Search results

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 reports the findings of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) involving more than 400 police officers and the use of body-worn cameras (BWC) in the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD). Officers were surveyed before and after the trial, and a random sample was interviewed to assess their level of comfort with technology, perceptions of self, civilians, other officers, and the use of BWCs. Information was gathered during ride-alongs with BWC officers and from a review of BWC videos.

The collection includes 2 SPSS data files, 4 Excel data files, and 2 files containing aggregated treatment groups and rank-and-treatment groups, in Stata, Excel, and CSV format:

• SPSS: officer-survey---pretest.sav (n=422; 30 variables)
• SPSS: officer-survey---posttest2.sav (n=95; 33 variables)
• Excel: officer-interviews---form-a.xlsx (n=23; 52 variables)
• Excel: officer-interviews---form-b.xlsx (n=27; 52 variables)
• Excel: ride-along-observations.xlsx (n=72; 20 variables)
• Excel: video-review-data.xlsx (n=53; 21 variables)
• Stata: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-treatment-group.dta (n=4; 42 variables)
• Excel: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-treatment-group.xls (n=4; 42 variables)
• CSV: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-treatment-group.csv (n=4; 42 variables)
• Stata: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-rank-and-treatment-group.dta (n=12; 43 variables)
• Excel: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-rank-and-treatment-group.xls (n=12; 43 variables)
• CSV: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-rank-and-treatment-group.csv (n=12; 43 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.

This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of the Los Angeles Elder Abuse Forensic Center (EAFC) by examining costs associated elder abuse cases processed under a multidisciplinary team approach. Using data collected in Evaluating the Elder Abuse Forensic Center Model in Los Angeles County, California, 2007-2009 (ICPSR 34979) researchers focused on the key components, participants, and processes necessary to operate the Los Angeles EAFC and identified the costs required to process an elder abuse case as well as the outcomes attained by the EAFC. This study also carried out a survey of Adult Protective Service (APS) social workers on time spent on different case process activity and their perception on efficiency of the Los Angeles EAFC, and collected associated costs estimates.

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 "Design Your Time" (DYT) program was designed to test, in a real world setting, the efficacy of systematically providing increased monitoring of probationers coupled with known, certain and quickly enforced sanctions to reduce substance use and increase positive probationer outcomes. Developed from a model of deterrence, the program informed eligible probationers of what exactly was required of them, what would happen to them when they failed to meet requirements (increased sanctions), and how to reduce their level of monitoring once they violated and triggered increased sanctions (reduced sanctions and garnered rewards). The program utilized a model based on deterrence in which certainty and speed, rather than immediate severity, were the key elements. It also empowered the probationer by clearly informing him or her of the elements of the program, thus allowing them to "Decide Your Time." The program focused on those offenders who tested positive for drugs at intake and involved frequent urinalysis for offenders, coupled with increasing sanctions and referral to treatment.

The collection includes 1 SPSS data file with 404 variables and 400 cases. Data from qualitative interviews with probationers, day to day observations in the probation office, qualitative interviews with the DYT probation officers conducted three months after that program launched, and a focus group with the DYT officers at the conclusion of the study are not available.

The Long-Term Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Impact Study was a pre-post, quasi-experimental study of the impact of the implementation of risk-needs assessment (RNA) and risk-need-responsivity-related (RNR) case management in 5 juvenile probation offices in 2 states. This study used 3 time points (pre-implementation, 1st year post-implementation, and 7th-year post-implementation) to examine the 7-year sustainability of impacts on system-responses (rates of informal processing, different dispositions, and out-of-home placements), youth outcomes (school and employment), and recidivism; as well as cost-effectiveness.

This study also examined whether there was a significant difference in the impacts of implementation after 7 years between probation offices that were effective versus ineffective in their first year of implementation.

The Multi-Site Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE) study included 23 drug courts and 6 comparison sites selected from 8 states across the country. The purpose of the study was to: (1) Test whether drug courts reduce drug use, crime, and multiple other problems associated with drug abuse, in comparision with similar offenders not exposed to drug courts, (2) address how drug courts work and for whom by isolating key individual and program factors that make drug courts more or less effective in achieving their desired outcomes, (3) explain how offender attitudes and behaviors change when they are exposed to drug courts and how these changes help explain the effectiveness of drug court programs, and (4) examine whether drug courts generate cost savings.

Offenders in all 29 sites were surveyed in 3 waves, at baseline, 6 months later, and 18 months after enrollment. The research comprises three major components: process evaluation, impact evaluation, and a cost-benefit analysis. The process evaluation describes how the 23 drug court sites vary in program eligibility, supervision, treatment, team collaboration, and other key policies and practices. The impact evaluation examines whether drug courts produce better outcomes than comparison sites and tests which court policies and offender attitudes might explain those effects. The cost-benefit analysis evaluates drug court costs and benefits.

On January 1, 2011, the Vera Institute of Justice (Vera) launched "A Natural Experiment in Reform: Analyzing Drug Law Policy in New York," which was funded by the National Institute of Justice, and conducted by Vera, with the John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York, and the School of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University. This study sought to analyze the effects of recent changes in drug offense sentencing laws in New York State (NYS) and chronicle New York City's experience with drug law reform (DLR). This includes changes in sentencing outcomes for felony drug cases, reoffending, and cost implications, with the hope of informing NYS policy makers, and provide other states across the nation with research to inform their own DLR efforts.

Specifically, this study revolves around the following objectives: 1) describe how the DLR is reflected in actual sentencing outcomes and the extent to which practices of judges, lawyers, and defense attorneys have shifted in response to the reforms; 2) investigate how treatment diversion impacts reoffending and 3) analyze the cost implications of changing drug law sentencing policies. Researchers analyzed administrative data to describe the impacts of reforms on sentencing decisions, collected New York City arrest data for drug felonies between October 1, 2006 and September 30, 2011, and evaluated outcome data measuring recidivism and costs between pre and post DLR periods.

Numerous variables tracking offenders' progress through the criminal justice system were collected including admission to the Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison (DTAP) program, arrest and disposition jurisdictions, charges, sentencing, and drug court screening and admission. Arrestees' criminal history and rearrest figures, as well as their sex, race, and ethnic demographics were collected also.

The Valuating Law Enforcement Data in the 21st Century study was conducted in four phases. Phase I included a literature scan and expert interviews. Phase II was an exploratory effort at understanding the dimensions and characteristics of valuation efforts focused on policing data. Phase III focused on developing a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) framework for body-worn cameras (BWCs). Finally, Phase IV turned the BWC CBA tool into a web-based calculator for law enforcement agencies to assess the likely impact of BWCs on their agency.

This collection includes qualitative notes from focus group discussions at site visits conducted in Phase II and Phase III of the study. Personnel from 13 law enforcement agencies across 10 U.S. states participated in the focus groups. Efforts were made to diversify among municipal police and sheriffs, the variety of agency sizes and populations served, and geography. In general, site visits were designed to include a variety of personnel, including from executive staff, information technology, patrol, investigations, and crime analysis.