Prosecuting Trafficking in Persons Cases: An Analysis of Local Strategies and Approaches, United States, 2009-2018 (ICPSR 37451)

Version Date: Dec 17, 2020

Cite this study |

Principal Investigator(s):
Kristina Lugo, Justice Research and Statistics Association

https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37451.v1

Version V1

Slide tabs to view more

Summary

This project examined practices and initiatives undertaken by prosecutors across the United States to address trafficking in persons (TIP) in order to learn about TIP case identification and case building; when jurisdictions prosecute utilizing their state's TIP statute or alternative charges; and how prosecutors approach victim identification, serving victims, and increasing convictions and penalties for traffickers and buyers. It also sought to draw lessons learned that other jurisdictions can use to begin this work or increase their capacity and effectiveness, regardless of size or location. This project was a partnership between the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) and the National District Attorney's Association (NDAA) and consisted of two phases. Phase I was a national survey of prosecutors and Phase II was a series of four case studies in jurisdictions undertaking anti-TIP initiatives.

The results of the survey are intended to provide a national snapshot of trends in local TIP prosecutions and the use of state-level TIP statutes by local prosecutors. It serves as a ten-year update to, and expansion of, previous research on local prosecutorial approaches to trafficking that had used data on cases prosecuted through 2008.

Citation

Lugo, Kristina. Prosecuting Trafficking in Persons Cases: An Analysis of Local Strategies and Approaches, United States, 2009-2018. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2020-12-17. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37451.v1

Export Citation:

  • RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
  • EndNote

Funding

United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice (2016-IJ-CX-0005)

Subject Terms

Geographic Coverage

Smallest Geographic Unit

City

Restrictions

Access to these data is restricted. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Restricted Data Use Agreement, specify the reason for the request, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research.

Distributor(s)

Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
Hide

Time Period(s)

2009-01-01 -- 2018-05-31

Date of Collection

2017-06-01 -- 2019-02-15
Hide

Study Purpose

The results of the survey are intended to provide a national snapshot of trends in local TIP prosecutions and the use of state-level TIP statutes by local prosecutors. It serves as a ten-year update to, and expansion of, previous research on local prosecutorial approaches to trafficking that had used data on cases prosecuted through 2008.

Study Design

The survey was constructed to build upon previous prosecutor surveys covering human trafficking. The prosecutors chosen to receive this survey came from NDAA's membership, which includes 2,386 prosecutors across all states and the District of Colombia. According to NDAA leadership, there are currently about 2,500 prosecutors in the U.S., so the sampling frame covered the vast majority. The survey was implemented by email using SurveyMonkey, and ran from June 14, 2017 through August 31, 2017.

Sample

All 2,386 prosecutor members of the National District Attorney's Association were requested to complete the survey. All full and partial responses received were included for analysis.

Time Method

Cross-sectional

Universe

Universe was the 2,386 prosecutors that are members of NDAA. There are an estimated 2,500 or so prosecutors in the U.S.

Unit(s) of Observation

Individual

Data Type(s)

Mode of Data Collection

Response Rates

The response rate for this survey was 8 percent, with 199 full and partial responses. Seventy respondents voluntarily supplied their case statistics.

Hide

Original Release Date

2020-12-17

Hide

Weight

Post-stratification weights are used for means and correlational analysis, except where described in the report to provide sample-specific descriptive statistics. Weights should be used for those analyses as follows: Post stratification weights are calculated for two sets of analyses. 1) Weights were calculated to correct for representativeness by jurisdiction size and region between the 199 sample and the universe of prosecutors targeted. These were used for all analyses but the regressions. 2) Weights were re-calculated to correct for any additional self-selection bias that may have been present among the sample of 70 respondents that provided their case statistics and those that did not. Only these weights should be used in the regressions. A separate copy of the dataset that includes only these offices, and the correct weights, is saved and uploaded here.

Hide

Notes

  • The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.

  • One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.