funds. The CPDO collected data from both state- and county-based offices. All public defender offices that were principally funded by state or local governments and provided general criminal defense services, conflict services, or capital case representation were within the scope of the study. Federal public defender offices and offices that provided primarily contract or assigned counsel services with private attorneys were excluded from the data collection. In addition, public defender offices that were principally funded by a tribal government, or provided primarily appellate or juvenile services were outside the scope of the project and were also excluded. The CPDO gathered information on public defender office staffing, expenditures, attorney training, standards and guidelines, and caseloads, including the number and type of cases received by the offices. The data collected by the CPDO can be compared to and analyzed against many of the existing national standards for the provision of indigent defense services.
Curated
Census of Public Defender Offices: State Programs, 2007 (ICPSR 29501)
Released/updated on: 2011-05-13
Geographic coverage: United States
The Bureau of Justice Statistics' (BJS) 2007 Census of Public Defender Offices (CPDO) collected data from public defender offices located across 49 states and the District of Columbia. Public defender offices are one of three methods through which states and localities ensure that indigent defendants are granted the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to counsel. (In addition to defender offices, indigent defense services may also be provided by court-assigned private counsel or by a contract system in which private attorneys contractually agree to take on a specified number of indigent defendants or indigent defense cases.) Public defender offices have a salaried staff of full- or part-time attorneys who represent indigent defendants and are employed as direct government employees or through a public, nonprofit organization. Public defenders play an important role in the United States criminal justice system. Data from prior BJS surveys on indigent defense representation indicate that most criminal defendants rely on some form of publicly provided defense counsel, primarily public defenders. Although the United States Supreme Court has mandated that the states provide counsel for indigent persons accused of crime, documentation on the nature and provision of these services has not been readily available. States have devised various systems, rules of organization, and funding mechanisms for indigent defense programs. While the operation and funding of public defender offices varies across states, public defender offices can be generally classified as being part of either a state program or a county-based system. The 22 state public defender programs functioned entirely under the direction of a central administrative office that funded and administered all the public defender offices in the state. For the 28 states with county-based offices, indigent defense services were administered at the county or local jurisdictional level and funded principally by the county or through a combination of county and state funds. The CPDO collected data from both state- and county-based offices. All public defender offices that were principally funded by state or local governments and provided general criminal defense services, conflict services, or capital case representation were within the scope of the study. Federal public defender offices and offices that provided primarily contract or assigned counsel services with private attorneys were excluded from the data collection. In addition, public defender offices that were principally funded by a tribal government, or provided primarily appellate or juvenile services were outside the scope of the project and were also excluded. The CPDO gathered information on public defender office staffing, expenditures, attorney training, standards and guidelines, and caseloads, including the number and type of cases received by the offices. The data collected by the CPDO can be compared to and analyzed against many of the existing national standards for the provision of indigent defense services.
Curated
Census of Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories, 2002 (ICPSR 4287)
Released/updated on: 2005-09-02
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2003-01-01--2004-01-01
To obtain current baseline information about the workload and operations of the nation's forensic crime laboratories, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) conducted its first census of publicly funded forensic crime laboratories from 2003 to 2004. Data were collected on the organization, functions, budget, staffing, workload, and performance expectations of the nation's publicly funded federal, state, and local forensic crime laboratories currently operating.
Curated
Census of Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories, 2002 and 2005 (ICPSR 23120)
Released/updated on: 2008-10-24
Geographic coverage: United States
This data collection contains data from censuses of publicly funded crime laboratories in 2002 and 2005. The data were collected to examine change and stability in the operations of crime laboratories serving federal, state, and local jurisdictions. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) first surveyed forensic crime laboratories in 1998, focusing solely on agencies that performed DNA analysis. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) funded the 1998 study as part of its DNA Laboratory Improvement Program. The BJS' National Study of DNA Laboratories was repeated in 2001. An expanded version of the data collection, called the Census of Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories, was first conducted among all forensic crime laboratories in 2002. Data were collected from 2003 to 2004 on the organization, functions, budget, staffing, workload, and performance expectations of the nation's forensic crime laboratories operating in 2002. A total of 306 of the 351 crime laboratories operating in 2002 responded to the census. The latest census obtained data from 351 of the 389 laboratories operating in 2005, including at least 1 laboratory from every state. The nation's publicly funded forensic crime laboratories performed a variety of forensic services in 2005, including DNA testing and controlled substance identification for federal, state, and local jurisdictions. The 2005 Census of Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories obtained detailed information on the types of forensic requests received by these laboratories and the resources needed to complete them. The census also collected data on crime laboratory budgets, personnel, accreditations, and backlogged cases.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Census of Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories, 2009 (ICPSR 34340)
Released/updated on: 2018-01-26
Geographic coverage: United States
