Search results

Showing 1 – 34 of 34 results.
Curated
Restricted

Bullying and Violence on the School Bus: A Mixed-Methods Assessment of Behavioral Management Strategies, United States, 2016-2018 (ICPSR 37043)

Released/updated on: 2018-11-29
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2016-09-01--2018-03-01

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 files for a brief dscription of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

The qualitative data are not available as part of the data collection at this time.

Numerous high-profile events involving student victimization on school buses have raised critical questions regarding the safety of school-based transportation for children, the efforts taken by school districts to protect students on buses, and the most effective transportation-based behavioral management strategies for reducing misconduct. To address these questions, a national web-based survey was administered to public school district-level transportation officials throughout the United States to assess the prevalence of misconduct on buses, identify strategies to address misconduct, and describe effective ways to reduce student misbehavior on buses. Telephone interviews were also conducted with a small group of transportation officials to understand the challenges of transportation-based behavioral management, to determine successful strategies to create safe and positive school bus environments, and to identify data-driven approaches for tracking and assessing disciplinary referrals.

The collection includes 10 Stata data files:

  • BVSBS_analysis file.dta (n=2,595; 1058 variables)
  • Title Crosswalk File.dta (n=2,594; 3 variables)
  • Lessons Learned and Open Dummies.dta (n=1,543; 200 variables)
  • CCD dataset.dta (n=12,494; 89 variables)
  • BVSB_REGION.dta (n=4; 3 variables)
  • BVSB_SCHOOLS.dta (n=3; 3 variables)
  • BVSB_STUDENTS.dta (n=3; 3 variables)
  • BVSB_URBAN.dta (n=8; 3 variables)
  • BVSB_WHITE.dta (n=3; 3 variables)
  • FINALRAKER.dta (n=2,595; 2 variables)
Curated

Comprehensive Longitudinal Study of School Violence and the School-to-Prison Pipeline: Root Causes and Consequences of and Implications for Restorative Justice Approaches, Oregon, 2004-2015 (ICPSR 37830)

Released/updated on: 2026-02-11
Geographic coverage: Oregon, United States
Time period: 2004-01-01--2015-01-01

This study used a multi-systems approach to understand the root causes of school violence in the state of Oregon (United States), accounting for factors within the individual, family, school, juvenile justice, child protective services, and social services systems and how they work together in predicting school violence. The effort was guided by four Research Questions:

  1. What are the potential root causes and related factors that contribute to school violence?
  2. What are the disciplinary responses to school violence, and are rates of suspensions and expulsions equivalent across demographic subgroups of students?
  3. What is the sequence of events that lead from a school-related disciplinary incident to an arrest and to juvenile or adult court involvement and disposition, and which individual, family, school, and neighborhood factors influence this trajectory?
  4. What are the responses to and consequences of shootings in K-12 public settings?

To answer these questions, RMC Research, with support from the the Oregon Youth Authority (OYA) and the Oregon Department of Education (ODE), conducted a secondary analysis of existing data on 15 cohorts of students between kindergarten and grade 12. Research Questions 1, 2, and 3 were addressed using a multi-level cohort design with longitudinal data provided by OYA (n=5,129,815 observations across time from 855,580 unique youth). Research Question 4 was addressed through an extensive review of research on school safety strategies.

This collection contains 16 SPSS syntax files used to clean and analyze the secondary data, detailed guides to data preparation and data-related decisions made by the research team, and a list of obtained data files and variables. There are no data files in this collection.

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Comprehensive School Safety in Atlanta Public Schools, Georgia, 2015-2021 (ICPSR 38459)

Released/updated on: 2026-04-16
Geographic coverage: United States, Atlanta, Georgia
Time period: 2015-01-01--2021-12-31

The Comprehensive School Safety Initiative (CSSI) is a research-focused initiative that was launched by the National Institute of Justice in response to high-profile incidents of school violence. The CSSI grant program aimed to identify and understand the root causes of school violence and identify effective strategies for responding to and resolving safety and security issues. The Atlanta Comprehensive School Safety Initiative (Atlanta CSSI) project, funded in 2016 under the National Institute of Justice's CSSI grant program, and as a partnership between researchers and practitioners, centered around the fundamental question of how to design and implement safe and supportive learning environments for students in Atlanta Public Schools (APS).

