Search results

Showing 1 – 50 of 61 results.
Curated

Assessing Police Officers' Decision Making and Discretion in Making Traffic Stops in Savannah, Georgia, 2002 (ICPSR 4340)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-16
Geographic coverage: Savannah, United States, Georgia
Time period: 2002-04-01--2002-11-01
This study aimed to fill a void in the research regarding police behavior by focusing on the formation and creation of cognitive suspicion by officers. The study also examined formal actions (stops) taken by the police pursuant to that suspicion. The study was conducted using observational research methods and collected quantitative and qualitative data on officer suspicion. Data were collected by observers who rode along with patrol officers from April 2002 to November 2002. Field observers used three major data collection instruments in order to gather as much relevant information as possible from a variety of sources and in diverse situations. The Officer Form was an overall evaluation of the officer's decision-making characteristics, Suspicion Forms captured information each time an incident occurred, and a Suspect Form was a compilation of data from the citizen who had the encounter with the officer. Additional documents included informed consent forms, a card detailing the language to be used for the initial contact with citizens, and hourly activity forms. Anytime a suspicion was formed or a formal action was taken after a suspicion was formed, the observer debriefed the officer as to his or her thoughts and elicited the officer's overall rating of the encounter. Data in this collection include general demographic characteristics of the officer and the suspect, as well as the area in which the suspicion was formed. Data was also gathered regarding what led the officer to form a suspicion, and why a person was or was not stopped.
Curated
Restricted

Assessing Police Performance in Citizen Encounters, Schenectady and Syracuse, NY, 2011-2014 (ICPSR 35467)

Released/updated on: 2017-12-14
Geographic coverage: Schenectady, United States, Syracuse, New York (state)
Time period: 2011-01-01--2014-01-01

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 how police managers would use information about their officers' performance in procedural justice terms. The project provided for the injection of citizen assessment of service quality into systems of police performance measurement and accountability. Information on the quality of police-citizen encounters was drawn from surveys of citizens who had contact with the police in each of two cities, Schenectady and Syracuse, New York. Following the accumulation of survey data to form a baseline, survey results on citizens' satisfaction and judgments about procedural justice in their police contacts were summarized and reported to command staffs on a monthly basis through the departments' respective Compstat meetings. In this way the project provided for measures of police performance with respect to procedural justice with sufficient periodicity that the information was potentially useful in managing performance.

The study addressed four specific questions:

  1. Does performance on these outcomes - procedural justice and citizen satisfaction - improve when information on these outcomes is incorporated into departments' systems of performance measurement and accountability?
  2. What do police managers do with this information, and how (if at all) are field supervisors and patrol officers affected by it?
  3. Are survey-based measures of citizens' subjective experiences valid measures of police performance, that is, do they reflect the procedural justice with which police act?
  4. Can survey based measures be deployed economically (e.g., through targeted sampling), and can other, less expensive measures of the quality of police-citizen encounters be substituted for survey-based measures?

To answer these questions, researches used a mixed methods data collection plan. In both Schenectady and Syracuse, a survey was administered to people who had recent contact with the police. Semi-monthly samples were randomly drawn from police records of calls for service, stops, and arrests from mid-July, 2011, through mid-January, 2013. Across the 18 months of surveying, 3,603 interviews were completed. Also carried out, was a survey of key informants in each city - neighborhood association leaders - in order to extend the assessment of public perceptions of the local police beyond those who have direct contact with police to the larger community. Interviews with patrol officers and supervisors were also conducted in both sites, once at about the mid-point of the 18-month police services survey and again at the conclusion of the surveying. Interviews were conducted with the commanders shortly after the project was introduced to them in October of 2011. Finally, in Schenectady, "armchair" observation of a subset of the 1,800 encounters about which the citizen had already been interviewed was conducted.

The collection contains 7 SPSS data files and 6 Syntax files:

  1. archive_Census_beat.sav (n=30; 28 variables)
  2. archive_keyinformant_analysis.sps
  3. archive_keyinformant_survey.sav (n=90; 28 variables)
  4. archive_obs_byenc.sav (n=476; 79 variables)
  5. archive_obs_byobserver.sav (n=1,078; 476 variables)
  6. archive_obs_enc_analysis.sps
  7. archive_obs_enc_var_construction.sps
  8. archive_police_data.sav (n=3,603; 9 variables)
  9. archive_policeservices_survey_analysis.sps
  10. archive_policeservices_survey_closed.sav (n=3,603; 148 variables)
  11. archive_policeservices_survey_open.sav (n=1,218; 23 variables)
  12. archive_policeservices_survey_var_construction.sps
  13. Syntax to replicate results - list by table.pdf

For confidentiality reasons, the qualitative interviews with citizens, police sergeants, patrol officers, and commanders regarding their experiences are not available as part of this collection.

Curated
Restricted

Assessing Procedural Justice During Police-Citizen Encounters with Officer Surveys, Citizen Surveys, and Systematic Social Observations, Norfolk, VA, 2017-2019 (ICPSR 37455)

Released/updated on: 2023-01-31
Geographic coverage: United States, Virginia, Norfolk
Time period: 2017-01-01--2019-01-01

This study aimed to improve the understanding of procedural justice during police-citizen encounters with a comprehensive approach including officer surveys, systematic social observations, and citizen surveys.

First, the study used officer surveys to evaluate the effectiveness of a procedural justice training program in Norfolk, Virginia. In 2017, an eight-hour training was conducted for all Norfolk police officers. A pretest and posttest survey was given to each officer during the training, which asked about their opinions on a multitude of statements representing the key elements of procedural justice in policing (e.g., voice, respect, trustworthiness, and neutrality). In 2019, the officers were given a second-wave survey to assess the long-term effects of the training.

The study also examined officers' procedurally fair behavior during interactions and citizens' behavioral responses through systematic social observations of police-citizen interactions captured by the police body-worn cameras. Patrol shifts were randomly selected and observed between December 2017 and March 2019.

