Search results

Showing 1 – 34 of 34 results.

Curated

Breaking the School-to-Prison Pipeline: Implications of Removing Police from Schools for Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Justice System, United States, 2003-2018 (ICPSR 39189)

Released/updated on: 2024-11-20

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2003-01-01--2018-12-31

Momentum toward removing school-based law enforcement (SBLE) has increased since the summer of 2020. This change has occurred due to issues of equity with the hope that removing SBLE will reduce existing racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal justice system. SBLE refers to sworn law enforcement stationed in schools on either a part- or full-time basis. Some SBLE are known as school resource officers, who often receive special training in juvenile law and interacting with students in schools, although this varies from state to state. Other SBLE do not receive any special training in working with young people.

Although the move toward removing SBLE may have intuitive appeal to some school districts, no empirical evidence exists regarding what happens to students' frequency of contact with the criminal justice system after schools remove SBLE. Similarly, current research has not examined the impacts on the attendant racial and ethnic disparities.

All the data used in this study are secondary data from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), including both the publicly available Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) and the restricted-use School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS). All data cleaning, manipulation, and analysis will be done using syntax files in Stata. This study is a collection of these three Stata .do syntax files.

This study compared changes in three measures of criminal justice contact (i.e., arrests, referrals to law enforcement, and crimes reported to police) in schools that removed SBLE relative to the changes in schools that did not remove SBLE. The study examined within-school racial and ethnic differences in rates of arrest and referrals to law enforcement, and between-school differences in all three measures of criminal justice system contact by school racial composition.

Curated

Restricted

The Comprehensive School Safety Initiative: Study of Police in Schools, California and Florida, 2011-2019 (ICPSR 37591)

Released/updated on: 2022-12-13

Geographic coverage: United States, California, Florida

Time period: 2011-01-01--2019-12-31

Although the placement of school resource officers (SROs) in schools is widespread, little is known about its effectiveness in preventing school crime or the extent to which placement may harm schools and students (e.g., by facilitating the formal processing of minor offenses). The Study of Police in Schools sought to strengthen the evidence base on the effects of SROs on schools and students. Specifically, this study addressed two research questions: (1) What are the effects of SROs on school disciplinary offenses and disciplinary actions? and (2) Do the effects of SROs vary by implementation, school, and student characteristics?

The study focused on public secondary schools that increased SRO staffing through the 2013 and 2014 Department of Justice's Community Policing Services (COPS) Hiring Program (CHP) and on matched comparison schools that neither received SROs funded by CHP grants nor increased SRO staffing at the same time as treatment schools. Using longitudinal analyses of monthly school-level administrative data, the study compared the treatment and comparison schools on disciplinary incidents/offenses and actions. In addition, the study analyzed data from web surveys of school administrators and SROs at the sample schools, and from interviews with law enforcement officials at the agencies that placed the SROs in the schools. To assess the extent to which the presence of SROs affects the measurement of school crime, research staff also collected and analyzed qualitative information from interviews with school administrators in select treatment schools.

To conduct the study, the following data sources were collected or obtained:

Linking and SRO program information data files (1 file for CA, 1 file for FL)
California Department of Education administrative data files (5 files)
SRO web survey data files (1 file for CA, 1 file for FL)
School administrator web survey data files (1 file for CA, 1 file for FL)
Law enforcement agency interview data files (1 file for CA, 1 file for FL)
Moderator data file (1 file for CA)
School administrator interview data file (1 file for CA)

Curated

Controlling Victimization in Schools: Effective Discipline and Control Strategies in a County in Ohio, 1994 (ICPSR 2587)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio

Time period: 1994-01-01--1994-12-31

The purpose of this study was to gather evidence on the relationship between discipline and the control of victimization in schools and to investigate the effectiveness of humanistic versus coercive disciplinary measures. Survey data were obtained from students, teachers, and principals in each of the 44 junior and senior high schools in a county in Ohio that agreed to participate in the study. The data represent roughly a six-month time frame. Students in grades 7 through 12 were anonymously surveyed in February 1994. The Student Survey (Part 1) was randomly distributed to approximately half of the students in all classrooms in each school. The other half of the students received a different survey that focused on drug use among students (not available with this collection). The teacher (Part 2) and principal (Part 3) surveys were completed at the same time as the student survey. The principal survey included both closed-ended and open-ended questions, while all questions on the student and teacher surveys were closed-ended, with a finite set of answers from which to choose. The three questionnaires were designed to gather respondent demographics, perceptions about school discipline and control, information about weapons and gangs in the school, and perceptions about school crime, including personal victimization and responses to victimization. All three surveys asked whether the school had a student court and, if so, what sanctions could be imposed by the student court for various forms of student misconduct. The student survey and teacher surveys also asked about the availability at school of various controlled drugs. The student survey elicited information about the student's fear of crime in the school and on the way to and from school, avoidance behaviors, and possession of weapons for protection. Data were also obtained from the principals on each school's suspension/expulsion rate, the number and type of security guards and/or devices used within the school, and other school safety measures. In addition to the surveys, census data were acquired for a one-quarter-mile radius around each participating school's campus, providing population demographics, educational attainment, employment status, marital status, income levels, and area housing information. Also, arrest statistics for six separate crimes (personal crime, property crime, simple assault, disorderly conduct, drug/alcohol offenses, and weapons offenses) for the reporting district in which each school was located were obtained from local police departments. Finally, the quality of the immediate neighborhood was assessed by means of a "windshield" survey in which the researchers conducted a visual inventory of various neighborhood characteristics: type and quality of housing in the area, types of businesses, presence of graffiti and gang graffiti, number of abandoned cars, and the number and perceived age of pedestrians and people loitering in the area. These contextual data are also contained in Part 3.

