Showing 1 – 20 of 20 results.
Curated
Restricted
Benefits and Limitations of Civil Protection Orders for Victims of Domestic Violence in Wilmington, Delaware, Denver, Colorado, and the District of Columbia, 1994-1995 (ICPSR 2557)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: District of Columbia, United States, Colorado, Denver, Delaware, Wilmington
Time period: 1994-01-01--1995-01-01
This study was designed to explore whether civil protection orders were effective in providing safer environments for victims of domestic violence and enhancing their opportunities for escaping violent relationships. The researchers looked at the factors that might influence civil protection orders, such as accessibility to the court process, linkages to public and private services and sources of support, and the criminal record of the victim's abuser, and then examined how courts in three jurisdictions processed civil protection orders. Wilmington, Delaware, Denver, Colorado, and the District of Columbia were chosen as sites because of structural differences among them that were believed to be linked to the effectiveness of civil protection orders. Since these jurisdictions each had different court processes and service models, the researchers expected that these models would produce various results and that these variations might hold implications for improving practices in other jurisdictions. Data were collected through initial and follow-up interviews with women who had filed civil protection orders. The effectiveness of the civil protection orders was measured by the amount of improvement in the quality of the women's lives after the order was in place, versus the extent of problems created by the protection orders. Variables from the survey of women include police involvement at the incident leading to the protection order, the relationship of the petitioner and respondent to the petition prior to the order, history of abuse, the provisions asked for and granted in the order, if a permanent order was not filed for by the petitioner, the reasons why, the court experience, protective measures the petitioner undertook after the order, and how the petitioner's life changed after the order. Case file data were gathered on when the order was filed and issued, contempt motions and hearings, stipulations of the order, and social service referrals. Data on the arrest and conviction history of the petition respondent were also collected.
Curated
Partially restricted
Criminal Protective Orders as a Critical Strategy to Reduce Domestic Violence, Connecticut, 2012-2016 (ICPSR 36605)
Released/updated on: 2018-07-24
Geographic coverage: United States, Connecticut
Time period: 2012-01-01--2016-01-01
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.
Criminal protection orders are a critical tool to enhance the safety and protection of victims of domestic violence (DV). However, limited research exists to elucidate the process and outcomes of these orders. The purposes of the study were to (a) elucidate the process of criminal orders as a critical strategy to reduce domestic violence, (b) increase knowledge about how criminal orders influence the daily lives of women, and children, and how they are associated with offender behavior, (c) disseminate findings to practitioners, policy makers, and academics to inform practice, policy, and future research; and (d) document in detail the relevant accounts of the collaboration to inform best practices for collaborations that lead to better policy, practice, and research. The sample is comprised of 298 female victims of DV by a male, intimate partner. Participants were recruited from two geographical area courthouses in an urban and a suburban New England community.
Information was collected in personal interviews and augmented with information from court records. Separate data files contain information about housing events as well as substance use. Qualitative data collected as part of this study are not included in this fast track release.
The collection contains 3 SPSS data files, NIJ-PO-Full-Dataset.sav (n=298; 1299 variables), NIJ-PO-Housing-TLFB-Dataset.sav (n=577; 29 variables) and NIJ-PO-Substance-Use-Dataset.sav (n=8940; 24 variables) and 1 Excel data file Living-Together-Data.xlsx (n=298; 3 variables). The collection also contains transcripts of qualitative interviews with 294 of the 298 respondents, which are not included in this release.
