Search results

The study examined adolescent sexual assault survivors' help-seeking experiences with the legal and medical systems in two Midwestern communities that have different models of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE)/Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) interventions.

In Dataset 1 (Qualitative Victim Interviews), investigators conducted qualitative interviews with N=20 adolescent sexual assault victims 14-17 years old. From these interviews, investigators identified three distinct patterns of survivors' post-assault disclosures and their pathways to seeking help from SANE programs and the criminal justice system: voluntary (survivors' contact with the legal and medical system was by their choice), involuntary (system contact was not by choice), and situational (circumstances of the assault itself prompted involuntary disclosure). Interviews included responses that described the assault, their experience with both the SANE/SART programs and the criminal justice system, and victim and offender demographic information.

In Dataset 2 (SANE Programs Quantitative Data), investigators obtained SANE program records, police and prosecutor records, and crime lab findings for a sample of N=395 (ages 13-17) adolescent sexual assault victims who sought services from the local SANE programs in two different counties. The data collected examined victim's progress through the criminal justice system. Factors that could potentially affect case progression were also examined; age of victim, relationship to offender, assault characteristics, number of assaults on victim, and evidence collected. Differences between the two different counties' programs were also examined for their effect on the case progression.

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 was a process evaluation of three programs funded by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) to identify and provide services to victims of sex and labor trafficking who are U.S citizens and lawful permanent residents (LPR) under the age of 18. The three programs evaluated in this study were:

1. The Standing Against Global Exploitation Everywhere (SAGE) Project
2. The Salvation Army Trafficking Outreach Program and Intervention Techniques (STOP-IT) program
3. The Streetwork Project at Safe Horizon

The purpose of this study was to evaluate a comprehensive, research-based framework of recommended practices for integrating police into the educational environment. This research tested use of a multi-faceted school-based law enforcement (SBLE) framework to determine how the framework contributes to multiple outcomes. The objectives for this study were to: (1) implement a randomized controlled trial to test a comprehensive framework for SBLE involving 25 middle and high schools; (2) assess the impacts of this framework on student victimization and delinquency, use of exclusionary discipline practices (e.g., suspension, expulsion), school climate measures, and student-officer interactions; and (3) disseminate tangible findings that can immediately be translated into practice and further research in schools nationwide.

The Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) funded agencies to develop programs to improve criminal justice, employment, education, health, and housing outcomes for released prisoners. SVORI was a goal-oriented initiative that specified outcomes that should be achieved by programs that were developed locally. The original Multi-site Evaluation of SVORI funded under NIJ grant 2004-RE-CX-0002 included a quasi-experimental impact evaluation to determine the effectiveness of programming. Specifically, the purpose of the impact evaluation was to determine whether individuals who participated in enhanced reentry programming, as measured by their enrollment in SVORI programs, had improved post-release outcomes than comparable individuals who did not participate in SVORI programming. Impact evaluation data collection for both SVORI and non-SVORI participants consisted of four waves of in-person, computer-assisted interviews and oral swab drug tests conducted in conjunction with two of the follow-up interviews. The research team collected data on a total of 2,391 individuals including 1,697 adult males (Part 1), 357 adult females (Part 2), and 337 juvenile males (Part 3). As part of the impact evaluation, experienced RTI field interviewers conducted pre-release interviews with offenders approximately 30 days before release from prison and a series of follow-up interviews at 3, 9, and 15 months post-release. These data provided information on criminal history and recidivism occurring by December 31, 2007. The Adult Males Data (Part 1), Adult Females Data (Part 2), and the Juvenile Males Data (Part 3) each contain the same 5,566 variables from the 3 waves of offender interviews, 10 drug test lab results variables, and 3 weight variables. (Note: Some interview questions were only asked of adults, and other questions were only asked of juveniles.) Offender interview variables include demographics, housing, employment, education, military experience, family background, peer relationships, program operations and services, physical and mental health, substance abuse, crime and delinquency, and attitudes toward those topics.

Under NIJ Grant 2009-IJ-CX-0010, the original Multi-site Evaluation of SVORI data were updated in order to examine the questions of, "What works, for whom, and for how long?" This included follow-up interview questions of those previously (and currently still) incarcerated. New variables derived from data collected under the original SVORI impact evaluation between 2004 and 2007 were also added to Part 3. Part one included an additional 100 variables, part two an additional 102 variables and part 3 an additional 99 variables.

This study is driven by the hypothesis that intervention and prevention programs to address violence and bullying in general, and cyberbullying in particular, can affect students' cyberbullying perpetration and victimization outcomes. Cyberbullying can occur throughout a student's day via various information and communication technologies. Thus, school administrators, teachers, and researchers have a unique opportunity to implement prevention programs that will, in addition to reducing toxic behavior, increase students' academic achievement, attendance, and rates of high school graduation. The researchers used meta-analytic techniques, such as combining all available effect sizes using robust variance estimation, to determine program effects. Specifically, the team answered the following questions:

1. What is the overall impact of anti-cyberbullying, traditional anti-bullying, anti-violence, and school-climate intervention and prevention programming on cyberbullying perpetration and victimization?
2. Are there certain program characteristics, types, or genres that are ineffective at producing meaningful changes in students' cyberbullying behaviors?
3. Are there additional characteristics of the primary studies' methodologies, measurements, or samples that significantly and meaningfully moderate the intervention effect size?
4. Do the programs have an impact on secondary outcomes, such as traditional bullying perpetration and student achievement?