Since 2014, district leadership from APS and researchers from WestEd and Georgia State University (GSU) developed a blended research and technical assistance approach to make progress towards improving school safety. The findings are based on data gathered through:

  1. focus groups with school-and district-based staff;
  2. observational protocols and meeting notes; and
  3. school-level student climate and discipline data gathered by the state.
Curated

Contents and Contexts of Cyberbullying: An Epidemiologic Study using Electronic Detection and Social Network Analysis, Iowa, 2014-2015 (ICPSR 36991)

Released/updated on: 2021-12-15
Geographic coverage: Iowa, United States
Time period: 2014-12-01--2015-05-01

Using a multi-methods research design, this study classified the contents of cyberbullying messages, measured their frequency and associations with offline bullying, and examined whether and how peer groups in social networks promote these behaviors.

Beginning in January 2015, 164 adolescents from 2 Iowa middle schools, grades 6 through 8, were surveyed. Two surveys, one at the start of the spring semester and one at the end of spring 2015, gathered self-reported information on perpetration, victimization, and witnessing of online and offline bullying and the structure of peer networks. A total of 77 students furthermore participated in an electronic capture period from January through May 2015. Participant smartphones were equipped with an application that collected incoming and outgoing text messages and Facebook and Twitter activity, and also surveyed them weekly about their bullying experiences. Demographic information collected included age, grade, gender, ethnicity, parents' marital status, household composition, religiosity, and socioeconomic status.

Curated

Evaluation of the Bully-Proofing Your School Program in Colorado, 2001-2006 (ICPSR 21840)

Released/updated on: 2009-03-31
Geographic coverage: United States, Colorado
Time period: 2001-01-01--2006-01-01
Bully-Proofing Your School (BPYS) was a school-based intervention program designed to reduce bullying and school violence. The BPYS program differed from other anti-bullying programs by providing teachers with a specific curriculum that could be implemented in the classroom. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the BPYS program at the elementary school and middle school level. The BPYS outcome evaluation consisted of school climate surveys administered to elementary school students (Part 1), middle school students (Part 2), and staff (Part 3) in both treatment and comparison schools. The design of the data collection for the study was a repeated cross-sectional design. The evaluation of BPYS took place over five years. In the spring semesters of 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, all participating schools completed a school climate survey. The researchers collected 4,136 completed elementary school surveys (Part 1), 1,627 completed middle school surveys (Part 2), and 1,209 completed staff surveys (Part 3). For the elementary and middle school students, the mode of data collection was an in-class (group administration) anonymous self-completed survey. For the 1,209 staff surveys (Part 3), the mode of data collection was a mail questionnaire. Part 1 variables include sociodemographic and general school information items, school climate variables, school safety variables, and home and family environment variables. Also included is a filter variable which can be used to select the 3,497 cases that were used in the original analyses. Part 2 variables include sociodemographic and general school information variables, school climate variables, school safety variables, substance use variables, home and family environment variables, variables about guns, variables on activities the respondent participated in, and school attendance variables. Part 3 variables include school and staff characteristics variables, questions about general conditions in the school, questions on how the respondent felt about other people working at the school, questions concerning the resources and participation in the school and the community, and questions regarding staff perceptions of safety at the school.
Curated

