Search results

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 Urban Institute, in collaboration with Tahirih Justice Center, sought to examine forced marriages in the United States via an exploratory study of the victimization experiences of those subjected to and threatened with forced marriage. The study also sought to begin to understand elements at the intersection of forced marriage with intimate partner and sexual violence, such as: how perpetrators threaten and actually force victims into marriages; the elements of force, fraud, or coercion in the tactics used to carry out victimization; other case demographics and dynamics (e.g., overseas marriages versus those in the United States); factors that put individuals at risk of forced marriage or that trigger or elevate their risk of related abuses; help-seeking behavior; the role of social, cultural, and religious norms in forced marriage; and the ability (or lack thereof) of service providers, school officials, and government agencies with protection mandates (law enforcement, child protection, and social workers) to screen for, and respond to, potential and reported cases of forced marriage.

This collection contains 1 Stata file: ICPSR-Data-File.dta (21007 cases; 48 variables).

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

Since 2015, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) has funded sites to engage in reforms intended to improve the national response to sexual assault cases. The goals of this initiative are to (1) create a coordinated community response that ensures just resolution to unsubmitted sexual assault kit (SAK) cases through a victim-centered approach and (2) build jurisdictions' capacity to prevent the development of conditions that lead to high numbers of unsubmitted sexual assault kits. Site efforts to address these issues include agencies such as law enforcement, prosecution, forensic laboratories, and victim advocacy service organizations. Westat was awarded a contract by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to assess components of BJA's Sexual Assault Kit Initiative (SAKI). The study includes (1) an evaluability assessment of 17 sites to determine their readiness for an evaluation, (2) a process evaluation and system reform assessment of the 17 sites, (3) a feasibility assessment of using case level data for an outcome evaluation, and analysis of a subset of unsubmitted SAK cases to identify how characteristics of incidents, offenders, and victims are associated with case processing decisions and outcomes, and (4) development of a long-term outcome evaluation plan.

Two sources of data are archived with NAJCD: (1) coded qualitative data from primarily on-site interviews the Westat Team conducted in 2018 with stakeholders from 17 of the fiscal year (FY) 2015 SAKI grantees and 2 private lab facilities and 2) quantitative case-level data from the 2 FY 2015 SAKI grantees on SAKI cases associated with previously unsubmitted sexual assault kits that were determined to contain foreign DNA or biological evidence through laboratory testing. The interview data file contains coded data from 172 interviews the research team conducted with one or more agency representatives regarding their organization's goals, strategies, and activities for processing sexual assault kits, and associated lessons learned, challenges, and expected outcomes. The quantitative case-level data file includes case-level information on 576 sexual assault kits determined to have DNA and associated cases included in the 2 sites' SAKI inventories. The case-level data captures information on case or offense-level information (e.g., date of offense, date offense reported to police, number of victims and suspects involved, investigation and prosecution activities), victim-level information (e.g., victim age, sex, race, participation in investigation), and suspect-level information (e.g., suspect's age, race, sex, criminal history).

The Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) created a new demonstration grant program, the OVC Wraparound Victim Legal Assistance Network Demonstration Project, to address the wide range of legal needs victims of crime have in relation to the victimization they experienced. The original four-year demonstration, which was increased to six years, included two phases: (1) a 15-month phase for planning, designing a new service delivery model in collaboration with local partners, and conducting a needs assessment, and (2) a second phase for grantees to implement the model as designed. The program originally funded six sites to plan and implement a new model of legal assistance for victims:

1. Alaska Immigrant Justice Center (entire state of Alaska)
2. Council on Crime and Justice (entire state of Minnesota)
3. Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles (Los Angeles County, California)
4. Lone Star Legal Aid (72 counties in East Texas)
5. Metropolitan Family Services' Legal Aid Society (Cook County, Illinois)
6. Rocky Mountain Victim Law Center (City of Denver, Colorado)

The new wraparound service delivery models were expected to facilitate the implementation of wraparound pro bono legal assistance networks to provide legal services to victims. Because victims often receive legal services from a variety of uncoordinated organizations (e.g., victim legal clinics for help with enforcing rights, and legal aid offices or law school clinics for help with other specific civil legal needs), integrated networks may be better able to provide a wide array of legal services from a single, coordinated system. The demonstration grant requirements included: creating and actively engaging a steering committee, working cooperatively with technical assistance provider(s) as needed, and employing a local research partner to help perform the needs assessment and work closely with the evaluation team.

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 evaluate the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) Statewide Automated Victim Information and Notification (SAVIN) program; evaluate victims' awareness and use of automated victim notification (AVN) systems and the role service providers play in ensuring that victims are aware of, and able to successfully register for, AVN services. Researchers conducted three waves of telephone interviews with automated victim notification (AVN) system administrators (AVN System Administrator Interview Data, n=52), including those in states not participating in the BJA SAVIN program. Researchers also interviewed individuals overseeing victim notification services in states without AVN. Researchers also created two online surveys to supplement the information collected in the telephone interviews (Survey of Service Providers, n = 1,246). Finally, Researchers contacted selected service providers via email and telephone to inform them that they had been identified to participate in the survey of victims (Survey of Victims Data, n=1,355) and asked to confirm their participation. Participating service providers displayed the surveys in a public area where they could be completed by anyone visiting the office for an issue related to victim services. To encourage participation from victims who did not receive in-office services, the research team gave providers a sample email (in both English and Spanish) that they could provide to remote clients with information about how to access the online survey. The research team fielded the survey for three months in 2012, with reminder emails sent to participating providers on a bi-weekly basis.

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 purpose of the impact evaluation was to gauge the success of the victim's rights clinics in attaining each of the following goals

• Aid in enforcing rights for individual victims and getting them help for crime-related needs, thereby increasing satisfaction of victims with the justice process;
• Change attitudes of criminal justice officials towards victims' rights and increase their knowledge about rights;
• Change the legal landscape: establish victim standing and develop positive case law;
• Increase compliance of criminal justice officials with victims' rights; and
• Sustain the clinic through developing alternative sources of funding

Researchers conducted surveys with prosecutors, judges, victim advocates, and defense attorneys to determine whether they had changed their attitudes toward victims' rights since the local clinic opened its doors. Surveys were fielded in South Carolina, Maryland, and Utah (Criminal Justice Official data, n=552) where clinic evaluations were conducted. An additional survey was fielded in Colorado (Colorado data, n=583) where the victim rights clinic had not yet started to accept cases. To determine the effect that clinics had on observance of victims' rights, researchers collected three samples of cases from prosecutors (NCVLI Case File Data, n=757) in the jurisdiction or jurisdictions in which each local clinic had done the most work: (a) all clinic cases closed since the start of each local clinic; (b) cases closed during the most recent 12-month period which did not involve representation by a clinic attorney; and (c) cases closed in the year prior to the start of each local clinic. Finally, to assess the impact of the clinics on victims' satisfaction with the criminal justice process and its compliance with their rights, researchers conducted telephone interviews (Victim Survey Data, n=125) with two samples of victims in each evaluation site, one drawn from the sample of cases at prosecutor offices and one drawn from the crime victim legal clinics.