Curated

Restricted

Evaluation of the Bully-Proofing Your School Program in Colorado, 2001-2006 (ICPSR 21840)

Released/updated on: 2009-03-31

Geographic coverage: United States, Colorado

Time period: 2001-01-01--2006-12-31

Bully-Proofing Your School (BPYS) was a school-based intervention program designed to reduce bullying and school violence. The BPYS program differed from other anti-bullying programs by providing teachers with a specific curriculum that could be implemented in the classroom. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the BPYS program at the elementary school and middle school level. The BPYS outcome evaluation consisted of school climate surveys administered to elementary school students (Part 1), middle school students (Part 2), and staff (Part 3) in both treatment and comparison schools. The design of the data collection for the study was a repeated cross-sectional design. The evaluation of BPYS took place over five years. In the spring semesters of 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, all participating schools completed a school climate survey. The researchers collected 4,136 completed elementary school surveys (Part 1), 1,627 completed middle school surveys (Part 2), and 1,209 completed staff surveys (Part 3). For the elementary and middle school students, the mode of data collection was an in-class (group administration) anonymous self-completed survey. For the 1,209 staff surveys (Part 3), the mode of data collection was a mail questionnaire. Part 1 variables include sociodemographic and general school information items, school climate variables, school safety variables, and home and family environment variables. Also included is a filter variable which can be used to select the 3,497 cases that were used in the original analyses. Part 2 variables include sociodemographic and general school information variables, school climate variables, school safety variables, substance use variables, home and family environment variables, variables about guns, variables on activities the respondent participated in, and school attendance variables. Part 3 variables include school and staff characteristics variables, questions about general conditions in the school, questions on how the respondent felt about other people working at the school, questions concerning the resources and participation in the school and the community, and questions regarding staff perceptions of safety at the school.

Curated

Evaluation of Violence Prevention Programs in Four New York City Middle Schools, 1993-1994 (ICPSR 2704)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States, New York (state)

Time period: 1993-02-01--1994-06-30

This research project sought to evaluate the impact of broad-based multifaceted violence prevention programs versus programs that have a more limited focus. Two specific programs were evaluated in four New York City middle schools. The more limited program used Project S.T.O.P.(Students Teaching Options for Peace), a conflict resolution and peer mediation training program. The full multi-faceted program combined Project S.T.O.P. with Safe Harbor, a program that provided victimization counseling and taught violence prevention. The effects of this combined program, offered in three of the middle schools, were compared to those of just the Project S.T.O.P. program alone in one middle school. To study the program models, researchers used a quasi-experimental pre-post design, with nonequivalent comparison groups. Questionnaires were given to students to assess the impact of the two programs. Students were asked about their knowledge and use of prevention programs in their schools. Data were also collected on students' history of victimization, such as whether they were ever attacked at school, stolen from, mugged, or threatened with a weapon. Students were also asked about their attitudes toward verbal abuse, victims of violence, and conditions when revenge is acceptable, and their exposure to violence, including whether they knew anyone who was sexually abused, beaten, or attacked because of race, gender, or sexual orientation. Additional questions covered students' use of aggressive behaviors, such as whether they had threatened someone with a weapon or had beaten, slapped, hit, or kicked someone. Data were also gathered on the accessibility of alcohol, various drugs, weapons, and stolen property. Demographic variables include students' school grade, class, sex, number of brothers and sisters, and household composition.