Evaluation of the Children at Risk Program in Austin, Texas, Bridgeport, Connecticut, Memphis, Tennessee, Savannah, Georgia, and Seattle, Washington, 1993-1997 (ICPSR 2686)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: Bridgeport, Seattle, Savannah, United States, Texas, Tennessee, Connecticut, Memphis, Georgia, Austin, Washington
Time period: 1993-01-01--1997-01-01
The Children at Risk (CAR) Program was a comprehensive, neighborhood-based strategy for preventing drug use, delinquency, and other problem behaviors among high-risk youth living in severely distressed neighborhoods. The goal of this research project was to evaluate the long-term impact of the CAR program using experimental and quasi-experimental group comparisons. Experimental comparisons of the treatment and control groups selected within target neighborhoods examined the impact of CAR services on individual youths and their families. These services included intensive case management, family services, mentoring, and incentives. Quasi-experimental comparisons were needed in each city because control group youths in the CAR sites were exposed to the effects of neighborhood interventions, such as enhanced community policing and enforcement activities and some expanded court services, and may have taken part in some of the recreational activities after school. CAR programs in five cities -- Austin, TX, Bridgeport, CT, Memphis, TN, Seattle, WA, and Savannah, GA -- took part in this evaluation. In the CAR target areas, juveniles were identified by case managers who contacted schools and the courts to identify youths known to be at risk. Random assignment to the treatment or control group was made at the level of the family so that siblings would be assigned to the same group. A quasi-experimental group of juveniles who met the CAR eligibility risk requirements, but lived in other severely distressed neighborhoods, was selected during the second year of the evaluation in cities that continued intake of new CAR participants into the second year. In these comparison neighborhoods, youths eligible for the quasi-experimental sample were identified either by CAR staff, cooperating agencies, or the staff of the middle schools they attended. Baseline interviews with youths and caretakers were conducted between January 1993 and May 1994, during the month following recruitment. The end-of-program interviews were conducted approximately two years later, between December 1994 and May 1996. The follow-up interviews with youths were conducted one year after the program period ended, between December 1995 and May 1997. Once each year, records were collected from the police, courts, and schools. Part 1 provides demographic data on each youth, including age at intake, gender, ethnicity, relationship of caretaker to youth, and youth's risk factors for poor school performance, poor school behavior, family problems, or personal problems. Additional variables provide information on household size, including number and type of children in the household, and number and type of adults in the household. Part 2 provides data from all three youth interviews (baseline, end-of-program, and follow-up). Questions were asked about the youth's attitudes toward school and amount of homework, participation in various activities (school activities, team sports, clubs or groups, other organized activities, religious services, odd jobs or household chores), curfews and bedtimes, who assisted the youth with various tasks, attitudes about the future, seriousness of various problems the youth might have had over the past year and who he or she turned to for help, number of times the youth's household had moved, how long the youth had lived with the caretaker, various criminal activities in the neighborhood and the youth's concerns about victimization, opinions on various statements about the police, occasions of skipping school and why, if the youth thought he or she would be promoted to the next grade, would graduate from high school, or would go to college, knowledge of children engaging in various problem activities and if the youth was pressured to join them, and experiences with and attitudes toward consumption of cigarettes, alcohol, and various drugs. Three sections of the questionnaire were completed by the youths. Section A asked questions about the youth's attitudes toward various statements about self, life, the home environment, rules, and norms. Section B asked questions about the number of times that various crimes had been committed against the youth, his or her sexual activity, number of times the youth ran away from home, number of times he or she had committed various criminal acts, and what weapons he or she had carried. Items in Section C covered the youth's alcohol and drug use, and participation in drug sales. Part 3 provides data from both caretaker interviews (baseline and end-of-program). Questions elicited the caretaker's assessments of the presence of various positive and negative neighborhood characteristics, safety of the child in the neighborhood, attitudes toward and interactions with the police, if the caretaker had been arrested, had been on probation, or in jail, whether various crimes had been committed against the caretaker or others in the household in the past year, activities that the youth currently participated in, curfews set by the caretaker, if the caretaker had visited the school for various reasons, school performance or problems by the youth and the youth's siblings, amount of the caretaker's involvement with activities, clubs, and groups, the caretaker's financial, medical, and personal problems and assistance received in the past year, if he or she was not able to obtain help, why not, and information on the caretaker's education, employment, income level, income sources, and where he or she sought medical treatment for themselves or for the youth. Two sections of the data collection instruments were completed by the caretaker. Section A dealt with the youth's personal problems or problems with others, and the youth's friends. Additional questions focused on the family's interactions, rules, and norms. Section B items asked about the caretaker's alcohol and drug use, and any alcohol and drug use or criminal justice involvement by others in the household older than the youth. Part 4 consists of data from schools, police, and courts. School data include the youth's grades, grade-point average (GPA), absentee rate, reasons for absences, and whether the youth was promoted each school year. Data from police records include police contacts, detentions, violent offenses, drug-related offenses, and arrests prior to recruitment in the CAR program and in Years 1-4 after recruitment, court contacts and charges prior to recruitment and in Years 1-4 after recruitment, and how the charges were disposed.
Curated