This data collection contains data from censuses of publicly funded crime laboratories in 2009. The data were collected to examine change and stability in the operations of crime laboratories serving federal, state, and local jurisdictions. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) first surveyed forensic crime laboratories in 1998, focusing solely on agencies that performed DNA analysis. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) funded the 1998 study as part of its DNA Laboratory Improvement Program. The BJS' National Study of DNA Laboratories was repeated in 2001. An expanded version of the data collection, called the Census of Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories, was first conducted among all forensic crime laboratories in 2002. For the 2009 study, data were collected from 2010 to 2011 on the organization, functions, budget, staffing, workload, and performance expectations of the nation's forensic crime laboratories operating in 2009. A total of 397 of the 411 eligible crime laboratories operating in 2009 responded to the census, including at least 1 laboratory from every state. The nation's publicly funded forensic crime laboratories performed a variety of forensic services in 2009, including DNA testing and controlled substance identification for federal, state, and local jurisdictions. The 2009 Census of Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories obtained detailed information on the types of forensic requests received by these laboratories and the resources needed to complete them. The census also collected data on crime laboratory budgets, personnel, accreditations, and backlogged cases.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Census of Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories, 2014 (ICPSR 36759)
Released/updated on: 2017-04-19
Geographic coverage: United States
This data collection contains data from censuses of publicly funded crime laboratories in 2014. The data were collected to examine change and stability in the operations of crime laboratories serving federal, state, and local jurisdictions. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) first surveyed forensic crime laboratories in 1998, focusing solely on agencies that performed DNA analysis. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) funded the 1998 study as part of its DNA Laboratory Improvement Program. The BJS' National Study of DNA Laboratories was repeated in 2001. An expanded version of the data collection, called the Census of Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories, was first conducted among all forensic crime laboratories in 2002. For the 2014 study, data were collected from April 2015 to September 2015 on the organization, functions, budget, staffing, workload, and performance expectations of the nation's forensic crime laboratories operating in 2014. A total of 360 of the 409 eligible crime laboratories operating in 2014 responded to the census. The nation's publicly funded forensic crime laboratories performed a variety of forensic services in 2014, including DNA testing and controlled substance identification for federal, state, and local jurisdictions. The 2014 Census of Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories obtained detailed information on the types of forensic requests received by these laboratories and the resources needed to complete them. The census also collected data on crime laboratory budgets, personnel, accreditations, and backlogged cases.
Curated
Census of State Adult Correctional Facilities, 1979 (ICPSR 7852)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
This census, designed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and conducted by the United States Census Bureau, includes all state correctional facilities known to the Census Bureau in 1979. Each facility is classified into one of ten categories such as community center, prison farm, road camp, or reception center. Data for 1979 include number of inmates by security classification and by sex, number of full- and part-time staff, number of paid and volunteer staff broken down by position, age, pay, and education, number and age of facilities, type of facilities provided in each cell by size of cell, hospital facilities available, programs provided for the inmates, job training, and inmate IQ scores.
Curated
Census of State Adult Correctional Facilities, 1984 (ICPSR 8444)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
This study provides a descriptive analysis of confinement facilities and state-operated community-based correctional facilities nationwide. Decision-makers, practitioners, and researchers may use the census to analyze the current conditions and needs of state correctional facilities for adults. Variables of interest include physical security, age of facilities, functions of facilities, programs, inmate work assignments, staff employment, facilities under court order/consent decree for conditions of confinement, capital and operating expenditures, custody level of residents/inmates, one-day and average daily population counts, race/ethnicity of inmates, inmate work assignments, inmate deaths, special inmate counts, and assaults and incidents by inmates. The institution is the unit of analysis.
Curated
Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies (CSLLEA), 2008 (ICPSR 27681)
Released/updated on: 2011-08-03
Geographic coverage: United States
The BJS Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies (CSLLEA) is conducted every 4 years to provide a complete enumeration of agencies and their employees. Employment data are reported by agencies for sworn and nonsworn (civilian) personnel and, within these categories, by full-time or part-time status. The pay period that included September 30, 2008, was the reference date for all personnel data. Agencies also complete a checklist of functions they regularly perform, or have primary responsibility for, within the following areas: patrol and response, criminal investigation, traffic and vehicle-related functions, detention-related functions, court-related functions, special public safety functions (e.g., animal control), task force participation, and specialized functions (e.g., search and rescue). The CSLLEA provides national data on the number of state and local law enforcement agencies and employees for local police departments, sheriffs' offices, state law enforcement agencies, and special jurisdiction agencies. It also serves as the sampling frame for BJS surveys of law enforcement agencies.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies (CSLLEA), 2018 (ICPSR 38771)
Released/updated on: 2023-05-30
Geographic coverage: United States
The BJS Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies (CSLLEA) is conducted every 4 years to provide a complete enumeration of agencies and their employees. Employment data are reported by agencies for sworn and nonsworn (civilian) personnel and, within these categories, by full-time or part-time status. The pay period that included June 30, 2018, was the reference date for personnel data. Agencies also complete a checklist of functions they regularly perform, or have primary responsibility for, within the following areas: patrol and response, criminal investigation, traffic and vehicle-related functions, detention-related functions, court-related functions, forensic services, special public safety functions (e.g., animal control), task force participation, and specialized functions (e.g., search and rescue). The CSLLEA provides national data on the number of state and local law enforcement agencies and employees for local police departments, sheriffs' offices, state law enforcement agencies, and special jurisdiction agencies. It also serves as the sampling frame for BJS surveys of law enforcement agencies.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Census of Tribal Law Enforcement Agencies, 2018 (ICPSR 38938)
Released/updated on: 2024-01-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2018-01-01--2018-12-31
The Census of Tribal Law Enforcement Agencies (CTLEA) is the first complete enumeration of tribal law enforcement agencies authorized to issue citations and make arrests for crime committed in Indian country. The CTLEA gathers administrative and operational information from tribally operated police departments, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) police, and the Alaska Village Public Safety Officer's (VPSO) program operating in the United States during 2018. The CTLEA helps fulfill the Bureau of Justice Statistics' legislative mandate under the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 (TLOA; P.L. 111-211, 124 Stat. 2258 Section 251(b)) to establish and implement a tribal crime data collection system.