Curated

Restricted

Impact Evaluation of Youth Crime Watch Programs in Three Florida School Districts, 1997-2007 (ICPSR 26601)

Released/updated on: 2010-01-29

Geographic coverage: United States, Florida

Time period: 1997-01-01--2007-12-31

The purpose of this study was to assess both the school-level effects and the participant-level effects of Youth Crime Watch (YCW) programs. Abt Associates conducted a four-year impact evaluation of Youth Crime Watch (YCW) programs in three Florida school districts (Broward, Hillsborough, and Pinellas Counties). School-based YCW programs implement one or more of a variety of crime prevention activities, including youth patrol, in which YCW participants patrol their school campus and report misconduct and crime. The evaluation collected both School-Level Data (Part 1) and Student-Level Data (Part 2). The School-Level Data (Part 1) contain 9 years of data on 172 schools in the Broward, Hillsborough, and Pinellas school districts, beginning in the 1997-1998 school year and continuing through the 2005-2006 school year. A total of 103 middle schools and 69 high schools were included, yielding a total of 1,548 observations. These data provide panel data on reported incidents of crime and violence, major disciplinary actions, and school climate data across schools and over time. The Student-Level Data (Part 2) were collected between 2004 and 2007 and are comprised of two major components: (1) self-reported youth attitude and school activities survey data that were administered to a sample of students in middle schools in the Broward, Hillsborough, and Pinellas School Districts as part of a participant impact analysis, and (2) self-reported youth attitude and school activities survey data that were administered to a sample of YCW continuing middle school students and YCW high school students in the same three school districts as part of a process analysis. For Part 2, a total of 3,386 completed surveys were collected by the project staff including 1,319 "new YCW" student surveys, 1,581 "non-YCW" student surveys, and 486 "Pro" or "Process" student surveys. The 138 variables in the School-Level Data (Part 1) include Youth Crime Watch (YCW) program data, measures of crime and the level of school safety in a school, and other school characteristics. The 99 variables in the Student-Level Data (Part 2) include two groups of questions for assessing participant impact: (1) how the respondents felt about themselves, and (2) whether the respondent would report certain types of problems or crimes that they observed at the school. Part 2 also includes administrative variables and demographic/background information. Other variables in Part 2 pertain to the respondent's involvement in school-based extracurricular activities, involvement in community activities, attitudes toward school, attitudes about home environment, future education plans, attitudes toward the YCW advisor, attitudes about effects of YCW, participation in YCW, reasons for joining YCW, and reasons for remaining in YCW.

Curated

Restricted

Mapping Decision Points from School-based Incidents to Exclusionary Discipline, Arrest, and Referral to the Juvenile Justice System, United States, 2016-2018 (ICPSR 37498)

Released/updated on: 2024-05-15

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2016-01-01--2018-12-31

This two-phase study examined factors influencing decisions that lead from a school-based incident to exclusionary discipline, an arrest, and a referral to the juvenile court. The research team hypothesized that multiple external factors such as race identity, socioeconomic status, and others would negatively impact the decision-maker, and generate harsher punishments for those who are in these vulnerable groups. Phase 1 involved interviewing groups of key stakeholders including school administrators, district administrators, discipline coordinators, juvenile court judges and other staff, law enforcement officers, Positive Behavior Intervention Support (PBIS) coordinators, and child welfare agencies to understand their approaches to behavior management. Phase 2 involved secondary analysis of data from local school districts and the juvenile court with jurisdiction in two counties.

Curated

Restricted

Nashville Longitudinal Study of Youth Safety and Wellbeing, Tennessee, 2009-2022 (ICPSR 38804)

Released/updated on: 2026-02-25

Geographic coverage: Tennessee, Nashville

Time period: 2009-01-01--2021-12-31, 2012-01-01--2021-12-31, 2019-01-01--2021-12-31, 2019-01-01--2021-12-31, 2019-01-01--2021-12-31, 2021-01-01--2022-12-31, 2015-01-01--2022-12-31, 2010-01-01--2010-12-31, 2013-01-01--2013-12-31, 2016-01-01--2016-12-31, 2019-01-01--2019-12-31, 2014-01-01--2021-12-31, 2010-01-01--2019-12-31, 2018-01-01--2021-12-31, 2020-01-01--2021-12-31, 2021-01-01--2021-12-31, 2021-01-01--2021-12-31

The Nashville Longitudinal Study of Youth Safety and Wellbeing (NLSYSW) was created to provide multi-level, multi-sector, longitudinal data on key ecological and developmental factors that impact youth violence and school safety. The data collected for this study include longitudinal survey and administrative data on disciplinary referrals and sanctions, social emotional competencies, school climate, community violence exposure, and attitudes toward violence from students in grades kindergarten through 12 in the Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools (MNPS) school district. In addition, this collection includes measures of several ecological influences, including school environment (e.g., programs/interventions offered, climate, and school safety) and neighborhood context (e.g., neighborhood economic structure, assets and resources, crime, gun violence, and housing) that can be linked to student data via neighborhood. The data provided spans the period of 2009 through 2022, with most intense coverage of 2018 through 2021.

These data have been utilized by an interdisciplinary team of researchers, educators, city government officials, police, juvenile courts, and youth development workers to support school and community initiatives related to understanding a) the role of neighborhood exposure to violence and disadvantage on students' norms/attitudes, behaviors, and achievement, b) the role of school climate and access to resources in moderating neighborhood and student risk factors, c) the neighborhood, school, and individual factors that influence students' social and emotional competence, and d) the neighborhood, school, and student factors that affect racial/ethnic disparities in office disciplinary referrals and the use of exclusionary discipline.

