Search results

Showing 1 – 8 of 8 results.

Curated

Partially restricted

Simple Crosstabs

Assessing the Practical and Monetary Efficacy of New Jersey's Megan's Law, 1972-2007 (ICPSR 26401)

Released/updated on: 2013-04-19

Geographic coverage: United States, New Jersey

Time period: 1972-01-01--2007-01-01

The study investigated New Jersey's Megan's Law and its specific deterrence effect on re-offending, including the level of general and sexual offense recidivism, the nature of sexual re-offenses, and time to first re-arrest for sexual and non-sexual re-offenses (i.e., community tenure). Data were collected on 550 sexual offenders released during the years 1990 to 2000.

Curated

Restricted

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

Released/updated on: 2018-09-14

Geographic coverage: United States

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

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

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

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

Curated

CBS News/60 Minutes/Vanity Fair National Poll, May #2, 2011 (ICPSR 33964)

Released/updated on: 2012-06-18

Geographic coverage: United States

This survey, fielded May 20-23, 2011, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicits public opinion on a range of political and social issues. Respondents were asked for their opinions of political figures President Barack Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama, Tim Pawlenty, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, and former President George W. Bush. Respondents were asked if they felt the country was going in the right direction, how President Obama and Congress were handling their jobs, and how things were going in Washington. Opinions were sought about how much influence various groups such as large corporations, labor unions, Planned Parenthood, the National Rifle Association, and special interest groups had on the government, who benefits most from the policies of the federal government, whether Congress serves special interest groups, and whether the salaries and benefits of the members of Congress are too high. Further questions addressed whether a political candidate's marital status mattered when deciding who to vote for, and whether more investigations were necessary into the bankers and members of high finance that played a role in the economic crash of 2008. Respondents were also asked which issues they were most angry about including federal policies, the political parties, and religious issues. Additional topics include plans for travelling over the summer, whether respondents thought being a father was more difficult now than when they were a child, whether they flew an American flag on holidays such as the Fourth of July or Flag Day, ATM fees, hypothetical scenarios, and whether they had ever looked up a map of registered sex offenders. Respondents were also asked about the condition of the national economy, their household financial situation, whether they had a close family member or friend or knew anyone who died in the September 11, 2001 attacks, and if they supported the Tea Party movement. Demographic information included sex, age, race, education level, household income, employment status, marital status, whether the respondent had children, religious preference, type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural), and state of residence, type of phone(s), number of phones, political party affiliation, political philosophy, voting behavior, and whether the respondent is a born-again Christian.

Curated

Partially restricted

Simple Crosstabs

Examination of South Carolina's Sex Offender Registration and Notification (SORN) Policy in Reducing Sexual Violence, 1990-2005 (ICPSR 31502)

Released/updated on: 2015-07-30

Geographic coverage: United States, South Carolina

Time period: 1990-01-01--2005-01-01

This study examined the effects of comprehensive registration and community notification policies on rates of sexual violence in South Carolina. Specifically, it proposed to (1) evaluate whether broad sex offender registration and notification policies have reduced recidivism or deterred new sexual offenses, (2) examine whether unintended effects of broad registration and notification policies occurred, and (3) focus on the effects of registration and notification as it pertained to offenses committed by adults. The study examined whether the introduction of sex offender registration and notification laws in South Carolina were associated with reductions in sexual crimes and, if so, whether this reduction could be attributed to an actual reduction in sexual violence and/or recidivism (i.e., an intended effect) or to changes in criminal judicial processing of individuals for registry crimes (i.e., an unintended effect).

Specific study aims included examining whether: (1) South Carolina registration and notification policies had the intended effect of preventing first time sexual offending; (2) South Carolina registration and notification policies had the intended effect of reducing sexual recidivism for known sex offenders; and (3) South Carolina registration and notification policies had the unintended effect of reducing the probability that individuals who committed sexual crimes would be prosecuted or convicted for such crimes. In addition to these primary aims, the researchers also investigated (4) registration violations (e.g., failure to register) were associated with sexual or general recidivism.

Curated

Impact Assessment of Sex Offender Notification on Wisconsin Communities, 1998 (ICPSR 3015)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, Wisconsin