Examining the Efficacy of Circles on School Safety and Student Outcomes in Boston Public Schools, Massachusetts, 2017-2020 (ICPSR 39254)

Released/updated on: 2025-12-02
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2017-01-01--2018-01-01, 2018-01-01--2019-01-01, 2019-01-01--2020-01-01
There is increasing evidence that promoting social-emotional learning and positive teacher-student relationships can prevent school violence. Many schools are turning to restorative practices to promote safe schools. When engaging in restorative practices, the emphasize focuses on learning and growth. When harm has occurred, restorative practices emphasize communication and accountability. Restorative practices in schools have been associated with decreased bullying and school violence, improvements in positive school climate and decreased use of suspensions. The current study presents implementation and impact findings of a cluster randomized control trial examining a school-wide restorative practices model called Circle Forward.
Curated

Investigating the Effectiveness of the School Security Climate on Student Connectedness and School Performance, New York City, New York, 2018-2021 (ICPSR 38254)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-12
Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)
Time period: 2018-01-01--2021-01-01

School safety research rarely considers the school security climate as a product of the simultaneous implementation of several school safety interventions. This is potentially problematic, as schools seldom employ only one safety intervention. Rather, schools today employ several interventions simultaneously to meet their safety and security needs. The purpose of this study is to investigate and identify effective types of school security climates and examine student growth within these climates. This multi-year project attempts to meet two goals: 1) Identify effective types of school security climates; and 2) Determine how the school security climate affects individual students. Data were collected from approximately 600 students attending 10 schools over the course of three years. Measures included an adapted version of the School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) and the Maryland Safe and Supportive Schools Survey (MDS3). The survey also included questions to obtain respondent demographics (age, gender, race/ethnicity) and other descriptive information about students and their experiences.

Curated

An Investigation of School Resource and Safety Programs Policy and Practice in Virginia, 2016-2019 (ICPSR 37685)

Released/updated on: 2023-05-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Virginia
Time period: 2016-01-01--2019-12-31

This study seeks to inform about the effectiveness and impact of school safety programs in the state of Virginia. In many Virginia schools, ensuring school safety often involves the use of School Resource Officers (SRO) and School Security Officers (SSO), or some combination of SROs and SSOs. This study investigated the current state of SRO and SSO programs in Virginia to illuminate how SRO and SSO programs are operating and uncover best practices associated with program development, implementation, and evaluation. Specifically, the research questions were:

  • RQ1: How are SROs and SSOs trained to operate in K-12 public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia?
  • RQ2:What are the criteria that are being used to select SROs and SSOs to operate in schools?
  • RQ3: How are the activities of SROs and SSOs that do not result in an arrest being documented?
  • RQ4: How are SROs and SSOs operating in schools supervised by their own department and/or by the school(s) in which they operate?
  • RQ5: What criteria are used to assess SRO and SSO performance?
  • RQ6: To what extent are SROs and SSOs involved addressing school disciplinary matters that do not rise to the level of criminal activity?
  • RQ7: Are there differences when comparing between school districts that have MOUs with local law enforcement, and school districts that do not have formal arrangements with local law enforcement?
Curated

