Arkansas Juvenile Court Records, 1991-1993 (ICPSR 6808)
Arkansas Juvenile Court Records, 1994 (ICPSR 6883)
Assessing the Effectiveness of Four Juvenile Justice Interventions on Adult Criminal Justice and Child Welfare Outcomes, Ohio, 2004-2008 (ICPSR 36130)
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 compared the adult criminal justice and child welfare system outcomes of four pathways through the juvenile justice system - Traditional Probation, Intensive Probation, Specialty Court Docket (Crossroads Program), and commitment to state youth correction services (Department of Youth Services). The study compared the effectiveness of a continuum of services and supervision in improving public safety, including re-arrest and re-incarceration, and in improving outcomes in engagement with child welfare as parents, including child welfare complaints and dispositions.
The core research question is: "what is the relative effectiveness of four different juvenile justice interventions on improving public safety and child welfare outcomes?" The study population is all youths (n=2581) who entered the juvenile court from 2004-2008. It then included 7-10 years of follow-up in the adult justice and child welfare systems for all youths. The four interventions are on a continuum of intensity of services and supervision with Traditional Probation having the fewest services followed by Intensive Probation, Crossroads, and Division of Youth Services commitment.
The study's deposits include 14 SPSS data files:
- arrest_final.sav
- CW_Custody_Adult_final.sav
- CW_Custody_child_final.sav
- CW_Intakes_Adult_final.sav
- CW_Intakes_child_final.sav
- CW_Placements_adult_final.sav
- CW_Placements_child_final.sav
- General_final.sav
- Jail_final.sav
- JC_charges_final.sav
- JC_detention_final.sav
- JC_disposition_final.sav
- JC_Gal_final.sav
- prison_final.sav
Assessing the Role of School Discipline In Disproportionate Minority Contact With the Juvenile Justice System, Texas, 1999-2008 (ICPSR 37186)
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 project utilized data originally collected for the project Breaking Schools' Rules (Fabelo et al., 2011), a joint project of the Public Policy Research Institute at Texas A and M University and the Council of State Governments Justice Center on which the Principal Investigator, Miner Marchbanks was a lead data analyst and co-author. Research was conducted at the Education Research Centers of the University of Texas, Austin, and Texas A and M University utilizing individual-level data from the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS), a data system of the Texas Education Agency (TEA), and CASEWORKER, a data management system of the Texas Probation Commission (now the Texas Juvenile Justice Department). The link between these records was conducted by TEA and is described in greater detail in Fabelo et al.
Through secondary analyses of these data, researchers attempted to measure the institutional and individual mechanisms that disproportionately pull and push students of color into the "school-to-prison pipeline." The project explores the predictors of school discipline contact and the resulting consequences of encountering this discipline. The project then moves to an examination of the determinants of progressing through the various decision points in a juvenile justice case. Additionally, the project explores the relationship between school strictness and various educational and juvenile justice outcomes. The "school-to-prison pipeline" (Wald and Losen, 2003) describes an "increasingly punitive and isolating" path through the education system for African American and other at-risk students.
The study collection includes 1 Stata (.do) syntax file (master_final.do) that was used by the researcher(s) in secondary analyses.