The third component included a survey of citizens who interacted with the police during the observation period. Randomly selected officers were, prior to the shift, encouraged to hand out survey cards to all citizens they encountered. These cards invited the citizens to take a survey online. Citizens could also give their phone numbers to the officers so that they could be contacted to take the survey over the phone. The goal of the citizen survey was to obtain information about the citizens' opinions of the Norfolk police in general and the specific encounters they had with the Norfolk police.

Taken together, the three components of this study offered a systematic understanding of the policing issues related to procedural justice, including officers' perceptions about procedural justice, officers' procedurally fair behavior during interactions, citizens' behavioral responses, and citizens' subjective evaluations of their encounters.

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

Assessing the Validity and Reliability of National Data on Citizen Complaints about Police Use of Force, 2003 and 2007 (ICPSR 36042)

Released/updated on: 2017-06-30
Geographic coverage: United States

These data are part of the 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 excepted as noted below. All direct identifiers have been removed and replaced with text enclosed in square brackets (e.g.[MASKED]). Due to the masking of select information, variables/content described in the data documentation may not actually be available as part of the collection. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This collection is one part of the Department of Justice's response to 42 USC 14142, a law which requires the U.S. Attorney General to 1) "acquire data about the use of excessive force by law enforcement officers" and 2) "publish an annual summary of the data." Researchers compared agency-level data reported in the 2003 (ICPSR 4411) and 2007 (ICPSR 31161) waves of the Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) surveys with available external sources including publicly available reports and direct contact with agency personnel. The purpose of this study was to assess validity and reliability of the available agency-level reported data on citizen complaints about police use of force.

Curated
Restricted

The Benefits of Body-Worn Cameras: New Findings from a Randomized Controlled Trial at the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Nevada, 2014-2015 (ICPSR 37048)

Released/updated on: 2018-10-30
Geographic coverage: Las Vegas, Nevada
Time period: 2014-02-01--2015-09-01

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 reports the findings of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) involving more than 400 police officers and the use of body-worn cameras (BWC) in the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD). Officers were surveyed before and after the trial, and a random sample was interviewed to assess their level of comfort with technology, perceptions of self, civilians, other officers, and the use of BWCs. Information was gathered during ride-alongs with BWC officers and from a review of BWC videos.

The collection includes 2 SPSS data files, 4 Excel data files, and 2 files containing aggregated treatment groups and rank-and-treatment groups, in Stata, Excel, and CSV format:

  • SPSS: officer-survey---pretest.sav (n=422; 30 variables)
  • SPSS: officer-survey---posttest2.sav (n=95; 33 variables)
  • Excel: officer-interviews---form-a.xlsx (n=23; 52 variables)
  • Excel: officer-interviews---form-b.xlsx (n=27; 52 variables)
  • Excel: ride-along-observations.xlsx (n=72; 20 variables)
  • Excel: video-review-data.xlsx (n=53; 21 variables)
  • Stata: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-treatment-group.dta (n=4; 42 variables)
  • Excel: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-treatment-group.xls (n=4; 42 variables)
  • CSV: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-treatment-group.csv (n=4; 42 variables)
  • Stata: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-rank-and-treatment-group.dta (n=12; 43 variables)
  • Excel: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-rank-and-treatment-group.xls (n=12; 43 variables)
  • CSV: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-rank-and-treatment-group.csv (n=12; 43 variables)
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

Calling the Police: Citizen Reporting of Serious Crime, 1979 (ICPSR 8185)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: San Diego, United States, Illinois, Peoria, Rochester (New York), California, Florida, New York (state), Jacksonville
Time period: 1979-04-21--1979-12-07
This dataset replicates the citizen reporting component of POLICE RESPONSE TIME ANALYSIS, 1975 (ICPSR 7760). Information is included on 4,095 reported incidents of aggravated assault, auto theft, burglary, larceny/theft offenses, forcible rape, and robbery. The data cover citizen calls to police between April 21 and December 7, 1979. There are four files in this collection, one each for Jacksonville, Florida, Peoria, Illinois, Rochester, New York, and San Diego, California. The data are taken from police dispatch records and police interviews of citizens who requested police assistance. Variables taken from the dispatch records include the dispatch time, call priority, police travel time, age, sex, and race of the caller, response code, number of suspects, and area of the city in which the call originated. Variables taken from the citizen interviews include respondent's role in the incident (victim, caller, victim-caller, witness-caller), incident location, relationship of caller to victim, number of victims, identification of suspect, and interaction with police.
Curated
Restricted

The Challenge and Promise of Using Community Policing Strategies to Prevent Violent Extremism, United States, 2014 (ICPSR 36460)

Released/updated on: 2018-03-07
Geographic coverage: United States

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

The study contains data from a survey of 480 large (200+ sworn officers) state and local law enforcement agencies, and 63 additional smaller county and municipal agencies that experienced violent extremism. These data were collected as part of a project to perform a comprehensive assessment of challenges and opportunities when developing partnerships between police and communities to counter violent extremism. Qualitative data collected as a part of this project are not included in this release.

This collection includes one tab-delimited data file: "file6-NIJ-2012-3163-Survey-Responses.csv" with 194 variables and 382 cases.

