Search results

Showing 1 – 50 of 67 results.

Curated

ABC News Poll of Public Opinion on Crime, December 1982 (ICPSR 8100)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States

This special topic poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. In this poll, respondents were questioned regarding their perceptions of crime and the criminal justice system. Questions assessed the respondents' fear of crime, perceptions of the seriousness of crime in the United States, evaluation of the judicial and penal systems, assessment of police performance, and confidence in the ability of the police to prevent crime. The poll also asked for respondents' opinions about President Ronald Reagan's policies, the state of the economy, and government spending. Demographic information was collected, including the respondent's sex, age, education level, race, and income level.

Curated

Assessing the Delivery of Community Policing Services in Ada County, Idaho, 2002 (ICPSR 4152)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-31

Geographic coverage: United States, Idaho

Time period: 2002-03-01--2002-04-01

This study was conducted to explore the ways that enable the Ada County Sheriff's Office (ACSO) to examine its behavior in five areas that embody its adoption of community policing elements: (1) periodic assessments of citizens' perceptions of crime and police services, (2) substation policing, (3) patrol based in problem-oriented identification and resolution, (4) performance evaluation in a community-oriented policing (COP)/problem-oriented policing (POP) environment, and (5) the building of community partnerships. The researchers strived to obtain both transitive and recursive effects. One of the goals of this project was to facilitate the ACSO's efforts toward self-reflection, and by doing so, become a learning organization. In order to do this, data were collected, via survey, from both citizens of Ada County and from deputies employed by the ACSO. The citizen survey was a random, stratified telephone survey, using CATI technology, administered to 761 Ada County residents who received patrol services from the ACSO. The survey was designed to correspond to a similar survey conducted in 1997 (DEVELOPING A PROBLEM-ORIENTED POLICING MODEL IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, 1997-1998 [ICPSR 2654]) in the same area regarding similar issues: citizens' fear of crime, citizens' satisfaction with police services, the extent of public knowledge about and interest in ideas of community policing, citizens' police service needs, sheriff's office service needs and their views of the community policing mandate. The deputy survey was a self-enumerated questionnaire administered to 54 deputies and sergeants of the ACSO during a pre-arranged, regular monthly training. This survey consisted of four sections: the deputies' perception of crime problems, rating of the deputy performance evaluation, ethical issues in policing, and departmental relations.

Curated

Restricted

Assessing the Impacts of Broken Windows Policing Strategies on Citizen Attitudes in Three California Cities: Redlands, Ontario and Colton, 2008-2009 (ICPSR 34427)

Released/updated on: 2016-06-20

Geographic coverage: Colton, Ontario (California), California, Redlands

Time period: 2008-03-01--2008-06-01, 2009-01-01--2009-04-01, 2008-03-01--2009-04-01

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

This study examined the impact that a six-month broken windows style policing crackdown on disorder had on residents of three California cities: Colton, Ontario and Redlands. The study investigated four questions:

What is the impact of broken windows policing on fear of crime among residents of the targeted hot spots?
What is the impact of broken windows policing on police legitimacy in the targeted hot spots?
What is the impact of broken windows policing on reports of collective efficacy in the targeted hot spots?
Is broken windows policing at hot spots effective in reducing both actual and perceived levels of disorder and crime in the targeted hot spots?

To answer these questions, a block randomized experimental design was employed to deliver a police intervention targeting disorder to 55 treatment street segments with an equal number of segments serving as controls.

Data were collected on the type and amount of crime before, during, and after implementation as well as interviews of residents before and after the crackdown in order to gauge their perception of its success.

Curated

British Crime Survey, 1982 (ICPSR 8672)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18

Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global

The primary purpose of the British Crime Survey was to estimate how many of the public in England and Wales are victims of selected types of crime over a year, describing the circumstances under which people become victims, and the consequences of crime for victims. Other aims included providing background information on fear of crime among the public and on public contact with the police. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether or not they or their households had been victims of relevant crimes during the one-year reference period. They were then asked a series of very detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information on respondents and their households was collected to allow analysis of the sorts of people who do and do not become victims. Information was also collected on other areas which were of intrinsic interest and which could usefully be related to experience as a victim, namely, fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending.

Curated

British Crime Survey, 1988 (ICPSR 9850)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12

Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global

This 1988 survey, the third in a series of surveys instituted by the Home Office in 1982, examines levels of victimization in Great Britain and offers attitudinal data on issues relating to crime. The 1988 survey was intended to replicate the 1982 and 1984 surveys (ICPSR 8672 and 8685) as much as possible. However, in 1988 an additional sample of ethnic minority respondents was included. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether they had been the victims of crime during the reference period, and another series of detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information, such as sex, age, employment, education, and number of children, was also collected on the respondents and their households. Other information was collected on fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending. Part 1 consists of data captured on the Demographic Questionnaire. Parts 2 and 3 represent data collected via Follow-Up Questionnaire A and Follow-Up Questionnaire B, respectively. Each respondent completed one of the two Follow-Up Questionnaires, with all respondents in the ethnic minority sample completing Follow-Up Questionnaire B. Part 4 consists of data from the Main Questionnaire. Each respondent completed a Main Questionnaire that included a large number of screening questions to identify crime victims, and some attitudinal questions. Data in Part 5 were collected from the Victim Form. Only respondents reporting incidents of victimization on the Main Questionnaire have Victim Forms, with up to four Victim Forms per respondent. The unit of analysis for this collection is the individual.

Curated

British Crime Survey, 1992 (ICPSR 6717)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18

Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global

The fourth in a series of surveys instituted by the Home Office in 1982, this survey examines levels of victimization in Great Britain and offers attitudinal data on issues relating to crime. The 1992 survey was intended to replicate the 1982, 1984, and 1988 surveys (ICPSR 8672, 8685, and 9850) in methodology and content as much as possible. In 1992, a "core" sample of 10,059 adults along with booster samples of 1,650 ethnic minority adults and 1,350 young people aged 12-15 resident in the same households as adult respondents were interviewed. The 1988 survey had also included an ethnic minority booster sample employing the same sampling method. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether they had been the victims of crime during the reference period, and another series of detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information, such as sex, age, employment, education, and number of children, was also collected on the respondents and their households. Other information was elicited on fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending. Part 1, Demographic File, consists of data captured on the Demographic Questionnaire. Parts 2 and 3 represent data collected via Follow-Up Questionnaire A and Follow-Up Questionnaire B, respectively. Each respondent completed one of the two Follow-Up Questionnaires, with all respondents in the ethnic minority booster sample completing Follow-Up Questionnaire A. Part 4, Main File, consists of data from the Main Questionnaire. Each respondent completed a Main Questionnaire that included some attitudinal questions and a large number of screening questions to identify crime victims. Data in Part 5, Victim File, were collected from the Victim Form. Only respondents reporting incidents of victimization on the Main Questionnaire have Victim Forms, with up to four Victim Forms per respondent. The unit of analysis for this collection is the individual.

