Search results

Showing 1 – 8 of 8 results.

Curated

Crime Incident Data for Selected HOPE VI Sites in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 2002-2010, and Washington, DC, 2000-2009 (ICPSR 29981)

Released/updated on: 2011-07-06

Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, District of Columbia, United States, Wisconsin

Time period: 2002-01-01--2010-02-01, 2000-01-01--2009-09-01

The purpose of this project was to conduct an evaluation of the impact on crime of the closing, renovation, and subsequent reopening of selected public housing developments under the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere (HOPE VI) initiative. The study examined crime displacement and potential diffusion of benefits in and around five public housing developments that, since 2000, had been redeveloped using funds from HUD's HOPE VI initiative and other sources. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, three sites were selected for inclusion in the study. However, due to substantial overlap between the various target sites and displacement zones, the research team ultimately decided to aggregate the three sites into a single target area. A comparison area was then chosen based on recommendations from the Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee (HACM). In Washington, DC, two HOPE VI sites were selected for inclusion in the study. Based on recommendations from the District of Columbia Housing Authority (DCHA), the research team selected a comparison site for each of the two target areas. Displacement areas were then drawn as concentric rings ("buffers") around the target areas in both Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Washington, DC. Address-level incident data were collected for the city of Milwaukee from the Milwaukee Police Department for the period January 2002 through February 2010. Incident data included all "Group A" offenses as classified under National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS). The research team classified the offenses into personal and property offenses. The offenses were aggregated into monthly counts, yielding 98 months of data (Part 1: Milwaukee, Wisconsin Data). Address-level data were also collected for Washington, DC from the Metropolitan Police Department for the time period January 2000 through September 2009. Incident data included all Part I offenses as classified under the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) system. The data were classified by researchers into personal and property offenses and aggregated by month, yielding 117 months of data (Part 2: Washington, DC Data). Part 1 contains 15 variables, while Part 2 contains a total of 27 variables. Both datasets include variables on the number of personal offenses reported per month, the number of property offenses reported per month, and the total number of incidents reported per month for each target site, buffer zone area (1000 feet or 2000 feet), and comparison site. Month and year indicators are also included in each dataset.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Healthy Neighborhoods Study, Boston, Massachusetts, 2016-2018 (ICPSR 38721)

Released/updated on: 2023-04-19

Geographic coverage: United States, Massachusetts, Boston

Time period: 2015-06-01--2017-03-31

The Healthy Neighborhoods Study (HNS) aimed to better understand the relationship between urban development, neighborhood conditions, and population health in Boston. More specifically, the research completed was the planning and baseline phase for a longer 9 year longitudinal study with two overarching aims:

to determine how to measure and evaluate the mid- to long-term impacts of transit-oriented development on neighborhood conditions and population health, and
to better understand the drivers and mechanisms that mediate the relationship between neighborhoods and health.

The study tracks measures in health, development, neighborhood conditions and resident experiences in nine urban centers in the Boston-metro area.

Curated

National Neighborhood Data Archive (NaNDA): Land Cover by Census Tract and ZIP Code Tabulation Area, United States, 1985-2023 (ICPSR 38598)

Released/updated on: 2025-04-07

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1985-01-01--2023-12-31

This collection contains measures of land cover (e.g., low-, medium-, or high-density development, forest, wetland, open water) derived from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) and aggregated by United States census tract and ZIP code tabulation area (ZCTA). For each land type, land cover is measured both in total square meters and as a proportion of all land of that type within the tract or the ZCTA.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Preventing Firearm Violence: An Evaluation of Urban Blight Removal in High Risk Communities, Cleveland, Ohio and Detroit, Michigan, 2011-2017 (ICPSR 39534)

Released/updated on: 2026-07-16

Geographic coverage: Detroit, United States, Ohio, Cleveland, Michigan

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

This study evaluated the effects of demolishing or rehabilitating vacant and decaying buildings in Cleveland, Ohio and Detroit, Michigan as a violence prevention measure. Researchers used detailed longitudinal property-level data from 2011-2017 in Cleveland, Ohio and 2017 in Detroit, Michigan, to estimate the effects of demolition and rehabilitation of vacant and decaying properties under different targeting strategies and concentrations. The data produced by this study were aggregated into neighborhood-level variables of varying geographic specificity, which measure the study's primary outcome, firearm violence, and primary exposures, property demolition and rehabilitation. These data also include contextual variables reporting socioeconomic data, demographics, additional violent and nonviolent crime rates, and neighborhood composition variables (e.g. counts of commercial lots, apartments, single family homes/condominiums, etc.) at the neighborhood-level.

