Showing 1 – 6 of 6 results.
Curated
Commercial Victimization Surveys, 1972-1975 [United States]: Cities Sample (ICPSR 8002)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: Oregon, Milwaukee, Detroit, United States, Cincinnati, Oakland, Cleveland, New York City, San Diego, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, New Orleans, Denver, Dallas, St. Louis, Wisconsin, Buffalo, Boston, Pittsburgh, District of Columbia, Chicago, Minnesota, California, Florida, New York (state), New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Miami, San Francisco, Baltimore, Illinois, Texas, Portland (Oregon), Louisiana, Ohio, Los Angeles, Newark, Georgia, Maryland, Philadelphia, Houston
Time period: 1972-01-01--1975-12-31
The National Crime Surveys, of which these Commercial Victimization Surveys are a part, were conducted to obtain current and reliable measures of serious crime in the United States. The Commercial Victimization Surveys are restricted to coverage of burglary and robbery incidents. They include all types of commercial establishments as well as political, cultural, and religious organizations. The survey includes a series of questions about the business, e.g., type and size, form of ownership, insurance, security, and break-in and robbery characteristics. Time and place, weapon, injury, entry evidence, offender characteristics, and stolen property data were collected for each of the incidents. Data on both victimized and nonvictimized establishments in 26 different cities were collected during 1972, 1973, and 1974. In the 1975 survey, data from the 13 cities surveyed during 1972 and 1973 were collected again.
Curated
Commercial Victimization Surveys, 1973-1977 [United States]: National Sample (ICPSR 8003)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: Oregon, Milwaukee, Detroit, United States, Cincinnati, Oakland, Cleveland, New York City, San Diego, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, New Orleans, Denver, Dallas, St. Louis, Wisconsin, Buffalo, Boston, Pittsburgh, District of Columbia, Chicago, Minnesota, California, Florida, New York (state), New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Miami, Baltimore, Illinois, Texas, Portland (Oregon), Louisiana, Ohio, Los Angeles, Newark, Georgia, Maryland, Philadelphia, Houston
Time period: 1973-01-01--1977-12-31
These Commercial Victimization Surveys were collected as part of the National Crime Surveys. They document burglary and robbery incidents for all types of commercial establishments, as well as political, cultural, and religious organizations. Business characteristics gathered include form of ownership and operation, size and type of business, and security measures. Information regarding the reported incidents includes time and place, weapon involvement, offender and entry characteristics, injuries and deaths, and type and value of stolen property. Data were collected by calendar quarter for four quarters in 1973-1976 and for two quarters in 1977, while the actual incidents reported in the files reflect those occurring six months prior to the interview date.
Curated
Restricted
Evaluation of the Agriculture Crime Technology Information and Operation Network (ACTION) in Nine Counties in California, 2004-2005 (ICPSR 4686)
Released/updated on: 2009-05-01
Geographic coverage: United States, California
Time period: 2004-01-01--2005-12-31
The Urban Institute and Florida State University multidisciplinary research team employed a multimethod approach to evaluate the Agricultural Crime, Technology, Information, and Operations Network (ACTION) project. The goal of the research was to provide policymakers, practitioners, program developers, and funders with empirically-based information about whether ACTION works. Two paper-and-pencil, self-administered surveys -- one in fall 2004 and the second in fall 2005 -- were sent to samples of farmers in the nine ACTION counties in California. The researchers identified farms using lists provided by Agricultural Commissioners in each county. The survey instruments asked farmers about experiences with agricultural crime victimization during the 12 months prior to the survey. It also asked questions about characteristics of their farm operations and the activities that they take to prevent agricultural crime. Advance notice of the study was given to farmers through the use of postcards, then surveys were sent to farmers in three waves at one-month intervals, with the second and third waves targeting nonrespondents. The Fall 2004 Agricultural Crime Survey (Part 1) contains data on 823 respondents (farms) and the Fall 2005 Agricultural Crime Survey (Part 2) contains data on 818 respondents (farms).
