Showing 1 – 7 of 7 results.
Curated
American Housing Survey 2007: Metropolitan Survey (ICPSR 24501)
Released/updated on: 2009-10-13
Geographic coverage: District of Columbia, United States, Minnesota, Florida, Miami, Baltimore, Minneapolis, Texas, Massachusetts, Tampa, Maryland, Boston, Houston
The metropolitan survey is conducted in even-numbered years, cycling through a set of 41 metropolitan areas, surveying each one about once every 6 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 seven separate parts: Part 1, Work Done Record (Replacement or Addition to the House), Part 2, Journey to Work 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, and Part 7, 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
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
Crime, Fear, and Control in Neighborhood Commercial Centers: Minneapolis and St. Paul, 1970-1982 (ICPSR 8167)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: Minneapolis, United States, St. Paul, Minnesota
Time period: 1970-01-01--1982-01-01
The major objective of this study was to examine how physical characteristics of commercial centers and demographic characteristics of residential areas contribute to crime and how these characteristics affect reactions to crime in mixed commercial-residential settings. Information on physical characteristics includes type of business, store hours, arrangement of buildings, and defensive modifications in the area. Demographic variables cover racial composition, average household size and income, and percent change of occupancy. The crime data describe six types of crime: robbery, burglary, assault, rape, personal theft, and shoplifting.
Curated
Impacts of Specific Incivilities on Responses to Crime and Local Commitment, 1979-1994: [Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and Seattle] (ICPSR 2520)
Released/updated on: 2008-04-23
Geographic coverage: Baltimore, Seattle, Minneapolis, United States, Chicago, Atlanta, Illinois, St. Paul, Minnesota, Georgia, Maryland, Washington
Time period: 1979-01-01--1994-01-01
This data collection was designed to test the "incivilities thesis": that incivilities such as extant neighborhood physical conditions of disrepair or abandonment and troubling street behaviors contribute to residents' concerns for personal safety and their desire to leave their neighborhood. The collection examines between-individual versus between-neighborhood and between-city differences with respect to fear of crime and neighborhood commitment and also explores whether some perceived incivilities are more relevant to these outcomes than others. The data represent a secondary analysis of five ICPSR collections: (1) CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH AND LOW CRIME NEIGHBORHOODS IN ATLANTA, 1980 (ICPSR 7951), (2) CRIME CHANGES IN BALTIMORE, 1970-1994 (ICPSR 2352), (3) CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND COMMUNITY CRIME PREVENTION, 1979: CHICAGO METROPOLITAN AREA SURVEY (ICPSR 8086), (4) CRIME, FEAR, AND CONTROL IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CENTERS: MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL, 1970-1982 (ICPSR 8167), and (5) TESTING THEORIES OF CRIMINALITY AND VICTIMIZATION IN SEATTLE, 1960-1990 (ICPSR 9741). Part 1, Survey Data, is an individual-level file that contains measures of residents' fear of victimization, avoidance of dangerous places, self-protection, neighborhood satisfaction, perceived incivilities (presence of litter, abandoned buildings, vandalism, and teens congregating), and demographic variables such as sex, age, and education. Part 2, Neighborhood Data, contains crime data and demographic variables from Part 1 aggregated to the neighborhood level, including percentage of the neighborhood that was African-American, gender percentages, average age and educational attainment of residents, average household size and length of residence, and information on home ownership.
Curated
National Crime Surveys: Cities, 1972-1975 (ICPSR 7658)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: Oregon, Milwaukee, Detroit, United States, Cincinnati, Oakland, Cleveland, New York City, San Diego, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, New Orleans, Denver, Dallas, St. Louis, Wisconsin, Buffalo, Boston, Pittsburgh, District of Columbia, Chicago, Minnesota, California, Florida, New York (state), New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Miami, San Francisco, Baltimore, Illinois, Texas, Portland (Oregon), Louisiana, Ohio, Los Angeles, Newark, Georgia, Maryland, Philadelphia, Houston
Time period: 1972-01-01--1975-01-01
This sample of the National Crime Survey contains information about victimization in 26 central cities in the United States. The data are designed to achieve three primary objectives: 1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, 2) to estimate the numbers and types of crimes not reported to police, and 3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes and permit reliable comparisons over time and between areas of the country. Information about each household or personal victimization was recorded. The data include type of crime (attempts are covered as well), description of offender, severity of crime, injuries or losses, time and place of occurrence, age, race and sex of offender(s), relationship of offenders to victims, education, migration, labor force status, occupation, and income of persons involved.
Curated
Restricted
Parents and Children Together (PACT) Responsible Fatherhood (RF) Study Data Collection, Kansas, Minnesota, and Missouri, 2012-2015 (ICPSR 37673)
Released/updated on: 2020-10-27
Geographic coverage: Minneapolis, United States, Missouri, Kansas City (Kansas), Minnesota, Kansas City (Missouri), Kansas, St. Louis
Time period: 2012-01-01--2015-01-01
Parent and Children Together (PACT) Responsible Fatherhood (RF) project is an examination of the effects of federally funded responsible fatherhood programs. This project was interested in learning about service implications, the needs and experiences of participants, and the effectiveness of these services. To examine how parenting, relationships, socioeconomic status, and well-being are being affected by responsible fatherhood programs.
This dataset is focused on individuals representing a few in the population. The 4 programs that participated in the Responsible Fatherhood study were: Connections to Success in Kansas and Missouri, Fathers' Support Center in Missouri, FATHER Project at Goodwill-Easter Seals Minnesota, and Urban Ventures in Minnesota.
This data collection covered topics such as parental involvement, parenting skills, relationship status, child engagement, employment, criminal justice involvement, housing stability, and mental well-being. The demographic variables are race, age, monthly income, and education level.