Showing 1 – 50 of 321 results.
Curated
Adjusting the National Crime Victimization Survey's Estimates of Rape and Domestic Violence for Gag Factors, 1986-1990 (ICPSR 6558)
Released/updated on: 1996-10-01
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1986-01-01--1990-01-01
The purpose of this project was to use statistical modeling techniques to estimate rape and domestic assault rates, adjusting for interviewing conditions under which the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) was administered. Data for women 16 years of age and older interviewed in the NCVS (see NATIONAL CRIME SURVEYS: NATIONAL SAMPLE, 1986-1990 [NEAR-TERM DATA] [ICPSR 8864]) were analyzed. The researchers considered whether the type of interview (personal or telephone) and the presence of another person (particularly a spouse) influenced or "gagged" the reporting of rape and domestic violence in the NCVS. The researchers also investigated correlates, primarily demographic in nature, of reporting rape, domestic violence, other assaults, and breaking and entry. In total, the data file contains reports of 434 rapes, 1,973 incidents of domestic violence, 13,459 other assaults, and 88,950 incidents of breaking and entry. The binary-coded variables provide information on whether the respondent was alone during the interview, others who were present, whether the interview was by telephone, whether the respondent refused a telephone interview, the number of persons who lived in the household, whether the respondent owned her home, whether the land use was urban, whether the household the respondent was living in was the same household from the last interview, whether the respondent had moved more than three times in the last five years, and whether an assault, domestic violence incident, rape, breaking and entry, or no crime was reported. Demographic information includes the respondent's education, income, employment during the last six months, marital status at the time of the interview, and whether the respondent was white (or non-white) or Hispanic (or non-Hispanic). Variables coded the same as the NCVS variables include age, respondent's relationship to the offender, type of crime, year and quarter of interview, NCVS control number, and person weight.
Curated
Restricted
Alaska Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) Data, 1996-2006 (ICPSR 28367)
Released/updated on: 2012-10-05
Geographic coverage: Fairbanks, Kotzebue, United States, Kodiak, Alaska, Anchorage, Homer, Soldotna, Bethel, Nome
Time period: 1996-01-01--2006-01-01
This project examined the characteristics of sexual assault victimizations in Alaska, as observed and recorded by sexual assault nurse examiners in Anchorage, Kodiak, Bethel, Soldotna, Nome, Fairbanks, Homer, and Kotzebue. The sample utilized for this study included all sexual assault nurse examinations conducted in Anchorage from 1996 to 2004, in Bethel and Fairbanks in 2005 and 2006, and in Homer, Kodiak, Kotzebue, Nome, and Soldotna in 2005. A total of 1,699 examinations were collected. More specifically, the information contains demographic characteristics of patients, pre-assault patient characteristics, assault characteristics, post assault characteristics, exam characteristics and findings, and suspect characteristics. Demographic characteristics of patients include gender, race / ethnicity, and age, whether the patient was disabled, and whether the patient reported being homeless. Pre-assault characteristics included whether the patient reported engaging in consensual sexual activity within three days prior to the assault and information on the location of the initial contact with the suspect. Assault characteristics included information on the location of the assault, methods employed by the suspect, the patients' condition at the time of the assault, the patients' use of drugs and alcohol, and a detailed description of the assault itself. This detailed description included the patient's position during the assault, whether condoms and lubricants had been used, whether ejaculation had occurred, and an inventory of 17 different sexual acts. Post-assault characteristics included information on post-assault actions taken by the patient, whether the patient engaged in consensual sexual activity between the time of the assault to the examination, and the time elapsed from the assault to the examination. Exam characteristics and findings included information on whether the exam was completed, the type of exam that was conducted, the patients' behavioral and emotional state during the exam, whether the patient required emergency medical care, whether the presence of sperm was documented, whether patients tested positive for sexually transmitted infections or other genital infections, whether the patient was pregnant, and whether injuries were documented. Injury characteristics included descriptions of both non-genital and genital injury. A total of 108 indicators of non-genital injury were captured. These included nine possible injuries (i.e., bruising, redness, abrasions, lacerations, swelling, fractures, bite marks, pain, and other) to 12 possible sites (i.e., head/face, mouth, neck, shoulders, arms, hands, chest, abdomen, back, buttocks/hips, legs, and feet). A total of 60 indicators of genital injury were also captured. These included four possible injuries (i.e., bruising, abrasions, lacerations, and tenderness) to 15 possible sites (i.e., mons pubis, labia majora, labia minora, labia majora / minora junction, clitoral hood, clitoris, periurethra, hymen, fossa navicularis, posterior fourchette, perineum, vaginal walls, cervix, anus, and rectum). Suspect characteristics included the number of suspects, whether the identity of the suspect was known, demographic characteristics (gender, race/ethnicity, and age), whether the suspect had used alcohol or drugs, and the relationship between the patient and the suspect. In addition to providing detailed information from sexual assault nurse examinations, the data also include three indicators of legal resolutions - whether cases were referred for prosecution, whether cases were accepted for prosecution, and whether cases resulted in a conviction. Data on legal resolutions are only available for 1,229 cases examined from 1999 to 2005.
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
Restricted
Bridge of Faith: Aim4Peace Community-Based Violence Prevention Project, Kansas City, Missouri, 2014-2017 (ICPSR 38128)
Released/updated on: 2022-01-13
Geographic coverage: Missouri, Kansas City (Missouri)
Time period: 2014-01-01--2017-01-01
This study followed the outcomes of the Bridge of Faith program. Bridge of Faith is an expansion project based on efforts of the Aim4Peace Violence Prevention Program, serving youth 13-24 years of age living in a prioritized area of Kansas City, Missouri. Bridge of Faith created goals and objectives that strategically address a continuum from response to violence exposure, intervention for violence survivors, and preventing of violence exposure. Activities were designed to target a reduction in risk factors and improvement in resiliency factors associated with the use of violence, as well as improve access to care and quality of services for those who are survivors of violence to reduce the probability of violence and exposure to others in the future. The overall purpose was to improve the health, social, and economic outcomes for youth and families who have been exposed to trauma and/or violence and prevent further violence from occurring. The project will facilitate these outcomes in specific goals and objectives to expand access to evidence-based programs and services for youth survivors through a new platform for collaborating agencies to link survivors of violence to additional wrap around services, and enhance the performance of service agencies through training, strengthening knowledge and skill development to ensure quality, trauma-informed, and culturally competent care.
This study on the Bridge of Faith Project was split into two datasets, Participant Survey Data and Police Data. Individuals were the unit of analysis measured in the Participant Survey Data, and criminal acts were the unit of analysis measured in the Police Data. Participant Survey Data contains 22 variables and 12 cases. Police Data contains 26 variables and 9 cases.
Curated
British Crime Survey, 1982 (ICPSR 8672)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global
The primary purpose of the British Crime Survey was to estimate how many of the public in England and Wales are victims of selected types of crime over a year, describing the circumstances under which people become victims, and the consequences of crime for victims. Other aims included providing background information on fear of crime among the public and on public contact with the police. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether or not they or their households had been victims of relevant crimes during the one-year reference period. They were then asked a series of very detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information on respondents and their households was collected to allow analysis of the sorts of people who do and do not become victims. Information was also collected on other areas which were of intrinsic interest and which could usefully be related to experience as a victim, namely, fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending.
Curated
British Crime Survey, 1988 (ICPSR 9850)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global
This 1988 survey, the third in a series of surveys instituted by the Home Office in 1982, examines levels of victimization in Great Britain and offers attitudinal data on issues relating to crime. The 1988 survey was intended to replicate the 1982 and 1984 surveys (ICPSR 8672 and 8685) as much as possible. However, in 1988 an additional sample of ethnic minority respondents was included. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether they had been the victims of crime during the reference period, and another series of detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information, such as sex, age, employment, education, and number of children, was also collected on the respondents and their households. Other information was collected on fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending. Part 1 consists of data captured on the Demographic Questionnaire. Parts 2 and 3 represent data collected via Follow-Up Questionnaire A and Follow-Up Questionnaire B, respectively. Each respondent completed one of the two Follow-Up Questionnaires, with all respondents in the ethnic minority sample completing Follow-Up Questionnaire B. Part 4 consists of data from the Main Questionnaire. Each respondent completed a Main Questionnaire that included a large number of screening questions to identify crime victims, and some attitudinal questions. Data in Part 5 were collected from the Victim Form. Only respondents reporting incidents of victimization on the Main Questionnaire have Victim Forms, with up to four Victim Forms per respondent. The unit of analysis for this collection is the individual.
Curated
British Crime Survey, 1992 (ICPSR 6717)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global
The fourth in a series of surveys instituted by the Home Office in 1982, this survey examines levels of victimization in Great Britain and offers attitudinal data on issues relating to crime. The 1992 survey was intended to replicate the 1982, 1984, and 1988 surveys (ICPSR 8672, 8685, and 9850) in methodology and content as much as possible. In 1992, a "core" sample of 10,059 adults along with booster samples of 1,650 ethnic minority adults and 1,350 young people aged 12-15 resident in the same households as adult respondents were interviewed. The 1988 survey had also included an ethnic minority booster sample employing the same sampling method. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether they had been the victims of crime during the reference period, and another series of detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information, such as sex, age, employment, education, and number of children, was also collected on the respondents and their households. Other information was elicited on fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending. Part 1, Demographic File, consists of data captured on the Demographic Questionnaire. Parts 2 and 3 represent data collected via Follow-Up Questionnaire A and Follow-Up Questionnaire B, respectively. Each respondent completed one of the two Follow-Up Questionnaires, with all respondents in the ethnic minority booster sample completing Follow-Up Questionnaire A. Part 4, Main File, consists of data from the Main Questionnaire. Each respondent completed a Main Questionnaire that included some attitudinal questions and a large number of screening questions to identify crime victims. Data in Part 5, Victim File, were collected from the Victim Form. Only respondents reporting incidents of victimization on the Main Questionnaire have Victim Forms, with up to four Victim Forms per respondent. The unit of analysis for this collection is the individual.
Curated
British Crime Survey, 1992: Teenage Booster Sample (ICPSR 6834)
Released/updated on: 1997-02-13
Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global
This survey was conducted in parallel with the BRITISH CRIME SURVEY, 1992 (ICPSR 6717) in the same households among the age group 12-15. The survey covers victimization out of the home, contacts with the police, and self-reported offending. The questions replicate the adult version as much as possible. Respondents were asked a series of screening questions to establish whether they had been victims of crime during the reference period, and another series of detailed questions about the incidents they reported. Basic descriptive background information was also collected on the respondent. Other information was elicited on fear of crime, contact with the police, lifestyle, and self-reported offending. The unit of analysis for this collection is the individual.