Curated

Community Policing in Madison, Wisconsin: Evaluation of Implementation and Impact, 1987-1990 (ICPSR 6480)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: Madison, United States, Wisconsin
Time period: 1987-01-01--1990-01-01
This study sought to evaluate the Madison, Wisconsin, Police Department's creation of a new organizational design (both structural and managerial) that was intended to support community-oriented and problem-oriented policing. One-sixth of the organization serving approximately one-sixth of the community was used as a test site for the new community policing approach. This Experimental Police District (EPD) was charged with implementing "quality policing," which emphasized quality of service delivery, quality of life in the community, and quality of life in the workplace. For the first part of the program evaluation, attitude changes among officers working in the EPD were compared with those of officers working in the rest of the police department. Part 1, Commissioned Personnel Data, Wave 1, contains responses from 269 commissioned personnel surveyed in December 1987, before the creation of the EPD. Part 2, Commissioned Personnel Data, Wave 2, consists of responses from 264 police officers who completed a Wave 2 survey in December 1988, and Part 3, Commissioned Personnel Data, Wave 3, supplies responses from 230 police officers who completed a Wave 3 survey in December 1989. Although the analysis was to be based on a panel design, efforts were made to survey all commissioned personnel during each survey administration period. Police personnel provided their assessments on how successfully quality leadership had been implemented, the extent to which they worked closely with and received feedback from other officers, the amount of their interaction with detectives, the amount of time available for problem-solving, ease of arranging schedules, safety of working conditions, satisfaction with working conditions, type of work they performed, their supervisor, commitment to the department, attitudes related to community policing and problem-solving, perception of their relationship with the community, views of human nature, attitudes toward change, attitudes toward decentralization, and demographic information. As the second part of the program evaluation, attitude changes among residents served by the EPD were compared with those of residents in the rest of the city. These data are presented in Part 4, Residents Data, Waves 1 and 2. Data for Wave 1 consist of personal interviews with a random sample of 1,166 Madison residents in February and March 1988, prior to the opening of the EPD station. During the second wave, Wave 1 respondents were interviewed by telephone in February and March 1990. Residents provided their perceptions of police presence, frequency and quality of police-citizen contacts, estimates of the magnitude of various problems in their neighborhoods, evaluation of the problem-solving efforts of the police, perception of neighborhood conditions, levels of fear of crime, personal experience of victimization, knowledge of victimization of other residents, and demographic information.
Curated
Restricted

A Comprehensive Evaluation of a Drug Market Intervention Training Cohort in Roanoke, Virginia; Jacksonville, Florida; and Guntersville, Alabama, 2011-2013. (ICPSR 36322)

Released/updated on: 2016-09-27
Geographic coverage: United States, Guntersville, Alabama, Florida, Roanoke, Virginia, Jacksonville
Time period: 2011-01-01--2012-01-01, 2011-01-01--2012-01-01

The Drug Market Intervention (DMI) has been identified as a promising practice for disrupting overt-drug markets, reducing the crime and disorder associated with drug sales, and improving police-community relations. Montgomery County, Maryland; Flint, Michigan; Guntersville, Alabama; Lake County, Indiana; Jacksonville, Florida; New Orleans, Louisiana; and Roanoke, Virginia applied for and received DMI training and technical assistance from Michigan State University in 2010 and 2011. This study followed the seven sites that were trained in the program to determine how the program was implemented, how the DMI affected the targeted drug market, whether the program affected crime and disorder, whether the program improved police-community relations, and how much the program cost.

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
Partially restricted
Simple Crosstabs

Developing Uniform Performance Measures for Policing in the United States: A Pilot Project in Four Agencies, 2008-2009 (ICPSR 29742)

Released/updated on: 2013-04-24
Geographic coverage: Knoxville, Broward County, United States, Texas, Tennessee, Kettering, Ohio, Florida, Dallas
Time period: 2008-01-01--2009-01-01
Between 2008 and 2009, the research team gathered survey data from 458 members of the community (Part 1), 312 police officers (Part 2), and 804 individuals who had voluntary contact (Part 3), and 761 individuals who had involuntary contact (Part 4) with police departments in Dallas, Texas, Knoxville, Tennessee, and Kettering, Ohio, and the Broward County, Florida Sheriff's Office. The surveys were designed to look at nine dimensions of police performance: delivering quality services; fear, safety, and order; ethics and values; legitimacy and customer satisfaction; organizational competence and commitment to high standards; reducing crime and victimization; resource use; responding to offenders; and use of authority. The community surveys included questions about police effectiveness, police professionalism, neighborhood problems, and victimization. The officer surveys had three parts: job satisfaction items, procedural knowledge items, and questions about the culture of integrity. The voluntary police contact and involuntary police contact surveys included questions on satisfaction with the way the police officer or deputy sheriff handled the encounter.
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
Simple Crosstabs

The Effect of Prior Police Contact on Victimization Reporting: Results From the Police-Public Contact and National Crime Victimization Surveys, United States, 2002-2011 (ICPSR 36370)

Released/updated on: 2021-11-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2002-01-01--2011-01-01

This study examines whether or not prior experiences with the police, both directly and indirectly through the experiences of others, can influence one's decision to report a crime. Data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) was linked with the Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) to construct a dataset of the police-related experiences of crime victims and non-victims. Variables include information on the prevalence, frequency, and the nature of respondents' encounters with the police in the prior year, as well as respondents' personal and household victimization experiences that occurred after the administration of the PPCS, including whether the crime was reported to the police. Demographic variables include age, race, gender, education, and socioeconomic status.

The ICPSR's holdings for both the NCVS and the PPCS are available in the NCVS series.

Curated

Enhancing Procedural Justness of Encounters Through Substantiation (EPJETS): The Atlantic County Randomized Controlled Trial, New Jersey, 2022-2024 (ICPSR 39659)

Released/updated on: 2026-03-11
Geographic coverage: Atlantic City, United States, Pleasantville, New Jersey
Time period: 2022-01-01--2024-01-01

The Enhancing Procedural Justness of Encounters Through Substantiation (EPJETS) project was a collaborative initiative between researchers from Stockton, Rutgers, and Northwestern Universities and the police departments of Atlantic City and Pleasantville, New Jersey that aimed to test whether incorporating principles of procedural justice, sharing body-worn camera (BWC) footage with drivers following traffic stops, and strategically targeting identified high-traffic crash locations for enforcement could improve public trust and perceptions of police legitimacy. Between October 2022 and June 2024, the study evaluated 1,423 traffic stops conducted for speeding violations by comparing standard enforcement protocols to a novel procedural justice-based intervention. Drivers who were speeding were surveyed immediately after the stop by researchers to determine whether the EPJETS protocol positively affected their perceptions of officer treatment and the effectiveness of BWCs.