Curated

British Crime Survey, 1992: Teenage Booster Sample (ICPSR 6834)

Released/updated on: 1997-02-13

Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global

This survey was conducted in parallel with the BRITISH CRIME SURVEY, 1992 (ICPSR 6717) in the same households among the age group 12-15. The survey covers victimization out of the home, contacts with the police, and self-reported offending. The questions replicate the adult version as much as possible. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether they had been victims of crime during the reference period, and another series of detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information was also collected on the respondent. Other information was elicited on fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending. The unit of analysis for this collection is the individual.

Curated

British Crime Surveys, 1984 (ICPSR 8685)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16

Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global

In 1982 the Home Office conducted the first British Crime Survey, a major study with the aim of discovering levels of victimization in Britain, and of producing attitudinal data on issues relating to crime. The survey was repeated in 1984 and was restricted to England and Wales, whereas the previous study had included Scotland. The survey set out to replicate the previous one as far as possible. Other than questions having to do with victimization and basic demographic details, the topics covered in the questionnaire were: general opinion of the local area, fear of crime and precautions taken, likelihood of crime occurring, extent of "incivilities" in the area, seriousness of various crimes, attitudes towards punishment and prison reform, victim support schemes, neighborhood watch schemes, and self-reported offending.

Curated

Characteristics of High and Low Crime Neighborhoods in Atlanta, 1980 (ICPSR 7951)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States, Atlanta, Georgia

Time period: 1980-08-01--1980-10-01

This study examines the question of how some urban neighborhoods maintain a low crime rate despite their proximity and similarity to relatively high crime areas. The purpose of the study is to investigate differences in various dimensions of the concept of territoriality (spatial identity, local ties, social cohesion, informal social control) and physical characteristics (land use, housing, street type, boundary characteristics) in three pairs of neighborhoods in Atlanta, Georgia. The study neighborhoods were selected by locating pairs of adjacent neighborhoods with distinctly different crime levels. The criteria for selection, other than the difference in crime rates and physical adjacency, were comparable racial composition and comparable economic status. This data collection is divided into two files. Part 1, Atlanta Plan File, contains information on every parcel of land within the six neighborhoods in the study. The variables include ownership, type of land use, physical characteristics, characteristics of structures, and assessed value of each parcel of land within the six neighborhoods. This file was used in the data analysis to measure a number of physical characteristics of parcels and blocks in the study neighborhoods, and as the sampling frame for the household survey. The original data were collected by the City of Atlanta Planning Bureau. Part 2, Atlanta Survey File, contains the results of a household survey administered to a stratified random sample of households within each of the study neighborhoods. Variables cover respondents' attitudes and behavior related to the neighborhood, fear of crime, avoidance and protective measures, and victimization experiences. Crime rates, land use, and housing characteristics of the block in which the respondent resided were coded onto each case record.

Curated

Community Policing in Baltimore, 1986-1987 (ICPSR 9401)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: Baltimore, United States, Maryland

Time period: 1986-01-01--1987-01-01

This data collection was designed to investigate the effects of foot patrol and ombudsman policing on perceptions of the incidence of crime and community policing practices in Baltimore, Maryland. Data collected at Wave 1 measured perceptions of crime and community policing practices before the two new policing programs were introduced. Follow-up data for Wave 2 were collected approximately one year later and were designed to measure the effects of the new policing practices. Included in the data collection instrument were questions on the perceived incidence of various crimes, police effectiveness and presence, disorder, property and personal crime and the likelihood of crime in general, feelings of safety, crime avoidance behaviors and the use of crime prevention devices, cohesion and satisfaction with neighborhoods, and awareness of victimization and victimization history. The instrument also included demographic questions on employment, education, race, and income.

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

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

Crime Factors and Neighborhood Decline in Chicago, 1979 (ICPSR 7952)

Released/updated on: 1997-09-26

Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois

This study explores the relationship between crime and neighborhood deterioration in eight neighborhoods in Chicago. The neighborhoods were selected on the basis of slowly or rapidly appreciating real estate values, stable or changing racial composition, and high or low crime rates. These data provide the results of a telephone survey administered to approximately 400 heads of households in each study neighborhood, a total of 3,310 completed interviews. The survey was designed to measure victimization experience, fear and perceptions of crime, protective measures taken, attitudes toward neighborhood quality and resources, attitudes toward the neighborhood as an investment, and density of community involvement. Each record includes appearance ratings for the block of the respondent's residence and aggregate figures on personal and property victimization for that city block. The aggregate appearance ratings were compiled from windshield surveys taken by trained personnel of the National Opinion Research Center. The criminal victimization figures came from Chicago City Police files.

Curated

Criminal Victimization and Perceptions of Community Safety in 12 United States Cities, 1998 (ICPSR 2743)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18

Geographic coverage: Madison, District of Columbia, Savannah, United States, Chicago, Tennessee, Tucson, Kansas City (Missouri), California, New York (state), Spokane, Washington, New York City, Knoxville, San Diego, Illinois, Massachusetts, Missouri, Los Angeles, Georgia, Springfield (Massachusetts), Wisconsin, Arizona

This collection presents survey data from 12 cities in the United States regarding criminal victimization, perceptions of community safety, and satisfaction with local police. Participating cities included Chicago, IL, Kansas City, MO, Knoxville, TN, Los Angeles, CA, Madison, WI, New York, NY, San Diego, CA, Savannah, GA, Spokane, WA, Springfield, MA, Tucson, AZ, and Washington, DC. The survey used the current National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) questionnaire with a series of supplemental questions measuring the attitudes in each city. Respondents were asked about incidents that occurred within the past 12 months. Information on the following crimes was collected: violent crimes of rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault, personal crimes of theft, and household crimes of burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. Part 1, Household-Level Data, covers the number of household respondents, their ages, type of housing, size of residence, number of telephone lines and numbers, and language spoken in the household. Part 2, Person-Level Data, includes information on respondents' sex, relationship to householder, age, marital status, education, race, time spent in the housing unit, personal crime and victimization experiences, perceptions of neighborhood crime, job and professional demographics, and experience and satisfaction with local police. Variables in Part 3, Incident-Level Data, concern the details of crimes in which the respondents were involved, and the police response to the crimes.