Curated
Divorce Mediation and Domestic Violence in the United States, 1993 (ICPSR 2561)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
This study gathered data on policies and procedures for identifying domestic violence issues among divorcing couples and examined divorce mediation practices and policies in cases with allegations of spousal violence. Mediators and court administrators provided information on: (1) whether and how they attempted to gauge the level of domestic abuse and the capacity of divorcing parties to mediate, and (2) common adjustments to the mediation process made to enhance safety in divorce cases where domestic abuse is present. Data collection involved a collaboration with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) in the administration and analysis of this survey. Court programs providing divorce mediation and/or custody evaluations in 1993 were targeted. The questionnaire was mailed in late 1993 to 200 institutional members of the AFCC and active providers of family and divorce services in the National Center for State Courts database. A total of 149 public-sector divorce mediation and custody/visitation counseling providers responded. Variables include information on the rules, statutes, or guidelines under which the program operates, case handling procedures prior to mediation or custody/visitation evaluations, and procedures used when clients come to mediation. Information is also provided on the number of paid professional staff, number of custody/visitation mediations and evaluations completed, population of the jurisdiction, the program's relationship to the court, types of orientation programs for parents provided by the court, if the community had any supervised visitation services, and the city and state in which the program is located.
Curated
Partially restricted
The Effectiveness of Coordinated Outreach in Intimate Partner Violence Cases in Denver, Colorado 2007 to 2009 (ICPSR 30961)
Released/updated on: 2014-11-07
Geographic coverage: United States, Colorado, Denver
Time period: 2007-01-01--2009-01-01
In collaboration with community- and system-based partners, the current study used an experimental design to test the impact of phone outreach from community-based agencies to women exposed to Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) compared to phone referrals provided by system-based unit (i.e., the Victim Assistance Unit of the DPD or the City Attorney's Office) in a racially and ethnically diverse sample of women whose cases have come to the attention of the criminal justice system. The phone outreach was informed by an interdisciplinary team involving both system- and community-based team members. Participants, who were randomly selected to receive outreach or treatment-as-usual, were interviewed at three time points: after an incident of IPV was reported to the police (T1), 6 months after T1, and 12 months after T1. The study addressed three primary roles. First, investigators evaluated the effectiveness of a coordinated, community-based outreach program in improving criminal justice and victim safety and empowerment outcomes for IPV victims using a longitudinal, randomized control design. Second, victim and case characteristics that moderated outcomes were identified. Third, the influence of spatial characteristics on criminal justice outcomes was evaluated.
Curated
Partially restricted
Environmental Scan of Family Justice Centers in the United States, 2016-2017 (ICPSR 36973)
Released/updated on: 2018-05-15
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2016-01-01--2017-01-01
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 in needed.
This study conducts an environmental scan of current Family Justice Centers (FJCs) across the United States as part of a multi-phase effort to develop a formal evaluation plan to measure the effectiveness of FJCs and similar multi-agency co-located collaboratives.
The collection contains 1 SAS data file (fjc_analysis_nacjd_20180226.sas7bdat (n=52; 813 variables)) and 1 syntax file.
Curated
Evaluating a Collaborative Intervention Between Health Care and Criminal Justice in Harris County, Texas, 2001-2002 (ICPSR 3542)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Texas
Time period: 2001-01-01--2002-01-01
This study sought to evaluate the Advocacy-Case Management Intervention designed to increase victim safety and the efficiency of the protection order process. The intervention was performed by registered nurses as part of a collaborative partnership between justice and health care agencies. A two-group experimental design using random assignments to control and experimental groups was used. The study subjects were women who qualified for a civil protection order against a sexual intimate. These women were contacted via telephone for initial interviews, as well as for three-, six-, 12-, and 18-month follow-up interviews. Variables were obtained from several instruments used to measure victim safety-seeking behaviors and levels of violence and harassment.