Data for the CTLEA were collected by NORC, at the University of Chicago, in collaboration with the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Indian Country section. The CTLEA consists of two surveys specific to tribally operated law enforcement agencies and the BIA police departments. The Alaska VPSO program is sponsored and funded by the Alaska State Troopers, which completed the tribally operated law enforcement agency questionnaire on behalf of all the VPSOs. Due to the unique territorial and criminal jurisdiction in Alaska Native Villages, only two tribally operated law enforcement agencies (the Chickaloon and Metlakatla Indian Community) met the eligibility criteria to be included in the CTLEA. Data for the 2019 CTLEA were collected through mail, email, and telephone nonresponse follow-up. Data on the number and type of tribally operated law enforcement and BIA agencies were obtained from all eligible federally recognized tribes. The final universe of eligible respondents included 234 tribally operated law enforcement agencies and the Alaska VPSO program, of which 215 (91.9%) participated in the survey. The 23 BIA police departments operating in the United States completed the survey.
Curated
Compassion Capital Fund Demonstration Program Impact Study, FY 2006-2008, United States (ICPSR 29481)
Released/updated on: 2011-10-14
Geographic coverage: United States
The Compassion Capital Fund (CCF) program conducted a study of the financial and technical assistance (TA) provided by intermediary organizations and the effects of those services in improving the organizational capacity of the faith-based and community organizations (FBCOs) they assist. The goal of the study was to assess whether the CCF program was meeting its primary objective of improving the organizational capacity of FBCOs. The study sample was the entire population of nonprofit organizations (NPOs) that applied for assistance and were determined eligible by the ten intermediary organizations awarded CCF Demonstration Program grants in the 2006 grant cycle. In total, 455 organizations completed the baseline survey and 385 completed a version of the follow-up survey. Survey questions were categorized into topics including organization profile, financial management practices, funding sources, human resource practices, organizational governance, technological equipment, and level of community engagement. Questions included the purpose for which the organization was applying for assistance, whether the organization was religious or faith based, the organizations primary service areas, how the organization measures effectiveness, total expenditures for the year, whether the organization previously applied for funding, sources of revenue, and whether the organization participated in grant writing workshops. Other questions included a head count of paid and volunteer staff, the number of organizational leaders, the level of involvement of organizational leaders in staff development, the level of staff participation in training and development opportunities, the activities of the Board of Directors, whether or not there was sufficient technological equipment to meet organizational needs, and how the organization has reached out to the community.
Curated
Directory of Law Enforcement Agencies, 1986: [United States] (ICPSR 8696)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States
This dataset lists law enforcement agencies and contains variables regarding employment categories such as total full-time, part-time, sworn-in, and other employees. It also contains FIPS codes and populations.
Curated
Directory of Law Enforcement Agencies, 1992: [United States] (ICPSR 2266)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
To ensure an accurate sampling frame for its Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) survey, the Bureau of Justice Statistics periodically sponsors a census of the nation's state and local law enforcement agencies. This census, known as the Directory Survey, gathers data on all police and sheriffs' departments that are publicly funded and employ at least one full-time or part-time sworn officer with general arrest powers. This data collection, compiled in July 1992, represents the second such census, with the first occurring in 1986 (DIRECTORY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, 1986: [UNITED STATES] [ICPSR 8696]). Variables include personnel totals, type of agency, geographic location of agency, and whether the agency had the legal authority to hold a person beyond arraignment for 48 or more hours.
Curated
Directory of Law Enforcement Agencies, 1996: [United States] (ICPSR 2260)
Released/updated on: 1998-09-11
Geographic coverage: United States
To ensure an accurate sampling frame for its Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) survey, the Bureau of Justice Statistics periodically sponsors a census of the nation's state and local law enforcement agencies. This census, known as the Directory Survey, gathers data on 49 primary state law enforcement agencies and all sheriffs' departments, local police departments, and special police agencies (state or local) that are publicly funded and employ at least one sworn officer with general arrest powers. The 1996 Directory Survey collected data on the number of sworn and nonsworn personnel employed by each agency, including both full-time and part-time employees. Within the full-time sworn category, data were collected from all agencies on the number who were uniformed officers with regularly assigned duties that included responding to calls for service. For agencies with at least 10 full-time sworn officers, the number whose primary duties were related to investigations, court operations, or jail operations was also obtained. This data collection, compiled in June 1996, represents the third such census, with the first occurring in 1986 (DIRECTORY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, 1986: [UNITED STATES] [ICPSR 8696]) and the second in 1992 (DIRECTORY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, 1992: [UNITED STATES] [ICPSR 2266]). Variables include personnel totals, type of government, type of agency, and whether the agency had the legal authority to hold a person beyond arraignment for 48 or more hours.