Law-Related Education Evaluation Project [United States], 1979-1984 (ICPSR 8406)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1979-01-01--1984-01-01
This data collection contains information gathered to evaluate certain activities of a number of organizations dedicated to the advancement of law-related education (LRE) in elementary, junior high, and senior high schools. The organizations whose activities were evaluated were (1) the Constitution Rights Foundation, (2) Law in a Free Society, (3) the National Street Law Institute, (4) the American Bar Association's Special Committee on Youth Education for Citizenship, (5) the Children's Legal Rights Information and Training Program, and (6) the Phi Alpha Delta Committee for Juvenile Justice. The evaluation research dealt primarily with two types of issues: (1) the degree of increase in awareness of and receptivity toward LRE among the nation's educators, juvenile justice, and other related professionals, as well as the degree of institutionalization of LRE in certain targeted states (i.e., California, Michigan, and North Carolina), and (2) the degree to which LRE could produce changes in students' knowledge of and attitudes about the law, and reduce juvenile delinquency (measured both by self-reported delinquency rates and by attitudes previously shown to be correlated with delinquent behavior). In 1981 (Part 1) and again in 1982 (Part 2), questionnaires were mailed to a sample of professionals in state educational organizations as well as to elementary and secondary school principals, juvenile justice specialists, juvenile and family court judges, police chiefs, and law school deans. Respondents were asked whether they had heard of the various projects, what they thought of LRE in terms of its impact on students and usefulness in the curriculum, whether LRE should be required, what type of publicity had contributed to their awareness of LRE, and the degree of involvement they would be willing to have in promoting or developing LRE programs. In a second component of the study, primary and secondary school students were selected for an impact evaluation of the LRE activities run by the six organizations under evaluation. Questionnaires were administered to students during academic years 1982-1983 (Part 3) and 1983-1984 (Part 4), before and after participating in LRE courses offered by the programs under evaluation. Control students (not taking LRE courses) were also used for the comparisons. The questionnaires tested the knowledge, attitudes (measuring such factors as isolation from school, delinquent peer influence, negative labeling, and attitudes toward violence), and self-reported delinquency of school children. Demographic information collected about the student respondents includes sex, age, race, grade in school, and grade-point average.
Curated

National Crime Surveys: Crime School Supplement, 1989 (ICPSR 9394)

Released/updated on: 1995-03-31
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Surveys was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including type of school, distance from home, and general attendance and monitoring policies. The data present information on the response of the school to student violation of rules, accessibility of drugs, and violence in school, including types of violence and student reaction. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 1995 (ICPSR 6739)

Released/updated on: 1998-04-06
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Surveys (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including type of school, distance from home, and general attendance and monitoring policies. The data present information on the response of the school to student violation of rules, accessibility of drugs, and violence in school, including types of violence and student reaction. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 1999 (ICPSR 3137)

Released/updated on: 2001-09-20
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2001 (ICPSR 3477)

Released/updated on: 2002-09-19
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2003 (ICPSR 4182)

Released/updated on: 2005-07-29
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2005 (ICPSR 4429)

Released/updated on: 2008-04-30
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, household income, and marital status are provided.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2007 (ICPSR 23041)

Released/updated on: 2009-03-26
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers, academic researchers, practitioners at the federal, state and local levels, and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2009 (ICPSR 28201)

Released/updated on: 2011-01-21
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2011 (ICPSR 33081)

Released/updated on: 2013-03-26
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2013 (ICPSR 34980)

Released/updated on: 2014-12-02
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2015 (ICPSR 36354)

Released/updated on: 2016-12-20
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, [United States], 2017 (ICPSR 36982)

Released/updated on: 2020-02-27
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, [United States], 2019 (ICPSR 37816)

Released/updated on: 2021-06-08
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, [United States], 2022 (ICPSR 38666)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-28
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the School Crime Supplement (SCS) is to obtain additional information about school-related victimizations so that policymakers; academic researchers; practitioners at the federal, state, and local levels; and special interest groups who are concerned with crime in schools can make informed decisions concerning policies and programs. The SCS asks questions related to students' experiences with, and perceptions of crime and safety at school, including preventive measures employed by schools; students' participation in after school activities; students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules; the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school; student bullying; hate-related incidents; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. These responses are linked to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) survey instrument responses for a more complete understanding of the individual student's circumstances.
Curated