In response to widespread public concern about convicted sex offenders being returned from prison, federal and state laws have been passed authorizing or requiring the notification of local communities where sex offenders would be living. The dilemma associated with community notification is balancing the public's right to be informed with the need to successfully reintegrate offenders within the community. Wisconsin was one of the 50 state jurisdictions that enacted a sex offender community notification statute. This project was an in-depth study of that state's experience from the vantage point of several groups affected by the community notification process. This data collection contains three surveys that were conducted from January 1998 through mid-September 1998: (1) a survey of 704 neighborhood residents at 22 community notification meetings throughout the state (Part 1), (2) a statewide survey of 312 police and sheriff agencies (Part 2), and (3) a statewide survey of 128 probation and parole agents and their supervisors from units with sex offender caseloads (Part 3). Variables in Part 1 include how respondents found out about the date and place of the community notification meeting, respondents' opinions of the purpose of the meeting, how clearly the purpose of meeting was stated, how the meeting went, outcomes, rating of information presented, if materials were handed out, if the materials were helpful, and respondents' level of concern after the meeting. Enforcement agency data (Part 2) include variables such as type of agency, type of jurisdiction, population size, if the agency designated a special staff member to coordinate the sex offender registration and notification functions, if the agency had policies regarding registration of sex offenders and community notification about sex offenders, if the agency attended statewide training, who participated in the Core Notification Team, what kind of information was used to determine a sex offender's risk to the community, which agencies registered to receive notice, and if the agency planned to update or expand their notification list. Additional variables cover the number of requests for information from Neighborhood Watch Programs, what identifying information about the offender the agency released, types of communication the agency received from the public after a notification had been issued, topics discussed in the public communication to the agency, benefits of the community notification law, difficulties in carrying out the requirements of the law, and methods developed to handle the problems. Probation and parole survey (Part 3) variables focused on characteristics of the respondent's supervising area, the number of agents assigned to the respondents' unit, the number of agents designated as Sex Offender Intensive Supervision Program (SO-ISP) agents or SO-ISP back-up agents, the number of child or adult sex offenders under probation or parole, if the respondent participated in any meetings regarding the provisions of the notification law and its implementation, if the supervisor received specialized training, and areas covered in the training. Other variables include whether the notification level was decided by the Core Notification Team, difficulties the respondent had with Special Bulletin Notification (SBN) offenders assigned to his/her caseload, if the respondent's field unit utilized SO-ISP or "high risk" agent teams to manage sex offenders, which individuals worked with the respondent's team, the type of caseload the respondent supervised, the number of sex offenders on the respondent's caseload, if the respondent used a special risk assessment or classification instrument for sex offenders, other information used to determine the supervision level for a sex offender, if child sex offenders were managed differently than other sex offenders, how often a polygraph was used on sex offenders, who paid for the polygraph, who chose the treatment provider, the number of supervision contacts with high-risk, SBN, or medium-risk sex offenders per week, victim policies and procedures used, rules or policies regarding revocation, and prerevocation sanctions used.

Curated

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

Released/updated on: 2021-08-16

Geographic coverage: United States

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

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

Curated

Restricted

Law Enforcement and Sex Offender Registration and Notification: Perspectives, Uses, and Experiences, 2014-2015 [United States] (ICPSR 36534)

Released/updated on: 2017-12-19

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2014-02-01--2014-06-01, 2015-04-01--2015-05-01

This study represents the first comprehensive national assessment of law enforcement uses of and perspectives on sex offender registration and notification (SORN) systems. The two-year, mixed-method study featured collection and analysis of interview data from over two-dozen jurisdictions, and administration of a nationwide survey of law enforcement professionals. The study examined ways in which law enforcement leaders, uniformed staff, and civilian staff engaged in SORN-related duties perceive SORN's roles and functions, general effectiveness, and informational utility. Additionally, the study elicited law enforcement perspectives related to promising SORN and related sex offender management practices, perceived barriers and challenges to effectiveness, and policy reform priorities.

This collection includes two SPSS data files and one SPSS syntax file: "LE Qualitative Data.sav" with 55 variables and 101 cases, "LE Quantitative Data-ICPSR.sav" with 201 variables and 1402 cases and "LE Quantitative Data Syntax.sps".

Qualitative data from interviews conducted with law enorcement professionals are not available at this time.

Curated

Management of Sex Offenders by Probation and Parole Agencies in the United States, 1994 (ICPSR 6627)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States

This study examined various ways states approach and sanction sex crimes (i.e., child sexual abuse, incest, and sexual assault) and sex offenders. The aim of the study was to obtain basic information about policies and procedures of probation and parole agencies with respect to adult sex offender case management. State corrections administrators in 49 states and the District of Columbia were contacted to supply information on their states' probation and parole offices and the corresponding jurisdictions. From these offices, probation and parole supervisors at the office-management level were selected as survey respondents because of their familiarity with the day-to-day office operations. Respondents were asked about the usage of various supervision methods, such as electronic monitoring, requiring offenders on probation or parole to register with law enforcement agencies, and polygraph testing. Sanctions such as requiring the offenders to seek treatment and forbidding contact with the victim were discussed, as were various queries about the handling of the victim in the case (whether a written statement by the victim was routinely included in the offender's file, whether officers usually had contact with the victim, and whether there was a system for advising victims of status changes for the offender). Other questions focused on whether the office used specialized assessments, caseloads, programs, and policies for sex offenders that differed from those used for other offenders. Various issues regarding treatment for offenders were also examined: who chooses and pays the treatment provider, whether the agency or the court approves treatment providers, what criteria are involved in approval, and whether the office had an in-house sex offender treatment program.