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 Simulation vs. Classroom-Based Implicit Bias Training to Improve Police Decision Making and Enhance the Outcomes of Police-Citizen Encounters, California, 2019-2021 (ICPSR 39309)

Released/updated on: 2025-06-12
Geographic coverage: United States, California
Time period: 2019-01-01--2021-01-01
This study evaluated the impact of implicit bias and counter bias training interventions for improving police behavior and public perceptions of bias. A random selection of Body Worn Camera (BWC) videos from a large and diverse municipal agency were scored before and after training using a validated tool for coding police behavior. The variables coded from BWC videos were compiled into Body Worn Camera Data (DS1) and include demographic details on citizens and officers, circumstances of the incident, and the behavior of both the officer and citizen. During pre- and post- intervention measurement periods, "discrimination"-based community member complaints were also collected. Information about these complaints including the type, incident date, and complaint findings was compiled into Complaints Data (DS2).
Curated
Partially restricted

Evaluation of the Target Corporation's Safe City Initiative in Chula Vista, California, and Cincinnati, Ohio, 2004-2008 (ICPSR 28044)

Released/updated on: 2010-09-29
Geographic coverage: United States, Texas, Chula Vista, Ohio, Cincinnati, California, New York (state), Buffalo, Houston
Time period: 2004-01-01--2008-11-01, 2004-01-01--2008-11-01, 2007-03-01--2008-03-01
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the implementation of the Safe City crime prevention model that was implemented in designated retail areas in jurisdictions across the United States. The model involved frequent meetings and information-sharing among the police, Target, and neighboring retailers, along with the implementation of enhanced technology. The first step in the Safe City evaluation involved selecting evaluation sites. The final sites selected were Chula Vista, California, and Cincinnati, Ohio. Next, for each of the two sites, researchers selected a site that had a potential for crime displacement caused by the intervention area, and a matched comparison area in another jurisdiction that would likely have been selected as a Safe City site. For Chula Vista, the displacement area was 2 miles east of the intervention area and the comparison area was in Houston, Texas. For Cincinnati, the displacement area was 1.5 miles north of the intervention area and the comparison area was in Buffalo, New York. In Chula Vista, the Safe City intervention activities were focused on gaining a better understanding of the nature and underlying causes of the crime and disorder problems occurring in the designated Safe City site, and strengthening pre-existing partnerships between law enforcement and businesses affected by these problems. In Cincinnati, the Safe City intervention activities centered on increasing business and citizen awareness, communication, and involvement in crime control and prevention activities. The research team collected pre- and post-intervention crime data from local police departments (Part 1) to measure the impact of the Safe City initiatives in Chula Vista and Cincinnati. The 981 records in Part 1 contain monthly crime counts from January 2004 to November 2008 for various types of crime in the retail areas that received the intervention in Chula Vista and Cincinnati, and their corresponding displacement zones and matched comparison areas. Using the monthly crime counts contained in the Safe City Monthly Crime Data (Part 1) and estimations of the total cost of crime to society for various offenses from prior research, the research team calculated the total cost of crimes reported during the month/year for each crime type that was readily available (Part 2). The 400 records in the Safe City Monthly Cost Benefit Analysis Data (Part 2) contain monthly crime cost estimates from January 2004 to November 2008 for assaults, burglaries, larcenies, and robberies in the retail areas that received the intervention in Chula Vista and Cincinnati, and their corresponding displacement zones and matched comparison areas. The research team also received a total of 192 completed baseline and follow-up surveys with businesses in Chula Vista and Cincinnati in 2007 and 2008 (Part 3). The surveys collected data on merchants' perceptions of crime and safety in and around businesses located in the Safe City areas. The Safe City Monthly Crime Data (Part 1) contain seven variables including the number of crimes in the target area, the month and year the crime was committed, the number of crimes in the displacement area, the number of crimes in a comparable area in a comparable city, the city, and the crime type. The Safe City Monthly Cost Benefit Analysis Data (Part 2) contain seven variables including the cost of the specified type of crime occurring in the target area, the month and year the cost was incurred, the cost of the specified type of crime in the displacement area, the cost of the specified type of crime in a matched comparison area, the city, and the crime type. The Safe City Business Survey Data (Part 3) contain 132 variables relating to perceptions of safety, contact with local police, experience and reporting of crime, impact of crime, crime prevention, community connections, and business/employee information.
Curated

Fatal Encounters Database, United States, 2000-present (ICPSR 38118)

Released/updated on: 2021-06-24
Geographic coverage: United States
The Fatal Encounters database aims to document all deaths through police interaction in the United States since Jan. 1, 2000. The database includes any non-police deaths that occur when police are present or are precipitated by police action or presence.
Curated

Improving Hot Spot Policing through Behavioral Interventions, New York City, 2012-2018 (ICPSR 37284)

Released/updated on: 2020-06-29
Geographic coverage: New York City
Time period: 2012-11-01--2018-10-31

This project aimed to develop new insights into offender decision-making in hot spots in New York City, and to test whether these insights could inform interventions to reduce crime in hot spots. There were two phases to the project. In the first phase a set of hypotheses were developed about offender decision-making based on semi-structured interviews with individuals who were currently incarcerated, formerly incarcerated individuals, individuals currently on probation, and community members of high crime areas with no justice-involvement. These interviews suggested several factors worthy of further testing. For instance, offenders believed they were less likely to get away with a crime if they knew more about the officers in their community. That is, when police officers were less anonymous, offenders were less likely to go forward with a crime.

