U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Bulletin

National Survey of Prosecutors


Prosecutors in State Courts, 2001


May 2002, NCJ 193441


----------------------------------------------------------------
This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables.
A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format
(.wk1) and the full report including tables and graphics in
.pdf format are available from:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/psc01.htm 

This report is one in a series.  More recent editions may be
available.  To view a list of all in the series go to
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pubalp2.htm#prosecutors.
----------------------------------------------------------------

By Carol J. DeFrances, Ph.D.
BJS Statistician

----------------------------------------------------------------
Highlights

*  Over the past decade prosecutors'
offices nationwide, on average,
experienced increases in their staff 
size, budget for prosecutorial functions, 
and population served.

*  In 2001 chief prosecutors were much
more likely to serve in a full-time
capacity than 10 years ago.

*  The percentage of prosecutors'
offices prosecuting felonies related to
domestic violence, child abuse, and
bank or thrift fraud increased in 2001
compared to 1994, when similar data
were collected. 

*  Over the 12 months preceding the
2001 survey, 42% of prosecutors'
offices reported prosecuting either
felony or misdemeanor computer-related 
crimes under their State's computer 
statutes.

*  Two-thirds of prosecutors' offices
used DNA evidence during plea negotiations 
or felony trials in 2001 compared to about 
half of the offices in 1996.

*  In 2001 about 23% of prosecutors'
offices assigned prosecutors to handle
community-related activities.
-------------------------------------------------------

In 2001, 2,341 prosecutors' offices
handled felony cases in State courts of
general jurisdiction.  These offices
employed over 79,000 attorneys,
investigators, victim advocates, and
support staff, with a median annual
budget of $318,000.  Over 40% of the
offices had experience prosecuting a
computer-related crime, and 68% used
DNA evidence either during plea
negotiations or felony trials.  Over
three-fourths of chief prosecutors were
employed full-time in 2001 compared to
half in 1990.

These are findings from the 2001
National Survey of Prosecutors (NSP),
which was a census of all chief prose-
cutors that tried felony cases in State 
courts of general jurisdiction.
*** Footnote 1: The 1990, 1992, 1994, and 
1996 NSP data collections surveyed a 
nationally representative sample of chief 
prosecutors that tried felony cases in 
State courts of general jurisdiction.***  
The census did not include municipal
attorneys or county attorneys who
primarily operate in courts of limited
jurisdiction.  This is the second report
based on results from the 2001 NSP that
describes how the role of the State court
prosecutor has changed over the past
decade.***Footnote 2: State Court Prose-
cutors in Large Districts, 2001, NCJ 
191206, available from the BJS website at
http:///www.ojp.usdoj.gov.bjs.***  

A chief prosecutor is the elected or
appointed attorney advocating for the
public in felony cases and in a variety 
of generally less serious offenses. Office
titles for chief prosecutors include 
district attorney, prosecuting attorney, 
county attorney, commonwealth attorney, and
state's attorney (Appendix).  State law
determines the number of chief prosecutors 
and whether they are elected or appointed.  
Texas had the largest number of chief 
prosecutors (155), followed by Virginia 
(120) and Missouri (115).  Except for Alaska, 
Connecticut, the District of Columbia, and 
New Jersey, in 2001 chief prosecutors were 
elected.

In Alaska, Delaware, and Rhode Island
criminal prosecution was the primary
responsibility of the State's Attorney
General.  In the District of Columbia the
United States Attorney had jurisdiction
over adult felony and misdemeanor
cases.

Most chief prosecutors served prosecutorial 
districts comprised of one or more counties 
(not shown in a table). In 2001, 85% of chief 
prosecutors served a prosecutorial district 
comprised of one county compared to 80% in 
1990. Half of all prosecutors' offices served 
a district with a population of 36,000 or less. 
Seventy-five percent of all offices served
a district with a population of less than
100,000, and 5% served a district with a
population of 500,000 or more.

The size of prosecutorial districts varied
considerably among the 2,341 offices. 
This report provides information for all
offices and by size of jurisdiction:

*  A full-time office in a large jurisdiction
refers to an office with a full-time chief
prosecutor serving a prosecutorial district
with a population of 1 million or more. 