Curated
Restricted
Evaluating a Multi-Disciplinary Response to Domestic Violence in Colorado Springs, 1996-1999 (ICPSR 3282)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Colorado, Colorado Springs
The Colorado Springs Police Department formed a nontraditional domestic violence unit in 1996 called the Domestic Violence Enhanced Response Team (DVERT). This unit involved a partnership and collaboration with the Center for the Prevention of Domestic Violence, a private, nonprofit victim advocacy organization, and 25 other city and county agencies. DVERT was unique in its focus on the safety of the victim over the arrest and prosecution of the batterer. It was also different from the traditional police model for a special unit because it was a systemic response to domestic violence situations that involved the coordination of criminal justice, social service, and community-based agencies. This study is an 18-month evaluation of the DVERT unit. It was designed to answer the following research and evaluation questions: (1) What were the activities of DVERT staff? (2) Who were the victims and perpetrators of domestic violence? (3) What were the characteristics of domestic violence-related incidents in Colorado Springs and surrounding jurisdictions? (4) What was the nature of the intervention and prevention activities of DVERT? (5) What were the effects of the intervention? (6) What was the nature and extent of the collaboration among criminal justice agencies, victim advocates, and city and county human services agencies? (7) What were the dynamics of the collaboration? and (8) How successful was the collaboration? At the time of this evaluation, the DVERT program focused on three levels of domestic violence situations: Level I included the most lethal situations in which a victim might be in serious danger, Level II included moderately lethal situations in which the victim was not in immediate danger, and Level III included lower lethality situations in which patrol officers engaged in problem-solving. Domestic violence situations came to the attention of DVERT through a variety of mechanisms. Most of the referrals came from the Center for the Prevention of Domestic Violence. Other referrals came from the Department of Human Services, the Humane Society, other law enforcement agencies, or city service agencies. Once a case was referred to DVERT, all relevant information concerning criminal and prosecution histories, advocacy, restraining orders, and human services documentation was researched by appropriate DVERT member agencies. Referral decisions were made on a weekly basis by a group of six to eight representatives from the partner agencies. From its inception in May 1996 to December 31, 1999, DVERT accepted 421 Level I cases and 541 Level II cases. Cases were closed or deactivated when DVERT staff believed that the client was safe from harm. Parts 1-4 contain data from 285 Level I DVERT cases that were closed between July 1, 1996, and December 31, 1999. Parts 5-8 contain data from 515 Level II cases from 1998 and 1999 only, because data were more complete in those two years. Data were collected from (1) police records of the perpetrator and victim, including calls for service, arrest reports, and criminal histories, (2) DVERT case files, and (3) Center for the Prevention of Domestic Violence files on victims. Coding sheets were developed to capture the information within these administrative documents. Part 1 includes data on whether the incident produced injuries or a risk to children, whether the victim, children, or animals were threatened, whether weapons were used, if there was stalking or sexual abuse, prior criminal history, and whether there was a violation of a restraining order. For Part 2 data were gathered on the date of case acceptance to the DVERT program and deactivation, if the offender was incarcerated, if the victim was in a new relationship or had moved out of the area, if the offender had moved or was in treatment, if the offender had completed a domestic violence class, and if the offender had served a sentence. Parts 3 and 4 contain information on the race, date of birth, gender, employment, and relationship to the victim or offender for the offenders and victims, respectively. Part 5 includes data on the history of emotional, physical, sexual, and child abuse, prior arrests, whether the victim took some type of action against the offender, whether substance abuse was involved, types of injuries that the victim sustained, whether medical care was necessary, whether a weapon was used, restraining order violations, and incidents of harassment, criminal trespassing, telephone threats, or kidnapping. Part 6 variables include whether the case was referred to and accepted in Level I and whether a DVERT advocate made contact on the case. Part 7 contains information on the offenders' race and gender. Part 8 includes data on the victims' date of birth, race, and gender.
Curated
Partially restricted
Evaluation of GPS Monitoring Technologies and Domestic Violence in the United States, 2001-2009 (ICPSR 33723)
Released/updated on: 2015-06-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2006-07-01--2008-07-01, 2001-10-01--2007-01-01, 2008-01-01--2009-01-01
This study examines the implementation and effectiveness of Global Positioning System (GPS) monitoring technology to enforce court mandated "no contact" orders in domestic violence (DV) cases, particularly those involving intimate partner violence (IPV). The project has two components: First, a national web-based survey of agencies providing pretrial supervision examined patterns of GPS usage among electronic monitoring (EM) programs for DV cases. Second, a quasi-experimental design study of three sites across the U.S. - referred to as Midwest, West, and South - examined the impact of GPS technology on DV defendants' program violations and rearrests during the pre-adjudication period (referred to as the "short term"), and during a one-year follow-up period after case disposition (referred to as the "long term").
