Building Drug Intelligence Networks to Combat the Opioid Crisis in Rural Communities: A Collaborative Intelligence-Led Policing Strategy, United States, 2019-2022 (ICPSR 38672)
Version Date: Jul 29, 2026 View help for published
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Andrew Hochstetler, Iowa State University;
David J. Peters, Iowa State University;
Shannon M. Monnat, Syracuse University;
Glenn E. Sterner III, Pennsylvania State University;
Jeffrey A. Bouffard, Iowa State University;
Kyle A. Burgason, Iowa State University
https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR38672.v1
Version V1
Summary View help for Summary
This NIJ-funded study used a data driven approach to understand rural police department responses to the opioid crisis. Researchers compiled County-Level Drug Data on overdose deaths to understand the spatio-temporal distribution of drug misuse and to identify counties with high levels of death that are doing better and worse than expected according to an inclusive statistical model. In combination with this data, researchers collected Police Agency Survey Data from police departments in four states to understand departments' access to intelligence resources. Based on this survey, six agencies with varying law enforcement structural relations with state-level agencies were selected to participate in the study intervention. Departments were partnered with mentors and encouraged to enhance their intelligence networks, design a simple initiative, equip themselves for it, and carry it out. Outcomes from the intervention were evaluated through survey data - available as Implementation Site Administrative and Survey Data - and through a series of qualitative interviews, which will be made available at a later date.
Citation View help for Citation
Export Citation:
Funding View help for Funding
Subject Terms View help for Subject Terms
Geographic Coverage View help for Geographic Coverage
Smallest Geographic Unit View help for Smallest Geographic Unit
county
Restrictions View help for Restrictions
Access to these data is restricted. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Restricted Data Use Agreement, specify the reason for the request, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research.
Distributor(s) View help for Distributor(s)
Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)
Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection
Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes
-
This study includes qualitative data in the form of interview transcripts. These qualitative data are not currently available through ICPSR, and will be made available in a future update.
Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose
This study's purpose was to prevent drug deaths, lower opioid risks, and increase enforcement outcomes in rural communities by identifying and sharing effective intelligence strategies.
Study Design View help for Study Design
The County-Level Drug data were compiled by analyzing of the spatial distribution of the U.S. drug crisis using county-level drug mortality data. Drug mortality data were drawn from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) and opioid mortality rates by residence were taken from 2000 Census data. County-level demographic data were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey, and additional information on data sources is present in the P.I. Codebook associated with the County-Level Drug Data.
The Police Survey Data were the product of a survey of rural police departments, used to identify potential participants for the study's planned intervention program. The goal of this survey was to understand available resources for drug intelligence in rural communities, allowing researchers to select departments with varying access to intelligence resources to participate in the intervention. The survey was provided to departments as a phone, mail, or web-based survey.
The Implementation Site Administrative, Survey, and Qualitative Data were obtained during the final phase of this study. Police departments identified through the aforementioned Police Survey were contacted by the study team to participate in the study as mentees. Willing departments were then paired with a mentor agency. Mentors were tasked with identifying areas for improvement in the mentee's drug intelligence system. In addition, mentors assisted the mentee agency in modifying their current practices and obtaining additional resources on a case-by-case basis. Administrative data was collected from each department prior to the intervention, and mentees completed and exit survey at the project's conclusion. Qualitative interviews, focus groups, and follow-up conversations were conducted throughout the intervention to assess site needs and progress. Qualitative data transcripts are not included in the current release.
Sample View help for Sample
The County-Level Drug Data were drawn from a sample of all counties in the 48 conterminous United States.
To collect the Police agency Survey Data, researchers used a purchased list of all U.S. police departments to identify and contact 2,490 departments in five U.S. regions of interest: West, Midwest, Southwest, Southeast, and Northeast. The study received responses from 232 departments.
The Implementation Site Administrative, Survey, and Qualitative Data sample consists of U.S. police departments selected by the study team based on the departments' access to drug intelligence resources. Of the 11 departments contacted, 6 completed the intervention program.
Time Method View help for Time Method
Universe View help for Universe
Dataset 1: U.S. counties
Datasets 2-4: U.S. law enforcement agencies
Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation
Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)
Mode of Data Collection View help for Mode of Data Collection
Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables
The County-Level Drug Data include county-level data on drug mortality rates, demographics (including demographic change), geographic features and context (water area, percent reservation land, metro adjacency, etc.), crime rates, business patterns, and other contextual variables. These data also include spatial lag and state fixed effect variables.
The Police Survey Data consist of survey responses about department policies, practices, and resources such as whether officers carry naloxone/Narcan, the community has an opioid abuse coalition, the department shares drug intelligence with federal, local, or state agencies, etc.
The Implementation Site Administrative Data include variables for contextualizing agency drug intelligence resources. These include a range of statistics about drug arrests, tips received on hotlines, money paid to confidential informants, hours spent in drug data analysis, uses of K-9s, etc.
The Implementation Site Survey and Qualitative Data both include open-ended responses from study participants about their departments' practices, current resources, resource needs, and the individual participants' roles and expectations for participating in the study. The Implementation Site Survey Data are primarily multiple-choice and associated open-ended responses, while the Implementation Site Qualitative Data are a series of qualitative interviews. The Implementation Site Qualitative Data are not currently available, and will be released in a future update.
Response Rates View help for Response Rates
The Police Agency Survey had a 9.31 percent response rate. Researchers also aimed to recruit 11 departments to act as mentees during the study intervention, and 6 (55 percent) participated in the final study.
HideOriginal Release Date View help for Original Release Date
2026-07-29
Version History View help for Version History
2026-07-29 ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:
- Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
Notes
The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.
ICPSR usually offers files in multiple formats for researchers to be able to access data and documentation in formats that work well within their needs. If you have questions about the accessibility of materials distributed by ICPSR or require further assistance, please visit ICPSR’s Accessibility Center.
One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.
This dataset is maintained and distributed by the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD), the criminal justice archive within ICPSR. NACJD is primarily sponsored by three agencies within the U.S. Department of Justice: the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.