Showing 1 – 6 of 6 results.
Curated
American Housing Survey, 1994: MSA Core and Supplement File (ICPSR 6954)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: Milwaukee, San Bernardino, Detroit, Anaheim, United States, Santa Ana, Fort Worth, California, New York (state), Michigan, New York City, San Diego, Texas, Phoenix, Dallas, Ontario, Wisconsin, Arizona, Arlington, Buffalo, Riverside
Time period: 1994-01-01--1994-12-31
This data collection provides information on characteristics of housing units in eight selected Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) of the United States. Data for each household member include age, sex, race, marital status, income, and relationship to the householder. For the householder, data also include tenure, length of residence, years of school completed, and Spanish origin. Variables pertaining to general housing characteristics cover number of rooms, type of heating and air-conditioning equipment, and whether the housing units had complete kitchens and plumbing facilities. Information on costs incurred for mortgage payments, rent, real estate taxes, property insurance, utilities, parking, and garbage collection permits comparisons of housing costs from one year to another between geographic areas. Limited data are provided on costs of additions, alterations, replacements, and repairs made to the property.
Curated
American Housing Survey, 2002: Metropolitan Microdata (ICPSR 4589)
Released/updated on: 2007-07-06
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Oregon, Milwaukee, Charlotte, United States, Kansas City (Kansas), Santa Ana, Fort Worth, San Diego, Columbus (Ohio), Phoenix, Dallas, Wisconsin, Arizona, Arlington, Buffalo, Anaheim, Fort Lauderdale, California, Kansas, Florida, New York (state), Miami, Texas, Portland (Oregon), Ohio
Time period: 2002-01-01--2002-12-31
The metropolitan survey is conducted in even-numbered years, cycling through a set of 41 metropolitan areas, surveying each one about once every six years. This data collection provides information on the characteristics of a metropolitan sample of housing units including apartments, single-family homes, mobile homes, and vacant housing units. The data are presented in eight separate parts: Part 1, Work Done Record (Replacement or Addition to the House), Part 2, Worker Record, Part 3, Mortgages (Owners Only), Part 4, Housing Unit Record (Main Record), Recodes (One Record per Housing Unit), and Weights, Part 5, Manager and Owner Record (Renters Only), Part 6, Person Record, Part 7, Ratio Verification, and Part 8, Mover Group Record. Data include year the structure was built, type and number of living quarters, occupancy status, access, number of rooms, presence of commercial establishments on the property, and property value. Additional data focus on kitchen and plumbing facilities, types of heating fuel used, source of water, sewage disposal, heating and air-conditioning equipment, and major additions, alterations, or repairs to the property. Information provided on housing expenses includes monthly mortgage or rent payments, cost of services such as utilities, garbage collection, and property insurance, and amount of real estate taxes paid in the previous year. Also included is information on whether the household received government assistance to help pay heating or cooling costs or for other energy-related services. Similar data are provided for housing units previously occupied by respondents who had recently moved. Additionally, indicators of housing and neighborhood quality are supplied. Housing quality variables include privacy of bedrooms, condition of kitchen facilities, basement or roof leakage, breakdowns of plumbing facilities and equipment, and overall opinion of the structure. For quality of neighborhood, variables include use of exterminator services, existence of boarded-up buildings, and overall quality of the neighborhood. In addition to housing characteristics, some demographic data are provided on household members, such as age, sex, race, marital status, income, and relationship to householder. Additional data provided on the householder include years of school completed, Spanish origin, length of residence, and length of occupancy.
Curated
Annual Housing Survey, 1977 [United States]: Travel-to-Work [SMSAs] (ICPSR 8322)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: Detroit, Indiana, Santa Ana, Fort Worth, Spokane, Utah, Memphis, Arizona, Pittsburgh, Seattle, Anaheim, Kentucky, California, Kansas, Florida, Pennsylvania, Troy, Garden Grove, Texas, Newark, Virginia, Maryland, Indianapolis, Madison, United States, Tennessee, Louisville, Arkansas, Washington, Albany (New York), Tacoma, Wichita, Minneapolis, Massachusetts, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Dallas, Saginaw, Wisconsin, District of Columbia, Schenectady, St. Paul, Minnesota, New York (state), New Jersey, Michigan, Orlando, Long Beach, Los Angeles
Time period: 1977-01-01--1977-12-31
This data collection provides travel-to-work data for respondents living in 20 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs). Data cover respondents' means of transportation to and from work -- whether they carpooled, drove alone, took public transportation, or used some other means. Also included is respondents' place of work and time they usually left home for work. The data contained in this collection are from the travel-to-work supplement in ANNUAL HOUSING SURVEY, 1977-1978 [UNITED STATES]: SMSA FILES (ICPSR 7980). The travel-to-work supplement was sponsored by the United States Department of Transportation. The collection consists of 20 data files, one for each SMSA represented.
