AndreaBozzo/ceres-open-data-index huggingface dataset:
Evaluating the Impact of a Specialized Domestic Violence  Police Unit in Charlotte, North Carolina, 2003-2005

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.
Law Enforcement Response to Human Trafficking and the Implications for Victims in the United States, 2005 

The purpose of the study was to explore how local law enforcement were responding to the crime of human trafficking after the passage of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) in 2000. The first phase of the study (Part 1, Law Enforcement Interview Quantitative Data) involved conducting telephone surveys with 121 federal, state, and local law enforcement officials in key cities across the country between August and November of 2005. Different versions of the telephone survey were created for the key categories of law enforcement targeted by this study (state/local investigators, police offices, victim witness coordinators, and federal agents). The telephone surveys were supplemented with interviews from law enforcement supervisors/managers, representatives from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Human Trafficking/Smuggling Office, the United States Attorney's Office, the Trafficking in Persons Office, and the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division. Respondents were asked about their history of working human trafficking cases, knowledge of human trafficking, and familiarity with the TVPA. Other variables include the type of trafficking victims encountered, how human trafficking cases were identified, and the law enforcement agency's capability to address the issue of trafficking. The respondents were also asked about the challenges and barriers to investigating human trafficking cases and to providing services to the victims. In the second phase of the study (Part 2, Case File Review Qualitative Data) researchers collected comprehensive case information from sources such as case reports, sanitized court reports, legal newspapers, magazines, and newsletters, as well as law review articles. This case review examined nine prosecuted cases of human trafficking since the passage of the TVPA. The research team conducted an assessment of each case focusing on four core components: identifying the facts, defining the problem, identifying the rule to the facts (e.g., in light of the rule, how law enforcement approached the situation), and conclusion.
Examination of Actuarial Offender-Based Prediction Assessments in Texas, 1993-1996

The purpose of this study was to provide a comprehensive assessment of the usefulness and effectiveness of prediction and classification of offenders under community supervision. A felony cohort data collection instrument was developed to test the validity of the Wisconsin Risk and Need Instrument in use in Texas, as well as to develop "better" predictor variables for a variety of dependent variables. Using the felony cohort data instrument, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Community Justice Assistance Division (TDCJ-CJAD) collected detailed statewide information on 3,405 felony offenders placed on probation in Texas during October 1993. Specifically, the form was completed by a probation officer on all felony probation intakes at the time the initial case classification risk/needs assessment was conducted. Additionally, follow-up forms were developed and administered to track the offenders' progress at one year, two years, and three years. Variables include probationer information, current offense, criminal history, social history, substance abuse, probation sanctions, case classification risk items, and case classification need items. Additional variables include felony cohort one-year follow-up data form questions, felony cohort second-year follow-up data form questions, and felony cohort third-year follow-up data form questions.
Outcome Evaluation of the Comprehensive Indian Resources for Community and Law Enforcement (CIRCLE) Project With Data From Nine Tribes in the United States, 1995-2004

The data for this study were collected in Phase 2, the outcome evaluation, of the Comprehensive Indian Resources for Community and Law Enforcement (CIRCLE) Project. The CIRCLE Project was launched in the late 1990s to strengthen tribal justice systems and, through effective tribal-level planning and strategic comprehensive approaches, to better equip Native American nations to combat the interlinked community problems of crime, violence, substance abuse, and juvenile delinquency. The Native American nations invited to participate in the CIRCLE Project were the Northern Cheyenne, the Ogling Sioux, and the Zuni. Part 1, Participant Data, contains data on each of the Native American nations. The Northern Cheyenne data include variables on juvenile arrests between 1995 and 2003 for intoxication, curfew violations, disorderly conduct, and total arrests. The Oglala Sioux data include variables on police force stability and court pleadings. The Zuni data include variables on arrests for simple assault, public intoxication, driving while intoxicated (DWI), endangerment, domestic violence, and total arrests between 2001 and 2004. Part 2, United States Department of Justice Funding Data, contains data on funding given to the Northern Cheyenne, the Oglala Sioux, the Zuni, and six comparison Native American nations for fiscal years 1998 to 2003.
Outcome Evaluation of the Crossroad to Freedom House and Peer I Therapeutic Communities in Colorado, 2000-2002   