Self-published
ECIN Replication Package for "Unexpected costs of performance incentives with production uncertainty: Theory and evidence from a real-effort laboratory experiment" (ICPSR 237066)
Released/updated on: 2025-08-28
Policy advocates often promote market-like incentives for publicly provided services like education or healthcare (e.g., Medicare). Evidence for performance incentives in these sectors is mixed, possibly due to production uncertainty represented as uncertainty about the marginal effect of inputs. Using a principal-agent model, we demonstrate that such uncertainty can lead to inefficiencies in output-based incentives. The model illustrates how employees favor inputs with lower uncertainty and reduce overall effort. Input-based incentives might be more effective in such cases. We conduct a real-effort lab experiment which validates these predictions: participants shift from efficient inputs as uncertainty grows, and reduce overall effort.
This replication package provides all code sufficient for recreating the analysis results in the manuscript. The experiment itself was run on Google AppEngine.
Curated
Partially restricted
Evaluation of Victim Advocacy Services Funded by the Violence Against Women Act in Urban Ohio, 1999 (ICPSR 2992)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio
The focus of this research and evaluation endeavor was on direct service programs in Ohio, particularly advocacy services for female victims of violence, receiving funding through the Services, Training, Officers, Prosecutors (STOP) formula grants under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994. The objectives of this project were (1) to describe and compare existing advocacy services in Ohio, (2) to compare victim advocacy typologies and identify key variables in the delivery of services, (3) to develop a better understanding of how victim advocacy services are defined and delivered, and (4) to assess the effectiveness of those services. For Part 1, Service Agencies Data, comprehensive information about 13 VAWA-funded programs providing direct services in urban Ohio was gathered through a mailback questionnaire and phone interviews. Detailed information was collected on organizational structure, clients served, and agency services. Focus groups were also used to collect data from clients (Parts 3-11) and staff (Parts 12-23) about their definitions of advocacy, types of services needed by victims, services provided to victims, and important outcomes for service providers. Part 2, Police Officer Data, focused on police officers' attitudes toward domestic violence and on evaluating service outcomes in one particular agency. The agency selected was a prosecutor's office that planned to improve services to victims by changing how the police and prosecutors responded to domestic violence cases. The prosecutor's office selected one police district as the site for implementing the new program, which included training police officers and placing a prosecutor in the district office to work directly with the police on domestic violence cases. The evaluation of this program was designed to assess the effectiveness of the police officers' training and officers' increased access to information from the prosecutor on the outcome of the case. Police officers from the selected district were administered surveys. Also surveyed were officers from another district that handled a similar number of domestic violence cases and had a comparable number of officers employed in the district. Variables in Part 1 include number of staff, budget, funding sources, number and type of victims served, target population, number of victims served speaking languages other than English, number of juveniles and adults served, number of victims with special needs served, collaboration with other organizations, benefits of VAWA funding, and direct and referral services provided by the agency. Variables in Part 2 cover police officers' views on whether it was a waste of time to prosecute domestic violence cases, if these cases were likely to result in a conviction, whether they felt sympathetic toward the victim or blamed the victim, how the prosecution should proceed with domestic violence cases, how the prosecution and police worked together on such cases, whether domestic violence was a private matter, and how they felt about the new program implemented under VAWA.
Curated
Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS), 1970-1971 Through 1971-1972: College and University Libraries (ICPSR 2113)
Released/updated on: 1998-12-17
Geographic coverage: Puerto Rico, United States, Marshall Islands, Guam, Virgin Islands of the United States, American Samoa, Global
The Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS) series was designed to provide comprehensive information on various aspects of postsecondary education in the United States and its territories (American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the Marshall Islands) and Department of Defense schools outside of the United States. Data are available for both public and private two-year and four-year institutions. The HEGIS College and University Libraries component for 1970-1971/1971-1972 sought data on libraries in institutions of higher education. Key data elements, presented for up to 19 record types, include number of library collections and resources, physical facilities, number of positions for library staff, salary expenditures, number of hours of assistance and expenditures for wages of library staff, number of employees, level of employees' educational attainment, library operating expenditures and budget, funds received for library services, and developmental areas.