Curated
Restricted
Evaluation of Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies for Domestic Violence Cases in the State College, Pennsylvania, Police Department, 1999-2000 (ICPSR 3166)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Pennsylvania
This project was an 18-month long research-practitioner partnership to conduct a process evaluation of the State College Police Department's implementation of a grant to encourage arrest policies for domestic violence. The general goals of the process evaluation were to assess how and to what extent the State College Police Department's proposed activities were implemented as planned, based on the rationale that such activities would enhance the potential for increasing victim safety and perpetrator accountability systemically. As part of the grant, the police department sought to improve case tracking and services to victims by developing new specialized positions for domestic violence, including: (1) a domestic violence arrest coordinator from within the State College Police Department who was responsible for monitoring case outcomes through the courts and updating domestic violence policies and training (Part 1, Victim Tracking Data from Domestic Violence Coordinator), (2) a victims service attorney from Legal Services who was responsible for handling civil law issues for domestic violence victims, including support, child custody, employment, financial, consumer, public benefits, and housing issues (Part 2, Victim Tracking Data From Victim Services Attorney), and (3) an intensive domestic violence probation officer from the Centre County Probation and Parole Department who was responsible for providing close supervision and follow-up of batterers (Part 3, Offender Tracking Data). Researchers worked with practitioners to develop databases suitable for monitoring service provision by the three newly-created positions for domestic violence cases. Major categories of data collected on the victim tracking form (Parts 1 and 2) included location of initial contact, type of initial contact, referral source, reason for initial contact, service/consultation provided at initial contact, meetings, and referrals out. Types of services provided include reporting abuse, filing a Protection from Abuse order, legal representation, and assistance with court procedures. Major categories of data collected on the offender tracking form (Part 3) included location of initial contact, type of initial contact, referral source, reason for initial contact, service/consultation provided, charges, sentence received, relationship between the victim and perpetrator, marital status, children in the home, referrals out, presentencing investigation completed, prior criminal history, and reason for termination. Types of services provided include pre-sentence investigation, placement on supervision, and assessment and evaluation. In addition to developing these new positions, the police department also sought to improve how officers handled domestic violence cases through a two-day training program. The evaluation conducted pre- and post-training assessments of all personnel training in 1999 and conducted follow-up surveys to assess the long-term impact of training. For Part 4, Police Training Survey Data, surveys were administered to law enforcement personnel participating in a two-day domestic violence training program. Surveys were administered both before and after the training program and focused on knowledge about domestic violence policies and protocols, attitudes and beliefs about domestic violence, and the background and experience of the officers. Within six months after the training, the same participants were contacted to complete a follow-up survey. Variables in Part 4 measure how well officers knew domestic violence arrest policies, their attitudes toward abused women and how to handle domestic violence cases, and their opinions about training. Demographic variables in Part 4 include age, sex, race, education, and years in law enforcement.