Curated
British Crime Surveys, 1984 (ICPSR 8685)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: Great Britain, Wales, England, Global
In 1982 the Home Office conducted the first British Crime Survey, a major study with the aim of discovering levels of victimization in Britain, and of producing attitudinal data on issues relating to crime. The survey was repeated in 1984 and was restricted to England and Wales, whereas the previous study had included Scotland. The survey set out to replicate the previous one as far as possible. Other than questions having to do with victimization and basic demographic details, the topics covered in the questionnaire were: general opinion of the local area, fear of crime and precautions taken, likelihood of crime occurring, extent of "incivilities" in the area, seriousness of various crimes, attitudes towards punishment and prison reform, victim support schemes, neighborhood watch schemes, and self-reported offending.
Curated
California Vital Statistics and Homicide Data, 1990-1999 (ICPSR 3482)
Released/updated on: 2006-02-17
Geographic coverage: United States, California
Time period: 1990-01-01--1999-01-01
This data collection resulted from the project "Linked Homicide File for 1990-1999," which was conducted by the California Department of Health Services (CDHS), Epidemiology and Prevention for Injury Control Branch, for the purpose of studying homicide and providing evidence for the development of strategies to reduce homicide in California. The researchers combined the strengths of law enforcement reporting and medical reporting in one dataset. The homicide data contain information on victims and circumstances of the 34,542 homicides investigated by law enforcement agencies in California for the period 1990 to 1999. The data are Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR), which are received monthly by the Department of Justice from all local California law enforcement agencies as part of the national Uniform Crime Reporting program (UNIFORM CRIME REPORTS [UNITED STATES]: SUPPLEMENTARY HOMICIDE REPORTS, 1976-1999 [ICPSR 3180]). The researchers linked the SHRs to the CDHS vital statistics mortality data, which contain the death records provided by the medical examiner or coroner of each county after investigation of the death. Variables include total number of offenders involved, weapon used in the homicide, county of the victim's residence, location and date of the incident, date of death, cause of death, date of arrest for the suspect, and whether supplemental homicide report matched the death record. Demographic data include age, sex, and race of the victim and the suspect, relationships between the suspect and the victim, and the victim's marital status.
Curated
Calling the Police: Citizen Reporting of Serious Crime, 1979 (ICPSR 8185)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: San Diego, United States, Illinois, Peoria, Rochester (New York), California, Florida, New York (state), Jacksonville
Time period: 1979-04-21--1979-12-07
This dataset replicates the citizen reporting component of POLICE RESPONSE TIME ANALYSIS, 1975 (ICPSR 7760). Information is included on 4,095 reported incidents of aggravated assault, auto theft, burglary, larceny/theft offenses, forcible rape, and robbery. The data cover citizen calls to police between April 21 and December 7, 1979. There are four files in this collection, one each for Jacksonville, Florida, Peoria, Illinois, Rochester, New York, and San Diego, California. The data are taken from police dispatch records and police interviews of citizens who requested police assistance. Variables taken from the dispatch records include the dispatch time, call priority, police travel time, age, sex, and race of the caller, response code, number of suspects, and area of the city in which the call originated. Variables taken from the citizen interviews include respondent's role in the incident (victim, caller, victim-caller, witness-caller), incident location, relationship of caller to victim, number of victims, identification of suspect, and interaction with police.
Curated
Changing Patterns of Homicide and Social Policy in Philadelphia, Phoenix, and St. Louis, 1980-1994 (ICPSR 2729)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Missouri, Phoenix, St. Louis, Arizona, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Time period: 1980-01-01--1994-01-01
This study sought to assess changes in the volume and types of homicide committed in Philadelphia, Phoenix, and St. Louis from 1980 to 1994 and to document the nature of those changes. Three of the eight cities originally studied by Margaret Zahn and Marc Riedel (NATURE AND PATTERNS OF HOMICIDE IN EIGHT AMERICAN CITIES, 1978 [ICPSR 8936]) were revisited for this data collection. In each city, police records were coded for each case of homicide occurring in the city each year from 1980 to 1994. Homicide data for St. Louis were provided by the St. Louis Homicide Project with Scott Decker and Richard Rosenfeld as the principal investigators. Variables describing the event cover study site, year of the case, date and time of assault, location of fatal injury, method used to kill the victim, and circumstances surrounding the death. Variables pertaining to offenders include total number of homicide and assault victims, number of offenders arrested, number of offenders identified, and disposition of event for offenders. Variables on victims focus on whether the victim was killed at work, if the victim was using drugs or alcohol, the victim's blood alcohol level, and the relationship of the victim to the offender. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, and marital status of victims and offenders.
Curated
Restricted
Charlotte [North Carolina] Spouse Assault Replication Project, 1987-1989 (ICPSR 6114)
Released/updated on: 2006-07-13
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Charlotte, United States
Time period: 1987-08-01--1989-06-01
This study is a replication and extension of an experiment conducted in Minneapolis (MINNEAPOLIS INTERVENTION PROJECT, 1986-1987 [ICPSR 9808]) to test the efficacy of three types of police response to spouse abuse. Three experimental treatments were employed: (1) advising and possibly separating the couple, (2) issuing a citation (an order to appear in court to answer specific charges) to the offender, and (3) arresting the offender. The main focus of the project concerned whether arrest is the most effective law enforcement response for deterring recidivism of spouse abusers. Cases were randomly assigned to one of the three treatments and were followed for at least six months to determine whether recidivism occurred. Measures of recidivism were obtained through official police records and victim interviews. Cases that met the following eligibility guidelines were included in the project: (1) a call involving a misdemeanor offense committed by a male offender aged 18 or over against a female victim aged 18 or over who were spouses, (2) ex-spouses, (3) cohabitants, or (4) ex-cohabitants. Also, both suspect and victim had to be present when officers arrived at the scene. Victims were interviewed twice. The first interview occurred shortly after the "presenting incident," the incident that initiated a call for police assistance. This initial interview focused on episodes of abuse that occurred between the time of the presenting incident and the day of the initial interview. In particular, detailed data were gathered on the nature of physical violence directed against the victim, the history of the victim's marital and cohabitating relationships, the nature of the presenting incident prior to the arrival of the police, the actual actions taken by the police at the scene, post-incident separations and reunions of the victim and the offender, recidivism since the presenting incident, the victim's previous abuse history, alcohol and drug use of both the victim and the offender, and the victim's help-seeking actions. Questions were asked regarding whether the offender had threatened to hurt the victim, actually hurt or tried to hurt the victim, threatened to hurt any member of the family, actually hurt or tried to hurt any member of the family, threatened to damage property, or actually damaged any property. In addition, criminal histories and arrest data for the six-month period subsequent to the presenting incident were collected for offenders. A follow-up interview was conducted approximately six months after the presenting incident and focused primarily on recidivism since the initial interview. Arrest recidivism was defined as any arrest for any subsequent offense by the same offender against the same victim committed within six months of the presenting incident. Victims were asked to estimate how often each type of victimization had occurred and to answer more detailed questions on the first and most recent incidents of victimization.
Curated
Chicago Women's Health Risk Study, 1995-1998 (ICPSR 3002)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
Time period: 1995-01-01--1998-01-01
The goal of the Chicago Women's Health Risk Study (CWHRS) was to develop a reliable and validated profile of risk factors directly related to lethal or life-threatening outcomes in intimate partner violence, for use in agencies and organizations working to help women in abusive relationships. Data were collected to draw comparisons between abused women in situations resulting in fatal outcomes and those without fatal outcomes, as well as a baseline comparison of abused women and non-abused women, taking into account the interaction of events, circumstances, and interventions occurring over the course of a year or two. The CWHRS used a quasi-experimental design to gather survey data on 705 women at the point of service for any kind of treatment (related to abuse or not) sought at one of four medical sites serving populations in areas with high rates of intimate partner homicide (Chicago Women's Health Center, Cook County Hospital, Erie Family Health Center, and Roseland Public Health Center). Over 2,600 women were randomly screened in these settings, following strict protocols for safety and privacy. One goal of the design was that the sample would not systematically exclude high-risk but understudied populations, such as expectant mothers, women without regular sources of health care, and abused women in situations where the abuse is unknown to helping agencies. To accomplish this, the study used sensitive contact and interview procedures, developed sensitive instruments, and worked closely with each sample site. The CWHRS attempted to interview all women who answered "yes -- within the past year" to any of the three screening questions, and about 30 percent of women who did not answer yes, provided that the women were over age 17 and had been in an intimate relationship in the past year. In total, 705 women were interviewed, 497 of whom reported that they had experienced physical violence or a violent threat at the hands of an intimate partner in the past year (the abused, or AW, group). The remaining 208 women formed the comparison group (the non-abused, or NAW, group). Data from the initial interview sections comprise Parts 1-8. For some women, the AW versus NAW interview status was not the same as their screening status. When a woman told the interviewer that she had experienced violence or a violent threat in the past year, she and the interviewer completed a daily calendar history, including details of important events and each violent incident that had occurred the previous year. The study attempted to conduct one or two follow-up interviews over the following year with the 497 women categorized as AW. The follow-up rate was 66 percent. Data from this part of the clinic/hospital sample are found in Parts 9-12. In addition to the clinic/hospital sample, the CWHRS collected data on each of the 87 intimate partner homicides occurring in Chicago over a two-year period that involved at least one woman age 18 or older. Using the same interview schedule as for the clinic/hospital sample, CWHRS interviewers conducted personal interviews with one to three "proxy respondents" per case, people who were knowledgeable and credible sources of information about the couple and their relationship, and information was compiled from official or public records, such as court records, witness statements, and newspaper accounts (Parts 13-15). In homicides in which a woman was the homicide offender, attempts were made to contact and interview her. This "lethal" sample, all such homicides that took place in 1995 or 1996, was developed from two sources, HOMICIDES IN CHICAGO, 1965-1995 (ICPSR 6399) and the Cook County Medical Examiner's Office. Part 1 includes demographic variables describing each respondent, such as age, race and ethnicity, level of education, employment status, screening status (AW or NAW), birthplace, and marital status. Variables in Part 2 include details about the woman's household, such as whether she was homeless, the number of people living in the household and details about each person, the number of her children or other children in the household, details of any of her children not living in her household, and any changes in the household structure over the past year. Variables in Part 3 deal with the woman's physical and mental health, including pregnancy, and with her social support network and material resources. Variables in Part 4 provide information on the number and type of firearms in the household, whether the woman had experienced power, control, stalking, or harassment at the hands of an intimate partner in the past year, whether she had experienced specific types of violence or violent threats at the hands of an intimate partner in the past year, and whether she had experienced symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder related to the incidents in the past month. Variables in Part 5 specify the partner or partners who were responsible for the incidents in the past year, record the type and length of the woman's relationship with each of these partners, and provide detailed information on the one partner she chose to