Search results

Showing 1 – 3 of 3 results.

Curated

Restricted

Crime and Victimization on the United States-Mexico Border: A Comparison of Legal Residents, Illegal Residents and Native-Born Citizens, Texas, 2019-2023 (ICPSR 39110)

Released/updated on: 2025-06-26

Geographic coverage: El Paso, Texas

Time period: 2019-01-01--2023-12-31

The project was divided into two studies that together sought to compare criminal histories and victimization experiences for immigrants compared to U.S.-born citizens in the U.S.-México border region. Study one (datasets 1 and 2) of the project consists of secondary data from the El Paso County Sheriff's office, the US Census, and the El Paso Neighborhood Survey. Study two (dataset 3) of the project consists of interviews with inmates from El Paso county jails.

Curated

Impact of Legal Advocacy on Intimate Partner Homicide in the United States, 1976-1997 (ICPSR 25621)

Released/updated on: 2009-07-10

Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, Oklahoma City, Detroit, Indiana, Tucson, Albuquerque, Fort Worth, Cincinnati, Austin, Oakland, San Jose, San Diego, Columbus (Ohio), Memphis, Jacksonville, Arizona, Buffalo, Boston, Pittsburgh, Sacramento, Seattle, El Paso, Nashville, California, Florida, Pennsylvania, Tulsa, Fresno, Illinois, Texas, Portland (Oregon), Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Indianapolis, Oregon, Virginia Beach, United States, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Cleveland, Washington, Nebraska, Omaha, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Massachusetts, Colorado, Honolulu, Missouri, New Orleans, Phoenix, Denver, Dallas, St. Louis, Wisconsin, District of Columbia, San Antonio, Chicago, Hawaii, Minnesota, Kansas City (Missouri), New York (state), Michigan, Miami, San Francisco, Baltimore, New Mexico, Long Beach, Louisiana, Ohio, Los Angeles, Toledo, Philadelphia, Houston

Time period: 1976-01-01--1996-12-31, 1976-01-01--1997-12-31

This study examined the impacts of jurisdictions' domestic violence policies on violent behavior of family members and intimate partners, on the likelihood that the police discovered an incident, and on the likelihood that the police made an arrest. The research combined two datasets. Part 1 contains information on police, prosecution policies, and local victim services. Informants within the local agencies of the 50 largest cities in the United States were contacted and asked to complete a survey inventorying policies and activities by type and year of implementation. Data from completed surveys covered 48 cities from 1976 to 1996. Part 2 contains data on domestic violence laws. Data on state statutes from 1976 to 1997 that related to protection orders were collected by a legal expert for all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Curated

Restricted

National Evaluation of the Safe Start Promising Approaches Initiative, 2011-2016 (ICPSR 36610)

Released/updated on: 2017-03-14

Geographic coverage: Detroit, El Paso, United States, Hawaii, Kalamazoo, New York (state), Spokane, Washington, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Aurora, Queens, Worcester, Texas, Massachusetts, Colorado, Honolulu, Denver, Philadelphia

Time period: 2011-11-01--2016-06-30

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 Safe Start Promising Approaches for Children Exposed to Violence Initiative funded 10 sites to implement and evaluate programs to improve outcomes for children exposed to violence. RAND conducted the national evaluation of these programs, in collaboration with the sites and a national evaluation team, to focus on child-level outcomes. The dataset includes data gathered at the individual family-level at baseline, 6-, 12-months. All families were engaged in experimental or quasi-experimental studies comparing the Safe Start intervention to enhanced services-as-usual, alternative services, a wait-list control group, or a comparable comparison group of families that did not receive Safe Start services. Data sources for the outcome evaluation were primary caregiver interviews, child interviews (for ages 8 and over), and family/child-level service utilization data provided by the Safe Start program staff.