Curated

Criminal Victimization of District of Columbia Residents and Capitol Hill Employees, 1982-1983 (ICPSR 8228)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18

Geographic coverage: District of Columbia, United States

Time period: 1982-01-01--1983-01-01

This data collection contains information about the victimization of District of Columbia residents. The primary objective was to measure the extent of crime in the District of Columbia and the impact of crime on the quality of life in the District. Researchers also studied the degree to which congressional employees working in the Capitol Hill area were subject to victimization and the extent to which fear of crime affected their productivity. However, to protect the confidentiality of the respondents, the data on Capitol Hill employees are not present in these files. The Capitol Hill employees data are archived at the Research Triangle Institute and, as of December 1984, a public-use data file did not exist. The three data files archived at the ICPSR contain information about District of Columbia residents only. The first data file includes person-level data including residential mobility, crime prevention measures, and sociodemographic characteristics such as race, age, income, and location and duration of current residence. Each record in Part 2, In Scope Crimes File, represents a reported criminal victimization. The third data file, Out of Scope File, contains data on crimes that were either outside the analysis time period of May 1, 1982, to April 30, 1983, or not crimes of interest for this study.

Curated

Developing a Problem-Oriented Policing Model in Ada County, Idaho, 1997-1998 (ICPSR 2654)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States, Idaho

Time period: 1997-01-01--1998-01-01

To explore the idea of community policing and to get an understanding of citizens' policing needs, representatives from the Ada County Sheriff's Office and Boise State University formed a research partnership and conducted surveys of county residents and sheriff's deputies. The county-wide survey of residents (Part 1) was designed to enhance the sheriff's current community policing program and to assist in the deployment of community policing officers by measuring citizens' perceptions and fear of crime, perceptions of deputies, knowledge of sheriff's services, and support for community policing. Questions in the citizen survey focused on feelings of safety in Ada County, such as perception of drugs, gangs, safety of youth, and safety at night, satisfaction with the Sheriff's Office, including ratings of the friendliness and fairness of the department and how well deputies and citizens worked together, attitudes regarding community-oriented policing, such as whether this type of policing would be a good use of resources and would reduce crime, and neighborhood problems, including how problematic auto theft, vandalism, physical decay, and excessive noise were for citizens. Other questions were asked regarding the sheriff's deputy website, including whether citizens would like the site to post current crime reports, and whether the site should have more information about the jail. Respondents were also queried about their encounters with police, including their ratings of recent services they received for traffic violations, requests for service, and visits to the jail, and familiarity with several programs, such as the inmate substance abuse program and the employee robbery prevention program. Demographic variables in the citizen survey include ethnicity, gender, level of schooling, occupation, income, age, and length of time residing in Ada County. The second survey (Part 2), created for the sheriff's deputies, used questions from the citizen survey about the Sheriff's Office service needs. Deputies were asked to respond to questions in the way they thought that citizens would answer these same questions in the citizen survey. The purpose was to investigate the extent to which sheriff's deputies' attitudes mirrored citizens' attitudes about the quality of service.

Curated

Domestic Terrorism: Assessment of State and Local Preparedness in the United States, 1992 (ICPSR 6566)

Released/updated on: 1996-10-01

Geographic coverage: United States

This project sought to analyze states' and municipalities' terrorism preparedness as a means of providing law enforcement with information about the prevention and control of terrorist activities in the United States. To accomplish this objective, a national survey of state and local law enforcement agencies was conducted to assess how law enforcement agencies below the federal level perceive the threat of terrorism in the United States and to identify potentially promising anti- and counter-terrorism programs currently used by these jurisdictions. For the purposes of this survey, the researchers used the legal definition of terrorism as provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which is "the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment of either, to further political or social objectives." However, incidents reported by state or local law enforcement agencies as potential terrorist incidents often are reclassified as ordinary crimes by the FBI if the FBI investigation does not reveal evidence that more than one crime was intended to be committed or that a network of individuals had prepared to carry out additional acts. Since these reported potential terrorist incidents may provide important early warnings that an organized terrorism effort is emerging, the researchers broadened the official definition to include suspected incidents and state and local officials' perceptions of crime due to terrorism. Three distinct jurisdictions with overlapping responsibilities for terrorism preparedness were surveyed in this study: (1) state law enforcement agencies, in most cases the state police, (2) organizations with emergency preparedness responsibilities and statewide authority but with limited powers of law enforcement, and (3) local law enforcement agencies, such as municipal police and sheriff departments. Similar questions were asked for all three jurisdiction groups. Variables pertaining to the organization include questions about contingency plans, guidelines, and special police training for dealing with threats of terrorism, the amount and types of information and resources exchanged among various agencies, and whether the agency had a special terrorism unit and, if so, its duties. Variables dealing with threat assessment include whether the agency had identified right-wing, left-wing, international, ethnic/emigre, or special-issue terrorist groups within their jurisdiction and how many incidents were attributed to each group. Additional variables provide information on whether the agency was involved in investigating any terrorist incidents and the type of support received from other agencies for these investigations. The risk assessment section of the survey sought information on whether the agency had conducted a risk assessment and what potential terrorist targets were present in their jurisdiction. Questions in the threat environment section cover the respondent's assessment of the impact of the Persian Gulf War, the agency's sources of information pertaining to terrorism, the likelihood of terrorist attacks on various major installations nationally, and the likelihood of a major attack in their jurisdiction. Administrative variables include the number of sworn officers or professional staff, number of support staff, department's budget for the current fiscal year, whether the agency received federal funds, and what percentage of the federal funds were used for anti-terrorism efforts.

Curated

Educating the Public About Police Through Public Service Announcements in Lima, Ohio, 1995-1997 (ICPSR 2885)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, Lima, Ohio

