Search results

This mixed methods study examined several aspects of the use of civil protection orders (CPOs) by adolescents and young adults (aged 14 to 24 years) in one county in Washington. The first aim examined the effectiveness of CPOs among adolescents and young adults with a history of intimate partner violence (IPV) on IPV recidivism rates of: 1) physical IPV; 2) psychological IPV; and 3) IPV-related property crimes. The second aim explored the knowledge, perceptions, and barriers to and facilitators of adolescent and young adult IPV victims' use of CPOs to best identify next steps in improving access and uptake among this population.

The collection includes a survival analysis dataset (DS1) containing data from county court records and CPO filings from IPV events, and documentation from IPV victim interviews (DS2). Demographic information includes victim, offender, and interview respondent ages, and interview respondent gender, race and ethnicity.

In the aftermath of the attacks on September 11, 2001, and subsequent terrorist attacks elsewhere around the world, a key counterterrorism concern was the possible radicalization of Muslims living in the United States. The purpose of the study was to examine and identify characteristics and practices of four American Muslim communities that have experienced varying levels of radicalization. The communities were selected because they were home to Muslim-Americans that had experienced isolated instances of radicalization. They were located in four distinct regions of the United States, and they each had distinctive histories and patterns of ethnic diversity.

This objective was mainly pursued through interviews of over 120 Muslims located within four different Muslim-American communities across the country (Buffalo, New York; Houston, Texas; Seattle, Washington; and Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina), a comprehensive review of studies an literature on Muslim-American communities, a review of websites and publications of Muslim-American organizations and a compilation of data on prosecutions of Muslim-Americans on violent terrorism-related offenses.

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 study integrated neighborhood-level data on robbery and burglary gathered from local police agencies across the United States, foreclosure data from RealtyTrac (a real estate information company), and a wide variety of social, economic, and demographic control variables from multiple sources. Using census tracts to approximate neighborhoods, the study regressed 2009 neighborhood robbery and burglary rates on foreclosure rates measured for 2007-2008 (a period during which foreclosure spiked dramatically in the nation), while accounting for 2007 robbery and burglary rates and other control variables that captured differences in social, economic, and demographic context across American neighborhoods and cities for this period. The analysis was based on more than 7,200 census tracts in over 60 large cities spread across 29 states. Core research questions were addressed with a series of multivariate multilevel and single-level regression models that accounted for the skewed nature of neighborhood crime patterns and the well-documented spatial dependence of crime.

The study contains one data file with 8,198 cases and 99 variables.

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2011, the reference date was Wednesday, October 26 (the last Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g. placing agency), the judicial process (e.g. court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g. age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g. facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction. The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children.

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2013, the reference date was Wednesday, October 23 (the fourth Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g. placing agency), the judicial process (e.g. court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g. age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g. facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children. Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction.

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2015, the reference date was Wednesday, October 28 (the fourth Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g. placing agency), the judicial process (e.g. court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g. age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g. facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children. Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction.

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2017, the reference date was Wednesday, October 25 (the fourth Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g. placing agency), the judicial process (e.g. court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g. age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g. facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children. Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction.

The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted every other year, asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the United States to describe all youth assigned a bed in the facility on a specified reference date. In 2021, the reference date was Wednesday, October 27 (the fourth Wednesday in October).

Each record in the data provides information on a juvenile in a residential facility on the reference date, including information on placement (e.g. placing agency), the judicial process (e.g. court adjudication status), and demographics (e.g. age). Each record that provides information about a juvenile also includes information about institutional characteristics (e.g. facility type, use of locked doors or gates), treatment services, and population of the facility in which the juvenile was held. Therefore, CJRP data can be analyzed at the individual or facility level.

The census was not sent to adult facilities or to facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment or for abused or neglected children. Some state and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction.

The purpose of the Census of Juveniles on Probation (CJP) was to collect individual-level data about youth on probation, including their numbers and characteristics. The CJP survey asked respondents to report the total number of juveniles on formal probation within their reporting jurisdiction on the reference date of October 24, 2012.

For each youth on probation, responding agencies were asked to provide the following information: sex, date of birth, race, most serious offense, state and county where most serious offense was committed, and the state and county where the juvenile resided on the census reference date.

This data collection contains the national data.