*  A full-time office in a medium
jurisdiction refers to an office with a
full-time chief prosecutor serving a
district with a population between
250,000 to 999,999. 

*  A full-time office in a small jurisdiction
refers to a full-time chief prosecutor
serving a district with a population less
than 250,000. 

*  A part-time office has a part-time chief
prosecutor serving a prosecutorial district
of any size.***Footnote 3: The full-and part-
time categories used in this report are
comparable to the categories used in Prosecutors
in State Courts, 1996, NCJ 170092.***  

Staffing in prosecutors' offices

In 2001 the Nation's prosecutors' offices
employed a workforce of over 79,000 full
and part-time staff, including assistant
prosecutors, supervisory attorneys,
investigators, victim advocates, and
support staff.  This total represented an
increase of 39% from 1992 and 13% from
1996.  Support staff, including
administrative staff and clerical staff,
comprised 35% of total staff, and
assistant prosecutors, including
supervisory attorneys, made up 34%. 
The number of assistant prosecutors,
including supervisory attorneys, grew to
nearly 27,000 in 2001, an increase of
35% since 1990 and 12% since 1996 (not
shown in a table).  

Over the past 10 years, the number of
assistant prosecutors (including
supervisory attorneys) per 100,000
residents kept pace with population
growth.  The rate per 100,000 residents
was 10 in 2001, compared to 9 in 1996.  
Overall, the ratio of assistant prosecutors
(including supervisory attorneys) to
investigators was 3.6 attorneys to 1
investigator, to victim advocates 5.9 to 1,
and to support staff members 1 to 1.
Between 1990 and 2001, the percentage
of prosecutors' offices with at least one
full-time assistant prosecutor increased
from 50% to 65%. 

In 2001 half the entering assistant
prosecutors earned $35,000 or more a
year; half the full-time assistant
prosecutors with 5 years' experience,
$45,000 or more; and half the
supervisory attorneys, $60,000 or more. 
About 8% of the total staff worked part
time in 2001.  In offices with a part-time
chief prosecutor, 40% of staff worked full
time.

The median total staff size across all
offices was nine, including the chief
prosecutor.  Half of the offices reported
two or more assistant prosecutors, one or
more victim advocates, and three or more
support staff.  In 2001 full-time offices in
large districts had a median total staff
size of 456, with medians of 151 assistant 
prosecutors, 21 supervisory attorneys, and 
145 support staff.  Half of part-time offices 
reported one or more assistant prosecutors 
and one or more support staff.

Term of office, length of service, 
and salary of chief prosecutor

In 2001 the percentage of full-time chief
prosecutors was 77% compared to 53%
in 1990 (not shown in a table).  The 532
part-time chief prosecutors were located
in 29 States.  Missouri had the largest
number of part-time chief prosecutors
with 80 of the State's 115 chief
prosecutors serving part-time.  Fifty
percent or more of chief prosecutors in
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, North Dakota,
Nebraska, Pennsylvania, and South
Dakota reported that they worked part
time.  

Eighty-seven percent of chief prosecutors
nationwide reported that they were
elected or appointed to 4-year terms. 
The median length of service for chief
prosecutors (elected or appointed) was
6.8 years.  About 32% of chief prosecutors 
had served 4 years or less and 20% had served 
15 years or more. Half of the chief prosecutors 
in full-time medium size offices served 8.4 
years or more.  The longest tenure reported by 
a survey respondent was 40 years.

Half of all offices reported that the chief
prosecutor earned $85,000 per year or
more.  About 29% of chief prosecutors
earned $100,000 or more per year.  In
general, the amount of annual salary
varied by the size of the prosecutorial
district served and whether the chief
prosecutor was full or part-time.  The
median salary for chief prosecutors in
full-time large offices was $136,700; for
full-time medium offices, $115,000; for
full-time small offices, $90,000; and for
chief prosecutors in part-time offices,
$39,750.  The annual salary for chief
prosecutors ranged from $10,500 to
$189,000.  