Time period: 1995-01-01--1997-01-01

This study was designed to analyze the impact of four televised public service announcements (PSAs) aired for three months in Lima, Ohio. The researchers sought to answer three specific research questions: (1) Were the PSAs effective in transferring knowledge to citizens about the police? (2) Did the PSAs have an impact on resident satisfaction with the police? and (3) Did the PSAs have an impact on the behavior of citizens interacting with the police? To assess public attitudes about the Lima police and to determine whether the substance of the PSAs was being communicated to the residents of Lima, three waves of telephone interviews were conducted (Part 1). The first telephone interviews were conducted in April 1996 with approximately 500 randomly selected Lima residents. These were baseline interviews that took place before the PSAs aired. The survey instrument used in the first interview assessed resident satisfaction with the police and the services they provided. After completion of the Wave 1 interviews, the PSAs were aired on television for three months (June 5-August 28, 1996). After August 28, the PSAs were removed from general circulation. A second wave of telephone interviews was conducted in September 1996 with a different group of randomly selected Lima residents. The same survey instrument used during the first interviews was administered during the second wave, with additional questions added relating to whether the respondent saw any of the PSAs. A third group of randomly selected Lima residents was contacted via the telephone in January 1997 for the final wave of interviews. The final interviews utilized the identical survey instrument used during Wave 2. The focus of this follow-up survey was on citizen retention, over time, of the information communicated in the PSAs. Official data collected from computerized records maintained by the Lima Police Department were also collected to monitor changes in citizen behavior (Part 2). The records data span 127 weeks, from January 1, 1995, to June 7, 1997, which includes 74 weeks of pre-PSA data and 53 weeks of data for the period during the initial airing of the first PSA and thereafter. Variables in Part 1 include whether respondents were interested in learning about what to do if stopped by the police, what actions they had displayed when stopped by the police, if they would defend another person being treated unfairly by the police, how responsible they felt (as a citizen) in preventing crimes, the likelihood of calling the police if they were aware of a crime, perception of crime and fear of crime, and whether there had been an increase or decrease in the level of crime in their neighborhoods. Respondents were also asked about the amount of television they watched, whether they saw any of the public service announcements and if so to rate them, whether the PSAs provided information not already known, whether any of the PSA topics had come up in conversations with family or friends, and whether the respondent would like to see more PSAs in the future. Finally, respondents were asked whether the police were doing as much as they could to make the neighborhood safe, how responsive the police were to nonemergency matters, and to rate their overall satisfaction with the Lima Police Department and its various services. Demographic variables for Part 1 include the race, gender, age, marital status, level of education, employment status, and income level of each respondent. Variables in Part 2 cover police use-of-force or resisting arrest incidents that took place during the study period, whether the PSA aired during the week in which a use-of-force or resisting arrest incident took place, the number of supplemental police use-of-force reports that were made, and the number of resisting arrest charges made.

Curated

Evaluation of Community Policing Initiatives in Jefferson County, West Virginia, 1996-1997 (ICPSR 2800)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: West Virginia, United States

This data collection was designed to evaluate the implementation of community policing initiatives for three police departments in Jefferson County, West Virginia: the Ranson Town Police Department, the West Virginia State Police (Jefferson County Detachment), and the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department. The evaluation was undertaken by the Free Our Citizens of Unhealthy Substances Coalition (FOCUS), a county-based group of citizens who represented all segments of the community, including businesses, churches, local law enforcement agencies, and local governments. The aim was to find answers to the following questions: (1) Can community policing have any detectable and measurable impact in a predominantly rural setting? (2) Did the police department do what they said they would do in their funding application? (3) If they were successful, what factors supported their efforts and were key to their success? and (4) If they were not successful, what problems prevented their success? The coalition conducted citizen surveys to evaluate how much of an impact community policing initiatives had in their county. In January 1996, research assistants conducted a baseline survey of 300 households in the county. Survey responses were intended to gauge residents' fear of crime and to assess how well the police were performing their duties. After one year, the coalition repeated its survey of public attitudes, and research assistants interviewed another 300 households. The research assumption was that any change in fear of crime or assessment of police performance could reasonably be attributed to these new community policing inventions. Crime reporting variables from the survey included which crime most concerned the respondent, if the respondent would report a crime he or she observed, and whether the respondent would testify about the crime in court. Variables pertaining to level of concern for specific crimes include how concerned respondents were that someone would rob or attack them, break into or vandalize their home, or try to sexually attack them/someone they cared about. Community involvement variables covered participation in community groups or activities, neighborhood associations, church, or informal social activities. Police/citizen interaction variables focused on the number of times respondents had called to report a problem to the police in the last two years, how satisfied they were with how the police handled the problem, the extent to which this police department needed improvement, whether children trusted law enforcement officers, whether police needed to respond more quickly to calls, whether the police needed improved relations with the community, and in the past year whether local police performance had improved/gotten worse. Specific crime information variables include whether the crime occurred in the respondent's neighborhood, whether he/she was the victim, if crime was serious in the respondent's neighborhood versus elsewhere, whether the respondent had considered moving as a result of crime in the neighborhood, and how personal safety had changed in the respondent's neighborhood. Variables relating to community policing include whether the respondent had heard the term "community policing" in the past year, from what source, and what community policing activities the respondent was aware of. Demographic variables include job self-classification, racial/ethnic identity, length of residency, age, gender, martial status, educational status, and respondent's town of residence.

Curated

Evaluation of the Impact of Innovative Policing Programs on Social Disorder in Seven Cities in the United States, 1983-1990 (ICPSR 6215)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1983-01-01--1990-01-01

This study was designed to permit a "meta-evaluation" of the impact of alternative policing programs on social disorder. Examples of social disorder include bands of teenagers deserting school and congregating on street corners, solicitation by prostitutes and panhandlers, public drinking, vandalism, verbal harassment of women on the street, street violence, and open gambling and drug use. The data used in this study were taken from studies conducted between 1983 and 1990 in seven cities. For this collection, a common set of questions was identified and recoded into a consistent format across studies. The studies were conducted using similar sampling and interviewing procedures, and in almost every case used a quasi-experimental research design. For each target area studied, a different, matched area was designated as a comparison area where no new policing programs were begun. Surveys of residents were conducted in the target and comparison areas before the programs began (Wave I) and again after they had been in operation for a period ranging from ten months to two-and-a-half years (Wave II). The data contain information regarding police visibility and contact, encounters with police, victimization, fear and worry about crime, household protection and personal precautions, neighborhood conditions and problems, and demographic characteristics of respondents including race, marital status, employment status, education, sex, age, and income. The policing methods researched included community-oriented policing and traditional intensive enforcement programs.

Curated

Evaluation of the Weed and Seed Initiative in the United States, 1994 (ICPSR 6789)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States