Curated
Evaluation of No-Drop Policies for Domestic Violence Cases in San Diego, California, Omaha, Nebraska, Klamath Falls, Oregon, and Everett, Washington, 1996-2000 (ICPSR 3319)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: Oregon, Omaha, Klameth Falls, San Diego, United States, Everett, California, Washington, Nebraska
Time period: 1996-01-01--2000-01-01
This study sought to examine the effects of no-drop policies on court outcomes, victim satisfaction with the justice system, and feelings of safety. Moreover, researchers wanted to determine whether (1) prosecution without the victim's cooperation was feasible with appropriate increases in resources, (2) implementing a no-drop policy resulted in increased convictions and fewer dismissals, (3) the number of trials would increase in jurisdictions where no-drop was adopted as a result of the prosecutor's demand for a plea in cases in which victims were uncooperative or unavailable, and (4) prosecutors would have to downgrade sentence demands to persuade defense attorneys to negotiate pleas in the new context of a no-drop policy. Statutes implemented in San Diego, California, were designed to make it easier to admit certain types of evidence and thereby to increase the prosecutor's chances of succeeding in trials without victim cooperation. To assess the impact of these statutes, researchers collected official records data on a sample of domestic violence cases in which disposition occurred between 1996 and 2000 and resulted in no trial (Part 1), and cases in which disposition occurred between 1996 and 1999, and resulted in a trial (Part 2). In Everett, Washington (Part 3), Klamath Falls, Oregon (Part 4), and Omaha, Nebraska (Part 5), researchers collected data on all domestic violence cases in which disposition occurred between 1996 and 1999 and resulted in a trial. Researchers also conducted telephone interviews in the four sites with domestic violence victims whose cases resolved under the no-drop policy (Part 6) in the four sites. Variables for Part 1 include defendant's gender, court outcome, whether the defendant was sentenced to probation, jail, or counseling, and whether the counseling was for batterer, drug, or anger management. Criminal history, other domestic violence charges, and the relationship between the victim and defendant are also included. Variables for Part 2 include length of trial and outcome, witnesses for the prosecution, defendant's statements to the police, whether there were photos of the victim's injury, the scene, or the weapon, and whether medical experts testified. Criminal history and whether the defendant underwent psychological evaluation or counseling are also included. Variables for Parts 3-5 include the gender of the victim and defendant, relationship between victim and defendant, top charges and outcomes, whether the victim had to be subpoenaed, types of witnesses, if there was medical evidence, type of weapon used, if any, whether the defendant confessed, any indications that the prosecutor talked to the victim, if the victim was in court on the disposition date, the defendant's sentence, and whether the sentence included electronic surveillance, public service, substance abuse counseling, or other general counseling. Variables for Part 6 include relationship between victim and defendant, whether the victim wanted the defendant to be arrested, whether the defendant received treatment for alcohol, drugs, or domestic violence, if the court ordered the defendant to stay away from the victim, and if the victim spoke to anyone in the court system, such as the prosecutor, detective, victim advocate, defense attorney, judge, or a probation officer. The victim's satisfaction with the police, judge, prosecutor, and the justice system, and whether the defendant had continued to threaten, damage property, or abuse the victim verbally or physically are also included. Demographic variables on the victim include race, income, and level of education.
Curated
Restricted
Evaluation of the Lexington County, South Carolina, Domestic Violence Court, 1997-2002 (ICPSR 4045)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, South Carolina
Time period: 1997-01-01--2002-01-01
A separate Criminal Domestic Violence Court (CDVC) was established in Lexington County, South Carolina, in November 1999, to hold perpetrators of domestic violence accountable through increasing fines and jail time and to place a strong emphasis on mandatory batterer treatment programs. The CDVC was a specialized court that combined the efforts of law enforcement, judges, prosecutors, mental health professionals, and victim advocates to improve the safety of domestic violence victims and hold offenders accountable. The researchers undertook to evaluate and measure the extent to which the CDVC was successful in implementing its goals. For the process evaluation, interviews were conducted in 2002 with 50 victims and 50 defendants to examine their overall level of satisfaction with the court process, their perceptions of procedural justice, and their recommendations for improving the CDVC process. Interviews were conducted in person using structured questions immediately after a case was heard. The outcome evaluation consisted of two methods of data collection. A time series intervention analysis examined the monthly frequency of criminal domestic violence for the years 1997 through 2001. Criminal domestic violence cases were compared for the 34 months before the establishment of the CDVC (January 1997 to October 1999) and the first 26 months following its implementation (November 1999 to December 2001). Additionally, in an effort to examine the impact of the Lexington County Criminal Domestic Violence Court on individual case outcomes, a recidivism analysis was conducted on a random sample of 400 criminal domestic violence cases. Of these cases, 200 were control cases drawn from the Lexington County Sheriff's Department's arrest database for the period January 1997 to June 1999, and 200 were treatment cases comprised of domestic violence arrest cases that occurred between December 1999 and December 2000 and processed through CDVC. Variables in Part 1 (Victim Interview Data) and Part 2 (Defendant Interview Data) included responses to structured interview questions about the victims' and offenders' perceptions of various aspects of the court process, whether they felt treated with dignity and respect, and their overall impression of the CDVC response to domestic violence. Variables in Part 3 (Monthly Arrest Data) include court period, month, and frequency of monthly domestic violence arrests, monthly simple assault arrests, and monthly aggravated assault arrests. Variables in Part 4 (Recidivism Data) include race, age, and gender of offender, employment status, booking date, days in jail prior to trial, number of charges pending, number of prior domestic violence offenses, date of first re-arrest, recidivism within first year and a half, days free of arrest, if defendant was diverted to pretrial intervention, and the amount of the fine.