Attorney recruitment and retention 
in prosecutors' offices

Almost a third of offices had experienced
problems with recruiting or retaining staff
attorneys (not shown in a table). Fifty-nine 
percent of full-time medium offices and 46% 
of full-time large offices reported problems 
of recruiting new staff attorneys compared to 
33% of full-time small offices and 12% of part-
time offices.  Similarly, over 60% of full-time
large and medium offices indicated a problem 
of retaining staff attorneys, while 31% of full-
time small offices and 11% of part-time offices 
reported such a problem.  Low salaries were cited 
as the primary reason for recruitment (67%) and
retention (58%) problems by the offices with these 
problems. 

Budget of prosecutors' offices

In 2001 prosecutors' offices nationwide
had total budgets of over $4.6 billion for
prosecutorial functions.   Half of the
offices reported an annual budget of
$318,000 or more.  The average budget
was $2 million.  The reported budgets
ranged from $6,000 to $373 million.  The
median annual budget for full-time large
offices was $32 million; for full-time
medium offices, $6 million; for full-time
small offices, $379,000; and for part-time
offices, $95,000. 

Almost all of the prosecutors' offices
(98%) indicated that salaries were
included in their reported budget amounts
for prosecutorial functions.  Dollar
amounts for expert services were
included in 65% of reported budgets,
investigators' services in 53%, and DNA
testing in 40%.  Funding for social
services were included by 15% of
prosecutors' offices.

-----------------------------------------
Staffing and budget in prosecutors' offices, 1992 to 2001
 
                                          1992            1994
Number of staff
    Total                               57,081           65,402
Median per office                            7                8
Mean per office                             24               29
 
Number of assistant prosecutors*
    Total                               21,344            22,278
Median per office                            2                 2
Mean per office                              9                10
 
Budget for prosecutorial functions
    Total (in 2001 dollars)                 --      +$2.9 billion
Median per office (in 2001 dollars          --           $271,264
Mean per office (in 2001 dollars)           --         $1,621,176
 
 
 
                                           1996              2001
Number of staff
    Total                                 70,526           79,436
Median per office                              9                9
Mean per office                               30               34
 
Number of assistant prosecutors*                   
    Total                                 24,040           26,921
Median per office                              3                2
Mean per office                               10               10
 
Budget for prosecutorial functions
    Total (in 2001 dollars)         +$3.5 billion   +$4.68 billion
Median per office (in 2001 dollars       $286,709         $318,000
Mean per office (in 2001 dollars)      $1,670,447       $2,000,026
 
Note: Data for 1992, 1994, and 1996 are from a nationally 
representative sample of chief prosecutors who tried felony 
cases in State courts of general jurisdiction. In 1992 
data on the number of total staff were available for 2,357 
of 2,396 prosecutors' offices and the number of assistant 
prosecutors for 2,396 offices.  In 1994 data on the number
of total staff were available for 2,293 of 2,343 
prosecutors' offices number of assistant prosecutors for 
2,336 offices, and the budget for prosecutorial for 2,336 
offices, and the budget for prosecutorial fun for 1,788 
offices.  In 1996 data on the number of total staff and 
number of assistant prosecutors were available for 2,341 
of 2,343 prosecutor offices, and the budget for 
prosecutorial functions for 2,121 offices 2001 data on 
the number of total staff and number of assistant
prosecutors' offices and estimated for 130 prosecutors' 
offices.
*Includes supervisory attorneys who litigate cases.
--Data were for total budget and were not directly 
comparable to 1994, 1996, and 2001 data.
 
*  Between 1992 and 2001 the number of total staff 
in prosecutors' offices increased by 39%.
 
*  In terms of specific staff members, the 
number of assistant prosecutors increased by 
26% during the period 1992 to 2001.
 
*  When 1994 budget amounts are adjusted for 
inflation, prosecutors' offices had combined 
total budgets of approximately $2.9 billion for 
prosecutorial functions. In 2001 these offices 
had combined total budgets of over $4.6 billion, 
an increase of 61%.