In the second phase a field intervention was developed and conducted to test whether reducing officer anonymity might deter crime. Through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) while working with NYPD neighborhood coordination officers, who work in New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) developments, it was tested whether sending information about officers to residents in housing developments would deter crime in those developments.

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Improving Officer Decision-Making: Can Personality Predict Outcomes in Use of Force Decisions? North Carolina and South Carolina, 2018-2020 (ICPSR 38687)

Released/updated on: 2024-04-11
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, United States, South Carolina
Time period: 2018-01-01--2020-09-30

The current study sought to examine the impact of select psychological, cognitive, professional experience and social network factors on police officers' decisions to use force. Additionally, the study examined the impact of a brief citizen education intervention (i.e. the completion of police officer training simulations) on citizens' attitudes toward police and use of force. All participants completed three training scenarios inside a firearms training simulator.

A sample of law enforcement officers and civilians took part in the study. Participants completed a series of questionnaires designed to measure, among other things:

  • Positive and Negative Emotionality
  • Need for Cognition
  • Cognitive Reflection
  • Professional experiences as a police officer (law enforcement participants only)
  • Size of friendship networks within the workplace (law enforcement participants only)
  • Perceptions of how their friendship networks would be impacted if the participant were to use excessive force (law enforcement participants only)
  • Pre-post measures of attitudes toward police (civilian participants only)
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

Keeping the Peace: Police Discretion and the Mentally Disordered in Chicago, 1980-1981 (ICPSR 8438)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
Time period: 1980-01-01--1981-01-01
For this data collection, information on police-citizen encounters was collected to explore the peacekeeping functions of the police and their handling of encounters with mentally ill persons. The data were gathered for part or all of 270 shifts through observations by researchers riding in police cars in two Chicago police districts during a 14-month period in 1980-1981. In Part 1 (Shift Level), information was collected once per shift on the general level of activity during the shift and the observer's perceptions of emotions/attitudes displayed by the police officers he/she observed. The file also contains, for each of the 270 shifts, information about the personal characteristics, work history, and working relationships of the police officers observed. Part 2 (Encounter Level) contains detailed information on each police-citizen encounter including its nature, location, police actions and/or responses, citizens involved, and their characteristics and behavior. A unique and consistent shift identification number is attached to each encounter so that information about police officer characteristics from Part 1 may be matched with Part 2. There are 1,382 police-citizen encounters involving 2,555 citizens in this collection.
Curated
Restricted

LAPD's TEAMS II: The Impact of a Police Integrity Early Intervention System, Los Angeles, California, 2000-2015 (ICPSR 36574)

Released/updated on: 2018-09-17
Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California
Time period: 2000-01-01--2015-01-01

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 research was an evaluation of the Los Angeles Police Department's (LAPD) Training Evaluation and Management System II (TEAMS II) Early Intervention System conducted by Justice and Security Strategies, Inc. TEAMS II was designed to identify officers at-risk for engaging in future problematic behavior. This system was mandated as part of the Consent Decree (Section II) that was formally entered into on June 15, 2001 between the U.S. Department of Justice and the LAPD. Justice and Security Strategies, Inc. research staff worked with the Information Technology Bureau to obtain and analyze TEAMS II data, conducted informal interviews with officers, sergeants, civilians, command staff, and technologists involved with TEAMS II, and worked with the TEAMS II contractors to examine and provide recommendations.

The data collection includes 3 Stata data files. The concentration analysis dataset (TEAMS-Concentration-Analysis-FINAL-v2.dta) with 143 variables for 15,710 cases, the regression-discontinuity dataset (TEAMS-Regression-Discontinuity-FINAL.dta) with 98 variables for 297,779 cases, and the time series dataset (TEAMS-Time-Series-FINAL.dta) with 43 variables for 192 cases. Demographic variables included as part of this data collection include officer age, gender, ethnicity, education level, and total number of officers employed by demographics.

Curated

Longitudinal Evaluation of Chicago's Community Policing Program, 1993-2001 (ICPSR 3335)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term organizational transition of the Chicago Police Department (CPD) to a community policing model. The Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy (CAPS) was an ambitious plan to reorganize the CPD, restructure its management, redefine its mission, and forge a new relationship between police and city residents. This evaluation of the CAPS program included surveys of police officers, residents, and program activists. In addition, observational data were collected from beat meetings, and aggregate business establishment and land-use data were added to describe the police beats and districts.
Curated
Restricted

The National Police Research Platform, Phase 2 [United States], 2013-2015 (ICPSR 36497)

Released/updated on: 2016-09-29
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2013-07-01--2013-11-01, 2013-09-01--2014-01-01, 2014-10-01--2015-02-01, 2013-01-01--2014-01-01

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

The purpose of the study was to implement a "platform-based" methodology for collecting data about police organizations and the communities they serve with the goals of generating in-depth standardized information about police organizations, personnel and practices and to help move policing in the direction of evidence-based "learning-organizations" by providing judicious feedback to police agencies and policy makers. The research team conducted three web-based Law Enforcement Organizations (LEO) surveys of sworn and civilian law enforcement employees (LEO Survey A Data, n=22,765; LEO Survey B Data, n=15,825; and LEO Survey C Data, n=16,483). The sample was drawn from the 2007 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) database. Agencies with 100 to 3,000 sworn police personnel were eligible for participation. To collect data for the Police-Community Interaction (PCI) survey (PCI Data, n=16,659), each week department employees extracted names and addresses of persons who had recent contact with a police officer because of a reported crime incident, traffic accident or traffic stop. Typically, the surveys were completed within two to four weeks of the encounter.