This study examined the laws, policies, and practices related to juvenile DNA collection, as well as their implications for the juvenile and criminal justice systems. DNA evidence proved valuable in solving crimes, which motivated a concerted effort to expand the categories of offenders who provided DNA samples for analysis and inclusion in the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)-operated national database.

State requirements for DNA collection, which initially focused on adult offenders convicted of sexual or violent offenses, expanded to include other categories of convicted felons, convicted misdemeanants, arrestees, and juveniles. In 30 states, certain categories of juveniles handled in the juvenile justice system must now provide DNA samples. The study was designed to explore the practice and implications of collecting DNA from juveniles and addressed the following questions:

1. How have state agencies, juvenile justice agencies and state laboratories implemented juvenile DNA collection laws?
2. What were the number and characteristics of juveniles with profiles included in CODIS?
3. How have juvenile profiles in CODIS contributed to public safety or other justice outcomes?
4. What improvements to policies and practices needed to be made?

To examine these questions, researchers at the Urban Institute: (1) systematically reviewed all state DNA statutes; (2) conducted semi-structured interviews with CODIS lab representatives in states that collect DNA from juveniles to understand how the laws were implemented; (3) collected and analyzed descriptive data provided by these labs on the volume and characteristics of juvenile profiles in CODIS; (4) conducted semi-structured interviews with juvenile and criminal justice stakeholders in five case study states; and (5) convened a meeting of federal officials and experts from the forensic and juvenile justice committees to explore the broader impacts of juvenile DNA collection.

The goal of the project was to improve police officers' sleep, health, safety, and wellness, thus improving the quality of police services. Using a multi-phase, mixed method approach, the core objectives included:

1. Measure the effects of work schedules and sleep loss on Seattle Police Department (SPD) officer health, wellness, safety, and quality of life.

2. Develop a fatigue risk management strategy, informed by the data collected during objective one.

3. Using a randomized control trial design, implement the resulting fatigue risk management strategy across the SPD, which is a large municipal police department (approximately 1,500 sworn officers)

4. Measure the effectiveness of the fatigue risk management strategy.

The main research questions the study sought to address were as follows:

1. What are the effects of shift work, work hours, sleep loss, and fatigue on police officers' safety, health, and quality of life?

2. Can a fatigue risk management strategy influence these effects?

Variables include measures of officers' sleep patterns and sleep quality, physical and mental health metrics, descriptions of the officers' role at the SPD, and demographic variables including age, gender, and race/ethnicity.

This project sought to gather and analyze data on the effects of marijuana legalization from primary and secondary data sources that are both local and national in scope, and at both the individual and aggregate level. Since 1996, 37 states have passed statutes legalizing marijuana for medical and/or recreational use, while it has remained illegal under federal law. Jurisdictional and temporal variation in law creates a complex environment and substantial challenges for police and prosecutors charged with enforcement, and little is known about the justice system processing, public safety, and public health outcomes of evolving laws and policies.

Secondary criminal justice and public health data were gathered from federal, state, and local sources. Each source has a sufficiently long time series to provide statistical power and to allow for sometimes gradual implementation. The design exploits geographic and temporal variation in the implementation of marijuana law, using a difference-in-differences design that compares outcomes in states which implemented the policies with states that did not, before and after implementation.

This study sought to examine the effects of cannabis legalization on crime and law enforcement in Washington State. In 2012 citizens voted to legalize possession of small amounts of cannabis, with the first licensed retail outlets opening on July 1, 2014. Researchers crafted their analysis around two questions. First, how are law enforcement agencies handling crime and offenders, particularly involving marijuana, before and after legalization? Second, what are the effects of marijuana legalization on crime, crime clearance, and other policing activities statewide, as well as in urban, rural, tribal, and border areas?

Research participants and crime data were collected from 14 police organizations across Washington, as well as Idaho police organizations situated by the Washington-Idaho border where marijuana possession is illegal. Additional subjects were recruited from other police agencies across Washington, prosecutors, and officials from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board, and the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators for focus groups and individual interviews. Variables included dates of calls for service from 2004 through 2018, circumstances surrounding calls for service, geographic beats, agency, whether calls were dispatch or officer initiated, and whether the agency was in a jurisdiction with legal cannabis.

Bullying behaviors are common among adolescents and are associated with numerous negative health and social consequences that can persist into adulthood for victims, bullies and bystanders. More recently, bullying behaviors have migrated to online platforms where they are not well understood and lack standardized definitions. Thus, current efforts to understand prevalence and promote appropriate policies lack a strong evidence base.

