Search results

Showing 1 – 3 of 3 results.

Curated

Factors Influencing the Quality and Utility of Government-Sponsored Criminal Justice Research in the United States, 1975-1986 (ICPSR 9089)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1975-01-01--1986-01-01

This data collection examines the effects of organizational environment and funding level on the utility of criminal justice research projects sponsored by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). The data represent a unique source of information on factors that influence the quality and utility of criminal justice research. Variables describing the research grants include NIJ office responsible for monitoring the grant (e.g., courts, police, corrections, etc.), organization type receiving the grant (academic or nonacademic), type of data (collected originally, existing, merged), and priority area (crime, victims, parole, police). The studies are also classified by: (1) sampling method employed, (2) presentation style, (3) statistical analysis employed, (4) type of research design, (5) number of observation points, and (6) unit of analysis. Additional variables provided include whether there was a copy of the study report in the National Criminal Justice Archive, whether the study contained recommendations for policy or practice, and whether the project was completed on time. The data file provides two indices--one that represents quality and one that represents utility. Each measure is generated from a combination of variables in the dataset.

Curated

Partially restricted

Long-Term Effects of Law Enforcement's Post-9/11 Focus on Counterterrorism and Homeland Security, 2007-2010, United States (ICPSR 29461)

Released/updated on: 2024-04-25

Geographic coverage: United States, Texas, Massachusetts, Los Angeles, California, Florida, Las Vegas, Boston, Nevada, Miami, Houston

Time period: 2007-01-01--2010-01-01

This study examines the state of counterterrorism and homeland security in five large urban law enforcement agencies (the Boston Police Department, the Houston Police Department, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, and the Miami-Dade Police Department) nine years following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. It explores the long-term adjustments that these agencies made to accommodate this new role.

Researchers from the RAND Corporation, in consultation with National Institute of Justice project staff, selected law enforcement agencies of major urban areas with a high risk of terrorist attacks from different regions of the United States that have varied experiences with counterterrorism and homeland security issues. The research team conducted on-site, in-depth interviews with personnel involved in developing or implementing counterterrorism or homeland security functions within their respective agency. The research team used a standardized interview protocol to address such issues as security operations, regional role, organizational structures, challenges associated with the focus on counterterrorism and homeland security issues, information sharing, training, equipment, and grant funding.

Curated

Partially restricted

National Evaluation of the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant Program, 1998-2002 (ICPSR 4046)

Released/updated on: 2006-09-22

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1998-01-01--2000-01-01

This study examined the operation of the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant program (JAIBG) from fiscal years 1998 through 2000. In order to describe how states implemented the JAIBG program, this study examined the program's effects on state and local juvenile justice policies and practices, which included studying how states awarded the grant funds to localities and for what purposes, and an assessment of how states changed their policies and practices during this period. Variables in Part 1 (Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant (JAIBG) Subgrant Follow-Up Information Form Data) provide grant information, jurisdiction type, planning typology of state, amount of funds budgeted for administrative purposes, and for each of 12 purpose areas, total amount of funds spent in subgrant, and number of the various entities involved in juvenile crime prevention. Variables in Part 2 (Fiscal Year 1998 Supplemental Programmatic Information Form Data) provide grant information, jurisdiction type, planning typology of state, type of program, primary purpose of funded programs in each of the 12 purpose areas (if the funds supported a new program in that purpose area), as well as allocation of funds and total funds in each purpose area. Variables in Parts 3-5 (Perceptions and Attitudes About the JAIBG Program Survey Data for JAIBG Subgrant Recipients, Perceptions and Attitudes About the JAIBG Program Survey Data for State Juvenile Crime Enforcement Coalition (JCEC) Members, and Perceptions and Attitudes About the JAIBG Program Survey Data for Local Juvenile Crime Enforcement Coalition (JCEC) Members) provide state, planning typology of state, and recipient's professional affiliations (by category). The surveys also included questions to measure the recipient's satisfaction with the JAIBG program and the funding received. Data available in this collection were obtained from the following two sources: (1) data collected by Follow-Up Information Forms (FIFs) for fiscal years 1998, 1999, and 2000 (Part 1), and (2) mail survey data collected by Abt Associates Inc., which included: programmatic and financial data for a sample of fiscal year 1998 programs (Part 2), attitudinal and opinion surveys of a sample of subgrant recipients (Part 3), state Juvenile Crime Enforcement Coalition (JCEC) members (Part 4), and a sample of local JCEC members (Part 5).