Demographic information at the student-level includes grade, gender, and race/ethnicity. At the school building-level, White, Black, and Hispanic staff percentages are provided.

Curated

National Crime Surveys: Crime School Supplement, 1989 (ICPSR 9394)

Released/updated on: 1995-03-31

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1989-01-01--1989-12-31

This supplement to the National Crime Surveys was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including type of school, distance from home, and general attendance and monitoring policies. The data present information on the response of the school to student violation of rules, accessibility of drugs, and violence in school, including types of violence and student reaction. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 1995 (ICPSR 6739)

Released/updated on: 1998-04-06

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1995-01-01--1995-12-31

This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Surveys (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including type of school, distance from home, and general attendance and monitoring policies. The data present information on the response of the school to student violation of rules, accessibility of drugs, and violence in school, including types of violence and student reaction. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 1999 (ICPSR 3137)

Released/updated on: 2001-09-20

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1999-01-01--1999-12-31

This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2001 (ICPSR 3477)

Released/updated on: 2002-09-19

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2001-01-01--2001-12-31

This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2003 (ICPSR 4182)

Released/updated on: 2005-07-29

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2003-01-01--2003-12-31

This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2005 (ICPSR 4429)

Released/updated on: 2008-04-30

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2005-01-01--2005-12-31

This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, household income, and marital status are provided.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2007 (ICPSR 23041)

Released/updated on: 2009-03-26

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2007-01-01--2007-12-31

The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers, academic researchers, practitioners at the federal, state and local levels, and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2009 (ICPSR 28201)

Released/updated on: 2011-01-21

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2009-01-01--2009-12-31

The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2011 (ICPSR 33081)

Released/updated on: 2013-03-26

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2011-01-01--2011-12-31

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2013 (ICPSR 34980)

Released/updated on: 2014-12-02

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2013-01-01--2013-12-31

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2015 (ICPSR 36354)

Released/updated on: 2016-12-20

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2015-01-01--2015-12-31

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, [United States], 2017 (ICPSR 36982)

Released/updated on: 2020-02-27

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2017-01-01--2017-12-31

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, [United States], 2019 (ICPSR 37816)

Released/updated on: 2021-06-08

Geographic coverage: United States

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

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, [United States], 2022 (ICPSR 38666)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-28

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2022-01-01--2022-12-31

Curated

National Survey of Weapon-Related Experiences, Behaviors, and Concerns of High School Youth in the United States, 1996 (ICPSR 2580)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1996-01-01--1996-12-31

This national-level survey of youth was undertaken to gather detailed behavioral and attitudinal data concerning weapons and violence. The research project sought to obtain information from a broad sample of high-school-aged youth to achieve diversity regarding history, cultural background, population size and density, urban and non-urban mix, economic situation, and class, race, and ethnic distributions. Data for the study were derived from two surveys conducted during the spring of 1996. The first survey was a lengthy questionnaire that focused on exposure to weapons (primarily firearms and knives) and violence, and was completed by 733 10th- and 11th-grade male students. Detail was gathered on all weapon-related incidents up to 12 months prior to the survey. The second survey, consisting of a questionnaire completed by 48 administrators of the 53 schools that the students attended, provided information regarding school characteristics, levels of weapon-related activity in the schools, and anti-violence strategies employed by the schools. The student survey covered demographic characteristics of the respondent, family living situations, educational situations and aspirations, drug, criminal, and gang activities, crime- and violence-related characteristics of family and friends, respondent's social and recreational activities, exposure to violence generally, personal victimization history, and possession of and activities relating to firearms and knives. Administrators were asked to provide basic demographic data about their schools and to rate the seriousness of violence, drugs, guns, and other weapons in their institutions. They were asked to provide weapon-related information about the average male junior in their schools as well as to estimate the number of incidents involving types of weapons on school grounds during the past three years. The administrators were also asked to identify, from an extensive list of violence reduction measures, those that were practiced at their schools. Variables are also provided about the type of school, grades taught, enrollment, and size of the community. In addition to the data collected directly from students and school administrators, Census information concerning the cities and towns in which the sampled schools were located was also obtained. Census data include size of the city or town, racial and ethnic population distributions, age, gender, and educational attainment distributions, median household and per capita income distributions, poverty rates, labor force and unemployment rates, and violent and property crime rates.

