Search results

The Chicago Community Adult Health Study (CCAHS) consists of four interrelated components that were conducted simultaneously: (1) a survey of adult health on a probability sample of 3,105 Chicago adults, including direct physical measurements of their blood pressure and heart rate and of height, weight, waist and hip circumference, and leg length; (2) a biomedical supplement which collected blood and/or saliva samples on a subset of 661 survey respondents; (3) a community survey in which individuals described aspects of the social environment of all survey respondents' neighborhoods; and (4) a systematic social observation (SSO) of the blocks in which potential survey respondents resided, including a lost letter drop (Milgram et al. 1965) as an unobtrusive measure of neighborhood social capital/sense of responsibility to help others. The latter two extend a community survey and SSO of neighborhoods carried out by the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) in 1995. The adult health survey and the community survey were conducted jointly through face-to-face interviews with a stratified, multistage probability sample of 3,105 individuals aged 18 and over and living in the city of Chicago, with a response rate of 72 percent that is about the highest currently attainable in large urban areas. In addition, blood pressure, heart rate, and physical measurements (of height, weight, waist and hips, and leg length) were collected during the survey interview, and blood and saliva samples from 661 respondents or 60 percent of those doing the survey in the 80 "focal" neighborhood clusters (NCs). SSOs were conducted on 1,663 of the 1,672 city blocks on which each respondent lived. The CCAHS is the largest of five projects under the NIH-funded Michigan Interdisciplinary Center on Social Inequalities, Mind and Body Mind (#P50HD38986), one of five Mind-Body Centers funded by the National Institutes of Health in late 1999. This study will advance the understanding of socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparities in health, a major priority of the Public Health Service and the National Institutes of Health.

The PI-supplied summary mentions that the study is comprised of four components. However, for the purposes of this data release there are three distinct datasets. Demographic variables include age, birth year, race, ethnicity, number of children in the household, number of children living elsewhere, number of times the respondent has been married, and relationship status, religious preference, and sex.

This study of 132 adults in managerial, personnel, and supervisory positions in private firms in the Detroit metropolitan area in 1972 provides information on affirmative action in the workplace, as well as company products, type and structure, management style, and profitability. Data are provided on respondents' firms' product lines and services, labor force, assets, profit margins and revenues, salaries and wages, stocks, use of computer technology, supervisors' duties and roles, pension plans, recruitment methods, unions, rates of promotion, dress codes, and work processes. Other items explored respondents' attitudes toward government's efforts to eliminate employment-based racial discrimination, and white collar and blue collar jobs. Demographic variables specify sex, race, education, income, religion, political party affiliation, length of residence in the Detroit area, and length of time in current job and position.

This survey focused on factors that influence social change in the Michigan tri-county area of Oakland, Macomb, and Wayne counties and the changes that have occurred over time with respect to different ethnic groups and women. Respondents' opinions were sought on issues such as job discrimination, including pay and promotion on the basis of race, ethnicity, or gender, factors that influence employers in hiring decisions, such as experience in line of work, formal education, references, looks and appearance, age, race, and gender, possible reasons for Blacks' having worse jobs, income, and housing than Whites, and factors that affect this situation, such as racial discrimination, perceived inferior ability, lack of educational opportunities, and lack of motivation on the part of Blacks. The survey also elicited respondents' views on factors influencing residential segregation, including the lack of affordable housing for African Americans and other ethnic minorities and the lack of Whites' acceptance of these ethnic minority groups in White neighborhoods. Other variables probed respondents' attitudes toward interracial marriage, segregated and desegregated schools, all-Black male and all-Black female public schools, nonviolent and violent means of social change among Blacks, government legislative measures such as the cut in welfare cost, parental approval for under-age abortion, the amount of federal taxes paid, and affirmative action for women and African Americans in job training, education, hiring, and promotion. Also explored were respondents' feelings about the quality of city and neighborhood services, public schools, crime, and the desirability of living in Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb counties and some of the suburbs around Detroit. Additional variables examined respondents' views on comparative wealth and intelligence among ethnic groups such as Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, Arab Americans, and Whites, the degree of discrimination toward Hispanics, Blacks, Asians, and women, and the high degree of self-reliance among immigrant groups and nationalities in the United States as compared to United States minorities such as African Americans. Questions on the respondents' educational background covered the level of education and professional qualifications. Additional information gathered by the survey includes duration of residence in the tri-county area and at the current residence, place of previous residence, employment status, place of employment, mode of transportation to work, income, current debts and assets, job benefits, previous military service, information on family and household members, religious denomination, presidential candidate preference, age, race, ethnicity, skin tone if Black, marital status, and gender.

This study brings to light what is both patently obvious and far too often dismissed from the human rights agenda. Transgender and gender non-conforming people face injustice at every turn: in childhood homes, in school systems that promise to shelter and educate, in harsh and exclusionary workplaces, at the grocery store, the hotel front desk, in doctors' offices and emergency rooms, before judges and at the hands of landlords, police officers, health care workers and other service providers.

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and the National Center for Transgender Equality are grateful to each of the 6,450 transgender and gender non-conforming study participants who took the time and energy to answer questions about the depth and breadth of injustice in their lives. A diverse set of people, from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands, completed online or paper surveys. This tremendous gift has created the first 360-degree picture of discrimination against transgender and gender non-conforming people in the U.S. and provides critical data points for policymakers, community activists and legal advocates to confront the appalling realities documented here and press the case for equity and justice.

These data provide information on discrimination in every major area of life, including housing, employment, health and health care, education, public accommodation, family life, criminal justice and government identity documents, and demographic information such as citizenship, race, ethnicity, employment, and income. In virtually every setting, the data underscores the urgent need for policymakers and community leaders to change their business-as-usual approach and confront the devastating consequences of anti-transgender bias.

Demographic information includes race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, education, income, U.S citizenship, household size, and relationship status.

The public-use dataset was created in an earlier version of Stata that truncated write-in responses after 244 characters. The non-truncated write-in responses, plus Q10 zip codes and the essay responses to Q70, are included in the restricted-use dataset.