The Department of Justice launched Operation Weed and Seed in 1991 as a means of mobilizing a large and varied array of resources in a comprehensive, coordinated effort to control crime and drug problems and improve the quality of life in targeted high-crime neighborhoods. In the long term, Weed and Seed programs are intended to reduce levels of crime, violence, drug trafficking, and fear of crime, and to create new jobs, improve housing, enhance the quality of neighborhood life, and reduce alcohol and drug use. This baseline data collection effort is the initial step toward assessing the achievement of the long-term objectives. The evaluation was conducted using a quasi-experimental design, matching households in comparison neighborhoods with the Weed and Seed target neighborhoods. Comparison neighborhoods were chosen to match Weed and Seed target neighborhoods on the basis of crime rates, population demographics, housing characteristics, and size and density. Neighborhoods in eight sites were selected: Akron, OH, Bradenton (North Manatee), FL, Hartford, CT, Las Vegas, NV, Pittsburgh, PA, Salt Lake City, UT, Seattle, WA, and Shreveport, LA. The "neighborhood" in Hartford, CT, was actually a public housing development, which is part of the reason for the smaller number of interviews at this site. Baseline data collection tasks included the completion of in-person surveys with residents in the target and matched comparison neighborhoods, and the provision of guidance to the sites in the collection of important process data on a routine uniform basis. The survey questions can be broadly divided into these areas: (1) respondent demographics, (2) household size and income, (3) perceptions of the neighborhood, and (4) perceptions of city services. Questions addressed in the course of gathering the baseline data include: Are the target and comparison areas sufficiently well-matched that analytic contrasts between the areas over time are valid? Is there evidence that the survey measures are accurate and valid measures of the dependent variables of interest -- fear of crime, victimization, etc.? Are the sample sizes and response rates sufficient to provide ample statistical power for later analyses? Variables cover respondents' perceptions of the neighborhood, safety and observed security measures, police effectiveness, and city services, as well as their ratings of neighborhood crime, disorder, and other problems. Other items included respondents' experiences with victimization, calls/contacts with police and satisfaction with police response, and involvement in community meetings and events. Demographic information on respondents includes year of birth, gender, ethnicity, household income, and employment status.

Curated

Partially restricted

Final Assessment of the Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative (SACSI) in New Haven, Connecticut, 1994-2001 (ICPSR 4223)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-06

Geographic coverage: New Haven, United States, Connecticut

Time period: 1994-01-01--2001-12-01

This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of New Haven, Connecticut's Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative (SACSI) project, named TimeZup, by measuring the impact of the program on public safety, public fear, and law enforcement relationships and operations. The study was conducted using data retrieved from the New Haven Police Department's computerized records and logs, on-site questionnaires, and phone interviews. Important variables included in the study are number of violent gun crimes committed, number and type of guns seized by the police, calls to the police involving shootings or gun shots, the date and time of such incidents, residents' perception of crime, safety and quality of life in New Haven, and supervisees' perceptions of the TimeZup program.

Curated

Impact of Neighborhood Structure, Crime, and Physical Deterioration on Residents and Business Personnel in Minneapolis-St.Paul, 1970-1982 (ICPSR 2371)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18

Geographic coverage: Minneapolis, United States, St. Paul, Minnesota

Time period: 1970-01-01--1982-01-01

This study is a secondary analysis of CRIME, FEAR, AND CONTROL IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CENTERS: MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL, 1970-1982 (ICPSR 8167), which was designed to explore the relationship between small commercial centers and their surrounding neighborhoods. Some variables from the original study were recoded and new variables were created in order to examine the impact of community structure, crime, physical deterioration, and other signs of incivility on residents' and merchants' cognitive and emotional responses to disorder. This revised collection sought to measure separately the contextual and individual determinants of commitment to locale, informal social control, responses to crime, and fear of crime. Contextual determinants included housing, business, and neighborhood characteristics, as well as crime data on robbery, burglary, assault, rape, personal theft, and shoplifting and measures of pedestrian activity in the commercial centers. Individual variables were constructed from interviews with business leaders and surveys of residents to measure victimization, fear of crime, and attitudes toward businesses and neighborhoods. Part 1, Area Data, contains housing, neighborhood, and resident characteristics. Variables include the age and value of homes, types of businesses, amount of litter and graffiti, traffic patterns, demographics of residents such as race and marital status from the 1970 and 1980 Censuses, and crime data. Many of the variables are Z-scores. Part 2, Pedestrian Activity Data, describes pedestrians in the small commercial centers and their activities on the day of observation. Variables include primary activity, business establishment visited, and demographics such as age, sex, and race of the pedestrians. Part 3, Business Interview Data, includes employment, business, neighborhood, and attitudinal information. Variables include type of business, length of employment, number of employees, location, hours, operating costs, quality of neighborhood, transportation, crime, labor supply, views about police, experiences with victimization, fear of strangers, and security measures. Part 4, Resident Survey Data, includes measures of commitment to the neighborhood, fear of crime, attitudes toward local businesses, perceived neighborhood incivilities, and police contact. There are also demographic variables, such as sex, ethnicity, age, employment, education, and income.

Curated

Impacts of Specific Incivilities on Responses to Crime and Local Commitment, 1979-1994: [Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and Seattle] (ICPSR 2520)

Released/updated on: 2008-04-23

Geographic coverage: Baltimore, Seattle, Minneapolis, United States, Chicago, Atlanta, Illinois, St. Paul, Minnesota, Georgia, Maryland, Washington

Time period: 1979-01-01--1994-01-01

This data collection was designed to test the "incivilities thesis": that incivilities such as extant neighborhood physical conditions of disrepair or abandonment and troubling street behaviors contribute to residents' concerns for personal safety and their desire to leave their neighborhood. The collection examines between-individual versus between-neighborhood and between-city differences with respect to fear of crime and neighborhood commitment and also explores whether some perceived incivilities are more relevant to these outcomes than others. The data represent a secondary analysis of five ICPSR collections: (1) CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH AND LOW CRIME NEIGHBORHOODS IN ATLANTA, 1980 (ICPSR 7951), (2) CRIME CHANGES IN BALTIMORE, 1970-1994 (ICPSR 2352), (3) CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND COMMUNITY CRIME PREVENTION, 1979: CHICAGO METROPOLITAN AREA SURVEY (ICPSR 8086), (4) CRIME, FEAR, AND CONTROL IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CENTERS: MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL, 1970-1982 (ICPSR 8167), and (5) TESTING THEORIES OF CRIMINALITY AND VICTIMIZATION IN SEATTLE, 1960-1990 (ICPSR 9741). Part 1, Survey Data, is an individual-level file that contains measures of residents' fear of victimization, avoidance of dangerous places, self-protection, neighborhood satisfaction, perceived incivilities (presence of litter, abandoned buildings, vandalism, and teens congregating), and demographic variables such as sex, age, and education. Part 2, Neighborhood Data, contains crime data and demographic variables from Part 1 aggregated to the neighborhood level, including percentage of the neighborhood that was African-American, gender percentages, average age and educational attainment of residents, average household size and length of residence, and information on home ownership.