This study aimed to further evaluate previous findings
regarding drug use and criminal behaviors among the criminal
population by investigating the effectiveness of two Colorado
Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Therapeutic Communities (RSAT
TC) for offenders. The first, the Crossroad to Freedom House
Therapeutic Community at the Arrowhead Correctional Center (ACC TC)
was a prison-based program. The second was the community-based Peer I
Therapeutic Community (Peer I). Two methodologies were used to gather
data. Part 1, RSAT Outcome Data, contains quantitative data collected
from five separate study groups of differing sample sizes that
received differing levels of treatment, with a total of 778 cases. The
groups were compared on five separate outcome variables: technical
violation, new misdemeanor arrest, new felony arrest, return to
prison, and overall supervision failure. To gather baseline
information from participants, a researcher administered the intake
packet in group format to participants within three weeks of admission
to ACC TC. After completing the treatment programs, outcome data were
collected for a two-year follow-up period for each participant. Part
2, Case Studies, consists of case studies of ten participants, two
from each of the above five listed groups. One from each group had
successful outcomes, and one did not. Successful outcomes were defined
as participants who were still living in the community after 12 to 18
months without any new charges. Unsuccessful outcomes were defined as
those participants who were returned to prison for technical
violations or new charges and were eligible for study only if they had
been living in the community for six to twelve months before returning
to prison. Information for the case studies were gathered through
interviews with both former prisoners and one of their significant
others. Variables for Part 1 include demographic information, length
of stay in both the ACC TC and Peer I, types of programs parolees were
released to, and time period between leaving the Department of
Corrections and any subsequent returns. Information was also gathered
on the presence of psychological concerns as an adult, as well as in
childhood. Part 2 consists of information regarding ACC TC and Peer I
participants' post-treatment such as their employment status,
financial well-being, significant relationships, relapse information
and whether or not the interviewee has returned to the Department of
Corrections since receiving treatment and being released.
Performance Measures in Prosecution and Their Application to Community Prosecution at Two Sites in the United States, 2005-2006

The purpose of this study was to explore empirical evidence to support the performance measurement framework identified by the American Prosecutors Research Institute's (APRI) Prosecution Study for the 21st Century. The framework included promoting the fair, impartial, and expeditious pursuit of justice and ensuring public safety. Two prosecutors' offices participated in the study. One was a traditional office, and the other was a more community-oriented office. Each site submitted monthly data on the identified performance measures for analysis. APRI also designed and administered a public safety survey to assess a number of factors related to the performance of prosecutors' offices, but for which data could not be provided by the offices. The public safety surveys were administered by phone using random digit dialing (RDD). Part 1, Site 1 Administrative Data, contains 15 months of data, and Part 2, Site 2 Administrative Data, contain 6 months of data on the identified performance measures for analysis from each site. Part 3, Public Safety Survey Data, contains variables that provide some basic demographic data about the respondents and several variables in response to Likert-style questions measuring attitudes and opinions on six factors. These include the seriousness of local crime, safety of the environment, organizational behavior of the prosecutor's office, participation in the community, community education, and task performance.
Understanding Court Culture and Improving Court Performance in 12 Courts in California, Florida, and Minnesota, 2002

The purpose of this study was to examine the organizational culture in 12 felony criminal trial courts selected in 3 states and to gauge prosecuting and public defender attorneys' views on how well the courts in which they practice achieve the goals of access, fairness, and managerial effectiveness. Data on organizational culture in each of the 12 courts (Part 1) were obtained by administering the Court Culture Assessment Instrument (CCAI) to all judges with a felony criminal court docket and to all senior court administrators. A total of 224 respondents completed the questionnaire. Additionally, surveys were conducted of prosecuting attorneys (Part 2) and public defender attorneys (Part 3) to gauge their views on how well the courts in which they practice achieve the goals of access, fairness, and managerial effectiveness. A total of 334 prosecuting attorneys and 260 public defense attorneys completed the 46-item trial court process survey. Part 1 contains 40 variables pertaining to 5 dimensions of current and preferred court culture. Variables in Part 2 and Part 3 each include seven items from a jurisdictional practice scale, eight items from a procedural fairness scale, seven items from a resource scale, nine items from a management scale, nine items from a practitioner competence scale, and six items from a court access scale.
Mandatory Custody Mediation in San Diego, California, 1996