National Survey of Youth, 1972 (ICPSR 7593)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Conducted five years after NATIONAL SURVEY OF YOUTH, 1967 (ICPSR 3509), this study also was designed to measure the frequency and seriousness of delinquent activity among a representative sample of American boys and girls. Interviews were conducted in the spring of 1972 with 1,395 respondents who were 11 to 18 years old. Part 1 contains data gathered about the teenager's and his or her family's characteristics, including job history, family size, parents' education, attitudes toward school, school grades, peer group activities, dating history, self image, body image, physical health and maturation, attitudes about authority and youth culture, relationship with parents, political opinions and participation, and job aspirations. Part 2 contains each respondent's indication of which of 17 specific offenses he or she had committed in the previous three years. Information was coded on up to three incidents of each type of delinquency for each respondent. Data detailing the circumstances of each offense is also included. The 17 offenses are: (1) hitting a parent, (2) skipping school, (3) damaging property on purpose, (4) trying to get something by lying about age or identity, (5) trying to get something by lying about what you would do for a person, (6) taking something not belonging to you, even if you return it, (7) hurting or injuring someone on purpose, (8) threatening to hurt or injure someone, (9) trespassing on property, (10) trespassing in a house or building, (11) drinking beer or liquor without parental permission, (12) smoking marijuana, (13) using drugs (other than marijuana) or chemicals, (14) taking part in a fight with friends against other kids, (15) carrying a gun or knife, (16) taking a car without permission of the owner, and (17) "going all the way" with a member of the opposite sex. All but one offense match the list presented in the 1967 study. The additional offense, marijuana use, was added to reflect changes in American society since the first study was done.
Curated
Partially restricted
Simple Crosstabs

Outcome Evaluation of Tribes Learning Communities in California, 2007-2010 (ICPSR 32821)

Released/updated on: 2012-12-20
Geographic coverage: San Francisco, United States, California
Time period: 2007-01-01--2010-01-01
This study was an outcome evaluation that employed a group randomized experimental design to assess the effectiveness of a school-based violence prevention program known as Tribes in preventing youth violence. The study took place in elementary schools in the San Francisco Unified School District and targeted students in Kindergarten through Fifth grade. Within each school, teachers (and their students) were randomly assigned to the experimental condition, with teachers assigned to the intervention condition using Tribes in their classrooms and control teachers delivering usual lessons. Multiple, repeated measures, including teacher surveys and checklists, parent checklists, direct evaluator observations of classrooms, and individual student interviews were employed between May 2007 and November 2010. Researchers gathered data in four major outcome areas: classroom environment, teacher practices, and student behavior and reasoning.
Curated

Project SECURE: Keeping Kids Safe in San Francisco Unified School District, California, 2017-2021 (ICPSR 38302)

Released/updated on: 2024-01-16
Geographic coverage: San Francisco, United States, California
Time period: 2017-01-01--2021-12-31
The purpose of Project SECURE (Safety, Equity, Caring, Understanding, and Resilience) was to evaluate the impact of a multi-tiered framework to strengthen the resilience of students who are the most vulnerable to adverse childhood experiences and trauma. Through Project SECURE, the team of researchers from SRI International and practitioners from San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) implemented and evaluated an evidence-based primary prevention program (Second Step) and targeted trauma-informed intervention (Bounce Back) in the district's elementary schools while developing a model for replication and expansion that reverses the negative trajectory and boosts the social-emotional and coping skills of students.
Curated

Project SOARS: Student Ownership, Accountability, and Responsibility for School Safety, Illinois and Oregon, 2016-2020 (ICPSR 37896)

Released/updated on: 2024-01-16
Geographic coverage: Oregon, United States, Illinois
Time period: 2018-01-01--2019-01-01, 2019-01-01--2020-01-01