Curated

Partially restricted

Outcome Evaluation of the Teens, Crime, and the Community/Community Works (TCC/CW) Training Program in Nine Cities Across Four States, 2004-2005 (ICPSR 25865)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, New Mexico, Massachusetts, Arizona, South Carolina

Time period: 2004-01-01--2004-12-31, 2005-01-01--2005-12-31, 2005-01-01--2005-12-31

In 1985, the Teens, Crime, and the Community and Community Works (TCC/CW) program, a collaborative effort by the National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) and Street Law, Inc., was developed in an effort to reduce adolescent victimization. The purpose of the study was to assess whether the TCC/CW program was successfully implemented and whether it achieved its desired outcome, namely to reduce adolescent victimization. Following an extensive effort to identify potential sites for inclusion in the TCC/CW program outcome evaluation, a quasi-experimental five-wave panel study of public school students was initiated in the fall of 2004. Classrooms in the sample were matched by teacher or subject and one-half of the classrooms received the TCC/CW curriculum while the other half (the control group) was not exposed to the curriculum. A total of 1,686 students representing 98 classrooms in 15 middle schools located in 9 cities in 4 different states were surveyed 3 times: pre-tests in Fall 2004 (Part 1), post-tests in Spring 2005 (Part 2), and through a one-year follow-up survey in Fall 2005 (Part 3). A total of 227 variables are included in Part 1, 297 in Part 2, and 290 in Part 3. Most of these variables are the same across waves, including demographic variables, variables measuring whether the students are involved in extracurricular and other school related activities, community service, religious activities, family activities, employment, or illegal activities and crime, variables measuring the students' views regarding bullying, schoolwork, school and neighborhood violence, property crimes, drug use, alcohol use, gun violence, vandalism, skipping school, inter-racial tensions, neighborhood poverty, and law-enforcement officers, variables measuring how students react to anger, risk, conflict with fellow students, and how they handle long-term versus short-term decision-making, variables measuring group dynamics, variables measuring students' self-esteem, and variables measuring students' awareness of resources in their respective school and neighborhood to address problems and provide support.

Curated

Restricted

Process and Outcome Evaluation of the Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) Program, 2006-2011 [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 34899)

Released/updated on: 2016-10-25

Geographic coverage: Chicago, Tennessee, Albuquerque, Fort Worth, Nashville, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Illinois, Texas, Greeley, Colorado, Portland (Oregon), Dallas, Philadelphia

Time period: 2006-09-01--2011-12-31

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 goal of the study was to determine what effect, if any, the Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) program had on students. The G.R.E.A.T., a 13-lesson general prevention program taught by uniformed law enforcement officers to middle school students, had three stated goals: 1) to reduce gang membership, 2) to reduce delinquency, especially violent offending, and 3) to improve students' attitudes toward the police.

To assess program effectiveness, researchers conducted a randomized control trial involving 3,820 students nested in 195 classrooms in 31 schools in 7 cities. A process evaluation consisted of multiple methods to assess program fidelity: 1) observations of G.R.E.A.T. Officer Trainings, 2) surveys and interviews of G.R.E.A.T.-trained officers and supervisors, 3) surveys of school personnel, and 4) "on-site," direct observations of officers delivering the G.R.E.A.T. program in the study sites. Only the data from the student surveys, law enforcement officer surveys, and school personnel surveys are available.

Data file 1 (Student Survey Data) has 3,820 cases and 1,926 variables. Data file 2 (Law Enforcement Survey Data) has 137 cases and 140 variables. Data file 3 (School Personnel Survey Data) has 230 cases and 148 variables.

Curated

Restricted

Project SOARS: Student Ownership, Accountability, and Responsibility for School Safety, Illinois and Oregon, 2016-2020 (ICPSR 37896)

Released/updated on: 2024-01-16

Geographic coverage: Oregon, United States, Illinois

Time period: 2016-01-01--2016-12-31, 2017-01-01--2017-12-31, 2018-01-01--2019-12-31, 2019-01-01--2020-12-31

Project SOARS (Student Ownership, Accountability, and Responsibility for School Safety) utilized a mixed-methods study design to develop and test a student-centered and technology-driven school safety framework to address peer victimization, violent behavior, and student reluctance to share critical safety information within high school settings. SOARS was a project of IRIS Media, Inc. and consisted of 4 phases implemented between 2016 and 2020. Activities for each phase were carried out in Oregon and Illinois high schools in order to facilitate inter-site replication of outcomes. Phase 1 was conducted in 2016 and consisted of focus groups and key informant interviews with students, school personnel, and parents to gather perceptions of current school safety practices. Phase 2 was undertaken in 2017 and asked students, school personnel, and parents to assess the acceptability and usability of prototypes of the SOARS framework. The SOARS framework consisted of (a) the Advocatr mobile app, which allowed students to report positive and negative behaviors in their school environment; (b) a 9-week curriculum engaging students with the concepts of student ownership of school safety, advocacy/self-advocacy, physical and emotional safety, and restorative conflict resolution; (c) informational briefs for school personnel and parents about the framework components and their rationale; and (d) guidelines for a student-led school-wide safety campaign. Phase 3 was rolled out in 2018 and 2019 and consisted of feasibility testing conducted with a small subset of teachers and students in those teachers' classrooms. Participants were surveyed before and after implementation of the SOARS framework. The focus of the feasibility test was on student access and use of the Advocatr app and the accompanying curriculum. During Phase 4 implementation in 2019 and 2020, researchers conducted a pilot test with students, school personnel, and parents from 4 high schools, 2 assigned to the intervention and 2 to the control condition. The focus of the pilot was to test the effectiveness of the SOARS framework.