Curated
International Crime Victimization Survey (ICVS), 1989-2000 (ICPSR 3803)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: Cambodia, United States, Wales, England, Scotland, Portugal, Global, Russia, Netherlands, South Korea, Sweden, Mongolia, Latvia, Mozambique, Panama, Poland, Slovenia, France, Nigeria, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Lesotho, Croatia, Colombia, Argentina, Romania, Hungary, Georgia (Republic), Philippines, Ukraine, Zambia, Belarus, Northern Ireland, Switzerland, Albania, Canada, Azerbaijan, Czech Republic, Belgium, Swaziland, Namibia, Botswana, Finland, Denmark, South Africa, Uganda, Australia, Estonia
Time period: 1989-01-01--1989-12-31, 1992-01-01--1992-12-31, 1996-01-01--1996-12-31, 2000-01-01--2000-12-31
The International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS) is a far-reaching program of fully standardized surveys investigating householders' experience of crime in different countries. The data were collected in four waves: 1989, 1992, 1996, and 2000. The main focus of the ICVS is whether the respondent was a victim of theft of or from vehicles, other thefts, vandalism, robbery, pickpocketing, sexual harassment or violence, or assault. The surveys also investigated the frequency of victimization, reasons for not reporting a crime to the police, familiarity with the offender in the case of a sexual offense, physical violence, injuries, fear of crime in the respondent's local area, use of help agencies for victims, satisfaction with police behavior, preferred legal sanctions, punishment, and length of detention for offenders, safety precautions when leaving home, possession of a gun, burglar alarm, or insurance, and frequency of going out. Some of the 2000 surveys were administered nationally and some were restricted to a main city within a given country. The ICVS National Survey Data cover the following countries: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Catalonia, Denmark, England and Wales, Finland, France, Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Scotland, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States. The ICVS City Survey Data cover the following countries: Albania, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Botswana, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Latvia, Lesotho, Lithuania, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Panama, Philippines, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, South Africa, Swaziland, Uganda, Ukraine, and Zambia.
Curated
International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS), 1989-1997 (ICPSR 2973)
Released/updated on: 2001-08-24
Geographic coverage: Chechnya, Wales, England, Paraguay, Kazakhstan, Global, Austria, Mongolia, Latvia, Yugoslavia, El Salvador, Brazil, Slovenia, Colombia, Argentina, Hungary, Georgia (Republic), Japan, Ukraine, Tanzania, Belarus, Northern Ireland, India, Albania, New Zealand, Canada, Belgium, Finland, South Africa, Italy, Macedonia, Germany, United States, Egypt, China (Peoples Republic), Scotland, Bolivia, Russia, Costa Rica, Malta, Netherlands, Sweden, Poland, Slovakia, France, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Tunisia, Kyrgyzstan, Croatia, Romania, Philippines, Switzerland, Spain, Norway, Botswana, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Australia, Indonesia, Estonia
The International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS) was a far-reaching program of standardized sample surveys that investigated householders' experiences with crime, policing, crime prevention, and perceptions of safety. The surveys were carried out in the following countries: Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chechnia, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Egypt, England and Wales, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany (West), Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malta, Mongolia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Norway, Paraguay, the Philippines, Poland, Rumania, Russia, Scotland, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, the United States, Yugoslavia, and Zimbabwe. The data were collected in three waves: 1989, 1992-1994, and 1995-1997. The main focus of the ICVS was whether the respondent was a victim of theft of or from vehicles, other thefts, vandalism, robbery, pickpocketing, sexual harassment or violence, or assault. The surveys also investigated the frequency of victimization, reasons for not reporting a crime to the police, familiarity with the offender in the case of a sexual offense, physical violence, injuries, fear of crime in the respondent's local area, use of help agencies for victims, satisfaction with police behavior, preferred legal sanctions, punishment, and length of detention for offenders, safety precautions when leaving home, possession of a gun, burglar alarm, or insurance, and frequency of going out.
Curated
Restricted
Optimizing Video Surveillance in Correctional Settings, Minnesota, 2015-2019 (ICPSR 37984)
Released/updated on: 2024-04-11
Geographic coverage: United States, Minnesota
Time period: 2015-01-01--2019-12-31
The Urban Institute and the Minnesota Department of Corrections (MnDOC) attempted to improve the surveillance system in two state correctional facilities: Stillwater (STW) and Moose Lake (ML). The goal of this study was to conduct a rigorous process and impact evaluation of the steps that STW and ML took to optimize their surveillance systems, which included repositioning existing cameras, installing new cameras, and making other infrastructural upgrades. In addition, ML integrated an audio analytic technology in their system that would alert on-unit security staff through a visual and audio alert when it detected sounds associated with anger, fear, or verbal aggression.
The evaluation used a mixed-methods research design. Qualitative data collection included stakeholder interviews and in-depth observations of the camera operations at ML and STW before, during, and after the upgrades. The research team interviewed wardens, supervisors and officers working in the intervention units, and numerous other individuals who oversaw operations, investigations, information technology, and camera installation and configuration in ML and STW.
Quantitative administrative data were collected from ML and comparison facilities and comparative interrupted time-series (CITS) analyses were employed to examine changes in two outcomes (total misconduct incidents and guilty dispositions) following the intervention. To support the CITS, another unit in ML was identified that did not upgrade its surveillance system but was similar to the intervention housing unit in terms of population, architecture, and misconduct levels (internal comparison unit), and used the synthetic control method to create another comparison unit derived from the three other medium-security prisons operated by MnDOC (external comparison unit).