Curated

New York Police Department (NYPD) Stop, Question, and Frisk Database, 2006 (ICPSR 21660)

Released/updated on: 2008-06-09
Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)
These data were originally collected by New York Police Department officers and record information gathered as a result of stop question and frisk (SQF) encounters during 2006. These data were used in a study carried out, under contract to the New York City Police Foundation, by the Rand Corporation's Center on Quality Policing. The release of the study, "Analysis of Racial Disparities in the New York Police Department's Stop, Question, and Frisk Practices" (Rand Document TR-534-NYCPF, 2007) generated interest in making the data available for secondary analysis. This data collection contains information on the officer's reasons for initiating a stop, whether the stop led to a summons or arrest, demographic information for the person stopped, and the suspected criminal behavior.
Curated

Patterns of Behavior in Police and Citizen Transactions: Boston, Chicago, and Washington, DC, 1966 (ICPSR 9086)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: District of Columbia, United States, Chicago, Illinois, Massachusetts, Boston
These data have been influential in the development of theories of police behavior. Variables in the collection supply information on the nature and context of encounters between citizens and the police. Data are included on the characteristics and roles of individuals involved in an encounter, relationships among the participants in the encounter, individuals' definitions of the situation after the arrival of police, specific police actions and manner of police behavior during the encounter, and informal characterizations by police of participants involved in the encounter. In cases where offender suspects were involved, information was collected on restraints employed, searches, interrogations, confessions, advisement of rights, booking, and other arrest processes.
Curated

A Place-based Approach to Address Youth-Police Officer Interactions in Crime Hotspots: A Randomized Controlled Trial, 3 U.S. cities, 2021-2023 (ICPSR 38930)

Released/updated on: 2025-03-27
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2021-01-01--2023-01-01
This study combines elements of community policing and problem-oriented policing (POP) to examine the effect of a place-based policing strategy that emphasizes POP and patrol officer training in law enforcement officers (LEO)-youth interactions and youth crime prevention (POP for Youth[YPOP]) on crime outcomes and related community outcomes in 128 crime hotspots across three mid-Atlantic sites within the same county. Between July 2021 and November 2022, one third of the hotspots received traditional POP services, one third received POP for Youth treatment (POP with an emphasis on positive youth interactions), and the remaining third received regular patrol services for an intervention period of 13-16 months. The YPOP intervention was evaluated using multiple data sources, including reported intervention activities, official police data, and community surveys. The main objectives of this YPOP initiative were to: (1) Examine the impact of YPOP on crime; and (2) explore the impact of YPOP on young community member's perception of safety (victimization and fear of crime), perceptions of police and relations with the community, police legitimacy, and community collective efficacy in targeted areas.
Curated

Police Officer Learning, Mentoring, and Racial Bias in Traffic Stops, Syracuse, New York, 2006-2009 (ICPSR 38201)

Released/updated on: 2022-01-13
Geographic coverage: United States, Syracuse, New York (state)
Time period: 2006-01-01--2009-01-01

This project is concerned with understanding the determinants of racial bias in police traffic stops and in the city of Syracuse, New York. Using an officer-level panel of data on vehicle stops and vehicle searches by 512 officers from 2006 to 2009, the primary goal of this research is to better understand the effects of officer experience on their proclivities for racial bias in traffic stops, while controlling for officer, citizen, and neighborhood demographics.

Included in these data are variables for census tracts as well as their racial and ethnic makeup, times and dates when traffic stops occurred, sunrise and sunset data for the City of Syracuse, and the racial and ethnic makeup of citizens involved in stops.

Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 1999: [United States] (ICPSR 3151)

Released/updated on: 2001-06-18
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey was undertaken to learn more about how often and under what circumstances police-public contact becomes problematic. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) initiated surveys of the public on their interactions with police in 1996 with the first Police-Public Contact Survey, a pretest among a nationally representative sample of 6,421 persons aged 12 or older. That initial version of the questionnaire revealed that about 20 percent of the public had direct, face-to-face contact with a police officer at least once during the year preceding the survey. At that time, the principal investigator estimated that about 1 in 500 residents, or about a half million people, who had an encounter with a police officer also experienced either a threat of force or the actual use of force by the officer. The current survey, an improved version of the 1996 Police-Public Contact Survey, was fielded as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (ICPSR 6406) during the last six months of 1999. A national sample nearly 15 times as large as the pretest sample in 1996 was used. The 1999 survey yielded nearly identical estimates of the prevalence and nature of contacts between the public and the police. This survey, because of its much larger sample size, permits more extensive analysis of demographic differences in police contacts than the 1996 pretest. In addition, it added a new and more detailed set of questions about traffic stops by police, the most frequent reason given for contact with police. Variables in the dataset cover type of contact with police, including whether it was face-to-face, initiated by the police or the citizen, whether an injury to the officer or the citizen resulted from the contact, crimes reported, and police use of force. Demographic variables supplied for the citizens include gender, race, and Hispanic origin.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2002 [United States] (ICPSR 4273)

Released/updated on: 2005-08-18
Geographic coverage: United States
The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS), was designed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to document contacts between police and the public that culminated in police using force. The 2002 survey was conducted as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). To date, the PPCS has been conducted three times by BJS. The first survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data" (NCJ 165040) -- documented levels of contacts with police during 1996. The second survey -- described in "Contacts Between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey" (NCJ 184957) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived in POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151). The third survey -- described here under the title "Contacts Between Police and the Public: Findings From the 2002 National Survey" (NCJ 207845) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2002. The results of this survey are contained in this data collection.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2005 [United States] (ICPSR 20020)

Released/updated on: 2008-05-06
Geographic coverage: United States
The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS), was designed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to document contacts between police and the public that culminated in police using force. The 2005 survey was conducted as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). To date, the PPCS has been conducted four times by BJS. The first survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data" (NCJ 165040) -- documented levels of contacts with police during 1996. The second survey -- described in "Contacts Between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey" (NCJ 184957) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived in POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999 (ICPSR 3151). The third survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Contacts Between Police and the Public, Findings from the 2002 National Survey" (NCJ 207845) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 2002. These data are archived in POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273). The fourth survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Contacts Between Police and the Public, 2005" (NCJ 215243) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2005. The results of this survey are contained in this data collection.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2008 (ICPSR 32022)

Released/updated on: 2011-10-05
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact. The PPCS interviews a nationally representative sample of United States residents aged 16 years or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted five times by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS):

  • The first survey -- described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040) -- documented levels of contacts with police during 1996.
  • The second survey -- described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).
  • The third survey -- described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2002. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).
  • The fourth survey -- described in the BJS publication, Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2005. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 20020).
  • The fifth survey -- described in the BJS publication, Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2008. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2011 (ICPSR 34276)

Released/updated on: 2014-03-18
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact. The PPCS interviews a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted six times by BJS:

The first survey - described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040) - documented levels of contacts with police during 1996.