Demographic information was collected from all informants and includes gender (sex male or female; transgender identification), ethnicity, and race. Additional demographic information about students includes sexual orientation, approximate age (over/under 18 years), primary language, GPA, and grade. Parent demographics also include education level and student's grade, while school personnel (teachers and staff) also provided information regarding education level, school role, job title, years in current position, grades taught, and subjects taught.

Users should note that qualitative data collected during phase 1 focus groups and phase 2 user acceptance tests are not included in version 1 of the ICPSR release. Additionally, in the quantitative datasets, character variables featuring open-ended string responses have been masked by ICPSR. This study will be updated at a later date to include qualitative data files and character variables in the quantitative datasets.

Curated

Restricted

Role of Law Enforcement in Public School Safety in the United States, 2002 (ICPSR 4457)

Released/updated on: 2008-12-24

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2002-01-01--2002-05-31, 2002-08-01--2002-08-31

The purpose of this research was to develop an accurate description of the current involvement of law enforcement in schools. The researchers administered a school survey (Part 1) as well as a law enforcement survey (Part 2 and Part 3). The school survey was designed specifically for this research, but did incorporate items from previous surveys, particularly the School Survey on Crime and Safety and the National Assessment of School Resource Officer Programs Survey of School Principals. The school surveys were then sent out to a total of 3,156 school principals between January 2002 and May 2002. The researchers followed Dillman's mail survey design and received a total of 1,387 completed surveys. Surveys sent to the schools requested that each school identify their primary and secondary law enforcement providers. Surveys were then sent to those identified primary law enforcement agencies (Part 2) and secondary law enforcement agencies (Part 3) in August 2002. Part 2 and Part 3 each contain 3,156 cases which matches the original sample size of schools. For Part 2 and Part 3, a total of 1,508 law enforcement surveys were sent to both primary and secondary law enforcement agencies. The researchers received 1,060 completed surveys from the primary law enforcement agencies (Part 2) and 86 completed surveys from the secondary law enforcement agencies (Part 3). Part 1, School Survey Data, included a total of 309 variables pertaining to school characteristics, type of law enforcement relied on by the schools, school resource officers, frequency of public law enforcement activities, teaching activities of law enforcement officers, frequency of private security activities, safety plans and meetings with law enforcement, and crime/disorder in schools. Part 2, Primarily Relied Upon Law Enforcement Agency Survey Data, and Part 3, Secondarily Relied Upon Law Enforcement Agency Survey Data, each contain 161 variables relating to school resource officers, frequency of public law enforcement activities, teaching activities of law enforcement agencies, safety plans and meetings with schools, and crime/disorder in schools reported to police according to primary/secondary law enforcement.

External data

School Crime Operations Package (School COP Software) (ICPSR 23543)

Released/updated on: 2008-10-09

Geographic coverage: United States

The School Crime Operations Package (School COP) is a software application developed by Abt Associates Inc. with funding from the National Institute of Justice. School COP is a free software package that persons responsible for school safety can use to enter, analyze, and map criminal incidents and school rule violations that occur in and around K-12 schools. School COP organizes information according to the data model that the United States Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics' Crime, Violence, and Discipline Reporting Task Force recommends. The School COP database includes data related to the incident (e.g., date, time, type, location) and to persons involved in the incident (e.g., name, grade, action taken). In other words, School COP is an incident-based system, rather than a student-based system. School COP offers a variety of techniques for analyzing school incidents, including tabular reports, bar graphs, pie charts, and maps. School COP can be installed on any Windows (95 or later) PC. It requires no other software to run, and is usable without formal training.

The origin of this project is an award to Abt Associates Inc. that was funded under the National Institute of Justice's (NIJ) June 1999 "Safe Schools Technology" solicitation, which requested proposals for innovative approaches to using technology to enhance the safety of our nation's elementary and secondary schools. School COP was initially released on CD-ROM in January 2001, and made available at the School COP Web site in June 2001. This Windows version of School COP was generally designed for individuals, for a single school, or for small offices within a school district. Abt Associates Inc. was subsequently awarded another grant in 2001 to enhance the School Crime Operations Package (School COP) and to conduct an evaluation of this software, which is used to enter and analyze incidents that occur on school campuses.

Two types of enhancements were made. First, an enhanced Windows version of School COP was developed that could run on a local- or wide-area network, thus allowing multiple users within a single school or across multiple schools to share a common School COP database. The enhanced Windows version also included two utilities: a Merge application (which enables a district-level School COP database to be constructed by merging several individual databases) and a Viewer application (which enables users to view -- but not add, edit, or delete -- incident information). Second, Web School COP was developed to meet the diverse information needs of persons charged with maintaining safe schools in large school districts, including persons at the school-level (e.g., principals, assistant principals, security officers, and school resource officers), the district-level (e.g., district-level administrators and security staff), as well as possibly parent organizations and state-level administrators. Web School COP was designed to run on either an Intranet (e.g., the school district's private Internet) or a secure third-party Web server, and was built to run on the current Microsoft Web platform.