Project SOARS (Student Ownership, Accountability, and Responsibility for School Safety) utilized a mixed-methods study design to develop and test a student-centered and technology-driven school safety framework to address peer victimization, violent behavior, and student reluctance to share critical safety information within high school settings. SOARS was a project of IRIS Media, Inc. and consisted of 4 phases implemented between 2016 and 2020. Activities for each phase were carried out in Oregon and Illinois high schools in order to facilitate inter-site replication of outcomes. Phase 1 was conducted in 2016 and consisted of focus groups and key informant interviews with students, school personnel, and parents to gather perceptions of current school safety practices. Phase 2 was undertaken in 2017 and asked students, school personnel, and parents to assess the acceptability and usability of prototypes of the SOARS framework. The SOARS framework consisted of (a) the Advocatr mobile app, which allowed students to report positive and negative behaviors in their school environment; (b) a 9-week curriculum engaging students with the concepts of student ownership of school safety, advocacy/self-advocacy, physical and emotional safety, and restorative conflict resolution; (c) informational briefs for school personnel and parents about the framework components and their rationale; and (d) guidelines for a student-led school-wide safety campaign. Phase 3 was rolled out in 2018 and 2019 and consisted of feasibility testing conducted with a small subset of teachers and students in those teachers' classrooms. Participants were surveyed before and after implementation of the SOARS framework. The focus of the feasibility test was on student access and use of the Advocatr app and the accompanying curriculum. During Phase 4 implementation in 2019 and 2020, researchers conducted a pilot test with students, school personnel, and parents from 4 high schools, 2 assigned to the intervention and 2 to the control condition. The focus of the pilot was to test the effectiveness of the SOARS framework.

Demographic information was collected from all informants and includes gender (sex male or female; transgender identification), ethnicity, and race. Additional demographic information about students includes sexual orientation, approximate age (over/under 18 years), primary language, GPA, and grade. Parent demographics also include education level and student's grade, while school personnel (teachers and staff) also provided information regarding education level, school role, job title, years in current position, grades taught, and subjects taught.

Users should note that qualitative data collected during phase 1 focus groups and phase 2 user acceptance tests are not included in version 1 of the ICPSR release. Additionally, in the quantitative datasets, character variables featuring open-ended string responses have been masked by ICPSR. This study will be updated at a later date to include qualitative data files and character variables in the quantitative datasets.

Curated

Protective Behaviors of Student Victims of Bullying: A Rare Events Analysis of the 2009 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (ICPSR 32741)

Released/updated on: 2015-02-25
Geographic coverage: United States
This study explored whether bullied students (ages 12 through 18, in grades 6 through 12, enrolled during the current school year, and not homeschooled) engage in specific protective behaviors that inhibit learning, put other students' safety at risk, or foster a negative school climate. It also explored whether bullied students' behaviors varied by the type of bullying (direct, verbal, indirect, or cyber) endured. The researchers conducted secondary analyses of the NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY: SCHOOL CRIME SUPPLEMENT, 2009 (ICPSR 28201), using rare events logistic regression, a technique that enables examination of the effects of several independent variables on a dichotomous dependent variable. The dataset produced contains a total of 65 variables, including 18 variables describing direct, verbal, indirect, and cyber bullying behaviors, 4 variables describing response behaviors by those bullied, and 28 variables describing student and school characteristics.
Curated

Pursuing Equitable Restorative Communities, Pittsburgh, PA, 2015-2017 (ICPSR 37387)

Released/updated on: 2023-01-31
Geographic coverage: United States, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh
Time period: 2015-01-01--2017-01-01
This study represents one of the first randomized controlled trials of the impacts of restorative practices on classroom and school climate and suspension rates. The research team collected extensive data about implementation to help examine how it is related to effects and to develop operational guidance for school district leaders. The studied schools, all part of the Pittsburgh Public Schools district, implemented restorative practices for two school years (2015-16 and 2016-17) under the leadership of the International Institute for Restorative Practices.
Curated

A Randomized Impact Evaluation of Capturing Kids' Hearts, South Carolina, 2016-2018 (ICPSR 37954)

Released/updated on: 2021-07-29
Geographic coverage: United States, South Carolina
Time period: 2016-01-01--2018-12-31

Funded by the National Institute of Justice, and in collaboration with the Flippen Group, the South Carolina Department of Education, and the districts of Charleston, Georgetown, Greenville, and Richland County Schools, WestEd conducted a randomized controlled trial of violence prevention and a school climate improvement program known as Capturing Kids' Hearts Campus by Design (CKH).