talk about (called "Name"). Variables in Part 6 probe the woman's help-seeking and interventions in the past year. Variables in Part 7 include questions comprising the Campbell Danger Assessment (Campbell, 1993). Part 8 assembles variables pertaining to the chosen abusive partner (Name). Part 9, an event-level file, includes the type and the date of each event the woman discussed in a 12-month retrospective calendar history. Part 10, an incident-level file, includes variables describing each violent incident or threat of violence. There is a unique identifier linking each woman to her set of events or incidents. Part 11 is a person-level file in which the incidents in Part 10 have been aggregated into totals for each woman. Variables in Part 11 include, for example, the total number of incidents during the year, the number of days before the interview that the most recent incident had occurred, and the severity of the most severe incident in the past year. Part 12 is a person-level file that summarizes incident information from the follow-up interviews, including the number of abuse incidents from the initial interview to the last follow-up, the number of days between the initial interview and the last follow-up, and the maximum severity of any follow-up incident. Parts 1-12 contain a unique identifier variable that allows users to link each respondent across files. Parts 13-15 contain data from official records sources and information supplied by proxies for victims of intimate partner homicides in 1995 and 1996 in Chicago. Part 13 contains information about the homicide incidents from the "lethal sample," along with outcomes of the court cases (if any) from the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts. Variables for Part 13 include the number of victims killed in the incident, the month and year of the incident, the gender, race, and age of both the victim and offender, who initiated the violence, the severity of any other violence immediately preceding the death, if leaving the relationship triggered the final incident, whether either partner was invading the other's home at the time of the incident, whether jealousy or infidelity was an issue in the final incident, whether there was drug or alcohol use noted by witnesses, the predominant motive of the homicide, location of the homicide, relationship of victim to offender, type of weapon used, whether the offender committed suicide after the homicide, whether any criminal charges were filed, and the type of disposition and length of sentence for that charge. Parts 14 and 15 contain data collected using the proxy interview questionnaire (or the interview of the woman offender, if applicable). The questionnaire used for Part 14 was identical to the one used in the clinic sample, except for some extra questions about the homicide incident. The data include only those 76 cases for which at least one interview was conducted. Most variables in Part 14 pertain to the victim or the offender, regardless of gender (unless otherwise labeled). For ease of analysis, Part 15 includes the same 76 cases as Part 14, but the variables are organized from the woman's point of view, regardless of whether she was the victim or offender in the homicide (for the same-sex cases, Part 15 is from the woman victim's point of view). Parts 14 and 15 can be linked by ID number. However, Part 14 includes five sets of variables that were asked only from the woman's perspective in the original questionnaire: household composition, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), social support network, personal income (as opposed to household income), and help-seeking and intervention. To avoid redundancy, these variables appear only in Part 14. Other variables in Part 14 cover information about the person(s) interviewed, the victim's and offender's age, sex, race/ethnicity, birthplace, employment status at time of death, and level of education, a scale of the victim's and offender's severity of physical abuse in the year prior to the death, the length of the relationship between victim and offender, the number of children belonging to each partner, whether either partner tried to leave and/or asked the other to stay away, the reasons why each partner tried to leave, the longest amount of time each partner stayed away, whether either or both partners returned to the relationship before the death, any known physical or emotional problems sustained by victim or offender, including the four-item Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) scale of depression, drug and alcohol use of the victim and offender, number and type of guns in the household of the victim and offender, Scales of Power and Control (Johnson, 1996) or Stalking and Harassment (Sheridan, 1992) by either intimate partner in the year prior to the death, a modified version of the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) (Johnson, 1996) measuring the type of physical violence experienced by either intimate partner, and the Campbell Danger Assessment for the victim and offender. In addition, Part 14 contains a number of summary variables about the fatal incident, most of which are also in Part 13. These include questions related to the circumstances of the incident, time, place, witnesses, who had initiated the violence, outcome for the offender (e.g., suicide or other death, arrest, sentence, etc.), and outcome for children and others who witnessed the violence or found the body. Part 15 contains the same data as Part 14, except that each variable is presented from the woman's point of view, regardless of whether she was the victim or offender in the homicide. Additional summary variables were added regarding the overall nature of any prior physical abuse in the relationship, as well as the overall pattern of leaving and returning to the relationship in the year prior to the death.
Curated
Child Abuse, Neglect, and Violent Criminal Behavior in a Midwest Metropolitan Area of the United States, 1967-1988 (ICPSR 9480)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1967-01-01--1988-01-01
These data examine the relationships between childhood abuse and/or neglect and later criminal and violent criminal behavior. In particular, the data focus on whether being a victim of violence and/or neglect in early childhood leads to being a criminal offender in adolescence or early adulthood and whether a relationship exists between childhood abuse or neglect and arrests as a juvenile, arrests as an adult, and arrests for violent offenses. For this data collection, adult and juvenile criminal histories of sampled cases with backgrounds of abuse or neglect were compared to those of a matched control group with no official record of abuse or neglect. Variables contained in Part 1 include demographic information (age, race, sex, and date of birth). In Part 2, information is presented on the abuse/neglect incident (type of abuse or neglect, duration of the incident, whether the child was removed from the home and, if so, for how long, results of the placement, and whether the individual was still alive). Part 3 contains family information (with whom the child was living at the time of the incident, family disruptions, and who reported the abuse or neglect) and data on the perpetrator of the incident (relation to the victim, age, race, sex, and whether living in the home of the victim). Part 4 contains information on the charges filed within adult arrest incidents (occasion for arrest, multiple counts of the same type of charge, year and location of arrest, and type of offense or charge), and Part 5 includes information on the charges filed within juvenile arrest incidents (year of juvenile charge, number of arrests, and type of offense or charge). The unit of analysis for Parts 1 through 3 is the individual at age 11 or younger, for Part 4 the charge within the adult arrest incident, and for Part 5 the charge within the juvenile arrest incident.
Curated
Convenience Store Crime in Georgia, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, and South Carolina, 1991-1995 (ICPSR 2699)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Massachusetts, Georgia, Maryland, South Carolina, Michigan
Time period: 1991-01-01--1995-01-01
For this study, convenience store robbery victims and offenders in five states (Georgia, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, and South Carolina) were interviewed. Robbery victims were identified by canvassing convenience stores in high-crime areas, while a sample of unrelated offenders was obtained from state prison rolls. The aims of the survey were to address questions of injury, to examine store characteristics that might influence the rate of robbery and injury, to compare how both victims and offenders perceived the robbery event (including their assessment of what could be done to prevent convenience store robberies in the future), and to identify ways in which the number of convenience store robberies might be reduced. Variables unique to Part 1, the Victim Data file, provide information on how the victim was injured, whether hospitalization was required for the injury, if the victim used any type of self-protection, and whether the victim had been trained to handle a robbery. Part 2, the Offender Data file, presents variables describing offenders' history of prior convenience store robberies, whether there had been an accomplice, motive for robbing the store, and whether various factors mattered in choosing the store to rob (e.g., cashier location, exit locations, lighting conditions, parking lot size, the number of clerks working, weather conditions, the time of day, and the number of customers in the store). Found in both files are variables detailing whether a victim injury occurred, use of a weapon, how each participant behaved, perceptions of why the store was targeted, what could have been done to prevent the robbery, and ratings by the researchers on the completeness, honesty, and cooperativeness of each participant during the interview. Demographic variables found in both the victim and offender files include age, gender, race, and ethnicity.
Curated
Cost of Mental Health Care for Victims of Crime in the United States, 1991 (ICPSR 6581)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
The main objective of this survey was to determine the number of crime victims receiving mental health counseling, by type of crime, and the annual cost of treatment for each type of crime victim. Multiplying these two figures would yield an estimate of the annual financial cost of mental health care for crime victims. For this survey, mental health professionals were sampled from eight professional organizations and were asked questions about their clients during 1991. Respondents were instructed to count only those clients whose primary reason for being treated was because they were previously crime victims, regardless of whether the criminal victimization was the presenting issue at the time the client was first treated. Interviews were structured to first elicit information about the number of victims served for each type of crime. Respondents were then asked for details about the type and length of treatment for the crime type most frequently encountered by the respondent. Similar information was obtained for each additional crime type mentioned by the respondent, in descending order of frequency. Variables include the number of adults, youths, and children served
Curated
Criminal Justice Response to Victim Harm in the United States, 1981 (ICPSR 8249)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
This data collection examines the ways in which victim harm affects decisions regarding arrest, prosecution, and sentencing, and the impact of these decisions on the victim's perception of the criminal justice system. Five types of offenses were studied: homicide, sexual assault, burglary, robbery, and aggravated assault. The victim file contains information on personal characteristics, results of victimization, involvement in case processing, use of victim assistance service, satisfaction with case outcomes, and opinions about the court system. The police file and the prosecutor file variables cover personal background, screening decisions on scenario cases, communication with victims, and opinions about the role of victims in the criminal justice system. The prosecutor file also includes sentencing recommendations on the scenarios. Data in the judge file cover personal background, sentencing recommendations on the scenario cases, communications with victims, sources of information regarding victim harm, and opinions about the role of victims in the criminal justice system.
Curated
Criminal Victimization Among Women in Cleveland, Ohio: Impact on Health Status and Medical Service Usage, 1986 (ICPSR 9920)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio, Cleveland
The impact of criminal victimization on the health status of women is the focus of this data collection. The researchers examined the extent to which victimized women differed from nonvictimized women in terms of their physical and psychological well-being and differences in their use of medical services. The sample was drawn from female members of a health maintenance plan at a worksite in Cleveland, Ohio. Questions used to measure criminal victimization were taken from the National Crime Survey and focused on purse snatching, home burglary, attempted robbery, robbery with force, threatened assault, and assault. In addition, specific questions concerning rape and attempted rape were developed for the study. Health status was assessed by using a number of instruments, including the Cornell Medical Index, the Mental Health Index, and the RAND Corporation test battery for their Health Insurance Experiment. Medical service usage was assessed by reference to medical records. Demographic information includes age, race, income, and education.
Curated
Restricted
The Detroit Sexual Assault Kit Action Research Project: 1980-2009 (ICPSR 35632)
Released/updated on: 2016-07-12
Geographic coverage: Detroit, United States, Michigan
Time period: 1980-01-01--2009-01-01
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.