By applying Concept Mapping and recruiting participants, including adolescents and professionals representing education, health and the justice system, the study team attempts to fills these gaps by creating a standardized definition of electronic harassment and an associated measurement tool. Further outcomes will include several manuscripts describing the findings submitted to health and social science conferences and journals, and dissemination efforts involving community leaders and local media. Upon successful completion of these objectives the diverse and multidisciplinary research team will disseminate these findings in the public health, education and policy arenas.

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 measures the size and structure of the underground commercial sex economy in eight major US cities: San Diego, Seattle, Dallas, Denver, Washington, DC, Kansas City, Atlanta, and Miami. The goals of this study were to derive a more rigorous estimate of the underground commercial sex economy (UCSE) in eight major US cities and to provide an understanding of the structure of this underground economy.

Researchers relied on a multi-method approach using both qualitative and quantitative data to estimate the size of UCSE including:

1. Collecting official data on crime related to the underground weapons and drugs economies
2. Conducting semi-structured interviews with convicted traffickers, pimps, child pornographers, and sex workers at the federal, state, and local levels
3. Conducting semi-structured interviews with local and federal police investigators and prosecutors to inform our analysis of the interrelationship across different types of underground commercial sex activity.

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.

Validation data (Human Trafficking Data, n = 180) was collected through 180 structured interviews with victim service provider clients who responded to the screening tool. The screening tool was administered by the victim service providers at regular intakes or subsequent interview sessions between July 2012 and June 2013. Service providers were instructed to invite any potential trafficking victims, that is persons who may have been trafficked or subject to similar crimes, whom they judge to be emotionally stable enough to participate. Status as a trafficking victim did not have to be determined in advance of the interview, since a mix of trafficked and non-trafficked clients in the study sample was necessary to establish the validity and predictive ability of the screening tool.

Researchers also conducted confidential case file reviews during site visits at partner agencies, and in-depth interviews with service providers (n = 12 from 11 agencies), clients (n = 7 from 6 agencies) and key informant interviews (n = 12) with law enforcement officers, prosecutors and probation officers.

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 is a secondary analysis of data from ICPSR Study Number 27101, Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) Multi-site Impact Evaluation, 2004-2011 [United States]- specifically the adult male dataset -to examine the associations among child support obligations, employment and reentry outcomes. The study addressed the following research questions:

1. Are the demographic, criminal justice and employment-related characteristics of incarcerated men with child support orders significantly different in any important way from incarcerated males without child support orders?
2. Did SVORI clients receive more support and services related to child support orders and modification of debt after release from prison compared to non-SVORI participants?
3. Does having legal child support obligations decrease the likelihood of employment in later waves, net of key demographic and criminal justice history factors?
4. How does employment influence the relationship between child support debt and recidivism? and
5. Is family instrumental support a significant predictor of reduced recidivism or increased employment in models assessing the relationship between child support obligations, employment and recidivism?

The study includes one document (Syntax_ChildSupport_Reentry_forICPSR_2012-IJ-CX-0012.docx) which contains SPSS and Stata syntax used to create research variables.

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.

The major aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that legal representation of the Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) victim in child custody decisions leads to greater legal protections being awarded in these decisions compared to similar cases of unrepresented IPV victims. A retrospective cohort study was conducted among King County couples with minor children filing for marriage dissolution in King County, Washington between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2010 who had a history of police or court documented intimate partner violence (IPV). The study examined the separate effects of private legal representation and legal aid representation relative to propensity score-matched, unrepresented comparison subjects. Primary study outcomes were measured at the time the first "Final Parenting Plan" was awarded. Researchers also examined the two-year period post-decree among the subset of cases with filing between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2009 for post-decree court proceedings indicative of continued child custody or visitation disputes.

Clearance rates for most crimes have remained low and stable for decades (Braga et al., 2011), despite advances in police technologies (Koper et al., 2015). Many police agencies have developed triaging practices for criminal investigations using solvability factors to guess which cases are most likely to be solved and to allocate investigative resources to those crimes (Eck, 1983; 1992). This practice partially stems from a persistent belief that resolving crimes and the resulting clearance rates are due to circumstances of the crime and community context, and are beyond the control of police. However, a growing body of research has challenged this belief, demonstrating that enhanced investigative efforts can improve crime clearance rates beyond solvability factors (Braga and Dusseault, 2018; Lum and Wellford, 2023).