Curated

Partially restricted

Implicit and Explicit Messages on Neighborhood Watch Signs in San Diego County, California, 2005-2007 (ICPSR 20620)

Released/updated on: 2010-11-24

Geographic coverage: United States, California

Time period: 2005-07-01--2005-11-01, 2006-01-01--2006-09-01, 2006-10-01--2007-03-01

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the effects of Neighborhood Watch signs on perceived crime rates, likelihood of victimization, community safety, and estimates of home and community quality. Part 1 (Study One Data) assessed the causal impact of Neighborhood Watch sign presence and content on perceptions of the community. Three Neighborhood Watch signs were incorporated into a series of slide show presentations. The signs utilized the traditional orange and white color scheme with black text and were used to represent an injunctive norm alone, a low descriptive norm for crime, or a high descriptive norm for crime. Digital color images of a for-sale home and the surrounding neighborhood of a middle class community in North San Diego County were shown to 180 undergraduates recruited from the Psychology Department's Human Participant Pool, and from other lower division general education courses at California State University, San Marcos, between July and November of 2005. Three of the slide shows were designated as Neighborhood Watch communities with one of the three sign types posted, and the fourth slide show served as a control with no posted crime prevention signs. Each slide show consisted of 20 images of the home and community, along with four instruction slides. Part 2 (Study Two Data) replicated the basic effect from Study 1 and extended the research to examine the moderating role of community social economic status (SES) on the effects of the Neighborhood Watch signs. Participants were 547 undergraduate students recruited from the Psychology Department's Human Participant Pool, and from other lower division general education courses at California State University and Palomar Community College in San Marcos, between January and September 2006. A total of 12 slide shows were utilized in Study Two, such that each of the four sign conditions from Study One was represented across each of the three communities (Low, Middle, and High SES). Part 3 (Study Three Data) examined the potential for the physical condition of the Neighborhood Watch signs posted in the community to convey normative information about the presence and acceptance of crime in the community. Participants were 364 undergraduate students recruited from the Psychology Department's Human Participant Pool, and from other lower division general education courses at California State University and Palomar Community College in San Marcos, between October 2006 and March 2007. Study Three used the same generic (Injunctive Norm, Program Only) sign that was utilized in Studies One and Two. However, three variations (new, aged, and defaced) of the sign were used. The surveys used for Study One, Study Two, and Study Three, were identical. The data include variables on perceived crime rates, perceived likelihood of victimization, perceived community safety, community ratings, self-protective behavior, burglar's perspective, manipulation check, and demographics of the respondent.

Curated

Increasing the Efficiency of Police Departments in Allegany County, New York, 1994-1995 (ICPSR 2558)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, New York (state)

Time period: 1994-01-01--1995-01-01

This study sought to investigate the attitudes of residents and law enforcement personnel living or working in Allegany County, New York in order to (1) assess community support of law enforcement efforts to collaborate on projects, and (2) determine rural law enforcement agencies' willingness to work together on community policing projects and share resources in such a way as to improve and increase their overall individual and collective effectiveness and efficiency. Community policing, for this study, was defined as any law enforcement strategy designed to improve policy directed toward law enforcement interaction with community groups and citizens. Data were gathered from surveys that were distributed to two groups. First, to determine community perceptions of crime and attitudes toward the development of collaborative community policing strategies, surveys were distributed to the residents of the villages of Alfred and Wellsville and the town of Alfred in Allegany County, New York (Part 1, Community Survey Data). Second, to capture the ideas and perceptions of different types of law enforcement agencies regarding their willingness to share training, communication, and technology, surveys were distributed to the law enforcement agencies of Wellsville, Alfred, the New York State Police substation (located in the town of Wellsville), the county sheriff's department, and the Alfred State College and Alfred University public safety departments (Part 2, Law Enforcement Survey Data). For Part 1 (Community Survey Data), the residents were asked to rate their level of fear of crime, the reason for most crime problems (i.e., gangs, drugs, or unsupervised children), positive and negative contact with police, the presence and overall level of police service in the neighborhoods, and the importance of motor vehicle patrols, foot patrols, crime prevention programs, and traffic enforcement. Respondents were also asked whether they agreed that police should concentrate more on catching criminals (as opposed to implementing community-based programs), and if community policing was a good idea. Demographic data on residents includes their age, sex, whether they had been the victim of a property or personal crime, and the number of years they had lived in their respective communities. Demographic information for Part 2 (Law Enforcement Survey Data) includes the sex, age, and educational level of law enforcement respondents, as well as the number of years they had worked with their respective departments. Respondents were asked if they believed in and would support programs targeted toward youth, adults, the elderly, and merchants. Further queries focused on the number of regular and overtime hours used to train, develop, and implement department programs. A series of questions dealing with degrees of trust between the departments and levels of optimism was also asked to gauge attitudes that might discourage collaboration efforts with other departments on community-oriented programs. Officers were also asked to rate their willingness to work with the other agencies.

Curated

Infusing Community Policing Strategies into Hot Spots Policing Practices: The Impacts on Police-Community Relations in a Mid-Sized City, Urbana, Illinois, 2018 (ICPSR 38669)

Released/updated on: 2025-06-12

Geographic coverage: United States, Illinois, Urbana

The purpose of this project was to study the implementation of hot spots policing in Urbana, Illinois. "Hot spots" policing refers to a range of strategies which use crime-mapping technologies to concentrate police resources to high crime areas. The goal was to evaluate two different hot spot policing strategies, targeted patrol versus community policing, and measure their effects on police-community relations and police legitimacy. Variables included perceptions of crime, collective efficacy, police satisfaction, police interactions, and demographic variables including race, gender, education, income, and marital status.

Curated

International Crime Victimization Survey (ICVS), 1989-2000 (ICPSR 3803)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18

Geographic coverage: Cambodia, United States, Wales, England, Scotland, Portugal, Global, Russia, Netherlands, South Korea, Sweden, Mongolia, Latvia, Mozambique, Panama, Poland, Slovenia, France, Nigeria, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Lesotho, Croatia, Colombia, Argentina, Romania, Hungary, Georgia (Republic), Philippines, Ukraine, Zambia, Belarus, Northern Ireland, Switzerland, Albania, Canada, Azerbaijan, Czech Republic, Belgium, Swaziland, Namibia, Botswana, Finland, Denmark, South Africa, Uganda, Australia, Estonia

The International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS) is a far-reaching program of fully standardized surveys investigating householders' experience of crime in different countries. The data were collected in four waves: 1989, 1992, 1996, and 2000. The main focus of the ICVS is whether the respondent was a victim of theft of or from vehicles, other thefts, vandalism, robbery, pickpocketing, sexual harassment or violence, or assault. The surveys also investigated the frequency of victimization, reasons for not reporting a crime to the police, familiarity with the offender in the case of a sexual offense, physical violence, injuries, fear of crime in the respondent's local area, use of help agencies for victims, satisfaction with police behavior, preferred legal sanctions, punishment, and length of detention for offenders, safety precautions when leaving home, possession of a gun, burglar alarm, or insurance, and frequency of going out. Some of the 2000 surveys were administered nationally and some were restricted to a main city within a given country. The ICVS National Survey Data cover the following countries: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Catalonia, Denmark, England and Wales, Finland, France, Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Scotland, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States. The ICVS City Survey Data cover the following countries: Albania, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Botswana, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Latvia, Lesotho, Lithuania, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Panama, Philippines, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, South Africa, Swaziland, Uganda, Ukraine, and Zambia.