Curated

Rural Establishment Innovation Survey (ICPSR 36544)

Released/updated on: 2016-11-29

Geographic coverage: United States

In 2014, the United States Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service (USDA ERS) conducted the Rural Establishment Innovation Survey (REIS). This survey provides a nationally representative sample of innovation processes in rural businesses. REIS defines innovation as the introduction of new goods, services, or ways of doing business that are valued by consumers. Traditional measures from secondary data sources, such as patents or research and development (R&D) expenditures, focus on science and engineering-based innovation, which usually depict rural innovation as rare or idiosyncratic. By focusing instead on a broader definition of innovation, the REIS provides a fuller assessment of rural innovative capacity.

The main research questions for this survey were:

Are rural firms as innovative as urban firms?
What constraints are impeding the innovative capacity of firms?
What strategies are innovative firms using to mitigate these constraints?

The target population for the survey was Nonmetro and metro establishments with 5 or more employees in tradable sectors (mining, manufacturing, wholesale trade, transportation and warehousing, finance, information, professional/technical/scientific services, arts and management of businesses). REIS used the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages Business Register for its sampling frame. Responses from 11,600 businesses were usable.

These data include responses from businesses in the Arts & Museums industry category. These businesses were oversampled by a factor of 3.3 to ensure reliable statistics.

The REIS data are restricted and require users to apply for access to the data. For permission to access to these data, visit the ERS Rural Economy Population: Business Industry page and scroll to the bottom of the page for contact information. If permission to access the data is granted, the data can be viewed through the NORC data enclave.

Curated

Security by Design: Revitalizing Urban Neighborhoods in the United States, 1994-1996 (ICPSR 2777)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1994-01-01--1996-01-01

This study was designed to collect comprehensive data on the types of "crime prevention through environmental design" (CPTED) methods used by cities of 30,000 population and larger, the extent to which these methods were used, and their perceived effectiveness. A related goal was to discern trends, variations, and expansion of CPTED principles traditionally employed in crime prevention and deterrence. "Security by design" stems from the theory that proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the incidence and fear of crime and an improvement in quality of life. Examples are improving street lighting in high-crime locations, traffic re-routing and control to hamper drug trafficking and other crimes, inclusion of security provisions in city building codes, and comprehensive review of planned development to ensure careful consideration of security. To gather these data, the United States Conference of Mayors (USCM), which had previously studied a variety of issues including the fear of crime, mailed a survey to the mayors of 1,060 cities in 1994. Follow-up surveys were sent in 1995 and 1996. The surveys gathered information about the role of CPTED in a variety of local government policies and procedures, local ordinances, and regulations relating to building, local development, and zoning. Information was also collected on processes that offered opportunities for integrating CPTED principles into local development or redevelopment and the incorporation of CPTED into decisions about the location, design, and management of public facilities. Questions focused on whether the city used CPTED principles, which CPTED techniques were used (architectural features, landscaping and landscape materials, land-use planning, physical security devices, traffic circulation systems, or other), the city department with primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with CPTED zoning ordinances/building codes and other departments that actively participated in that enforcement (mayor's office, fire department, public works department, planning department, city manager, economic development office, police department, building department, parks and recreation, zoning department, city attorney, community development office, or other), the review process for proposed development, security measures for public facilities, traffic diversion and control, and urban beautification programs. Respondents were also asked about other security-by-design features being used, including whether they were mandatory or optional, if optional, how they were instituted (legislation, regulation, state building code, or other), and if applicable, how they were legislated (city ordinance, city resolution, or state law). Information was also collected on the perceived effectiveness of each technique, if local development regulations existed regarding convenience stores, if joint code enforcement was in place, if banks, neighborhood groups, private security agencies, or other groups were involved in the traffic diversion and control program, and the responding city's population, per capita income, and form of government.