Curated
Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS), 1976-1977: College and University Libraries (ICPSR 2116)
Released/updated on: 1999-02-03
Geographic coverage: Puerto Rico, United States, Marshall Islands, Guam, Virgin Islands of the United States, American Samoa, Global
Time period: 1976-01-01--1977-01-01
The Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS) series was designed to provide comprehensive information on various aspects of postsecondary education in the United States and its territories (American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the Marshall Islands) and Department of Defense schools outside of the United States. Data are available for both public and private two-year and four-year institutions. The HEGIS College and University Libraries component for 1976-1977 sought data on libraries in 2,985 institutions of higher education. Key data elements, presented for up to 16 record types, include number of library collections, number of hours of student assistance and expenditures for wages of library staff, number of employees, total library operating expenditures and budget, funds received for library services, developmental areas, total hours and days of library operation per week, and participation in cooperatives/networks with libraries of other institutions.
Curated
Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS), 1978-1979 through 1979-1980: College and University Libraries (ICPSR 2118)
Released/updated on: 1999-02-17
Geographic coverage: Puerto Rico, United States, Marshall Islands, Guam, Virgin Islands of the United States, American Samoa, Global
The Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS) series was designed to provide comprehensive information on various aspects of postsecondary education in the United States and its territories (American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the Marshall Islands) and Department of Defense schools outside of the United States. Data are available for both public and private two-year and four-year institutions. The HEGIS College and University Libraries component for 1978-1979/1979-1980 sought data on libraries in 3,190 institutions of higher education in addition to 21 Federal Interagency Committees on Education (FICES) representing joint libraries. Key data elements, presented for up to 12 record types, include number of library collections, number of hours of student assistance and expenditures for wages of library staff, developmental areas, number of library loan transactions for the year, number of transactions per week, library hours and days open per week, library operating expenditures, and library receipts from federal government grants.
Curated
Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS), 1985-1986: College and University Libraries (ICPSR 2120)
Released/updated on: 1999-02-03
Geographic coverage: Puerto Rico, United States, Marshall Islands, Guam, Virgin Islands of the United States, American Samoa, Global
Time period: 1985-01-01--1986-01-01
The Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS) series was designed to provide comprehensive information on various aspects of postsecondary education in the United States and its territories (American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the Marshall Islands) and Department of Defense schools outside of the United States. Data are available for both public and private two-year and four-year institutions. The HEGIS College and University Libraries component for 1985-1986 sought data on libraries in 3,388 institutions of higher education. Key data elements, presented for up to 12 record types, include number of branch outlets, total annual and weekly public service hours, number of staff, library operating expenditures and budget, number of library collections, number of loan transactions for the year, and attendance, use of materials, and number of transactions per typical week.
Curated
Implementation of Community Corrections in Oregon, Colorado, and Connecticut [1981] (ICPSR 8407)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: Oregon, United States, Colorado, Connecticut
Data were collected from three states to evaluate the success of community corrections programs and to identify the conditions that underlie these successes. In-person field interviews, telephone interviews, and mailback questionnaires were used at state, county, and district levels. The variables in the study were designed to examine the kinds of people who implement and maintain these programs, the level of commitment by judicial and prison officials to these programs, community support, and the goals of cost reduction, work training, and rehabilitation.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Law Enforcement Agency Roster (LEAR), 2016 (ICPSR 36697)
Released/updated on: 2017-04-05
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2015-01-01--2016-01-01
In the past several years, BJS has made efforts to develop a national roster of publicly funded law enforcement agencies. The Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies (CSLLEA) represents the core of the BJS's law enforcement statistics program, and is currently used as the primary universe for all BJS law enforcement collections. The CSLLEA was last conducted in 2014 but encountered data collection issues. Since the last law enforcement universe list was the 2008 CSLLEA, BJS decided further work was needed to have a reliable and complete roster of law enforcement agencies. Using the 2008 and 2014 CSLLEA universe as the base, the LEAR integrated multiple datasets in an effort to compile a complete list of active general purpose law enforcement agencies. The goal of the LEAR was to serve as the universe list for which the Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) core and supplement samples could be pulled. The 2016 LEAR contains a census of 15,810 general purpose law enforcement agencies, including 12,695 local and county police departments, 3,066 sheriffs' offices and 49 primary state police departments. Staffing size from multiple datasets has also been merged into the LEAR file.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics Body-Worn Camera Supplement (LEMAS-BWCS), 2016 (ICPSR 37302)
Released/updated on: 2019-06-20
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2015-01-01--2016-01-01
Beginning in 2016, the Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) survey adopted a core and supplement structure. The LEMAS core has been conducted every 3 to 4 years since 1987 with approximately 3,200 local, county and state law enforcement agencies across the United States. Due to the breadth of the survey, detailed analysis of any specific law enforcement topic cannot be done with the LEMAS core. The LEMAS supplements are designed to fill this void by allowing for a more comprehensive examination on a key topic in law enforcement and are administered in between core years. The 2016 LEMAS Body-Worn Camera Supplement (LEMAS-BWCS) is the first supplement administered under the new structure.
Curated
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), 1987 (ICPSR 9222)
Released/updated on: 2012-08-01
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1987-06-01--1988-06-01
This survey, the first in the Bureau of Justice Statistics' program on Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), presents information on three types of general purpose law enforcement agencies: state police, local police, and sheriffs' departments. Data from the primary state police agency in each of 49 states (Hawaii does not have a state police agency) are also presented. Variables include size of the populations served by the typical police or sheriffs' department, levels of employment and spending, various functions of the department, average salary levels for uniformed officers, and other matters relating to management and personnel.