The evaluation of School COP entailed case studies of six sites to address three main issues: (1) what decision process do sites go through when deciding whether to use School COP, (2) once the site decides to use School COP, what implementation obstacles exist, including those related to installation, customization, and training, and (3) what benefits do sites realize from using School COP.

Curated

Partially restricted

School Culture, Climate, and Violence: Safety in Middle Schools of the Philadelphia Public School System, 1990-1994 (ICPSR 2026)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Time period: 1990-01-01--1990-12-31, 1992-01-01--1994-12-31

This study was designed to explore school culture and climate and their effects on school disorder, violence, and academic performance on two levels. At the macro level of analysis, this research examined the influences of sociocultural, crime, and school characteristics on aggregate-level school violence and academic performance measures. Here the focus was on understanding community, family, and crime compositional effects on disruption and violence in Philadelphia schools. This level included Census data and crime rates for the Census tracts where the schools were located (local data), as well as for the community of residence of the students (imported data) for all 255 schools within the Philadelphia School District. The second level of analysis, the intermediate level, included all of the variables measured at the macro level, and added school organizational structure and school climate, measured with survey data, as mediating variables. Part 1, Macro-Level Data, contains arrest and offense data and Census characteristics, such as race, poverty level, and household income, for the Census tracts where each of the 255 Philadelphia schools is located and for the Census tracts where the students who attend those schools reside. In addition, this file contains school characteristics, such as number and race of students and teachers, student attendance, average exam scores, and number of suspensions for various reasons. For Part 2, Principal Interview Data, principals from all 42 middle schools in Philadelphia were interviewed on the number of buildings and classrooms in their school, square footage and special features of the school, and security measures. For Part 3, teachers were administered the Effective School Battery survey and asked about their job satisfaction, training opportunities, relationships with principals and parents, participation in school activities, safety measures, and fear of crime at school. In Part 4, students were administered the Effective School Battery survey and asked about their attachment to school, extracurricular activities, attitudes toward teachers and school, academic achievement, and fear of crime at school. Part 5, Student Victimization Data, asked the same students from Part 4 about their victimization experiences, the availability of drugs, and discipline measures at school. It also provides self-reports of theft, assault, drug use, gang membership, and weapon possession at school.

Curated

School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), 2000: [United States] (ICPSR 3964)

Released/updated on: 2010-06-10

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2000-03-27--2000-08-15

The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on behalf of the United States Department of Education (ED). SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and school administrators of public schools in America. Data from this collection can be used to correlate school characteristics with violent and serious violent crimes in American schools. Furthermore, data from SSOCS can be used to assess what school programs, practices, and policies are used by schools in their efforts to prevent crime. SSOCS has been conducted three times, in school years 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2005-2006. The 1999-2000 School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS:2000) was developed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and conducted by Abt Associates Inc. Funding for the survey was provided by the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. Questionnaire packets were mailed to 3,366 public primary, middle, high, and combined schools. A total of 2,270 public schools submitted usable questionnaires for a weighted response rate of 70 percent. Data were collected from March 27, 2000 to August 15, 2000.

Curated

School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), 2004 (ICPSR 25681)

Released/updated on: 2010-03-04

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2004-01-01--2004-12-31

The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on behalf of the United States Department of Education (ED). SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and school administrators of public schools in America. Data from this collection can be used to correlate school characteristics with violent and serious violent crimes in American schools. Furthermore, data from SSOCS can be used to assess what school programs, practices, and policies are used by schools in their efforts to prevent crime. SSOCS has been conducted three times, in school years 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2005-2006. The 2003-2004 School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS:2004) was developed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and conducted by Abt Associates Inc. Questionnaire packets were mailed to 3,743 public primary, middle, high, and combined schools. A total of 2,772 public schools submitted usable questionnaires for a weighted response rate of 77.2 percent. Data were collected from March 1, 2004, to June 4, 2004.

Curated

School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), 2006 (ICPSR 25421)

Released/updated on: 2010-03-04

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2006-01-01--2006-12-31

The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on behalf of the United States Department of Education (ED). SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and school administrators of United States public schools. Data from this collection can be used to examine the relationship between school characteristics and violent and serious violent crimes in primary schools, middle schools, high schools, and combined schools. In addition, data from SSOCS can be used to assess what crime prevention programs, practices, and policies are used by schools. SSOCS has been conducted in school years 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2005-2006. A fourth collection is planned for school year 2007-2008. SSOCS:2006 was conducted by the United States Census Bureau. Data collection began on March 17, 2006, when questionnaire packets were mailed to schools, and continued through May 31, 2006. A total of 2,724 public schools submitted usable questionnaires: 715 primary schools, 948 middle schools, 924 high schools, and 137 combined schools.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Systematic Review of School-Based Programs to Reduce Bullying and Victimization, 1983-2009 (ICPSR 31703)