Curated
Partially restricted
Evaluation of the Statewide Automated Victim Information and Notification (SAVIN) Program [United States], 2010-2012 (ICPSR 34593)
Released/updated on: 2016-09-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2010-01-01--2012-01-01
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 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.
Curated
Impact of Constitutional and Statutory Protection on Crime Victims' Rights in Four States in the United States, 1995 (ICPSR 2467)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey of crime victims was undertaken to determine whether state constitutional amendments and other legal measures designed to protect crime victims' rights had been effective. It was designed to test the hypothesis that the strength of legal protection for victims' rights has a measurable impact on how victims are treated by the criminal justice system and on their perceptions of the system. A related hypothesis was that victims from states with strong legal protection would have more favorable experiences and greater satisfaction with the system than those from states where legal protection is weak. The Victim Survey (Parts 1, 4-7) collected information on when and where the crime occurred, characteristics of the perpetrators, use of force, police response, victim services, type of information given to the victim by the criminal justice system, the victim's level of participation in the criminal justice system, how the case ended, sentencing and restitution, the victim's satisfaction with the criminal justice system, and the effects of the crime on the victim. Demographic variables in the file include age, race, sex, education, employment, and income. In addition to the victim survey, criminal justice and victim assistance professionals at the state and local levels were surveyed because these professionals affect crime victims' ability to recover from and cope with the aftermath of the offense and the stress of participation in the criminal justice system. The Survey of State Officials (Parts 2 and 8) collected data on officials' opinions of the criminal justice system, level of funding for the agency, types of victims' rights provided by the state, how victims' rights provisions had changed the criminal justice system, advantages and disadvantages of such legislation, and recommendations for future legislation. The Survey of Local Officials (Parts 3 and 9) collected data on officials' opinions of the criminal justice system, level of funding, victims' rights to information about and participation in the criminal justice process, victim impact statements, and restitution.
Curated
Partially restricted
Impact of Proactive Enforcement of No-Contact Orders on Victim Safety and Repeat Victimization in Lexington County, South Carolina, 2005-2008 (ICPSR 25261)
Released/updated on: 2013-07-31
Geographic coverage: United States, South Carolina
Time period: 2005-11-01--2008-06-01
The study focused on domestic violence victims whose alleged batterers were free on bond with a no-contact order (NCO) as a condition of their release in Lexington County, South Carolina between 2005 and 2008. The project involved a prospective, randomized experimental study in which 466 NCO cases were randomly assigned to either the current level of NCO enforcement (the control condition, N=229) or to proactive enforcement (the treatment condition, N=237). An additional 51 interim control cases were enrolled in the study during a coverage gap between the two officers that implemented the treatment condition over the course of the study. The treatment condition involved the following intervention: (1) a special domestic violence investigator assigned by the jurisdiction's sheriff proactively "checked in" with the "treatment" group of victims to verify that they understood the NCO and to monitor compliance; (2) the investigator provided advice on mobilizing law enforcement and collecting evidence to help sanction the offender if the order was violated. Data were collected from official Lexington County Sheriff's Department (LCSD), Criminal Domestic Violence Court (CDVC), and Office of Diversion Programs (ODP) records (Dataset 1, Offender Data). Efforts were made to interview victims at six weeks (Dataset 2, Time 1 Victim Interview Data, N=141) and six months (Dataset 3, Time 2 Victim Interview Data, N=100) after the gateway arrest. Dataset 4 (Combined Time 1/Time 2 Victim Interview Data, N=97) include overall measures for respondents who completed both the Time 1 and Time 2 interviews. The victim interviews include measures on background characteristics, life experiences, circumstances surrounding the "gateway incident" which resulted in the case being enrolled in the study, and subsequent victimization experiences and no-contact order compliance levels.
