Showing 1 – 5 of 5 results.
Curated
Evaluation of Multi-Jurisdictional Task Forces in the United States, 1999-2000 (ICPSR 3865)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1999-01-01--2000-01-01
Since the inception of the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program in 1988, a large proportion of formula grant program funds has been allocated by state administrative agencies (SAA) to support multi-jurisdictional drug task forces (MJTFs). MJTFs are a subset of law enforcement task forces that were created in order to target the illegal distribution of drugs at the local and regional levels. While many policymakers, researchers, and practitioners express confidence in the task force approach generally, there remains insufficient understanding of the possible community and organizational impact of individual MJTFs and the kinds of evaluation methodologies that can elicit such information. The goal of this project was to identify several methodologies that could be used by state planning agencies, task forces, and others to assess the work of MJTFs. This project consisted of two surveys that were designed to ascertain the extent to which state administrative agencies (SAAs) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces (MJTFs) collected various kinds of process and outcome information and conducted evaluations of task forces.
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
Law Enforcement Assistance Administration Profile Data, [1968-1978] (ICPSR 8075)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Time period: 1968-01-01--1978-01-01
The Law Enforcement Assistance Administration File (PROFILE) System was designed for the automated storage and retrieval of information describing programs sponsored by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The two types of data elements used to describe the projects in this file are basic data and program descriptors. The basic data elements include the title of the grant, information regarding the location of the grantee and the project, critical funding dates, the government level and type of grantee, financial data, the name of the project director, indication of the availability of reports, and identification numbers. The program descriptor elements form the program classification system and describe the key characteristics of the program. Key characteristics include subject of the program, primary and secondary activity, whether the program covered a juvenile or adult problem, and what specific crimes, clients, staff, program strategies, agencies, equipment, or research methods were to be used or would be affected by the project.
Curated
National Evaluation of Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Programs in the United States, 1995-1999 (ICPSR 2914)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1995-01-01--1999-01-01
The Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) for State Prisoners Formula Grant Program, created by Title III (Subtitle U of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994), was designed by Congress to implement residential substance abuse programs providing individual and group treatment for inmates in residential facilities operated by state and local correctional agencies. Under the Corrections Program Office of the Office of Justice Programs of the United States Department of Justice, state and local correctional agencies received funds to develop or enhance existing programs that: (1) lasted between six and 12 months, (2) provided residential treatment facilities set apart from the general correctional population, (3) were directed at the substance abuse problems of the inmate, (4) were intended to develop the inmate's cognitive, behavioral, social, vocational, and other skills in order to treat related problems as well as the substance abuse, and (5) continued to require urinalysis and/or other proven reliable forms of drug and alcohol testing of individuals assigned to treatment programs during and after release from residential custody. The National Development and Research Institutes, Inc. (NDRI) entered into a cooperative agreement with the National Institute of Justice wherein NDRI would evaluate the extent to which the goals of the RSAT program were being accomplished and the problems that were encountered by the participating states. The methods of this national evaluation were: (1) an initial state survey to ascertain the RSAT programs and program directors in each of the 50 states plus five territories and the District of Columbia and to collect basic information on the aggregate impact of the RSAT-funded programs in each state or territory (Part 1, State Data), (2) a follow-up state survey to collect more detailed information on the aggregate impact of the RSAT-funded programs in each state (Part 1, State Data), and (3) an initial program survey to describe the separate RSAT programs as they came on line and to assess whether a few of the programs might serve as model programs which could undergo subsequent intensive evaluation (Part 2, Program Data). The sampling method used was a census of all the existing RSAT-funded programs and all of the state RSAT officials. Part 1 variables include the amount of RSAT funds received by the state in fiscal years 1996 to 1998, amounts from other sources of funding, and amount spent on salaries, training, drug tests, other supplies, and facilities, as well as number of residents, number of staff, reasons why funding was delayed, RSAT award date, and RSAT end date. Part 2 variables include the number of clients in the program, number of beds available, number of staff by gender, race, age, education, profession, and years of experience, admission inclusion criteria, reporting procedures, treatment type and duration, type of drug testing and number of tests, annual budget, sources of funding, and cost per capita.
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).