The four primary goals of The Detroit Sexual Assault Kit Action Research Project (DSAK-ARP) were:
- To assess the scope of the problem by conducting a complete census of all sexual assault kits (SAKs) in police property.
- To identify the underlying factors that contributed to why Detroit had so many un-submitted SAKs.
- To develop a plan for testing SAKs and to evaluate the efficacy of that plan.
- To create a victim notification protocol and evaluate the efficacy of that protocol.
To conduct the census and investigate factors that contributed to untested SAKs, The study investigated police and other public records, interviewed public officials and employees and manually cataloged untested SAKs to conduct the census and gather information as to the decision making processes as to why the SAKs remained untested.
A random sample of 1,595 SAKs were tested as part of developing a SAK testing plan. Kits were divided into four testing groups to examine the utility of testing SAKs for stranger perpetrated sexual assaults, non-stranger perpetrated sexual assaults and sexual assaults believed to be beyond the statute of limitations. The final testing group split SAKs randomly into two addition sample sets as part of an experimental design to examine whether the testing method of selective degradation was a quicker and more cost efficient approach that offered satisfactory levels of accuracy when compared to standard DNA testing methods.
A two stage protocol was created to inform sexual assault victims that their SAKs had been tested, discuss options for participating with the investigation and prosecution process and connect the victim with community services.
Curated
Restricted
Developing a Taxonomy To Understand and Measure Outcomes of Success in Community-Based Elder Mistreatment Interventions, New York City, New York, 2018-2019 (ICPSR 37955)
Released/updated on: 2022-06-29
Geographic coverage: New York City, Queens, United States, Brooklyn, New York (state), Manhattan (New York City)
Time period: 2018-01-01--2019-01-01
Research tools available to help advance knowledge of effective community-based elder mistreatment (EM) interventions are limited. The field lacks an understanding of what success means in EM response program (EMRP) interventions, which work directly with victims to reduce the risk of re-victimization. Without establishing indicators of EMRP success, it is not possible to develop valid intervention outcome measures to compare different EMRP models toward the development of evidence-based practice. Informed by the EMRP practice principle of older adult self-determination, this study developed a victim-centric taxonomy of case outcomes that indicate EMRP success.
This study drew on two sources of data, including interviews with EM victims and a scoping review to inform taxonomy development. Prioritizing the perspective of victims, this study conducted interviews with 27 victims involved in EMRP services who vary in EM subtype, gender, and race/ethnicity.
The taxonomy of successful EMRP outcomes will serve as important research infrastructure to support the development of EMRP intervention outcome measurement in future research.
Curated
Restricted
Domestic Violence Experience in Omaha, Nebraska, 1986-1987 (ICPSR 9481)
Released/updated on: 2006-07-24
Geographic coverage: Omaha, United States, Nebraska
Time period: 1986-01-01--1987-01-01
The purpose of this data collection was to corroborate the findings of SPECIFIC DETERRENT EFFECTS OF ARREST FOR DOMESTIC ASSAULT: MINNEAPOLIS, 1981-1982 (ICPSR 8250) that arrest is an effective deterrent against continued domestic assaults. The data addressed the following questions: (1) To what extent does arrest decrease the likelihood of continued violence, as assessed by the victim? (2) To what extent does arrest decrease the likelihood of continued complaints of crime, as assessed by police records? (3) What are the differences in arrest recidivism between cases that involved arrest versus cases that involved mediation, separation, warrant issued, or no warrant issued? Domestic violence cases in three sectors of Omaha, Nebraska, meeting established eligibility criteria, were assigned to one of five experimental treatments: mediation, separation, arrest, warrant issued, or no warrant issued. Data for victim reports were collected from three interviews with the victims conducted one week, six months, and 12 months after the domestic violence incident. Arrest, charge, and complaint data were collected on the suspects at six- and twelve-month intervals following the original domestic violence incident. The investigators used arrest recidivism, continued complaints of crime, and victim reports of repeated violence (fear of injury, pushing/hitting, and physical injury) as outcome measures to assess the extent to which treatments prevented subsequent conflicts. Other variables include victim's level of fear, self-esteem, locus of control, and welfare dependency, changes in the relationship between suspect and victim, extent of the victim's injury, and extent of drug use by the victim and the suspect. Demographic variables include race, age, sex, income, occupational status, and marital status.
Curated
Effectiveness of a Joint Police and Social Services Response to Elder Abuse in Manhattan [New York City], New York, 1996-1997 (ICPSR 3130)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)
Time period: 1996-01-01--1997-01-01
This project consisted of an evaluation of an elder abuse program run by the New York Police Department and Victim Services Research. The focus of the study was domestic elder abuse, which generally refers to any of several forms of maltreatment, physical abuse, sexual abuse, psychological abuse, neglect, and/or financial exploitation of an older person. The program, conducted in New York City public housing, had two complementary parts. First, public housing projects in Manhattan were assigned to one of two levels of public education (i.e., to receive or not to receive educational materials about elder abuse). Once the public education treatment had been implemented, 403 older adult residents of the housing projects who reported elder abuse to the police during the next ten months were assigned to one of two levels of follow-up to the initial police response (i.e., to receive or not to receive a home visit) as the second part of the project. The home visit intervention consisted of a strong law enforcement response designed to prevent repeat incidents of elder abuse. A team from the Domestic Violence Intervention and Education Program (DVIEP), consisting of a police officer and a social worker, followed up on domestic violence complaints with a home visit within a few days of the initial patrol response. Victims were interviewed about new victimizations following the intervention on three occasions: six weeks after the trigger incident, six months after the trigger incident, and twelve months after the trigger incident. Interviews at the three time points were identical except for the omission of background information on the second and third interviews. Demographic data collected during the first interview included age, gender, ethnicity, education, employment, income, legal relationship with abuser, living situation, number of people in the household, and health. For each time point, data provide measures of physical, psychological, and financial abuse, knowledge of elder abuse, knowledge and use of social services, satisfaction with the police, assessment of service delivery, and self-esteem and well-being. The DVIEP databases maintained on households at each of the three participating Police Service Areas (PSAs) were searched to identify new police reports of elder abuse for households in the sample within 12 months following the trigger incident. Variables from the DVIEP databases include age, race, ethnicity, and sex of the victim and the perpetrator, relationship of perpetrator to victim, type of abuse reported, charge, whether an arrest was made, if an order of protection had been obtained, if the order of protection was violated, use of weapons, if the victim had been injured, and if the victim was taken to the hospital. Several time lapse variables between different time points are also provided.
Curated
Effectiveness of Alternative Victim Assistance Service Delivery Models in the San Diego Region, 1993-1994 (ICPSR 2789)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: San Diego, United States, California
Time period: 1993-01-01--1994-01-01
This study had a variety of aims: (1) to assess the needs of violent crime victims, (2) to document the services that were available to violent crime victims in the San Diego region, (3) to assess the level of service utilization by different segments of the population, (4) to determine how individuals cope with victimization and how coping ability varies as a function of victim and crime characteristics, (5) to document the set of factors related to satisfaction with the criminal justice system, (6) to recommend improvements in the delivery of services to victims, and (7) to identify issues for future research. Data were collected using five different survey instruments. The first survey was sent to over 3,000 violent crime victims over the age of 16 and to approximately 60 homicide witnesses and survivors in the San Diego region (Part 1, Initial Victims' Survey Data). Of the 718 victims who returned the initial survey, 330 victims were recontacted six months later (Part 2, Follow-Up Victims' Survey Data). Respondents in Part 1 were asked what type of violent crime occurred, whether they sustained injury, whether they received medical treatment, what the nature of their relationship to the suspect was, and if the suspect had been arrested. Respondents for both Parts 1 and 2 were asked which service providers, if any, contacted them at the time of the incident or afterwards. Respondents were also asked what type of services they needed and received at the time of the incident or afterwards. Respondents in Part 2 rated the overall service and helpfulness of the information received at the time of the incident and after, and their level of satisfaction regarding contact with the police, prosecutor, and judge handling their case. Respondents in Part 2 were also asked what sort of financial loss resulted from the incident, and whether federal, state, local, or private agencies provided financial assistance to them. Finally, respondents in Part 1 and Part 2 were asked about the physical and psychological effects of their victimization. Demographic variables for Part 1 and Part 2 include the marital status, employment status, and type of job of each violent crime victim/witness/survivor. Part 1 also includes the race, sex, and highest level of education of each respondent. Police and court case files were reviewed six months after the incident occurred for each initial sample case. Data regarding victim and incident characteristics were collected from original arrest reports, jail booking screens, and court dockets (Part 3, Tracking Data). The variables for Part 3 include the total number of victims, survivors, and witnesses of violent crimes, place of attack, evidence collected, and which service providers were at the scene of the crime. Part 3 also includes a detailed list of the services provided to the victim/witness/survivor at the scene of the crime and after. These services included counseling, explanation of medical and police procedures, self-defense and crime prevention classes, food, clothing, psychological/psychiatric services, and help with court processes. Additional Part 3 variables cover circumstances of the incident, initial custody status of suspects, involvement of victims and witnesses at hearings, and case outcome, including disposition and sentencing. The race, sex, and age of each victim/witness/survivor are also recorded in Part 3 along with the same demographics for each suspect. Data for Part 4, Intervention Programs Survey Data, were gathered using a third survey, which was distributed to members of the three following intervention programs: (1) the San Diego Crisis Intervention Team, (2) the EYE Counseling and Crisis Services, Crisis and Advocacy Team, and (3) the District Attorney's Victim-Witness Assistance Program. A modified version of the survey with a subset of the original questions was administered one year later to members of the San Diego Crisis Intervention Team (Part 5, Crisis Intervention Team Survey Data) and to the EYE Counseling and Crisis Services, Crisis and Advocacy Team (Part 6, EYE Crisis and Advocacy Team Survey Data). The survey questions for Parts 4-6 asked each respondent to provide their reasons for becoming involved with the program, the goals of the program, responsibilities of the staff or volunteers, the types of referral services their agency provided, the number of hours of training required, and the topics covered in the training. Respondents for Parts 4-6 were further asked about the specific types of services they provided to victims/witnesses/survivors. Part 4 also contains a series of variables regarding coordination efforts, problems, and resolutions encountered when dealing with other intervention agencies and law enforcement agencies. Demographic variables for Parts 4-6 include the ethnicity, age, gender, and highest level of education of each respondent, and whether the respondent was a staff member of the agency or volunteer. The fourth survey was mailed to 53 referral agencies used by police and crisis interventionists (Part 7, Service Provider Survey Data). Part 7 contains the same series of variables as Part 4 on dealing with other intervention and law enforcement agencies. Respondents in Part 7 were further asked to describe the type of victims/witnesses/survivors to whom they provided service (e.g., domestic violence victims, homicide witnesses, or suicide survivors) and to rate their level of satisfaction with referral procedures provided by law enforcement officers, hospitals, paramedics, religious groups, the San Diego Crisis Intervention Team, the EYE Crisis Team, and the District Attorney's Victim/Witness Program. Part 7 also includes the hours of operation for each service provider organization, as well as which California counties they serviced. Finally, respondents in Part 7 were given a list of services and asked if they provided any of those services to victims/witnesses/survivors. Services unique to this list included job placement assistance, public awareness campaigns, accompaniment to court, support groups, and advocacy with outside agencies (e.g., employers or creditors). Demographic variables for Part 7 include the ethnicity, age, and gender of each respondent. The last survey was distributed to over 1,000 law enforcement officers from the Escondido, San Diego, and Vista sheriff's agencies (Part 8, Law Enforcement Survey Data). Respondents in Part 8 were surveyed to determine their familiarity with intervention programs, how they learned about the program, the extent to which they used or referred others to intervention services, appropriate circumstances for calling or not calling in interventionists, their opinions regarding various intervention programs, their interactions with interventionists at crime scenes, and suggestions for improving delivery of services to victims. Demographic variables for Part 8 include the rank and agency of each law enforcement respondent.