Curated
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), 1990 (ICPSR 9749)
Released/updated on: 2012-08-02
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey, the second in the Bureau of Justice Statistics' program on Law Enforcement and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), presents information on four types of general-purpose law enforcement agencies: state police, local police, special police, and sheriff's departments. Variables include size of the population served by the police or sheriff's department, levels of employment and spending, various functions of the department, average salary levels for uniformed officers, and other matters related to management and personnel.
Curated
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), 1993 (ICPSR 6708)
Released/updated on: 2012-08-02
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey, the third in the Bureau of Justice Statistics' program on Law Enforcement and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), presents information on five types of general-purpose law enforcement agencies: state police, county police, special police (state and local), municipal police, and sheriff's departments. Variables include size of the population served by the police or sheriff's department, levels of employment and spending, various functions of the department, average salary levels for uniformed officers, policies and programs, and other matters related to management and personnel.
Curated
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS): 1997 Sample Survey of Law Enforcement Agencies (ICPSR 2700)
Released/updated on: 2008-12-04
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey, the fourth in the Bureau of Justice Statistics' program on Law Enforcement and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), presents information on law enforcement agencies: state police, county police, special police (state and local), municipal police, and sheriff's departments. Variables include size of the population served by the police or sheriff's department, levels of employment and spending, various functions of the department, average salary levels for uniformed officers, policies and programs, and other matters related to management and personnel.
Curated
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS): 1999 Sample Survey of Law Enforcement Agencies (ICPSR 3079)
Released/updated on: 2008-12-09
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey, the fourth in the Bureau of Justice Statistics' program on Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), presents information on law enforcement agencies: state police, county police, special police (state and local), municipal police, and sheriff's departments. Variables include size of the population served by the police or sheriff's department, levels of employment and spending, various functions of the department, average salary levels for uniformed officers, policies and programs, and other matters related to management and personnel.
Curated
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS): 2000 Sample Survey of Law Enforcement Agencies (ICPSR 3565)
Released/updated on: 2008-12-08
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey, the sixth in the Bureau of Justice Statistics' program on Law Enforcement and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), presents information on law enforcement agencies in the United States: state police, county police, special police (state and local), municipal police, and sheriff's departments. Variables include size of the population served by the police or sheriff's department, levels of employment and spending, various functions of the department, average salary levels for uniformed officers, policies and programs, and other matters related to management and personnel.This survey, the sixth in the Bureau of Justice Statistics' program on Law Enforcement and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), presents information on law enforcement agencies in the United States: state police, county police, special police (state and local), municipal police, and sheriff's departments. Variables include size of the population served by the police or sheriff's department, levels of employment and spending, various functions of the department, average salary levels for uniformed officers, policies and programs, and other matters related to management and personnel.
Curated
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS): 2003 Sample Survey of Law Enforcement Agencies (ICPSR 4411)
Released/updated on: 2006-05-10
Geographic coverage: United States
The Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) survey collects data from a nationally representative sample of publicly funded State and local law enforcement agencies in the United States. Data include agency personnel, expenditures and pay, operations, community policing initiatives, equipment, computers and information systems, and written policies. The LEMAS survey has been conducted in 1987, 1990, 1993, 1997, 1999 (limited scope), 2000, and 2003.
Curated
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), 2007 (ICPSR 31161)
Released/updated on: 2011-07-07
Geographic coverage: United States
Every three to four years, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) surveys a nationally representative sample of state and local law enforcement agencies. The surveys are conducted as part of the Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) program. Data include agency personnel, expenditures and pay, operations, community policing initiatives, equipment, computers and information systems, and written policies. The LEMAS survey has been conducted in 1987, 1990, 1993, 1997, 1999 (limited scope), 2000, 2003, and 2007.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), 2013 (ICPSR 36164)
Released/updated on: 2015-09-22
Geographic coverage: United States
The Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) survey collects data from a nationally representative sample of state and local law enforcement agencies in the United States. Although the data collection instrument (see page 150 of the codebook) uses the year 2012 for the title, most questions have a reference date of January 1, 2013. For this reason, the study title uses the year 2013. The 2013 LEMAS sample design called for the survey questionnaire to be sent to 3,336 general purpose state and local law enforcement agencies including 2,353 local police departments, 933 sheriffs' offices, and the 50 primary state law enforcement agencies. The design called for all agencies employing 100 or sworn personnel to be included with certainty (self-representing) and for smaller agencies to be sampled from strata base on number of officers employed. A total of 26 local police departments were determined to be out-of-scope for the survey because they were closed, outsourced, or operating on a part-time basis. A total of 38 sheriffs' offices were excluded from the survey because they had no primary law enforcement jurisdiction. The final mailout total of 3,272 agencies included 2,327 local police departments, 895 sheriffs' offices, and the 50 state agencies.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), 2016 (ICPSR 37323)