Curated

Washington Post District of Columbia Poll, January 2008 (ICPSR 24602)

Released/updated on: 2009-10-12

Geographic coverage: District of Columbia, United States

This special topic poll, fielded January 3-8, 2008, is a part of continuing series of monthly polls that solicit public opinion on various political and social issues. The District of Columbia was the focus of this poll. Residents were asked for their feelings about the future of the District of Columbia, whether they thought the District was moving in the right direction, and the biggest problems facing the District at that time. Respondents were asked for their opinions of Mayor Adrian Fenty and whether they approved of the way he was handling his job and other issues such as improving city services, reducing crime, creating more jobs for District residents, the number of African Americans serving in city government, as well as their opinions of Mayor Fenty's relations with the District Council. Opinions were also solicited on the District of Columbia Council, respondents' own ward council members, the District police, Ward Eight Representative Marion Barry, head coach of the Washington Redskins Joe Gibbs, Police Chief Cathy Lanier, District Council Chairman Vincent Gray, Chancellor of the District of Columbia public schools Michelle Rhee, and District of Columbia Chief Financial Officer Natwar Ghandi. Several questions asked about issues in the respondents' own neighborhood, including safety from crime, how the process of redevelopment would affect the rich and poor, the neighborhood, and the city overall, whether respondents thought they would be forced from their homes due to the redevelopment, and whether respondents thought they could find a home they could afford within the District if they had to move that day. A series of questions focused on District public schools, including the school system's budget, violence and crime in the schools, lack of parental involvement, what was the biggest problem facing District public schools, and whether the transfer of control of District public schools to the mayor had made a difference. Additional topics included the theft of millions of dollars from the city by employees in the District's Tax and Revenue Department, respondents' financial situation, the Washington Nationals major league baseball team and new publicly funded baseball stadium, opinions on financing a soccer stadium for the team D.C. United, terrorist attacks in the Washington area, and gun control. Demographic information includes sex, age, race, education level, household income, whether anyone in the household worked for the federal or city government, frequency of religious attendance, type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural), whether respondents rented or owned their home, voter registration status and participation history, political party affiliation, political philosophy, the presence of children under 18 in the household, and whether respondents had children in the District of Columbia public school system.

Curated

World Cities Culture Report, 2022 (ICPSR 39411)

Released/updated on: 2025-05-16

The World Cities Culture Forum, established in 2012, is a leading global network of civic leaders from over 40 creative cities across six continents, representing a combined population of over 245 million. The forum fosters collaborations to place culture at the core of urban development, addressing 21st-century challenges such as climate change, affordable workspaces, cultural tourism, and diversity in public spaces. Through its Global Summit, partnerships, and programs like the Leadership Exchange Programme and Digital Dialogue Masterclasses, the forum promotes cultural integration in city planning. The World Cities Culture Report 2022 provides comprehensive open-source data on culture, including over 60 datasets from 40 cities.

Contextual Data: Includes demographics such as characteristics of the overall and working-age populations (including percent who were foreign born) and of the geographical area, such as the percentage of national population living in the city and the percentage of the area devoted to parks and other public green spaces.
Cultural Infrastructure: Provides counts (and rates) of various facilities and venues, including art galleries, artists' studios, rehearsal spaces, bars, bookshops, cinemas, community centers, concert halls, museums, nightclubs, libraries, video game arcades, and theatres.
Participation and Tourism: Focuses on cultural participation metrics, such as cinema and theatre admissions, festival attendance, museum visits, average daily attendance at the top five art exhibits, and international tourist numbers.
Creative Economy: Encompasses data on book publishing, creative industries employment, film festivals, restaurant ratings, and performances.
Education: Includes statistics on public library book loans, higher education levels, international student enrollment, and specialist institutes in art and design education.

The source for each number is identified within the dataset. Data users can freely download selected datasets as .csv files.