Curated
Effect of Procedural Justice in Spouse Assault in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1987-1989 (ICPSR 20343)
Released/updated on: 2008-04-17
Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, United States, Wisconsin
Time period: 1987-01-01--1989-01-01
The purpose of the research project was to examine the extent to which the perception of procedural fairness by suspects arrested for spouse assault effectively inhibited their subsequent violence. The data for this study were collected for the MILWAUKEE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE EXPERIMENT, 1987-1989 (ICPSR 9966), which was conducted from April 1987 to August 1988. In this experiment, all cases of misdemeanor domestic battery where probable cause to arrest existed were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (1) warning with no arrest, (2) arrest with a brief detention period (average of 3 hours), and (3) arrest with a longer detention period (average of 11 hours). Variables include demographic and background information, as well as descriptive variables pertaining to the domestic violence incident.
Curated
Effects of Crime on After-School Youth Development Programs in the United States, 1993-1994 (ICPSR 6791)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Time period: 1993-01-01--1994-01-01
This study obtained information on youth-serving organizations around the country that provide constructive activities for youth in the after-school and evening hours. It was carried out in collaboration with seven national youth-serving organizations: Boys and Girls Clubs of America, Boy Scouts of America, Girls Incorporated, Girl Scouts of the U.S.A., National Association of Police Athletic Leagues, National 4-H Council and United States Department of Agriculture 4-H and Youth Development Service, and YMCA of the U.S.A. The research involved a national survey of affiliates and charter members of these organizations. Respondents were asked to provide information about their programs for the 1993-1994 school year, including summer 1994 if applicable. A total of 1,234 questionnaires were mailed to the 658 youth-serving organizations in 376 cities in October 1994. Survey data were provided by 579 local affiliates. Information was collected on the type of building where the organization was located, the months, days of the week, and hours of operation, number of adults on staff, number and sex of school-age participants, number of hours participants spent at the program location, other participants served by the program, and characteristics of the neighborhood where the program was located. Questions were also asked about the types of contacts the organization had with the local police department, types of crimes that occurred at the location in the school year, number of times each crime type occurred, number of times the respondent was a victim of each crime type, if the offender was a participant, other youth, adult with the program, adult from the neighborhood, or adult stranger, actions taken by the organization because crimes occurred, and crime prevention strategies recommended and adopted by the organization. Geographic information includes the organization's stratum and FBI region.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Enhancing Response to Victims: A Formative Evaluation of the Office for Victims of Crime Law Enforcement-Based Victim Services (LEV) Program, United States, 2021-2022 (ICPSR 39018)
Released/updated on: 2025-08-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2021-01-01--2022-12-31
Through this formative evaluation, researchers sought to provide foundational knowledge of the law enforcement-based victim services programs funded through the Office for Victims of Crime Law Enforcement-based Victim Services (LEV) program and move the victim services field closer to being able to evaluate the effectiveness of LE-based victim services and identify best practices for service provision. The researchers' specific objectives were to (1) develop a comprehensive inventory and typology of all LEV programs, (2) develop logic models and identify core components of a subset of sites, (3) conduct an evaluability assessment in the subset of sites, (4) develop recommendations for future outcome evaluation, and (5) develop an implementation guide and fidelity measures. The data archived here include administrative data on LEV programs provided by the Training and Technical Assistance (TTA) team, a web survey of all LEV sites, and Census data that was used to describe the communities in which LEV programs were located.
Curated
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 Alternative Police Responses to Spouse Assault in Colorado Springs: an Enhanced Replication of the Minneapolis Experiment, 1987-1989 (ICPSR 9982)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States, Colorado, Colorado Springs
Time period: 1987-03-01--1989-04-01
The purpose of this study was to replicate an experiment in Minneapolis (MINNEAPOLIS INTERVENTION PROJECT, 1986-1987 [ICPSR 9808]) testing alternative police response to cases of spouse assault, using a larger number of subjects and a more complex research design. The study focused on how police response affected subsequent incidents of spouse assault. Police responses studied included arrest, issuing emergency protection orders, referring the suspect to counseling, separating the suspect and the victim, and restoring order only (no specific action). Data were obtained through initial incident reports, counseling information, and personal interviews. Follow-up interviews were conducted at three- and six-month periods, and recidivists were identified through police and court record checks. Variables from initial incident reports include number of charges, date, location, and disposition of charges, weapon(s) used, victim injuries, medical attention received, behavior towards police, victim and suspect comments, and demographic information such as race, sex, relationship to victim/offender, age, and past victim/offender history. Data collected from counseling forms provide information on demographic characteristics of the suspect, type of counseling, topics covered in counseling, suspect's level of participation, and therapist comments. Court records investigate victim and suspect criminal histories, including descriptions of charges and their disposition, conditions of pretrial release, and the victim's contact with pretrial services. Other variables included in follow-up checks focus on criminal and offense history of the suspect. The data collection includes separate data files for the original, second, and final versions of some of the forms that were used.
Curated
Evaluating Network Sampling in Victimization Surveys in Peoria, Illinois, 1986 (ICPSR 9968)
Released/updated on: 1993-05-13
Geographic coverage: United States, Illinois, Peoria
Time period: 1986-02-01--1986-09-01
This data collection evaluates the advantages of network sampling over traditional methods in conducting crime and victimization surveys. Network sampling links population households in specified ways, for reporting purposes, in order to increase the likelihood of locating households with particular characteristics. The investigators conducted a reverse record check survey of victims and a network survey with a random sample of the victims' relatives and close friends. The researchers compared the extent to which crime victims reported their victimization experiences in a general crime and victimization interview and the extent to which a randomly selected relative or close friend of each victim reported the same victimization in the same type of interview. In addition, they examined whether significant reporting differences were evident by type of crime and by various demographic variables.
Curated
Restricted
Evaluating the Impact of a Specialized Domestic Violence Police Unit in Charlotte, North Carolina, 2003-2005 (ICPSR 20461)
Released/updated on: 2008-07-01
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Charlotte, United States
Time period: 2003-01-01--2005-01-01
The specific goals of this project were (1) to assess the selection criteria used to determine the domestic violence cases for intensive intervention: what criteria are used, and what differentiates how cases are handled, (2) to track the outcomes through Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department (CMPD), Mecklenburg domestic violence court, and the Mecklenburg jail for the different methods of dealing with the cases, and (3) to provide an assessment of the relative effectiveness of a specialized domestic violence unit vis-a-vis normal patrol unit responses in terms of repeat calls, court processing, victim harm, and repeat arrests. The population from which the sample was selected consisted of all police complaint numbers for cases involving domestic violence (DV) in 2003. The unit of analysis was therefore the domestic violence incident. Cases were selected using a randomized stratified sample (stratifying by month) that also triple-sampled DV Unit cases, which generated 255 DV Unit cases for inclusion. The final sample therefore consists of 891 domestic violence cases, each involving one victim and one suspect. Within this final sample of cases, 25 percent were processed by the DV Unit. The data file contains data from multiple sources. Included from the police department's computerized database (KBCOPS) are variables pertaining to the nature of the crime, victim information and suspect information such as suspect and victim demographic data, victim/offender relationship, highest offense category, weapon usage, victim injury, and case disposition status. From police narratives come such variables as victim/offender relationship, weapon use (more refined than what is included in KBCOPS data), victim injury (also a more refined measure), and evidence collected. Variables from tracking data include information regarding the nature of the offense, the level/type of harm inflicted, and if the assault involved the same victim in the sample. Variables such as amount of jail time a suspect may have had, information pertaining to the court charges (as opposed to the charges at arrest) and case disposition status are included from court and jail data.
Curated
Evaluation of a Centralized Response to Domestic Violence by the San Diego County Sheriff's Department Domestic Violence Unit, 1998-1999 (ICPSR 3488)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: San Diego, United States, California
Time period: 1998-01-01--1999-01-01
This study examined the implementation of a specialized domestic violence unit within the San Diego County Sheriff's Department to determine whether the creation of the new unit would lead to increased and improved reporting, and more filings for prosecution. In order to evaluate the implementation of the specialized domestic violence unit, the researchers conducted the following tasks: (1) They surveyed field deputies to assess their level of knowledge about domestic violence laws and adherence to the countywide domestic violence protocol. (2) They studied a sample from the case tracking system that reported cases of domestic violence handled by the domestic violence unit to determine changes in procedures compared to an earlier case tracking study with no specialized unit. (3) They interviewed victims of domestic violence by phone to explore the responsiveness of the field deputies and the unit detectives to the needs of the victims. Part 1 (Deputy Survey Data) contains data on unit detectives' knowledge about the laws concerning domestic violence. Information includes whether or not the person considered the primary aggressor was the person who committed the first act of aggression, if a law enforcement officer could decide whether or not to complete a domestic violence supplemental report, whether an arrest should be made if there was reasonable cause to believe that a misdemeanor offense had been committed, and whether the decision to prosecute a suspect lay within the discretion of the district or city attorney. Demographic variables include deputy's years of education and law enforcement experience. Part 2 (Case Tracking Data) includes demographic variables such as race and sex of the victim and the suspect, and the relationship between the victim and the suspect. Other information was collected on whether the victim and the suspect used alcohol and drugs prior to or during the incident, if the victim was pregnant, if children were present during the incident, highest charge on the incident report, if the reporting call was made at the same place the incident occurred, suspect actions described on the report, if a gun, knife, physical force, or verbal abuse was used in the incident, if the victim or the suspect was injured, and if medical treatment was provided to the victim. Data were also gathered on whether the suspect was arrested or booked, how the investigating officer decided whether to request that the prosecutor file charges, type of evidence collected, if a victim or witness statement was collected, if the victim had a restraining order, prior history of domestic violence, if the victim was provided with information on domestic violence law, hotline, shelter, transportation, and medical treatment, highest arrest charge, number of arrests for any drug charges, weapon charges, domestic violence charges, or other charges, case disposition, number of convictions for the charges, and number of prior arrests and convictions. Part 3 (Victim Survey Data) includes demographic variables such as victim's gender and race. Other variables include how much time the deputy spent at the scene when s/he responded to the call, number of deputies the victim interacted with at the scene, number of deputies at the scene that were male or female, if the victim used any of the information the deputy provided, if the victim used referral information for counseling, legal, shelter, and other services, how helpful the victim found the information, and the victim's rating of the performance of the deputy.