Released/updated on: 2020-08-20
Geographic coverage: United States
The Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) survey collects data from a nationally representative sample of general-purpose agencies (i.e., local and county police departments, sheriffs' offices, and primary state police agencies). The 2016 LEMAS sample design called for the survey questionnaire to be sent to 3,499 general purpose law enforcement agencies, including 2,640 local and county police departments, 810 sheriffs' offices, and the 49 primary state police departments (Hawaii does not have a primary state police agency). The design called for all agencies employing 100 or more full-time equivalent sworn personnel to be included with certainty (self-representing), and for smaller agencies to be sampled from strata based on number of full-time equivalent sworn officers and type of agency. A total of 28 local police departments were determined to be out-of-scope for the survey because they had closed, had less than one full-time equivalent sworn officer, had contracted out their services with another law enforcement agency, or only had special enforcement responsibilities. The final mail out total of 3,471 agencies included 2,612 local police departments, 810 sheriffs' offices, and the 49 state agencies.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), 2020 (ICPSR 38651)
Released/updated on: 2023-03-07
Geographic coverage: United States
The Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) survey collects data from a nationally representative sample of general-purpose agencies (i.e., local and county police departments, sheriffs' offices, and primary state police agencies). The 2020 LEMAS sample design called for the survey questionnaire to be sent to 3,499 general purpose law enforcement agencies, including 2,631 local and county police departments, 819 sheriffs' offices, and the 49 primary state police departments (Hawaii does not have a primary state police agency). The design called for all agencies employing 100 or more full-time equivalent sworn personnel to be included with certainty (self-representing), and for smaller agencies to be sampled from strata based on number of full-time equivalent sworn officers and type of agency. A total of 37 local police departments were determined to be out-of-scope for the survey because they had closed, had less than one full-time equivalent sworn officer, had contracted out their services with another law enforcement agency, or only had special enforcement responsibilities. The final mail out total of 3,462 agencies included 2,611 local police departments, 802 sheriffs' offices, and the 49 state agencies.
Curated
Library General Information Survey (LIBGIS) III [United States]: Public Libraries, Fiscal Year 1977-1978 (ICPSR 2209)
Released/updated on: 2002-05-21
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey provides information about the public libraries' public service outlets, holdings, staffing, receipts, expenditures, loan transactions, physical facilities, and business hours. These data also contribute to an understanding of the total picture of school, academic, and public libraries on a nationwide basis.
Curated
Library General Information Survey (LIBGIS) I [United States]: Public Libraries, Fiscal Year 1974 (ICPSR 2208)
Released/updated on: 2002-03-19
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey provides information about public libraries' public service outlets, holdings, staffing, receipts, expenditures, loan transactions, physical facilities, and hours and days open. These data also contribute to an understanding of the total picture of school, academic, and public libraries on a nationwide basis.
Curated
Library General Information Survey (LIBGIS) I [United States]: Public School Libraries/Media Centers, Fall 1974 (ICPSR 2225)
Released/updated on: 2002-03-19
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey provides current information for individual public school libraries/media centers on holdings, expenditures, staffing, loan transactions, physical facilities, and hours and days open. It also contributes to an understanding of the total picture of public school libraries on a nationwide basis.
Curated
Library Networks and Cooperative Library Organizations, 1977-1978: [United States] (ICPSR 2224)
Released/updated on: 2002-03-19
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1977-01-01--1978-01-01
The purpose of this survey was to identify the cooperative library organizations within the United States and to gather information about these organizations, such as organizational structure, staffing, funds received during the fiscal year, funds carried over from previous years, expenditures, major services provided, and computer and other automated services.
Curated
National Assessment Program Survey of Criminal Justice Personnel in the United States, 1986 (ICPSR 9923)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey probed the needs and problems facing local criminal justice practitioners. Within each sampled county, survey questionnaires were distributed to the police chief of the largest city, the sheriff, the jail administrator, the prosecutor, the chief trial court judge, the trial court administrator (where applicable), and probation and parole agency heads. Although the general topics covered in the questionnaires are similar, specific items are not repeated across the questionnaires, except for those given to the sheriffs and the police chiefs. The sheriffs surveyed were those with law enforcement responsibilities, so the questions asked of the police chiefs and the sheriffs were identical. The questionnaires were tailored to each group of respondents, and dealt with five general areas: (1) background characteristics, including staff size, budget totals, and facility age, (2) criminal justice system problems, (3) prison crowding, (4) personnel issues such as training needs and programs, and (5) operations and procedures including management, management information, and the specific operations in which the respondents were involved. In some cases, sets of question items were grouped into question batteries that dealt with specific topic areas (e.g., staff recruitment, judicial training, and number of personnel). For example, the Staff Recruitment battery items in the Probation and Parole Questionnaire asked respondents to use a 4 point scale to indicate the seriousness of each of the following problems: low salaries, poor image of corrections work, high entrance requirements, location of qualified staff, shortage of qualified minority applicants, and hiring freezes.