The purpose of the study was to provide empirical data to inform the debate and lead to meaningful answers to questions in custody mediation and domestic violence including equity of outcomes for families with partner violence versus those without any evidence of violence, and the issue of health and safety outcomes for the children. Researchers examined every seventh action filed in the Family Court in San Diego during the calendar year 1996. Each of the 512 nonagreement mediation reports and its associated Court Screening Form were scanned in its entirety and subsequently printed. Each report also contained an appended page, containing a detailed parenting plan in which the mediator summarized the percentage of physical custody recommended for each parent. Each report was studied and content analyzed by three trained raters who had no access to the Court Screening Form and so were blind to any a prior domestic violence allegations. The majority of coding items called for yes/no responses. Other coding items allowed the raters to choose from among more than two options. A variable was coded in a particular direction if all three raters agreed or if two of the three raters agreed. The domestic violence sample (n = 200) included all of the selected cases with domestic violence indicators on the current screening form, prior allegation of domestic violence on a court screening form and/or a permanent domestic violence restraining order in the case file that was available to the mediator, and clear cases of domestic violence as documented by the mediator in which there was absolutely no indication of domestic violence on any screening form or in the case file. The nondomestic violence sample (n = 200) included 200 of the remaining 312 cases that had no indicators of domestic violence in the file and no mention of domestic violence in the mediation report. The data includes five categories of variables: general case information, parental factors, child factors, family interaction factors, and current parental relationship.
Variations in Criminal Patterns Among Narcotic Addicts in Baltimore and New York City, 1983-1984

This data collection was undertaken to develop a typology
of narcotic addicts according to the kind, frequency, and seriousness
of their crimes and to identify the most serious criminal offenders,
thereby determining which individuals were best suited to
rehabilitation. The following questions are addressed by the data: (1)
What "types" of narcotic addicts can be distinguished in terms of
their criminal behavior? Which of these types are amenable to
rehabilitation? (2) At what time during their addiction careers do
addicts commit the most crime? Do narcotic addicts "mature" out of
addiction? (3) What is the relationship between individuals'
involvement in crime prior to addiction and their criminal activity
and drug use over their addiction career? (4) Which demographic,
personality, or other factors are associated with serious crime
committed during periods of narcotic addiction? (5) What are the
contributions of situational and dispositional factors to the
relationship between addiction and crime? Part 1 of the collection
details the subjects' addiction careers, the age they first used
various drugs, the age they first became addicted to narcotics, the
amount of time they were addicted/not addicted to narcotics, and the
total length of their addiction careers. Part 2 contains variables
generated by cluster analysis, including cluster assignment or "type."
Part 3 includes the educational, occupational, and arrest histories of
the subjects, as well as the drug use and arrest histories of their
families. The Part 4 file consists of Minnesota Multiphasic
Personality Inventory and Raven Progressive Matrix scores. The
frequency and types of crime that subjects committed during the
preaddiction period comprise Part 5, while the frequency and nature of
drug use during the preaddiction period comprise Part 6. Parts 7 and 8
contain crime variables and drug use variables, respectively, across
all nonaddiction periods. Finally, Part 9 contains data characterizing
crime across all addiction periods, and Part 10 contains variables
regarding drug use across total addiction periods.
Drugs, Alcohol, and Student Crime in the United States, April-May 1989  

This project examined different aspects of campus crime --
 specifically, the prevalence of crimes among college students, whether
 the crime rate was increasing or decreasing on college campuses, and
 the factors related to campus crime. Researchers made the assumption
 that crimes committed by and against college students were likely to
 be related to drug and alcohol use. Specific questions designed to be
 answered by the data include: (1) Do students who commit crimes differ
 in their use of drugs and alcohol from students who do not commit
 crimes? (2) Do students who are victims of crimes differ in their use
 of drugs and alcohol from students who are not victims? (3) How do
 multiple offenders differ from single offenders in their use of drugs
 and alcohol? (4) How do victims of violent crimes differ from victims
 of nonviolent crimes in their use of drugs and alcohol? (5) What types
 of student crimes are more strongly related to drug or alcohol use
 than others? (6) Other than drug and alcohol use, in what ways can
 victims and perpetrators of crimes be differentiated from students who
 have had no direct experiences with crime? Variables include basic
 demographic information, academic information, drug use information,
and experiences with crime since becoming a student.
Domestic Violence Experience in Omaha, Nebraska, 1986-1987

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.
Child Abuse, Neglect, and Violent Criminal Behavior in a Midwest Metropolitan Area of the United States, 1967-1988

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.