The second survey - described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957) - recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

The third survey - described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845) - covered interactions between police and the public in 2002. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

The fourth survey - described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243) - covered interactions between police and the public in 2005. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 020020).

The fifth survey - described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599) - covered interactions between police and the public in 2008. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

The sixth survey (split sample design due to instrument changes) - new instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938) - covered interactions between police and publice and public perceptions of police in 2011. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2015 (ICPSR 36653)

Released/updated on: 2018-04-11
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted seven times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 020020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2018 (ICPSR 37916)

Released/updated on: 2021-12-13
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted eight times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 020020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

8. 2018.Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2018. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2018 (ICPSR 37916).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2020 (ICPSR 38320)

Released/updated on: 2022-11-17
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted nine times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 20020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

8. 2018. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2018. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2018 (ICPSR 37916).

9. 2020. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2020. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2020 (ICPSR 38320).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2022 (ICPSR 38872)

Released/updated on: 2024-10-03
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted ten times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 20020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

8. 2018. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2018. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2018 (ICPSR 37916).

9. 2020. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2020. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2020 (ICPSR 38320).

10. 2022. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2022. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2022 (ICPSR 38872).

Curated

Police Use of Force Data, 1996: [United States] (ICPSR 6999)

Released/updated on: 1998-01-13
Geographic coverage: United States
In 1996, the Bureau of Justice Statistics sponsored a pretest of a survey instrument designed to compile data on citizen contacts with police, including contacts in which police use force. The survey, which involved interviews (both face-to-face and by phone) carried out by the United States Census Bureau, was conducted as a special supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), an ongoing household survey of the American public that elicits information concerning recent crime victimization experiences. Questions asked in the supplement covered reasons for contact with police officer(s), characteristics of the officer, weapons used by the officer, whether there were any injuries involved in the confrontation between the household member and the officer, whether drugs were involved in the incident, type of offense the respondent was charged with, and whether any citizen action was taken. Demographic variables include race, sex, and age.
Curated

Police Use of Force in Metro-Dade, Florida, and Eugene and Springfield, Oregon, 1993-1995 (ICPSR 3152)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: Oregon, United States, Springfield, Eugene, Florida
Time period: 1993-01-01--1995-01-01
This study gathered data on police use of force in Metro-Dade, Florida, and Eugene and Springfield, Oregon. The study differed from previous research in that it addressed the level of force used by the police relative to the suspect's level of resistance. The data for Metro-Dade (Part 1) were collected from official Metro-Dade Police Department Control of Persons Reports from the last quarter of 1993 and all of 1994 and 1995. The Eugene and Springfield dataset (Part 2) was created from items in the Police Officers' Essential Physical Work Report Form, which was completed by members of the Eugene and Springfield, Oregon, Police Departments during April 1995. The dataset includes all police-citizen contacts, rather than being limited to the use-of-force situations captured by the Metro-Dade data. In Part 1 (Metro-Dade Data), information on the subject includes impairment (i.e., alcohol and drugs), behavior (i.e., calm, visibly upset, erratic, or highly agitated), level of resistance used by the subject, types of injuries to the subject, and types of force used by the subject. Information on the officer includes level of force used, medical treatment, and injuries. Other variables include ethnic match between officer and the subject and relative measures of force. Demographic variables include age, gender, race, and ethnicity of both the subject and the officer. In Part 2 (Oregon Data), information is provided on whether the officer was alone, how work was initiated, elapsed time until arrival, reasons for performance, perceived mental state and physical abilities of the suspect, amount and type of resistance by the suspect, if another officer assisted, perceived extent of effort used by the suspect, type of resistance used by the suspect, if the officer was knocked or wrestled to the ground, if the officer received an injury, level of effort used to control the suspect, types of control tactics used on the suspect, whether the officer was wearing tactical gear, how restraint devices were applied to inmate, time taken to get to, control, resolve, and remove the problem, how stressful the lead-up time or the period following the incident was, if the officer worked with a partner, types of firearm used, and if force was used. Demographic variables include age, gender, weight, and height of both the suspect and officer, and the officer's duty position.
Curated

Police Use of Force [United States]: Official Reports, Citizen Complaints, and Legal Consequences, 1991-1992 (ICPSR 6274)

Released/updated on: 1996-07-13
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1991-01-01--1992-01-01
This national survey was designed to collect information on police departmental policies and practices pertaining to the use of physical force--both deadly and less than lethal--by law enforcement officers. A further objective was to investigate the enforcement of these policies by examining the extent to which complaints of policy violations were reviewed and violations punished. Additionally, the survey sought to determine the extent to which departments kept records on the use of force, and to collect from those agencies that recorded this information data relating to how frequently officers used force, the characteristics of officers who did and did not have complaints filed against them, and the training of recruits on the appropriate use of force. The study also provides data on citizen complaints of excessive force, the disposition of those complaints, and litigation concerning allegations of excessive force. Additional variables provide agency size, demographic characteristics, and workload.
Curated

Process Evaluation of the Comprehensive Communities Program in Selected Cities in the United States, 1994-1996 (ICPSR 3492)