Curated
Comparative Study of Community Decision-Making (ICPSR 25)
Released/updated on: 2008-03-25
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Milwaukee, Akron, Charlotte, Indiana, Santa Ana, Berkeley, Fort Worth, Utica, Tyler, Cambridge, Utah, San Jose, Memphis, Jacksonville, Arizona, Buffalo, Boston, Pittsburgh, Seattle, St. Petersburg, Clifton, California, Florida, Pennsylvania, Waukegan, Hammond, Texas, Connecticut, Newark, Georgia, Malden, Tampa, Indianapolis, Duluth, United States, Tennessee, Euclid, Alabama, Pasadena, Albany (New York), Warren, Amarillo, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Massachusetts, Washington (state), Missouri, Hamilton, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, St. Louis, Wisconsin, Gary, Schenectady, Waterbury, Fullerton, St. Paul, Bloomington, Minnesota, Irvington, New York (state), Birmingham, New Jersey, Michigan, San Francisco, Santa Monica, Palo Alto, Long Beach, New Hampshire, Manchester, Ohio, South Bend, Waco
This study contains data for 51 communities with populations of 50,000-750,000 in 22 states of the United States on the characteristics of community leadership, decision-making, and patterns of influence, as well as political, economic, and demographic composition of the communities and per capita expenditures for various common community functions. Information regarding general political and public policy issues, specific municipal problems, and their solutions was obtained from interviews with eight prominent individuals in each city, such as the Chamber of Commerce president, a labor leader, a leading newspaper editor or publisher, the chairmen of the Democratic and Republican parties, the president of the largest bank, and the mayor. Data are also provided on the characteristics of the cities, including composite indexes created from the interview data as well as data from other sources. The study is composed of three files: a Merged Aggregate and Individual file (Part 1), an Aggregate file (Part 2), and an Individual file (Part 3). The Merged Aggregate and Individual file (Part 1) contains the responses of the individuals interviewed and information on the characteristics of each respondent's city from other sources. Items include education, health, culture, welfare, and total expenditures of the city. The Aggregate file (Part 2) contains information on the population characteristics of each city, as well as information on the structure, income, and expenditures of the city government. Demographic indices describe age and income distribution of the population, racial composition, level of educational attainment, and the size, income and occupational distribution of the labor force. The Individual file (Part 3) provides information received from respondents on decision-making pertaining to issues of urban renewal, mayoral elections, air pollution control, race relations, health, education, industrial and economic development, and anti-poverty programs.
Curated
Partially restricted
Simple Crosstabs
Latino National Survey (LNS), 2006 (ICPSR 20862)
Released/updated on: 2013-06-05
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, United States, Fort Worth, Arkansas, Washington, San Diego, Atlanta, Colorado, Denver, Dallas, Arizona, Nevada, New York, District of Columbia, Seattle, San Antonio, Chicago, California, Florida, New Jersey, Miami, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Los Angeles, Georgia, Houston
Time period: 2006-01-01--2006-12-31
The Latino National Survey (LNS) contains 8,634 completed interviews (unweighted) of self-identified Latino/Hispanic residents of the United States. Interviewing began on November 17, 2005, and continued through August 4, 2006. The survey instrument contained approximately 165 distinct items ranging from demographic descriptions to political attitudes and policy preferences, as well as a variety of social indicators and experiences. All interviewers were bilingual, English and Spanish. Respondents were greeted in both languages and were immediately offered the opportunity to interview in either language. Interviewers also provided a consent script that allowed respondents to opt out of the survey. Demographic variables include age, ancestry, birthplace, education level, ethnicity, marital status, military service, number of people in the household, number of children under the age of 18 living in the household, political party affiliation, political ideology, religiosity, religious preference, race, and sex.
Curated
Latino National Survey (LNS) Focus Group Data, 2006 (ICPSR 29601)
Released/updated on: 2015-08-19
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, United States, Fort Worth, Arkansas, Washington, San Diego, Atlanta, Colorado, Denver, Dallas, Arizona, Nevada, District of Columbia, Seattle, San Antonio, Chicago, California, Florida, New York (state), New Jersey, Miami, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Los Angeles, Georgia, Houston
Time period: 2006-01-01--2006-12-31
The focus groups conducted by the research team for the project presented here offer precisely this convergence of both breadth and depth. The team used a common protocol to guide discussion in fifteen focus groups -- with more than 150 participants in nine cities across eight states -- that were designed to include Spanish and English-speaking respondents, in different regions of the country, with differing compositions by generation and country of origin. The number and range of the participants in these Latino focus groups are unique in the social science literature. This study presents the results of a unique data set, the results of fifteen focus groups conducted across the United States with Latino residents, including foreign-born -- both legal and undocumented immigrants and native-born. These data provide more range than allowed by the typical interview-based project and not only give key insights into Latino residents' thoughts about community, language, discrimination, ties to their countries of origin, and the like, but also provide some sense of participants' explanations of their reasoning and motivations, something not achievable through structured survey data alone.