Criminal Justice Researcher-Practitioner Placement Program: Reading Intervention, Academic and Behavioral Outcomes for Adolescents: A Community Agency and University Partnership Project, Indiana, 2016-2018 (ICPSR 37407)
Decision-Making in the Juvenile Justice System in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio, 1999-2000 (ICPSR 3581)
Deterrent Effect of Curfew Enforcement: Operation Nightwatch in St. Louis, 2003-2005 (ICPSR 4302)
Evaluating the Virginia Court-Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) Program, 1991-1995 (ICPSR 2812)
Evaluation of Utah's Early Intervention Mandate: Juvenile Sentencing Guidelines and Intermediate Sanctions, 1996-2000 (ICPSR 3502)
Exposure to Violence, Trauma, and Juvenile Court Involvement: A Longitudinal Analysis of Mobile Youth and Poverty Study Data, Mobile, Alabama, 1998-2011 (ICPSR 37495)
Impact of Institutional Placement on the Recidivism of Delinquent Youth in New York City, 2000-2003 (ICPSR 20347)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1982: [United States] (ICPSR 8440)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1983 [United States] (ICPSR 8656)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1984: [United States] (ICPSR 8940)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1985: [United States] (ICPSR 9297)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1986: Reported Cases in Calendar Year Data Base (ICPSR 9691)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1987: [United States] (ICPSR 6119)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1988: [United States] (ICPSR 6120)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1989: [United States] (ICPSR 6121)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1990: [United States] (ICPSR 6508)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1991: [United States] (ICPSR 6582)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1992: [United States] (ICPSR 6634)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1993: [United States] (ICPSR 6715)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1994: [United States] (ICPSR 6882)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1995: [United States] (ICPSR 2805)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1996: [United States] (ICPSR 2841)
Juvenile Court Statistics, 1997: [United States] (ICPSR 2894)
Juvenile Domestic and Family Violence Court Evaluation in Contra Costa, Santa Clara, and San Francisco Counties, California, 1999-2005 (ICPSR 34564)
Missouri Juvenile Court Records, 1984-1987 (ICPSR 9448)
Missouri Juvenile Court Records, 1994 (ICPSR 6884)
National Juvenile Court Data Archive, United States, 1985-2019 (ICPSR 38418)
The National Juvenile Court Data Archive houses over 15 million automated records of cases handled by courts with juvenile jurisdiction. Although some states' data contain traffic and dependency cases, the majority are delinquency and status offense records. The collection itself dates back to the 1920s when it was under the Children's Bureau, however in 1974 the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), within the U.S. Department of Justice assumed responsibility for the work of promoting access to automated juvenile court data sets for juvenile justice research and policymaking efforts.
The Archive contains the most detailed information available on juveniles involved in the juvenile justice system and on the activities of U.S. juvenile courts. The Archive houses a sizable collection of automated juvenile court data files that not only support the national estimates but also support the study of a wide range of national and subnational juvenile justice issues. Designed to facilitate research on the juvenile justice system, the Archive's data files are available to policy-makers, researchers, students, and the public. The data have been used to explore a broad range of topics, from investigating the effectiveness of juvenile court programs and examining policy developments in individual jurisdictions, to monitoring the impact of legislative changes, and guiding juvenile justice system reform.
National Prosecutors Survey, 1994 (ICPSR 6785)
National Prosecutors Survey, 1996 (ICPSR 2433)
National Prosecutors Survey, 2005 (ICPSR 4600)
National Prosecutors Survey [Census], 2007 (ICPSR 33202)
National Survey of Juvenile Justice Professionals, 2005-2007 [United States] (ICPSR 26381)
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Self Report of Offending, Wave 1, 1994-1997 (ICPSR 13601)
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Self Report of Offending, Wave 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13658)
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Self Report of Offending, Wave 3, 2000-2002 (ICPSR 13742)
Prosecuting Adolescents in Juvenile and Criminal Jurisdictions in Selected Counties in New Jersey and New York, 1992-1993 (ICPSR 3976)
Pursuing a National Estimate of Dual System Youth, Illinois, New York, Ohio, 1992-2014 (ICPSR 39105)
Across the country, child welfare and juvenile justice systems now recognize that youth involved in both systems (i.e., dual system youth) are a vulnerable population who go unrecognized because of challenges in information-sharing and cross-system collaboration. These challenges currently prevent the development of accurate estimations of the number of dual system youth nationally and limit understanding of best practices used by jurisdictions implementing integrated systems models. OJJDP funded this secondary analysis study to address this gap in knowledge.
All data used in the Dual System Youth Design Study were owned or accessed by various partners. No primary data collection occurred in the study. In addition, most of the data accessed by the study partners was confidential, de-identified data that required memorandums of agreement and/or court orders to access and use. Some sites have ongoing or standing agreements with the public agencies who own the data which allow access and use for specific projects. Because, most frequently, the data are owned by the public service agencies and include sensitive information the data are not available to be publicly archived. Instead, here a descriptive overview is provided of the data used and accessed by each study partner as well as contact information of a person at each site that will be able to share syntax and/or coding parameters for those who are considering to replicate the findings or methods.
Researchers interested in inquiring the data and syntax used in this project should refer to the study partners section of the downloadable study documentation. Data provider agency names along with the specific study data that were requested are listed in the documentation.