-----------------------------------------

Half of the prosecutors' offices received
85% or more of their funding from the
county government (not shown in a
table).  About a third of the offices relied
exclusively on the county government for
their budget.  About half of the offices
reported receiving some funding from the
State government.  Six percent of the
offices reported 100% funding from their
State government.  Some funding from
the city government was reported by 4%
of the prosecutors' offices.  Over a third
of the offices indicated that some portion
of their budget came from grant funds. 

Types of cases handled by
prosecutors' offices

In addition to felony criminal matters,
prosecutors' offices handled a variety of
other case types.  Nine out of ten offices
also had jurisdiction over misdemeanor
cases.  Juvenile matters were handled by
89% of the offices and traffic violations by
84%.  Fifty-four percent of offices
represented the government in civil
lawsuits.  About half of the offices had
jurisdiction over child support
enforcement cases.
  
Part-time offices were more likely to
handle traffic violations (94%) and
represent the government in civil lawsuits
(75%) than their full-time counterparts. 
Felony (77%) and misdemeanor (97%)
appeals were more likely to be handled in
full-time large offices than any of the
other office types.

----------------------------------------
Computer-related crime prosecuted by
prosecutors' offices

Cybercrime has new importance given
the increased consumer and business
use of the Internet.  With cybercrime a
priority on several levels, the 2001 NSP
asked prosecutors' offices about the
kinds of computer-related cases they
may have handled.

Over the 12 months before the survey,
42% of the prosecutors' offices reported
prosecuting computer-related crimes
under their State's computer statutes. 
Computer-related crimes (felony or
misdemeanor) were prosecuted by 97% of 
full-time large offices, 73% of full-time 
medium offices, 44% of full-time small 
offices, and 17% of part-time offices.  

Three in ten offices nationwide reported
prosecuting computer-related crimes
dealing with the transmittal of child
pornography.  A quarter of all offices
prosecuted credit card fraud (27%) and
bank card fraud (22%).  Computer sabotage 
was prosecuted by 5% of the offices and 
theft of intellectual property by 3%.

                                Percent of prosecutors' offices
                                Full-time offices (population served)
                                                  Large
Type of computer                       All       (1,000,000
crime prosecuted                       offices    or more)
 
Any computer-related crime              41.5%       97.0%
 
Credit card fraud                       27.4        93.5
Bank card fraud/a                       22.3        83.3
Computer forgery/b                      13.3        63.0
Computer sabotage/c                      4.6        53.6
Unauthorized access to computer/d        9.6        60.7
Unauthorized copying or
distribution of computer programs/e      2.7        53.8
Cyberstalking/f                         16.3        76.7
Theft of intellectual property           3.2        40.7
Transmitting child pornography          30.0        87.1
Identity theft                          18.2        80.0
 
 
                                        Medium     Small
Type of computer                       (250,000   (under
crime prosecuted                       to 999,99   250,000) Part-time
 
Any computer-related crime              72.9%       44.2%    16.8%
 
Credit card fraud                       61.2        28.2      7.4
Bank card fraud/a                       50.9        22.6      6.9
Computer forgery/b                      39.2        12.8      2.7
Computer sabotage/c                     14.4         3.8      0.5
Unauthorized access to computer/d       28.8         8.8      2.3
Unauthorized copying or
distribution of computer programs/e      9.0         1.8      0.2
Cyberstalking/f                         47.8        15.1      4.5
Theft of intellectual property          13.4         2.3      0.5
Transmitting child pornography          67.1        30.4     10.8
Identity theft                          51.9        17.2      4.5
 
Note:  Data on prosecution of any computer related 
crime under their State's computer statutes were 
available for 2,151 prosecutors' offices.  Data were 
available on credit card fraud for 1,995 prosecutors' 
offices, bank card fraud 1,956 offices, forgery 1,894 
offices,  sabotage 1,853 offices, unauthorized access 
to computer system 1,878 offices, unauthorized copying 
or distribution of computer programs 1,883 offices, 
cyberstalking 1,927 offices,  theft of intellectual
property 1,839 offices, transmitting child pornography 
2,029 offices, cyberstalking 1,927 offices, theft of 
intellectual property 1,839 offices, transmitting child 
pornography 2,029 offices, and identity theft 1,927 
offices.
a/ATM or debit.
b/Alteration of computerized documents.
c/To hinder the normal function of a computer system 
through the introduction of worms, viruses, or logic 
bombs.
d/Hacking.
f/The activity of users sending harassing or
threatening e-mail to other users.
---------------------------------