CKH is a skill intensive, systematic process, whole-school intervention, designed to strengthen students' connectedness to school through enhancing protective factors (strong bonds with teachers, clear rules of conduct that are consistently enforced) and targeting modifiable risk factors (inappropriate behavior, poor social coping skills). The CKH training program aims to address the mechanisms and processes of social skills instruction that lead to improved student behavior by promoting skills acquisition (i.e., modeling, coaching, and behavioral rehearsal), enhancing skills performance, removing competing behavior, and facilitating maintenance of social skills.

Components of CKH have been widely used throughout the United States. As of 2013, CKH training has been offered to over 200,000 staff in more than 7,000 schools. Although widely used, the whole package of CKH training and service has not been sufficiently subjected to a rigorous evaluation to assess the effectiveness of the program.

The purpose of this study is to test and evaluate the Capturing Kids' Hearts package of programs and processes offered in the school-wide model, CKH Campus by Design, which includes Capturing Kids' Hearts, Process Champions-Plus, Campus TrAction Pacs, Teen Leadership, CKH Recharged, and Leadership Blueprint.

Curated

School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), 2000: [United States] (ICPSR 3964)

Released/updated on: 2010-06-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-03-27--2000-08-15
The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on behalf of the United States Department of Education (ED). SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and school administrators of public schools in America. Data from this collection can be used to correlate school characteristics with violent and serious violent crimes in American schools. Furthermore, data from SSOCS can be used to assess what school programs, practices, and policies are used by schools in their efforts to prevent crime. SSOCS has been conducted three times, in school years 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2005-2006. The 1999-2000 School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS:2000) was developed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and conducted by Abt Associates Inc. Funding for the survey was provided by the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. Questionnaire packets were mailed to 3,366 public primary, middle, high, and combined schools. A total of 2,270 public schools submitted usable questionnaires for a weighted response rate of 70 percent. Data were collected from March 27, 2000 to August 15, 2000.
Curated

School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), 2004 (ICPSR 25681)

Released/updated on: 2010-03-04
Geographic coverage: United States
The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on behalf of the United States Department of Education (ED). SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and school administrators of public schools in America. Data from this collection can be used to correlate school characteristics with violent and serious violent crimes in American schools. Furthermore, data from SSOCS can be used to assess what school programs, practices, and policies are used by schools in their efforts to prevent crime. SSOCS has been conducted three times, in school years 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2005-2006. The 2003-2004 School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS:2004) was developed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and conducted by Abt Associates Inc. Questionnaire packets were mailed to 3,743 public primary, middle, high, and combined schools. A total of 2,772 public schools submitted usable questionnaires for a weighted response rate of 77.2 percent. Data were collected from March 1, 2004, to June 4, 2004.
Curated

School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), 2006 (ICPSR 25421)

Released/updated on: 2010-03-04
Geographic coverage: United States
The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on behalf of the United States Department of Education (ED). SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and school administrators of United States public schools. Data from this collection can be used to examine the relationship between school characteristics and violent and serious violent crimes in primary schools, middle schools, high schools, and combined schools. In addition, data from SSOCS can be used to assess what crime prevention programs, practices, and policies are used by schools. SSOCS has been conducted in school years 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2005-2006. A fourth collection is planned for school year 2007-2008. SSOCS:2006 was conducted by the United States Census Bureau. Data collection began on March 17, 2006, when questionnaire packets were mailed to schools, and continued through May 31, 2006. A total of 2,724 public schools submitted usable questionnaires: 715 primary schools, 948 middle schools, 924 high schools, and 137 combined schools.
Back to top