Curated

International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS), 1989-1997 (ICPSR 2973)

Released/updated on: 2001-08-24

Geographic coverage: Chechnya, Wales, England, Paraguay, Kazakhstan, Global, Austria, Mongolia, Latvia, Yugoslavia, El Salvador, Brazil, Slovenia, Colombia, Argentina, Hungary, Georgia (Republic), Japan, Ukraine, Tanzania, Belarus, Northern Ireland, India, Albania, New Zealand, Canada, Belgium, Finland, South Africa, Italy, Macedonia, Germany, United States, Egypt, China (Peoples Republic), Scotland, Bolivia, Russia, Costa Rica, Malta, Netherlands, Sweden, Poland, Slovakia, France, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Tunisia, Kyrgyzstan, Croatia, Romania, Philippines, Switzerland, Spain, Norway, Botswana, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Australia, Indonesia, Estonia

The International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS) was a far-reaching program of standardized sample surveys that investigated householders' experiences with crime, policing, crime prevention, and perceptions of safety. The surveys were carried out in the following countries: Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chechnia, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Egypt, England and Wales, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany (West), Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malta, Mongolia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Norway, Paraguay, the Philippines, Poland, Rumania, Russia, Scotland, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, the United States, Yugoslavia, and Zimbabwe. The data were collected in three waves: 1989, 1992-1994, and 1995-1997. The main focus of the ICVS was whether the respondent was a victim of theft of or from vehicles, other thefts, vandalism, robbery, pickpocketing, sexual harassment or violence, or assault. The surveys also investigated the frequency of victimization, reasons for not reporting a crime to the police, familiarity with the offender in the case of a sexual offense, physical violence, injuries, fear of crime in the respondent's local area, use of help agencies for victims, satisfaction with police behavior, preferred legal sanctions, punishment, and length of detention for offenders, safety precautions when leaving home, possession of a gun, burglar alarm, or insurance, and frequency of going out.

Curated

Local-Area Crime Survey, [United States], 2015, 2016 (ICPSR 38920)

Released/updated on: 2024-04-29

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2015-09-01--2015-12-01, 2016-09-01--2016-12-01

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) entered into a cooperative agreement with Westat to develop and evaluate a lower-cost, subnational companion survey of victimization as one piece of the subnational estimates program. The Local-Area Crime Survey (LACS) was fielded in 2015 and 2016 and is intended for use by states, municipalities, or other jurisdictions and entities to assess levels and trends in public safety. The LACS is modeled in part after the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), conducted for BJS by the U.S. Census Bureau. One of the two major statistical programs on crime produced by the U.S. Department of Justice, the NCVS is the nation's primary source of information about criminal victimization, whether reported or not reported to police. The core NCVS methodology includes a mix of in-person and telephone interviews with household members age 12 and older selected from an area probability sample to produce reliable national-level estimates. As another part of the subnational estimates program, BJS worked with the Census Bureau to enhance and reallocate the NCVS sample to support subnational estimates for the 22 most populous states and potentially substate areas within those states. For the most part, this direct estimation component of the program will not support estimates at the local level. See the NCVS Subnational Estimates webpage on the BJS website for more information.

The goals of this research were to (1) develop and test a relatively inexpensive survey design (2) that could be administered by local jurisdictions or their vendors (3) to produce cross-jurisdiction estimates and estimates of change over time within jurisdictions that may be compared with similar estimates using NCVS data. In addition to questions about victimization experiences, the LACS included questions about perceptions of community safety and police efficacy. The rationale for including these items was that they were relevant to all households, not just victims. The hope was that these items would increase survey response rates as non-victims would have important questions to answer. The LACS served as a platform for assessing the value of these questions for the planned NCVS instrument redesign. For more information, see the NCVS Instrument Redesign webpage on the BJS website.

Curated

Media Crime Prevention Campaign in the United States, 1980 (ICPSR 8050)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16

Geographic coverage: United States

This data collection evaluated the effects of the "Take a Bite Out of Crime" public service advertising campaign. It sought to determine whether mass communications contribute to motivating the public to participate in crime prevention activities, and in what way the media could forge effective public communications on behalf of crime prevention. Variables cover perceptions and fear of crime, media use, sources of information about crime, and protective measures taken to prevent crime.

Curated

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

Released/updated on: 1998-04-06

Geographic coverage: United States

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

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

Released/updated on: 2014-12-02

Geographic coverage: United States

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

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

Released/updated on: 2016-12-20

Geographic coverage: United States

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

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

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

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: Supplemental Victimization Survey, [United States], 2016 (ICPSR 36841)

Released/updated on: 2021-04-15

Geographic coverage: United States

The Supplemental Victimization Survey (SVS) data measure the prevalence of nonfatal stalking victimization among persons age 16 or older, the characteristics of stalking victims, and patterns of reporting to the police and other authorities so that policymakers, academic researchers, practitioners at the federal, state and local levels, and advocates can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SVS also collects important characteristics of stalking such as the physical and emotional impact on victims, offender information, measures of self-protective actions, and the criminal justice system response. The SVS asks questions related to victims' experiences of unwanted contacts or behaviors during the previous 12 months. These responses are linked to the NCVS survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the stalking victim's circumstances. The 2016 SVS was the second administration of this NCVS supplement. The first SVS administration was in 2006. The 2016 SVS data are not comparable to the 2006 SVS data as the survey instrument underwent a redesign.

Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: Supplemental Victimization Survey, [United States], 2019 (ICPSR 37950)

Released/updated on: 2022-02-10

Geographic coverage: United States

The Supplemental Victimization Survey (SVS) data measure the prevalence of nonfatal stalking victimization among persons age 16 or older, the characteristics of stalking victims, and patterns of reporting to the police and other authorities so that policymakers, academic researchers, practitioners at the federal, state and local levels, and advocates can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SVS also collects important characteristics of stalking such as the physical and emotional impact on victims, offender information, measures of self-protective actions, and the criminal justice system response. The SVS asks questions related to victims' experiences of unwanted contacts or behaviors during the previous 12 months. These responses are linked to the NCVS survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the stalking victim's circumstances. The 2019 SVS was the third administration of this NCVS supplement. The first SVS administration was in 2006. SVS releases from 2016 and after are not comparable to the 2006 SVS data because the survey instrument underwent a redesign with SVS 2016.