Curated
Restricted
Evaluation of a Coordinated Community Response to Domestic Violence in Alexandria, Virginia, 1990-1998 (ICPSR 2858)
Released/updated on: 2006-07-13
Geographic coverage: United States, Alexandria, Virginia
Time period: 1990-01-01--1998-01-01
This study was undertaken to evaluate Alexandria, Virginia's Domestic Violence Intervention Program (DVIP), which is a coordinated community response to domestic violence. Specifically, the goals of the study were (1) to determine the effectiveness of DVIP, (2) to compare victims' perceptions of program satisfaction and other program elements between the Alexandria Domestic Violence Intervention Program and domestic violence victim support services in Virginia Beach, Virginia, (3) to examine the factors related to abusers who repeatedly abuse their victims, and (4) to report the findings of attitudinal surveys of the Alexandria police department regarding the mandatory arrest policy. Data were collected from four sources. The first two sources of data were surveys conducted via telephone interviews with females living in either Alexandria, Virginia (Part 1), or Virginia Beach, Virginia (Part 2), who were victims of domestic violence assault incidents in which the police had been contacted. These surveys were designed to describe the services that the women had received, their satisfaction with those services, and their experience with subsequent abuse. For Part 3 (Alexandria Repeat Offender Data), administrative records from the Alexandria Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) were examined in order to identify and examine the factors related to abusers who repeatedly abused their victims. The fourth source of data was a survey distributed to police officers in Alexandria (Part 4, Alexandria Police Officer Survey Data) and was developed to assess police officers' attitudes regarding the domestic violence arrest policy in Alexandria. In four rounds of interviews for Part 1 and three rounds of interviews for Part 2, victims answered questions regarding the location where the domestic violence incident occurred and if the police were involved, their perceptions of the helpfulness of the police, prosecutor, domestic violence programs, hotlines, and shelters, their relationship to the abuser, their living arrangements at the time of each interview, and whether a protective order was obtained. Also gathered was information on the types of abuse and injuries sustained by the victim, whether she sought medical care for the injuries, whether drugs or alcohol played a role in the incident(s), whether the victim had been physically abused or threatened, yelled at, had personal property destroyed, or was made to feel unsafe by the abuser, if any other programs or persons provided help to the victim and how helpful these additional services were, and whether a judge ordered services for the victim or abuser. After the initial interviews, in subsequent rounds victims were asked if they had had any contact with the abuser since the last interview, if they had experienced any major life changes, if their situation had improved or gotten worse and if so how, and what types of assistance or programs would have helped improve their situation. Demographic variables for Part 3 include offenders' race, sex, age at first criminal nondomestic violence charge, and age at first domestic violence charge. Other variables include charge number, type, initiator, disposition, and sentence of nondomestic violence charges, as well as the conditions of the sentences, imposed days, months, and years, effective days, months, and years, type of domestic violence case, victim's relationship to offender, victim's age, sex, and race, whether alcohol or drugs were involved, if children were present at the domestic violence incident, the assault method used by the offender, and the severity of the assault. For Part 4, police officers were asked whether they knew what a domestic violent incident was, whether arresting without a warrant was considered good policy, whether they were in favor of domestic violence policy as a police response, whether they thought domestic violence policy was an effective deterrent, whether officers should have discretion to arrest, and how much discretion was used to handle domestic violence calls. The number and percent of domestic violence arrests made in the previous year, percent of domestic violence calls that involved mutual combat, and the number of years each respondent worked with the Alexandria, Virginia, police department are included in the file. Demographic variables for Part 4 include the age and gender of each respondent.
Curated
Restricted
Evaluation of a Demonstration for Enhanced Judicial Oversight of Domestic Violence Cases in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Washtenaw County, Michigan; and Dorchester, Massachusetts; 1997-2004 (ICPSR 25924)
Released/updated on: 2011-04-29
Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, United States, Lowell, Massachusetts, Dorchester, Wisconsin, Michigan
Time period: 1997-01-01--2004-01-01
The Judicial Oversight Demonstration (JOD) was designed to test the feasibility and impact of a coordinated response to intimate partner violence (IPV) that involved the courts and justice agencies in a central role. The primary goals were to protect victim safety, hold offenders accountable, and reduce repeat offending. The two primary evaluation objectives were: (1) to test the impact of JOD interventions on victim safety, offender accountability, and recidivism, and (2) to learn from the experiences of well-qualified sites who were given resources and challenged to build a collaboration between the courts and community agencies to respond to intimate partner violence. Dorchester, Massachusetts, and Washtenaw County, Michigan, participated in a quasi-experimental evaluation of the impact of the program. IPV cases reaching disposition during the JOD were compared to similar cases reaching disposition in Lowell, Massachusetts, and Ingham County, Michigan. All IPV cases reaching disposition from approximately January 2003 to November 2004 (see Study Time Periods and Time Frames) were reviewed and included in the sample if appropriate. To be eligible for the sample, cases had to involve: (1) criminal IPV charges; (2) victims and offenders age 18 or older; and (3) victims and offenders who lived in the target jurisdiction at the time of case disposition. Cases that reached disposition more than a year after the incident were excluded to limit loss of data due to poor recall of the facts of the incident and police response. The evaluation design of JOD in Milwaukee differed from that of the other two sites. The evaluation in Milwaukee was based on a quasi-experimental comparison of offenders convicted of IPV and ordered to probation during JOD (January 1, 2001, to May 21, 2002) and before JOD (October 8, 1997, to December 21, 1999). This design was selected when early plans for an experimental design had to be abandoned and no comparable contemporaneous comparison group could be identified. Data for this evaluation were collected from court and prosecutors' records of case and defendant characteristics, probation files on offender supervision practices, and official records of rearrest, but do not include interviews with victims or offenders. This data collection has 20 data files containing 3,578 cases and 4,092 variables. The data files contain information related to each site's Batterer Intervention Programs (Parts 1, 8, and 15), court data (Parts 2, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 18), law enforcement (Parts 3, 11, and 17), and victim data (Parts 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, and 19). The Dorchester, Massachusetts, and Washtenaw County, Michigan, Impact Evaluation Data (Part 7) include baseline and follow-up information for the offender and the victim. The data file also contains Probation Supervision Performance Reports, Victim Services Logs, and Case Incident Fact Sheet information. The Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Impact Evaluation Data (Part 20) include information related to the offender and the victim such as age, race, and sex, as well as arrest records including charges filed.
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
Evaluation of Pre-Trial Settlement Conference: Dade County, Florida, Criminal Court, 1979 (ICPSR 7710)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Florida
This study reports on the implementation in Dade County, Florida, of a proposal to involve, on a voluntary basis, victims, defendants, and police in a judicial plea negotiation conference. The study was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, United States Department of Justice. Parts 1-3, Defendants, Victims, and Police files, consist of responses to questionnaires given to defendants, victims, and police. The questionnaires were administered during 20-minute interviews, conducted after the case had been completed. The interview instruments were designed to collect data on three major issues: (1) the extent to which respondents reported participation in the processing of their cases, (2) respondents' knowledge of the way their cases were processed, and (3) respondents' attitudes toward the disposition of their cases and toward the criminal justice system. Part 4 is the Conference Data File. During the pretrial settlement conference, an observer wrote down in sequence as much as possible of the verbal behavior. After the session, the observer made some subjective ratings, provided descriptive data about the conclusion of the session, and classified comments into one of the following categories: (1) Facts of the Case, (2) Prior Record, (3) Law and Practices, (4) Maximum Sentence, (5) Prediction of Trial Outcome, (6) Conference Precedent, (7) Personal Background History, and (8) Recommendations. Information in Part 5, the Case Information Data File, was drawn from court records and includes type of case, number of charges, sentence type, sentence severity (stated and perceived), seriousness of offense, date of arrest, date of arraignment, date of conference, prior incarcerations, and defendant background.
Curated
Restricted
Evaluation of Special Session Domestic Violence Court Processing in Connecticut, 1999-2000 (ICPSR 3603)
Released/updated on: 2003-10-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Connecticut
Time period: 1999-01-01--2000-01-01
This study documented women's experience of enhanced services and advocacy in the context of the three special session domestic violence courts in Connecticut. The study conducted 60 in-depth interviews with women whose current or former partners were arrested for domestic violence and who appeared in one of the three special session courts. The questions were designed to elicit information from women about the meaning and context of intimate violence in their lives generally, their assessments of the risks and options available to them and their children from family, friends, and other institutions, their strategies for maximizing safety for themselves and their children, the meaning of the arrest incident in their overall experience of their relationship with their abusive partner, and the impact of the court experience on their plans, sense of options, and understanding of the abuse they had experienced.
Curated
Restricted
Evaluation of the Bureau of Justice Assistance Sexual Assault Kit Initiative, United States, 2018 (ICPSR 37897)
Released/updated on: 2022-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
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).