Released/updated on: 2014-01-24

Geographic coverage: United States, United Kingdom, Switzerland, Global, Spain, New Zealand, Greece, Canada, Czech Republic, Norway, Ireland, Finland, South Africa, Italy, Slovakia, Australia, Germany

Time period: 1983-01-01--2009-12-31

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of school-based anti-bullying programs in reducing school bullying. The following criteria were used for the inclusion of studies in the systematic review: the study described an evaluation of a program designed specifically to reduce school (kindergarten to high school) bullying; bullying was defined as including: physical, verbal, or psychological attack or intimidation that is intended to cause fear, distress, or harm to the victim; and an imbalance of power, with the more powerful child (or children) oppressing less powerful ones; bullying (specifically) was measured using self-report questionnaires, peer ratings, teacher ratings, or observational data; the effectiveness of the program was measured by comparing students who received it (the experimental condition) with a comparison group of students who did not receive it (the control condition). There must have been some control of extraneous variables in the evaluation by (1) randomization, or (2) pre-test measures of bulling, or (3) choosing some kind of comparable control condition; published and unpublished reports of research conducted in developed countries between 1983 and 2009 were included; and it was possible to measure the effect size. Several search strategies were used to identify 89 anti-bully studies meeting the criteria for inclusion in this review: researchers searched for the names of established researchers in the area of bullying prevention; researchers conducted a keyword search of 18 electronic databases; researchers conducted a manual search of 35 journals, either online or in print, from 1983 until the end of May 2009; and researchers sought information from key researchers on bullying and from international colleagues in the Campbell Collaboration. Studies included in the review were coded for the following key features: research design, sample size, publication date, location of the study, average age of the children, and the duration and intensity of the anti-bullying program for both the children and the teachers.

Curated

Partially restricted

Violent Incidents Among Selected Public School Students in Two Large Cities of the South and the Southern Midwest, 1995: [United States] (ICPSR 2027)

Released/updated on: 2012-08-22

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1995-01-01--1995-12-31

This study of violent incidents among middle- and high-school students focused not only on the types and frequency of these incidents, but also on their dynamics -- the locations, the opening moves, the relationship between the disputants, the goals and justifications of the aggressor, the role of third parties, and other factors. For this study, violence was defined as an act carried out with the intention, or perceived intention, of physically injuring another person, and the "opening move" was defined as the action of a respondent, antagonist, or third party that was viewed as beginning the violent incident. Data were obtained from interviews with 70 boys and 40 girls who attended public schools with populations that had high rates of violence. About half of the students came from a middle school in an economically disadvantaged African-American section of a large southern city. The neighborhood the school served, which included a public housing project, had some of the country's highest rates of reported violent crime. The other half of the sample were volunteers from an alternative high school attended by students who had committed serious violations of school rules, largely involving illegal drugs, possession of handguns, or fighting. Many students in this high school, which is located in a large city in the southern part of the Midwest, came from high-crime areas, including public housing communities. The interviews were open-ended, with the students encouraged to speak at length about any violent incidents in school, at home, or in the neighborhood in which they had been involved. The 110 interviews yielded 250 incidents and are presented as text files, Parts 3 and 4. The interview transcriptions were then reduced to a quantitative database with the incident as the unit of analysis (Part 1). Incidents were diagrammed, and events in each sequence were coded and grouped to show the typical patterns and sub-patterns in the interactions. Explanations the students offered for the violent-incident behavior were grouped into two categories: (1) "justifications," in which the young people accepted responsibility for their violent actions but denied that the actions were wrong, and (2) "excuses," in which the young people admitted the act was wrong but denied responsibility. Every case in the incident database had at least one physical indicator of force or violence. The respondent-level file (Part 2) was created from the incident-level file using the AGGREGATE procedure in SPSS. Variables in Part 1 include the sex, grade, and age of the respondent, the sex and estimated age of the antagonist, the relationship between respondent and antagonist, the nature and location of the opening move, the respondent's response to the opening move, persons present during the incident, the respondent's emotions during the incident, the person who ended the fight, punishments imposed due to the incident, whether the respondent was arrested, and the duration of the incident. Additional items cover the number of times during the incident that something was thrown, the respondent was pushed, slapped, or spanked, was kicked, bit, or hit with a fist or with something else, was beaten up, cut, or bruised, was threatened with a knife or gun, or a knife or gun was used on the respondent. Variables in Part 2 include the respondent's age, gender, race, and grade at the time of the interview, the number of incidents per respondent, if the respondent was an armed robber or a victim of an armed robbery, and whether the respondent had something thrown at him/her, was pushed, slapped, or spanked, was kicked, bit, or hit with a fist or with something else, was beaten up, was threatened with a knife or gun, or had a knife or gun used on him/her.