Curated

National Firearms Survey, 1999 (ICPSR 4552)

Released/updated on: 2007-07-06

Geographic coverage: United States

This survey was undertaken to obtain information on the characteristics of gun ownership, gun storage and gun carrying practices, and weapons-related incidents in the United States--specifically, use of guns and other weapons in self-defense against other people. Data were collected using national random-digit dial telephone surveys completed between March 19, 1999 and July 13, 1999. Sampling was suspended after the school shooting in Littleton, Colorado on April 20, 1999, and resumed after a cool-down period. Part 1, Survey Data, contains the coded data obtained during the interviews, and Part 2, Open-Ended Verbatim Responses, consists of open-ended answers provided by the respondents. Four qualifying questions were asked, dealing with: (1) gun ownership, (2) gun display against the respondent, (3) gun use in self-defense against another person, and (4) the use of a weapon other than a gun in self-defense against another person. A "yes" response to a qualifying question led to a series of additional questions on the same topic as the qualifying question. Information was collected from all respondents on the perceived safety of their neighborhood, whether they would feel safer if more people owned guns, whether guns should be allowed in public places, whether gun injuries were a problem in their community, whether they would favor or oppose a program to reduce gun injuries, and whether they had ever been shot with a gun. Respondents living in households that currently contained a gun were asked how many and what type of guns were present, the main reasons for owning a gun, whether any of the guns were loaded and unlocked, and whether they had received formal firearms training. Questions about incidents in which a gun was displayed in a hostile manner against the respondent included the number of times it took place, how long ago it had occurred, whether the respondent was in the military or police force at the time, the location of the incident, whether the individual displaying the gun was known to the respondent, whether the respondent had a gun, and whether the police were contacted. Respondents who had used a gun or other weapon in self-defense in the last five years were asked about the number of times it took place, the location of the incident, whether they were in the military or police force at the time, the type of weapon used, whether they knew the other person, whether this individual also had a weapon, whether the police were contacted and arrests made, and what crime was committed. Additional questions asked respondents whether they smoked cigarettes, drank alcohol, whether they had gotten married, had had a fire in their home, and had been hospitalized for a fracture in the past year, and whether they had ever had contact with extraterrestrial life. Demographic variables include sex, age, race, education level, household income, type of residential area (e.g., urban, rural, etc.), and age and number of children in the household.

Curated

National Opinion Survey of Crime and Justice, 1995 (ICPSR 6720)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States, Texas

The purpose of this survey was to provide legislators, public officials, and Texas residents with a reliable source of information about citizens' opinions and attitudes concerning crime and criminal justice related-topics. The data collection consists of two distinctly different files, National Data (Part 2) and Texas Data (Part 1), which can be linked or used separately for analysis. The survey questions concern neighborhood atmosphere and presentation of crime in the media, worries regarding possible attacks--both robbery and physical attacks, confidence in and opinions of police and their effectiveness, problems dealing with courts, and attitudes regarding prisoners and prisons, drug laws and drug problems, and juvenile gangs. Other questions focused on attitudes concerning the death penalty, guns, and the availability of firearms. The National Data file contains additional information expanding on the respondent's sources of crime news and gang-related questions. Demographic information on respondents includes sex, age, race, income, education, and religion.

Curated

Neighborhood Revitalization and Disorder in Salt Lake City, Utah, 1993-2000 (ICPSR 3261)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Time period: 1993-01-01--2000-01-01

This project examined physical incivilities (disorder), social strengths and vulnerabilities, and police reports in a declining first-ring suburb of Salt Lake City. Physical and social conditions were assessed on residential face blocks surrounding a new subdivision that was built as a revitalization effort. Data were collected before and after the completion of the new subdivision to assess the effects of the subdivision and of more proximal social and physical conditions on residents' blocks in order to understand important revitalization outcomes of crime, fear, and housing satisfaction and conditions. The study also highlighted place attachment of residents as a psychological strength that deserved greater attention. The research site consisted of a neighborhood located on the near west side of Salt Lake City that had been experiencing gradual decline. The neighborhood surrounded a new 84-unit single family detached housing subdivision, which was built in 1995 with money from a HUD demonstration grant. The study began in 1993 with a systematic observational assessment of crime and fear-related physical features on 59 blocks of the older neighborhood surrounding the planned housing site and 8 sampled addresses on each block, followed by interviews with surrounding block residents during 1994-1995, interviews with residents in the newly built housing in 1997, and interviews and physical condition assessments on the surrounding blocks in 1998-1999. Police crime report and city building permit data for the periods during and immediately following both waves of data collection were obtained and matched to sample addresses. Variables in Parts 1 and 2, Environmental and Survey Data for Older Subdivision, focus on distance of respondent's home to the subdivision, psychological proximity to the subdivision, if new housing was in the respondent's neighborhood, nonresidential properties on the block, physical incivilities, self-reported past victimization, fear of crime, place attachment, collective efficacy (neighboring, participation, social control, sense of community), rating of neighborhood qualities, whether block neighbors had improved property, community confidence, perceived block crime problems, observed conditions, self-reported home repairs and improvements, building permits, and home satisfaction. Demographic variables for Parts 1 and 2 include income, home ownership, ethnicity, religion, gender, age, marital status, if the resident lived in a house, household size, number of children in the household, and length of residence. Variables in Part 3, Environmental and Survey Data for Intervention Site, include neighborhood qualities and convenience, whether the respondent's children would attend a local school, and variables similar to those in Parts 1 and 2. Demographic variables in Part 3 specify the year the respondent moved in, number of children in the household, race and ethnicity, marital status, religion, sex, and income in 1996.

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

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

Performance Measures in Prosecution and Their Application to Community Prosecution at Two Sites in the United States, 2005-2006 (ICPSR 20401)

Released/updated on: 2008-10-31

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2005-01-01--2006-09-01

The purpose of this study was to explore empirical evidence to support the performance measurement framework identified by the American Prosecutors Research Institute's (APRI) Prosecution Study for the 21st Century. The framework included promoting the fair, impartial, and expeditious pursuit of justice and ensuring public safety. Two prosecutors' offices participated in the study. One was a traditional office, and the other was a more community-oriented office. Each site submitted monthly data on the identified performance measures for analysis. APRI also designed and administered a public safety survey to assess a number of factors related to the performance of prosecutors' offices, but for which data could not be provided by the offices. The public safety surveys were administered by phone using random digit dialing (RDD). Part 1, Site 1 Administrative Data, contains 15 months of data, and Part 2, Site 2 Administrative Data, contain 6 months of data on the identified performance measures for analysis from each site. Part 3, Public Safety Survey Data, contains variables that provide some basic demographic data about the respondents and several variables in response to Likert-style questions measuring attitudes and opinions on six factors. These include the seriousness of local crime, safety of the environment, organizational behavior of the prosecutor's office, participation in the community, community education, and task performance.