Released/updated on: 2009-06-30
Geographic coverage: Indiana, United States, Fort Worth, Utah, Washington, South Carolina, Wichita, Atlanta, Columbia (South Carolina), Massachusetts, Colorado, Denver, Salt Lake City, Boston, Gary, Seattle, East Bay, California, Kansas, Baltimore, Texas, Connecticut, Hartford, Georgia, Maryland
Time period: 1995-09-01--1997-04-01, 1995-09-01--1997-04-01, 1995-09-01--1997-04-01, 1995-09-01--1997-04-01, 1995-11-01--1997-03-01, 1997-12-01--1998-01-01, 1996-01-01--1997-03-01, 1997-12-01--1998-01-01, 1995-11-01--1997-01-01, 1997-12-01--1998-01-01, 1995-09-01--1996-12-01, 1997-12-01--1998-01-01
This study was a process evaluation of the Comprehensive Communities Program (CCP) intended to develop insights into how community approaches to crime and drug abuse prevention and control evolved, to track how each site implemented its comprehensive strategy, to determine the influence of preexisting ecological, social, economic, and political factors on implementation, and to monitor the evolution of strategies and projects over time. Intensive evaluations were done at six CCP sites: Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; Columbia, South Carolina; Fort Worth, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; and Seattle, Washington. Less intensive evaluations were done at six other CCP sites: Gary, Indiana; Hartford, Connecticut; Wichita, Kansas; the Denver, Colorado, metropolitan area; the Atlanta, Georgia, metropolitan area; and the East Bay area of northern California. At all 12 sites, 2 waves of a Coalition Survey (Parts 1 and 2) were sent to everyone who participated in CCP. Likewise, 2 waves of the Community Policing Survey (Parts 3 and 4) were sent to the police chiefs of all 12 sites. Finally, all 12 sites were visited by researchers at least once (Parts 5 to 13). Variables found in this data collection include problems facing the communities, the implementation of CCP programs, the use of community policing, and the effectiveness of the CCP programs and community policing efforts.
Curated

Project on Policing Neighborhoods in Indianapolis, Indiana, and St. Petersburg, Florida, 1996-1997 (ICPSR 3160)

Released/updated on: 2007-06-01
Geographic coverage: Indiana, United States, St. Petersburg, Florida, Indianapolis
Time period: 1996-01-01--1997-01-01
The purpose of the Project on Policing Neighborhoods (POPN) was to provide an in-depth description of how the police and the community interact with each other in a community policing (CP) environment. Research was conducted in Indianapolis, Indiana, in 1996 and in St. Petersburg, Florida, in 1997. Several research methods were employed: systematic observation of patrol officers (Parts 1-4) and patrol supervisors (Parts 5-14), in-person interviews with patrol officers (Part 15) and supervisors (Parts 16-17), and telephone surveys of residents in selected neighborhoods (Part 18). Field researchers accompanied their assigned patrol or supervising officer during all activities and encounters with the public during the shift. Field researchers noted when various activities and encounters with the public occurred during these "ride-alongs," who was involved, and what happened. In the resulting data files coded observation data are provided at the ride level, the activity level (actions that did not involve interactions with citizens), the encounter level (events in which officers interacted with citizens), and the citizen level. In addition to encounters with citizens, supervisors also engaged in encounters with patrol officers. Patrol officers and patrol supervisors in both Indianapolis and St. Petersburg were interviewed one-on-one in a private interviewing room during their regular work shifts. Citizens in the POPN study beats were randomly selected for telephone surveys to determine their views about problems in their neighborhoods and other community issues. Administrative records were used to create site identification data (Part 19) and data on staffing (Part 20). This data collection also includes data compiled from census records, aggregated to the beat level for each site (Part 21). Census data were also used to produce district populations for both sites (Part 22). Citizen data were aggregated to the encounter level to produce counts of various citizen role categories and characteristics and characteristics of the encounter between the patrol officer and citizens in the various encounters (Part 23). Ride-level data (Parts 1, 5, and 10) contain information about characteristics of the ride, including start and end times, officer identification, type of unit, and beat assignment. Activity data (Parts 2, 6, and 11) include type of activity, where and when the activity took place, who was present, and how the officer was notified. Encounter data (Parts 3, 7, and 12) contain descriptive information on encounters similar to the activity data (i.e., location, initiation of encounter). Citizen data (Parts 4, 8, and 13) provide citizen characteristics, citizen behavior, and police behavior toward citizens. Similarly, officer data from the supervisor observations (Parts 9 and 14) include characteristics of the supervising officer and the nature of the interaction between the officers. Both the patrol officer and supervisor interview data (Parts 15-17) include the officers' demographics, training and knowledge, experience, perceptions of their beats and organizational environment, and beliefs about the police role. The patrol officer data also provide the officers' perceptions of their supervisors while the supervisor data describe supervisors' perceptions of their subordinates, as well as their views about their roles, power, and priorities as supervisors. Data from surveyed citizens (Part 18) provide information about their neighborhoods, including years in the neighborhood, distance to various places in the neighborhood, neighborhood problems and effectiveness of police response to those problems, citizen knowledge of, or interactions with, the police, satisfaction with police services, and friends and relatives in the neighborhood. Citizen demographics and geographic and weight variables are also included. Site identification variables (Part 19) include ride and encounter numbers, site beat (site, district, and beat or community policing areas [CPA]), and sector. Staffing variables (Part 20) include district, shift, and staffing levels for various shifts. Census data (Part 21) include neighborhood, index of socioeconomic distress, total population, and total white population. District population variables (Part 22) include district and population of district. The aggregated citizen data (Part 23) provide the ride and encounter numbers, number of citizens in the encounter, counts of citizens by their various roles, and by sex, age, race, wealth, if known by the police, under the influence of alcohol or drugs, physically injured, had a weapon, or assaulted the police, counts by type of encounter, and counts of police and citizen actions during the encounter.
Back to top