Special categories of felony offenses
handled by prosecutors' offices

During the previous year over 90% of
prosecutors' offices prosecuted domestic
violence (96%) and child abuse (93%)
offenses.  Illegal sale or possession of a
firearm offenses were prosecuted by 83%
of the offices, stalking offenses 61%,
bank or thrift fraud 45%, and elder abuse
42%.  About 2 in 10 offices reported
prosecuting offenses related to health
care fraud (23%) or hate crime (20%).

In general, full-time large offices were
more likely to prosecute special categories 
of felony offenses than the smaller offices.  
For example, hate crime offenses were 
prosecuted in 91% of full-time large offices 
compared to 57% of full-time medium offices, 
18% of full-time small offices, and 6% of 
part-time offices. Sixty-five percent of 
full-time large offices prosecuted police use 
of excessive force offenses compared to 28% of 
full-time medium offices, 7% of full-time small
offices, and 2% of part-time offices.

Number of cases and convictions 
in prosecutors' offices

Over 2.3 million felony cases and almost
7 million misdemeanor cases were closed by 
prosecutors' offices during the 12 months 
preceding the survey (not shown in a 
table).***Footnote 4: The caseload data
collected in the 2001 NSP are not directly
comparable to prior NSP caseload estimates.
For the 2001 NSP data collection, the 
respondent defined a case, whereas in the
1992, 1994, and 1996 collections, BJS
provided the definition of a case.***
About 38% of the total number of felony cases 
closed were prosecuted in full-time small 
offices, 37% in full-time medium offices, 21% 
in full-time large offices, and 3% in part-time
offices.  

Approximately 857 felony cases were
closed per 100,000 residents.  About 87
felony cases per assistant prosecutor
were closed.***Footnote 5: This estimate was
calculated by dividing the total number of 
felony cases closed by the number of assistant
prosecutors including supervisory attorneys.
An assumption made in calculating the estimate
if that all assistant prosecutors handled 
felony cases, which may not always be the 
case.***  Staff from prosecutors' offices 
participated in over 67,000 felony jury trials 
that resulted in a verdict. 

The median number of felony and misdemeanor 
criminal cases closed by prosecutors' offices 
was 976.***Footnote 6: Methods of counting 
criminal cases vary among prosecutors' offices.
About 44% indicated counting criminal cases by 
each defendant; 21%, by each charge; 17%, by each 
incident; 4%, by the most serious charge; and
15%, by other methods or did not respond.***
Half of the prosecutors' offices closed 250 or 
more felony cases.  In at least half of the
offices, 90% or more of the felony cases closed 
resulted in a felony or misdemeanor conviction.

The median number of felony jury trial
verdicts per office was 8.  The median
annual number of felony cases closed by
full-time large offices was 12,079; by
full-time medium offices 3,162; by
full-time small office 288; and by
part-time offices 50.  The median
conviction rate for felony cases was 90%
or more in part-time offices (93%) and in
full-time small offices (90%).  

Half of the full-time large offices were
involved in at least 354 felony jury trials
that resulted in a verdict during the
preceding year.  Half of the offices
serving a medium size jurisdiction
participated in  91 or more such trials;
half the small offices, 10 or more trials;
and half the part-time offices, 2 or more
felony jury trials.