Curated
National Home and Hospice Care Survey, 1992 (ICPSR 6536)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
The National Home and Hospice Care Survey (NHHCS) for 1992 is the first annual survey of home health agencies and hospices and their patients and discharges. The survey was designed to provide information for those who establish standards for, plan, provide, and assess long-term care services, both in the home and in inpatient settings. Data on agency characteristics were obtained through personal interviews with administrators and include the number of home health and hospice patients served in the last 12 months, type of facility ownership (i.e., profit, nonprofit, government, other), Medicare and Medicaid certification, number and type of staff personnel, and the hours they worked. Data on a sample of patients currently receiving home health and hospice care as well as a sample of discharges were obtained by interviewing staff people most familiar with the care provided to these patients. Respondents were requested to refer to medical or other records whenever necessary. No patient was interviewed directly. Information for patients currently receiving services and discharged patients includes service provided and provider type, type of residence, referral source, medical diagnosis, type of care (home health or hospice), type of aids used (eyeglasses, dentures, walker, cane, oxygen, hospital bed, etc.), daily living activities that required assistance, and billing charges and expected payment source(s). The discharge diagnosis for discharged patients was also recorded. Demographic variables for both types of patients include sex, age, race, Hispanic origin, and marital status.
Curated
National Home and Hospice Care Survey, 1993 (ICPSR 6664)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
The National Home and Hospice Care Survey (NHHCS) for 1993 is the second annual survey of home health agencies and hospices and their current patients and discharges. This survey was designed to provide information for those who establish standards for, plan, provide, and assess long-term care services, both in the home and in inpatient settings. Data on agency characteristics were obtained through personal interviews with the agency administrators and include the number of home health and hospice patients served in the last 12 months, type of facility ownership (i.e., profit, nonprofit, government, other), Medicare and Medicaid certification, number and type of staff personnel, and the hours they worked. Data on a sample of patients currently receiving home health and hospice care as well as a sample of discharges were obtained by interviewing staff persons most familiar with the care provided to these patients. Respondents were requested to refer to medical or other records whenever necessary. No patient was interviewed directly. Information for patients currently receiving services and discharged patients includes service provided and provider type, type of residence, referral source, medical diagnosis, type of care (home health or hospice), type of aids used (eyeglasses, dentures, walker, cane, oxygen, hospital bed, etc.), daily living activities that required assistance, and billing charges and expected payment source(s). The discharge diagnosis for discharged patients was also recorded. Demographic variables for both types of patients include sex, age, Hispanic origin, race, and marital status.
Curated
National Home and Hospice Care Survey, 1994 (ICPSR 6733)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
The National Home and Hospice Care Survey (NHHCS) for 1994 is the third annual survey of home health agencies and hospices and their current patients and discharges. These surveys were designed to provide information for those who establish standards for, plan, provide, and assess long-term care services, both in the home and in inpatient settings. Data on agency characteristics were obtained through personal interviews with the agency administrators and include the number of home health and hospice patients served in the last 12 months, type of facility ownership (i.e., profit, nonprofit, government, other), Medicare and Medicaid certification, number and type of staff personnel, and the hours they worked. Data on a sample of patients currently receiving home health and hospice care as well as a sample of discharges were obtained by interviewing staff persons most familiar with the care provided to these patients. Respondents were requested to refer to medical or other records whenever necessary. No patient was interviewed directly. Information for patients currently receiving services and discharged patients includes services provided and provider type, type of residence, referral source, medical diagnosis, type of care (home health or hospice), type of aids used (eyeglasses, dentures, walker, cane, oxygen, hospital bed, etc.), daily living activities that required assistance, and billing charges and expected payment source(s). The discharge diagnosis for discharged patients was also recorded. Demographic variables for both types of patients include sex, age, race, Hispanic origin, and marital status.
Curated
National Home and Hospice Care Survey, 1996 (ICPSR 2707)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: United States
The National Home and Hospice Care Survey (NHHCS) for 1996 is the fourth survey of home health agencies and hospices and their current patients and discharges. These surveys were designed to provide information for those who establish standards for, plan, provide, and assess long-term care services, both in the home and in inpatient settings. Data on agency characteristics were obtained through personal interviews with the agency administrators and include the number of home health and hospice patients served in the last 12 months, type of facility ownership (i.e., profit, nonprofit, government, other), Medicare and Medicaid certification, number and type of staff personnel, and the hours they worked. Data on a sample of patients currently receiving home health and hospice care as well as a sample of discharges were obtained by interviewing staff persons most familiar with the care provided to these patients. Respondents were requested to refer to medical or other records whenever necessary. No patient was interviewed directly. Information for patients currently receiving services and discharged patients includes services provided and provider type, type of residence, referral source, medical diagnosis, type of care (home health or hospice), type of aids used (eyeglasses, dentures, walker, cane, oxygen, hospital bed, etc.), daily living activities that required assistance, and billing charges and expected payment source(s). The discharge diagnosis for discharged patients was also recorded. Demographic variables for both types of patients include sex, age, race, Hispanic origin, and marital status.