Curated
Evaluation of the Phoenix, Arizona, Homicide Clearance Initiative, 2003-2005 (ICPSR 26081)
Released/updated on: 2011-07-05
Geographic coverage: United States, Phoenix, Arizona
Time period: 2003-07-01--2005-06-30
The purpose of the study was to conduct a process and outcome evaluation of the Homicide Clearance Project in the Phoenix, Arizona Police Department. The primary objective of the Homicide Clearance Project was to improve homicide clearance rates by increasing investigative time through the transfer of four crime scene specialists to the homicide unit. In 2004, the Phoenix Police Department received a grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance providing support for the assignment of four crime scene specialists directly to the department's Homicide Unit. Responsibilities of the crime scene specialists were to collect evidence at homicide scenes, prepare scene reports, develop scene diagrams, and other supportive activities. Prior to the project, homicide investigators were responsible for evidence collection, which reduced the time they could devote to investigations. The crime scene specialists were assigned to two of the four investigative squads within the homicide unit. This organizational arrangement provided for a performance evaluation of the squads with crime scene specialists (experimental squads) against the performance of the other squads (comparison squads). During the course of the evaluation, research staff coded information from all homicides that occurred during the 12-month period prior to the transfers (July 1, 2003 - June 30, 2004), referred to as the baseline period, the 2-month training period (July 1, 2004 - August 31, 2004), and a 10-month test period (September 1, 2004 - June 30, 2005). Data were collected on 404 homicide cases (Part 1), 532 homicide victims and survivors (Part 2), and 3,338 records of evidence collected at homicide scenes (Part 3). The two primary sources of information for the evaluation were investigative reports from the department's records management system, called the Police Automated Computer Entry (PACE) system, and crime laboratory reports from the crime laboratory's Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS). Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 each contain variables that measure squad type, time period, and whether six general categories of evidence were collected. Part 1 contains a total of 18 variables including number of investigators, number of patrol officers at the scene, number of witnesses, number of crime scene specialists at the scene, number of investigators collecting evidence at the scene, total number of evidence collectors, whether the case was open or closed, type of arrest, and whether the case was open or closed by arrest. Part 2 contains a total of 37 variables including victim characteristics and motives. Other variables in Part 2 include an instrumental/expressive homicide indicator, whether the case was open or closed, type of arrest, whether the case was open or closed by arrest, number of investigators, number of patrol officers at the scene, number of witnesses, and investigative time to closure. Part 3 contains a total of 46 variables including primary/secondary scene indicator, scene type, number of pieces of evidence, total time at the scene, and number of photos taken. Part 3 also includes variables that measure whether 16 specific types of evidence were found and the number of items of evidence that were collected for 13 specific evidence types.
Curated
Restricted
Evaluation of Victim Advocacy Services for Battered Women in Detroit, 1998-1999 (ICPSR 3017)
Released/updated on: 2012-08-22
Geographic coverage: Detroit, United States, Michigan
Time period: 1998-01-01--1999-01-01
This study evaluated advocacy services offered to battered women in Detroit, Michigan, and examined other aspects of coordinated community responses to domestic violence by focusing on women named as victims in police reports. Advocacy was defined as those services provided to support victims during the legal process or to enhance their safety. For the Preliminary Complaint Reports Data (Part 1), a random sample of preliminary complaint reports (PCRs), completed by police officers after they responded to domestic violence calls, were gathered, resulting in a sample of 1,057 incidents and victims. For Victim Advocacy Contact Data (Part 2), researchers obtained data from advocates' files about the services they provided to the 1,057 victims. For Case Disposition Data (Part 3), researchers conducted a computer search to determine the outcomes of the cases. They looked up each perpetrator from the list of 1,057 incidents, and determined whether there was a warrant for the focal incident, whether it turned into a prosecution, and the outcome. The Initial Victim Interview (Part 4) and Follow-Up Victim Interview Data (Part 5) were conducted from April 1998 to July 1999. During the same period that researchers were completing the second interviews, they also interviewed 23 women (Victim Comparison Group Interview Data, Part 6) from the list of 1,057 whom they had been unable to reach during the first interviews. They compared these 23 women to the 63 who had second interviews to determine if there were any differences in use of services, or views toward or participation in prosecution. Variables in Part 1 focus on whether alcohol and abuse were involved, previous incidents, the suspect's psychological aggressions and physical assaults, if a weapon was used, if the victim was hurt, if property was damaged, if the victim sought medical attention, and the severity of physical abuse or injury. Variables in Part 2 provide information on the role of the advocate, methods of contact, types of referrals made, and services provided. Variables in Part 3 include the type of charge, outcome of resolved case, why the case was dismissed, if applicable, and if the suspect was sentenced to probation, costs, confinement, no contact with the victim, a batterer program, or community service. The initial, follow-up, and comparison group interviews (Parts 4-6) all collected similar information. Variables about the incident include how well the respondent remembered the incident, if police arrived promptly, if the respondent was advised to file charges, if police told the respondent that a counselor was available, and if the respondent's partner had been in jail since the incident. Variables concerning advocacy include whether the victim contacted advocates, and if advocates provided legal help and referrals. Legal system variables include whether the respondent felt pressured by anyone to drop charges or pursue charges, if the respondent received help for preliminary examination or trial, and if contact with the legal system helped the respondent. Variables about services include whether the respondent received assistance in temporary shelter, food/money resources, child care, employment, education, a lawyer for divorce/custody, support or self-help group, or a substance abuse treatment program. Variables concerning what happened in the previous six months cover the number of times the respondent had called police because of danger, left home because of a violent incident, partner had been arrested because of violence, and partner physically abused respondent. Variables about events that occurred while the respondent and abuser were separated include how often the partner harassed the respondent on the phone, wrote threatening letters, violated legal restrictions, refused to leave the respondent's home, failed to pay child support, and threatened to take the children. Demographic variables include respondent's race or ethnic background, education, marital status, number of children, number of children who lived with respondent, and employment status and income at the time of the interviews.
Curated
Restricted
Evaluation of Victim Advocacy Services Funded by the Violence Against Women Act in Urban Ohio, 1999 (ICPSR 2992)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio
The focus of this research and evaluation endeavor was on direct service programs in Ohio, particularly advocacy services for female victims of violence, receiving funding through the Services, Training, Officers, Prosecutors (STOP) formula grants under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994. The objectives of this project were (1) to describe and compare existing advocacy services in Ohio, (2) to compare victim advocacy typologies and identify key variables in the delivery of services, (3) to develop a better understanding of how victim advocacy services are defined and delivered, and (4) to assess the effectiveness of those services. For Part 1, Service Agencies Data, comprehensive information about 13 VAWA-funded programs providing direct services in urban Ohio was gathered through a mailback questionnaire and phone interviews. Detailed information was collected on organizational structure, clients served, and agency services. Focus groups were also used to collect data from clients (Parts 3-11) and staff (Parts 12-23) about their definitions of advocacy, types of services needed by victims, services provided to victims, and important outcomes for service providers. Part 2, Police Officer Data, focused on police officers' attitudes toward domestic violence and on evaluating service outcomes in one particular agency. The agency selected was a prosecutor's office that planned to improve services to victims by changing how the police and prosecutors responded to domestic violence cases. The prosecutor's office selected one police district as the site for implementing the new program, which included training police officers and placing a prosecutor in the district office to work directly with the police on domestic violence cases. The evaluation of this program was designed to assess the effectiveness of the police officers' training and officers' increased access to information from the prosecutor on the outcome of the case. Police officers from the selected district were administered surveys. Also surveyed were officers from another district that handled a similar number of domestic violence cases and had a comparable number of officers employed in the district. Variables in Part 1 include number of staff, budget, funding sources, number and type of victims served, target population, number of victims served speaking languages other than English, number of juveniles and adults served, number of victims with special needs served, collaboration with other organizations, benefits of VAWA funding, and direct and referral services provided by the agency. Variables in Part 2 cover police officers' views on whether it was a waste of time to prosecute domestic violence cases, if these cases were likely to result in a conviction, whether they felt sympathetic toward the victim or blamed the victim, how the prosecution should proceed with domestic violence cases, how the prosecution and police worked together on such cases, whether domestic violence was a private matter, and how they felt about the new program implemented under VAWA.
Curated
Evaluation of Victim Services Programs Funded by "Stop Violence Against Women" Grants in the United States, 1998-1999 (ICPSR 2735)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1998-01-01--1999-01-01
This project investigated the effects of Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) STOP (Services, Training, Officers, Prosecutors) funds with respect to the provision of victim services by criminal justice-based agencies to domestic assault, stalking, and sexual assault victims. Violence Against Women grants were intended "to assist states, Indian tribal governments, and units of local government to develop and strengthen effective law enforcement and prosecution strategies to combat violent crimes against women, and to develop and strengthen victim services in cases involving violent crimes against women." Domestic violence and sexual assault were identified as primary targets for the STOP grants, along with support for under-served victim populations. Two types of programs were sampled in this evaluation. The first was a sample of representatives of STOP grant programs, from which 62 interviews were completed (Part 1, Criminal Justice Victim Service Program Survey Data). The second was a sample of 96 representatives of programs that worked in close cooperation with the 62 STOP program grantees to serve victims (Part 2, Ancillary Programs Survey Data). General questions from the STOP program survey (Part 1) covered types of victims served, years program had been in existence, types of services provided, stages when services were provided, number of victims served by the program the previous year, the program's operating budget, and primary and secondary funding sources. Questions about the community in which the program operated focused on types of services for domestic violence and/or sexual assault victims that existed in the community, if services provided by the program complemented or overlapped those provided by the community, and a rating of the community's coordinated response in providing services. Questions specific to the activities supported by the STOP grant included the amount of the grant award, if the STOP grant was used to start the program or to expand services and if the latter, which services, and whether the STOP funds changed the way the program delivered services, changed linkages with other agencies in the community, increased the program's visibility in the community, and/or impacted the program's stability. Also included were questions about under-served populations being served by the program, the impact of the STOP grant on victims as individuals and on their cases in the criminal justice system, and the program's impact on domestic violence, stalking, and sexual assault victims throughout the community. Data from the ancillary programs survey (Part 2) pertain to types of services provided by the program, if the organization was part of the private sector or the criminal justice system, and the impact of the STOP program in the community on various aspects of services provided and on improvements for victims.
Curated
Examination of Homicides in Houston, Texas, 1985-1994 (ICPSR 3399)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Texas, Houston
Time period: 1985-01-01--1994-01-01
As a contribution to nationwide efforts to more thoroughly understand urban violence, this study was conducted to assess the impact of cultural dynamics on homicide rates in Houston, Texas, and to profile homicides in the city from 1985 to 1994. This data collection provides the results of quantitative analysis of data collected from all Houston homicide cases recorded in the police murder logs for 1985-1994. Variables describe the homicide circumstances, the victim-offender relationship, the type of weapon used, and any drug- or gang-related activity involved. Other variables include the year and month in which the homicide occurred, whether the homicide occurred on a weekday or over the weekend, the motive of the homicide, whether the homicide was drug-related, whether the case was cleared by police at time of data entry, weapon type and means of killing, the relationship between the victim and the offender, whether a firearm was the homicide method, whether it was a multiple victim incident or multiple offender incident, whether the victim or the offender was younger than age 15, and the inter-racial relationship between the victim and the offender. Demographic variables include age, sex, and race of the victim as well as the offender.
