Search results

Showing 1 – 3 of 3 results.
Curated
Restricted

Efficiency in Processing Sexual Assault Kits in Crime Laboratories and Law Enforcement Agencies, United States, 2013-2014 (ICPSR 36747)

Released/updated on: 2018-11-29
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2013-01-01--2014-01-01

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

This study presents a research-informed approach to identify the most efficient practices for addressing un-submitted sexual assault kits (SAKs) that accrue in U.S. law enforcement agencies (LEAs) as well as untested SAKs pending analysis in crime laboratories. The study examined intra- and interagency dynamics associated with SAK processing efficiency in a linked sample of crime laboratories. SAK outputs and inputs were assessed for laboratories that conduct biological forensic analysis and LEAs that submit SAK evidence to these laboratories. Production functions were estimated to examine effects of labor and capital inputs, in addition to policies, management systems, and cross-agency coordination on efficiency. Six jurisdictions were recruited for site visits, and qualitative methods were used to understand how LEAs, laboratories, and prosecutors implement practices that affect efficiency.

This study contains 7 data files including:

  1. Crime Lab_Raw.dta (n=147; variables =242)
  2. Crosswalk File.dta (n=2337; variables=2)
  3. lab_analysis_sample_2017-04-06.dta (n=132; variables=92)
  4. LEA Communication LCAs.dta (n=321; variables=15
  5. merged_analysis_file_JH2017-04-30.dta (n=273; variables=117)
  6. policy Class probabilities_LABS.dta (n=139; variables=19)
  7. SAK LAB COMMUNICATION LCA.dta (n=134; variables=15)
Curated

Intercity Variation in Youth Homicide, Robbery, and Assault, 1984-2006 [United States] (ICPSR 30981)

Released/updated on: 2012-09-20
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1984-01-01--2006-01-01
The research team collected data on homicide, robbery, and assault offending from 1984-2006 for youth 13 to 24 years of age in 91 of the 100 largest cities in the United States (based on the 1980 Census) from various existing data sources. Data on youth homicide perpetration were acquired from the Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) and data on nonlethal youth violence (robbery and assault) were obtained from the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR). Annual homicide, robbery, and assault arrest rates per 100,000 age-specific populations (i.e., 13 to 17 and 18 to 24 year olds) were calculated by year for each city in the study. Data on city characteristics were derived from several sources including the County and City Data Books, SHR, and the Vital Statistics Multiple Cause of Death File. The research team constructed a dataset representing lethal and nonlethal offending at the city level for 91 cities over the 23-year period from 1984 to 2006, resulting in 2,093 city year observations.
Curated
Restricted

Research on the Impact of Technology on Policing Strategy, 2012-2014 [United States] (ICPSR 36367)

Released/updated on: 2017-12-21
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2012-01-01--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.

The purpose of this study was to develop a research-based framework to guide police agencies in future selection, implementation, and use of technology. This project was conducted in three phases. First, an expert panel was convened to identify key policing technology and to ensure that the survey captured critical indicators of technology performance. Second, a nationally representative survey was administered to over 1,200 state and local law enforcement agencies. The survey explored policing strategies and activities as well as technology acquisition, use, and challenges.

Back to top