Curated
Restricted
National Evaluation of the Arrest Policies Program Under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), 1996-2000 (ICPSR 3795)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1996-01-01--2000-01-01
This study was undertaken to evaluate the impact of the Arrest Policies Program, funded by the Violence Against Women Office (VAWO), on criminal justice system changes and offender accountability, and victim safety and well-being. Through convenience sampling, six project sites were chosen to participate in the study. Part 1, Case Tracking Data, contains quantitative data collected from criminal justice agencies on arrests, prosecution filings, criminal case disposition, convictions, and sentences imposed for intimate partner violence cases involving a male offender and female offender. Data for Part 2, Victim Interview Data, were collected from in-depth personal interviews with domestic violence victims/survivors (1) to learn more about victim experiences with and perceptions of the criminal justice response, and (2) to obtain victim perceptions about how the arrest and/or prosecution of their batterers affected their safety and well-being. The survey instrument covered a wide range of topics including severity and history of domestic violence, social support networks, perceptions of police response, satisfaction with the criminal justice process and the sentence, experiences in court, and satisfaction with prosecutors, victim services provider advocates, and probation officers.
Curated
National Evaluation of the National Institute of Justice Grants to Combat Violent Crimes Against Women on Campus Program, 2000-2002 (ICPSR 3814)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-01-01--2002-01-01
This study was undertaken as a process evaluation of the Grants to Combat Violence Against Women on Campus Program (Campus Program), which was conducted by the Institute for Law and Justice under a grant from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and funding from the Violence Against Women Office (VAWO). The Campus Program was comprised of 38 colleges or universities, which received funding in 1999 and 2000. Part 1 data consist of basic demographic information about each campus and the violence against women programs and services available at each site. Data for Part 2, collected from questionnaires administered to grant project staff, documented perceptions about the Campus Program project and participation and collaboration from those involved in the partnership with each college or university (i.e., non-profit, non-governmental victim service providers).
Curated
Partially restricted
National Portrait of Domestic Violence Courts (ICPSR 27282)
Released/updated on: 2014-04-16
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1985-01-01--2008-01-01
The study was designed to create a portrait of domestic violence courts across America, specifically courtroom policies, procedures and goals were examined as described by court employees and prosecutors that work with the domestic violence courts. Geographic information on 338 courts was collected and organized in a national compendium of domestic violence courts. From this compendium a sample of 129 domestic violence courts was surveyed along with 74 prosecutors offices.
Curated
Partially restricted
Providing a Citywide System of Single Point Access to Domestic Violence Information, Resources, and Referrals to a Diverse Population: An Evaluation of the City of Chicago Domestic Violence Help Line, 2004-2005 (ICPSR 33970)
Released/updated on: 2012-10-23
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
Time period: 2004-07-01--2005-08-01, 2005-04-01--2005-08-01, 2004-05-01--2004-09-01
This study was a 2-year evaluation of the City of Chicago Domestic Violence Help Line. The Help Line was a unique telephone service functioning as a clearinghouse for all domestic violence victim services in the Chicago metropolitan area. The service was toll-free, multi-lingual, confidential, and operated 24-hours, 7 days a week. The purpose of the Help Line was to connect domestic violence victims to specialized services through direct referrals and three-way phone linkages.