Curated
Experiences and Needs of Formerly Intimate Stalking Victims in Southeastern Pennsylvania, 1991-1995 (ICPSR 2899)
Released/updated on: 2000-08-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Pennsylvania
Time period: 1991-01-01--1995-01-01
This study sought to explore the nature of the stalking experiences of noncelebrity stalking victims who had previously been in intimate relationships with their stalkers. These were cases in which the stalkers were seeking revenge and/or reconciliation through stalking. Data were collected from 187 female stalking victims during 1991-1995 living in Chester, Delaware, Bucks, Philadelphia, and Montgomery counties in southeastern Pennsylvania. Data collection was comprised of an extensive, semistructured, face-to-face interview conducted with each woman to gather information concerning the nature of the stalking, the relationship between the victim and the stalker, the victim's response to the stalking, the consequences of the stalking for the victim, the needs of stalking victims in general, and fulfillment of those needs in terms of victim services and interaction with and cooperation from the criminal justice system. A brief survey questionnaire was also administered to obtain demographic information about each victim and her stalker. Content analysis of the interview transcripts was used to identify variables. Each variable fell into one of six categories: (1) victim's prior relationship with the stalker, (2) characteristics of the stalking, (3) victim's attempt to discourage the stalker (through both legal and extralegal mechanisms), (4) assistance sought by the victim through formal and informal networks and the subsequent handling of the situation by others, (5) the physical and emotional effects of the stalking on the victim, and (6) other victimization experiences. Demographic variables include the age, race, education level, marital status, and employment status of both the victim and the stalker.
Curated
Restricted
Factors Related to Domestic Violence Court Dispositions in a Large Midwestern Urban Area, 1997-1998: [United States] (ICPSR 3010)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1997-01-01--1998-01-01
The goal of this study was to identify factors that influence whether city misdemeanor domestic violence cases in which batterers are arrested by police result in dismissals, acquittals, or convictions in the courts, and how these cases are processed. The researchers sought to examine factors that influence court officials' decision-making in domestic violence cases, as well as factors that influence victim and witness reluctance in bringing batterers to successful adjudication. In Part 1 researchers merged pretrial services data with information from police and prosecutors' reports in the urban area under study to answer the following questions: (1) What is the rate of dismissals, acquittals, and convictions for misdemeanor court cases and what are the conditions of these sentences? (2) What factors in court cases are significantly related to whether the disposition is a dismissal, acquittal, or conviction, and how are these cases processed? In Part 2, judges, prosecutors, and public defenders were asked detailed questions about their level of knowledge about, attitudes toward, and self-reported behaviors regarding the processing of domestic violence cases to find out: (1) What roles do legal and extra-legal factors play in decision-makers' self-reported behaviors and attitudes? (2) How do decision-makers rate victim advocate and batterer treatment programs? (3) How do court professionals view the victim's role in the court process? and (4) To what degree do court professionals report victim-blaming attitudes and experiences? For Part 3 researchers used a stratified random sample to select court cases of misdemeanor domestic violence that would be transcribed and used for a content analysis to examine: (1) Who speaks in court and how? and (2) What is considered relevant by different court players? In Parts 4-103 victim surveys and interviews were administered to learn about battered women's experiences in both their personal lives and the criminal processing system. Researchers sought to answer the following questions: (1) How do victim/witnesses perceive their role in the prosecution of their abusers? (2) What factors inhibit them from pursuing prosecution? (3) What factors might help them pursue prosecution? and (4) How consistent are the victims'/witnesses' demographic and psychological profiles with existing research in this area? Domestic violence victims attending arraignment between January 1 and December 31 of 1997 were asked to complete surveys to identify their concerns about testifying against their partners and to evaluate the effectiveness of the court system in dealing with domestic violence cases (Part 4). The disposition of each case was subsequently determined by a research team member's examination of defendants' case files and/or court computer files. Upon case closure victims who had both completed a survey and indicated a willingness to be interviewed were contacted to participate in an interview (Parts 5-103). Variables in Part 1, Pretrial Services Data, include prior criminal history, current charges, case disposition, sentence, victim testimony, police testimony, victim's demeanor at trial, judge's conduct, type of abuse involved, weapons used, injuries sustained, and type of evidence available for trial. Demographic variables include age, sex, and race of defendants, victims, prosecutors, and judges. In Part 2, Professional Survey Data, respondents were asked about their tolerance for victims and offenders who appeared in court more than once, actions taken when substance abuse was involved, the importance of injuries in making a decision, attitudes toward battered women, the role of victim advocates and the police, views on restraining orders, and opinion on whether arrest is a deterrent. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, marital status, and years of professional experience. Variables in Part 3, Court Transcript Data, include number and type of charges, pleas, reasons for dismissals, types of evidence submitted by prosecutors and defense, substance abuse by victim and defendant, living arrangements and number of children of victim and defendant, specific type of abuse, injuries sustained, witnesses to injuries, police testimony, verdict, and sentence. Demographic variables include age and sex of defendant and victim and relationship of victim and defendant. In Part 4, Victim Survey Data, victims were asked about their relationship and living arrangements with the defendant, concerns about testifying in court, desired outcomes of case and punishment for defendant, emotional issues related to abuse, health problems, substance abuse, support networks, other violent domestic incidents and injuries, and safety concerns. Part 5 variables measured victims' safety at different stages of the criminal justice process and danger experienced due to further violent incidents, presence of weapons, and threats of homicide or suicide. Parts 6-103 contain the qualitative interview data.
Curated
Restricted
Failure to Appear: Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking Victims' Experience with the Juvenile Justice System and Their Readiness to Change, Nevada, 2016-2018 (ICPSR 37251)
Released/updated on: 2022-11-29
Geographic coverage: United States, Nevada
Time period: 2016-01-01--2018-01-01
A critical gap in knowledge about service provision for domestic minor sex trafficking (DMST) victims is why youth resist help from providers. This project asked DMST survivors about the barriers they experienced and their readiness to leave their commercial sexual exploitation. The study included an in-depth qualitative phase of formerly sex trafficked women (n=41), followed by a cross-sectional, self-report survey administered to recently trafficked young adults (n=94).
Curated
Restricted
Financial Abuse of Elderly People vs. Other Forms of Elder Abuse in Virginia, 2003-2008 (ICPSR 29301)
Released/updated on: 2015-06-26
Geographic coverage: United States, Virginia
Time period: 2003-01-01--2008-01-01
This study examined financial exploitation of elderly people compared to other forms of elder maltreatment (physical abuse, neglect, and hybrid, i.e., financial exploitation and physical abuse and/or neglect) that occurred in a domestic setting. The cases were explored by obtaining information from a variety of sources including:
- Three different individuals about a given case including (1) the caseworker from APS that managed the reported case, (2) the person who had been reported to have experienced elder abuse and, (3) where they were available, a non-offending third party who knew the elder at the time of the APS response to the report of elder abuse (e.g., the elder's domestic partner, care provider, friend, or family member).
- Data derived from the Virginia Department of Social Services' Adult Services Adult Protective Services (ASAPS) Database which contains information drawn from several sources.
- Prosecutors in four states that were interviewed about their experience prosecuting elder abuse, barriers and facilitators associating with prosecuting such cases, and possible reforms.
The specific goals of this research were to (1) Determine unique aspects of financial exploitation as compared to other forms of elder maltreatment, including risk factors, reporting, investigation, and case outcomes; (2) Determine the degree of congruence between the perceptions of victims of elder maltreatment and APS caseworkers regarding these cases; and (3) Develop recommendations based on these findings for addressing the financial abuse of the elderly.
Curated
Restricted
Finding Victims of Human Trafficking, 2005-2008 [United States] (ICPSR 35308)
Released/updated on: 2016-01-25
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2005-10-01--2008-08-01
This study was a response to the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act passed by Congress in 2005, which called for a collection of data; a comprehensive statistical review and analysis of human trafficking data; and a biennial report to Congress on sex trafficking and unlawful commercial sex acts. It examined the human trafficking experiences (and to a lesser extent commercial sex acts) among a random sample of 60 counties across the United States. In contrast to prior research that had examined the issue from a federal perspective, this study examined experiences with human trafficking at the local level across the United States. The specific aims of the research were to:
- Identify victims and potential victims of domestic labor and sex trafficking;
- Determine whether they have been identified as victims by law enforcement; and
- Explore differences between sex trafficking and unlawful commercial sex.
To achieve these goals the researchers collected data through telephone interviews with local law enforcement, prosecutors, and service providers; a mail-out statistical survey completed by knowledgeable officials in those jurisdictions; and an examination of case files in four local communities. This latter effort consisted of reviewing incident and arrest reports and charging documents for a variety of offenses that might have involved criminal conduct with characteristics of human trafficking. Through this method, the researchers not only gained a sense of how local authorities handled these types of cases but also the ways in which trafficking victims "fall through the cracks" in the interfaces between local and federal judicial systems as well as among local, state, and federal law enforcement and social service systems.
Curated
Restricted
Forensic Evidence in Homicide Investigations, Cleveland, Ohio, 2008-2011 (ICPSR 36202)
Released/updated on: 2018-02-13
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio, Cleveland
Time period: 2008-01-01--2011-01-01
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.
The objective of this study was to determine how homicide investigators use evidence during the course of their investigations. Data on 294 homicide cases (315 victims) that occurred in Cleveland between 2008 and 2011 was collected from investigative reports, forensic analysis reports, prosecutors and homicide investigators, provided by the Cleveland Ohio Police Department, Cuyahoga County Medical Examiner's Office, and Cuyahoga County Clerk of Courts.
The study collection includes 1 Stata data file (NIJ_Cleveland_Homicides.dta, n=294, 109 variables).
Curated
Restricted
Formative Evaluation of a Technology-Based Behavioral Health Program for Victims of Crime, North Carolina, 2019-2021 (ICPSR 38261)
Released/updated on: 2024-08-28
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, United States
Time period: 2019-01-01--2021-01-01
This initial Phase 1 formative evaluation included the development of a logic model to guide telehealth programming, an evaluability assessment of existing telehealth services, and a pilot test of initial implementation to capture the components needed for future fidelity assessment of these telehealth services as part of a multi-phase evaluation. The telemental health programming was focused on a hybrid approach of service delivery by El Futuro, a community-based organization in Durham, North Carolina. El Futuro's hybrid model of telemental health services combines methods of telehealth and in-person treatment with an array of service components including psychotherapy, psychiatric services, and case management for individuals who were victims of crime (VOCs) seeking mental health services.
Data associated with this project contain information about telehealth sites, client gender, psychiatric diagnoses, session types for the hybrid model, reported traumas for the overall sample used in the evaluability, and feasibility portion of the formative evaluation. The collection also includes outcome information for a subset of participants, such as client reported improvement and satisfaction.