In this study, the research team sought to determine if investigative follow-ups could increase clearance rates for robbery and burglary cases (frequently occurring crime types with traditionally low clearance rates) and increase victim satisfaction with police services. Agencies selected for the study were the Seattle Police Department (SPD) in Seattle, Washington, and the Rochester Police Department (RPD) in Rochester, New York. Both agencies triaged a large proportion of robbery cases and would have a large enough sample size to successfully carry out an experiment.

The original study design was a randomized controlled trial. In both sites, robbery cases would be allocated to either the intervention condition--an investigative follow-up conducted by an officer during their daily patrol assignment--or the control condition with no follow-up. Challenges to personnel and agency funding from the COVID-19 pandemic, the murder of George Floyd, and other officer-involved deaths in 2020 led to difficulties implementing the study as initially designed. The experiment was not initiated in Rochester, and initiated but not completed in Seattle. Therefore, the team transitioned to a natural quasi-experiment design in Rochester and added a case analysis of robberies in Seattle.

This collection contains three datasets: victim satisfaction surveys from Seattle (DS1, n=39) and Rochester (DS2, n=37), and supplemental reports on follow-ups made during the Seattle experiment implementation (DS3, n=82).

This study collection sought to thoroughly understand the creation, testing, and use of forensic science in five jurisdictions across the country. A random sample was selected of recent criminal cases in the following jurisdictions and tracked from investigation to adjudication to understand how forensic evidence functions:

• Sacramento County, CA: 990 cases
• Segwick County, KS: 936 cases
• Allegheny County, PA: 978 cases
• Bexar County (San Antonio), TX: 936 cases
• King County, WA: 892 cases

The Principal Investigator sought answers to the following seven primary research questions:

• How often is forensic evidence collected and analyzed and how is it used pre-arrest?
• What are the outcomes of forensic evidence testing?
• What is the effect of forensic evidence on arrest and charging?
• How does forensic evidence affect the plea-bargaining process?
• What effect does forensic evidence have on conviction and sentencing outcomes?
• Does the turnaround time for analysis of forensic evidence have any impact on case disposition?
• Does the institutional configuration of the crime laboratory have any effect on its productivity?

Data for the following types of forensic testing are included in this data collection: hair, fibers, glass, paint, gas chromatography / mass spectrometry (GC/MS), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), scanning electron microscopy / energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (SEM/EDX), physical match, drug identification, toxicology, serology, combined DNA index system (CODIS), DNA short tandem repeat (Y-STR), blood pattern, test fire, and comparison scope.

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, with assistance from the National Institute of Justice's Data Resources Program (FY2012), is a reanalysis of data from the national evaluation of the federal Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI). SVORI provided funding to 69 agencies across the United States to enhance reentry programs and coordination between corrections and community services. The national evaluation covered 16 of these sites, twelve of which provided services to the 2,054 adult ex-prisoners who are the focus of the present study.

The purpose of this study is to understand whether or not offenders receive the services they say they need, and whether the degree of 'fit' between this self-reported criminogenic need and services received is related to recidivism. This study analyzes data from the SVORI multisite evaluation to assess the potential explanations for the mixed effectiveness of reentry programs. The goal is to understand whether or not service-risk/need fit is related to successful reentry outcomes, or whether the needs of returning prisoners are unrelated to their risk of recidivism regardless of how well they are addressed. For the present study researchers obtained the SVORI (ICPSR 27101) outcome evaluation datasets from the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD). The archive holds four separate datasets from the evaluation: Adult Males Data (Part 1, N=1,697), Adult Females Data (Part 2, N=357), Juvenile Males Data (Part 3, N=337) and official recidivism and reincarceration data (Part 4, N=35,469), which can be linked on a one-to-many basis with the individual-level data in the other three datasets. To prepare the SVORI data for analysis researchers merged Datasets 1 and 2 (Adult Males and Adult Females) and created seven separate datasets containing Waves 1 through 4 survey data, National Crime Information Center (NCIC) crime data, administrative data, and sampling weights.

This deposit to NACJD is intended to complement the existing SVORI dataset (ICPSR 27101). It contains an R syntax file to be used with the datasets contained in the ICPSR 27101 collection.