In order to conduct a comprehensive evaluation, the perspective of a broad range of users of the Help Line was sought. Telephone interviews were conducted with domestic violence victim callers to the Help Line over the course of one year (Part 1 - Victims Data). Telephone interviews were also conducted with domestic violence service providers (Part 2 - Providers Data). As the largest referral source into the Help Line, Chicago Police Officers completed a written survey about their experiences with the Help Line (Part 3 - Police Data). Finally, to explore the general awareness of the Help Line, members of the District Advisory Committees across the city were surveyed (Part 4 - District Advisory Committee (DAC) Data).
The Part 1 (Victims Data) data file contains 399 cases and 277 variables. The Part 2 (Providers Data) data file contains 74 cases and 137 variables. The Part 3 (Police Data) data file contains 1,205 cases and 128 variables. The Part 4 (District Advisory Committee (DAC) Data) data file contains 357 cases and 105 variables.
Curated
Partially restricted
Statewide Profile of Abuse of Older Women and the Criminal Justice Response in Rhode Island, 2002 (ICPSR 22740)
Released/updated on: 2008-08-18
Geographic coverage: Rhode Island, United States
Time period: 1979-01-01--2007-01-01
This study examined the often overlooked and under reported issue of elder abuse. The research focused on female victims of domestic abuse over 50 years of age. The data were also compared to similar data on women under the age of 50. The data were collected in Rhode Island for several reasons, including the state's relatively broad definition of domestic violence and the large number of reports. Researchers examined every domestic violence report made to state and local law enforcement across Rhode Island in 2002 involving women victims 50 years of age and older. These reports include every incident, whether or not police ultimately arrested the alleged suspect, that meets the statutory definition of "domestic violence." The source of the report information was the Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Reporting Form (DV/SA). Data were also collected about the past criminal activity of the suspects and any charges made after the study incident(s) occurred. The data were found in the Rhode Island Courts' central repository called CourtConnect. The purpose of the study was to better understand the characteristics of the victims and their abusers, the circumstances of the incidences of abuse, and the police response to the reports of domestic abuse. Data collected consisted of independent variables which are organized into conceptual clusters including those relating to victim characteristics, abuser characteristics, the nature of the incident, and the state's response to the incident. The victim characteristics included demographics and abuse history, if any. Abuser characteristics included demographics and criminal history. Incident characteristics described the abuse incidence in detail. Criminal justice response variables outlined how police and courts responded and reacted to the abuse. There were two dependent outcome variables in this study consisting of re-victimization and re-abuse. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, bivariate relationships, and multiple logistic regression. This study primarily focused on the response of the criminal justice system to elder abuse, the effect of age of victim, and re-abuse and re-victimization in order to gain a clearer picture into the realities of domestic abuse of elderly women.
Curated
Partially restricted
Victim Participation in Intimate Partner Violence Prosecution - Implications for Safety: Kalamazoo County, Michigan, 1999-2002 (ICPSR 30741)
Released/updated on: 2014-03-28
Geographic coverage: United States, Kalamazoo, Michigan
Time period: 1999-01-01--2002-12-31
This longitudinal mixed-methods study examined to what extent female intimate partner violence (IPV) victim participation in prosecution was associated with their future safety. The study followed a cohort of female IPV victims with cases the police presented to the prosecutor, in the year 2000, in a single Midwestern United States county (Kalamazoo County, Michigan) for a four-year period (1999-2002) across multiple systems (police, prosecutor, criminal court, civil court, hospital Emergency Departments) to assess the victim's experience with participation in IPV prosecution and her associated future help seeking, health and safety. Since this study utilized retrospective administrative data, subsequent IPV was defined as a future documented IPV-related police incident or an Emergency Department visit for IPV or injury. The data abstraction and analysis of the administrative data was informed by focus groups with survivors, advocates, and medical and criminal justice service providers, along with in-depth qualitative analysis of a stratified random sample of individual IPV cases. The final analytic dataset created by the research team integrated two types of data: (1) in-depth data about the index assault case and characteristics of the couple involved, and (2) longitudinal data about prior and subsequent IPV events spanning multiple systems: police, prosecutor, emergency department, and family court protection orders.