Juveniles proceeded against in 
criminal courts by prosecutors' 
offices

Measuring the number of juvenile cases
proceeded against is difficult due to the
various mechanisms (judicial waiver,
direct file by prosecutor, and statutory
exclusion of certain offenses from
juvenile court jurisdiction) by which a
juvenile case can reach criminal court,
the variation in the definition of juvenile
across States, and the different
terminology used by States in referring to
this type of case.  Approximately 69% of
prosecutors' offices indicated that they
had handled juvenile cases in criminal
court.  During the previous year,
prosecutors' offices reported proceeding
against over 32,000 juvenile cases in
criminal court, an increase of 23% from
1996.***Footnote 7: Other sources of 
statistics for juvenile cases handled in
criminal court: Delinquency Cases Waived
to Criminal Court, 1988-1997, Office of 
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Fact Sheet, February 200; State Court
Sentencing of Convicted Felons, 1994, BJS
NCJ 164614; and Juvenile Felony Defendants
in Criminal Court, BJS NCJ 165815.***
A median of five juvenile cases per office 
were proceeded against in criminal court.  

About 7% of the offices reported having a
specialized unit that handled juvenile
cases in criminal court.  These specialized 
units were more likely to be found in full-time 
medium offices (39%)and full-time large offices 
(35%) than either full-time small offices (5%) 
or part-time offices (1%).  

Over a third of prosecutors' offices
indicated that a designated attorney
handled juvenile cases proceeded
against in criminal court.  Forty-one
percent of full-time small offices indicated
designating attorneys to handle juvenile
cases in criminal court, 35% of full-time
large offices, 32% of full-time medium
offices, and 17% of part-time offices. 

Written guidelines for handling juvenile
cases in criminal court were reported by
19% of all offices.  Full-time large offices
(59%) were more likely to have written
guidelines than their full-time and
part-time office counterparts.

Work-related threats or assaults
against staff in prosecutors' offices 

In 2001, 41% of prosecutors' offices
reported a work-related threat or assault
against a staff member (not shown in
table).  This was a decrease from 1996
when 49% of offices indicated that a staff
member experienced a work-related
threat or assault.  In 2001, 81% of
full-time large offices reported a
work-related threat or assault against a
staff member, 56% of full-time medium
offices, 41% of full-time small offices, 
and 32% of part-time offices.  About 2%
reported having only assaults against
staff members. 

In terms of specific staff members, about
a third of chief prosecutors and a quarter
of assistant prosecutors nationwide
experienced a work-related threat or
assault. 

Security measures used 
in prosecutors' offices

A variety of security measures were used
by prosecutors' offices to protect their
staff and building.  Electronic security
systems (22%), building guards (21%),
and metal detectors (21%) were used by
over 20% of all prosecutors' offices
nationwide.  About 1 out of 10 offices had
electronic surveillance (12%) or police
protection (11%).  The percentage of
prosecutors' offices using building guards
and metal detectors in 2001 more than
doubled since 1994, when 10% of offices
reported using building guards and 10%
metal detectors.

The chief prosecutor carried a firearm for
personal security in 21% of the offices. 
Twenty-three percent of full-time small
offices indicated that their chief
prosecutor carried a firearm for personal
security, 22% of full-time medium offices,
15% of part-time offices, and 12% of
full-time large offices.  About a third of 
all offices reported that a staff investigator 
carried a firearm. 

DNA evidence used by prosecutors'
offices

In 2001 two-thirds of prosecutors' offices
reported the use of DNA evidence during
plea negotiations or felony trials.  This is
an increase from 1996 when about half of
all offices indicated using DNA evidence
during plea negotiations or felony trials. 
All the full-time large offices reported
using DNA evidence during plea
negotiations or felony trials, 98% of
full-time medium offices, 73% of full-time
small offices, and 38% of part-time
offices. 
 
A State-operated forensic laboratory
performed the DNA testing for 61% of all
offices, a privately operated laboratory for
22%, the FBI for 8%, and a local agency
for 5%.  Full-time medium offices (82%)
were more likely to use a State-operated
forensic laboratory than full-time small
offices (67%), full-time large offices
(66%), and part-time offices (34%).  A
local agency was used for DNA testing by
81% of full-time large offices, 22% of
full-time medium offices, and 2% of
full-time small offices.***Footnote 8: For
more information on DNA laboratories, see
BJS report, Survey of DNA Crime Laboratories,
2001, NCJ 179104.*** 

When asked about problems in the use
of DNA evidence, a third of all offices
indicated at least one instance of
excessive delay in getting laboratory
results. Excessive delays in getting DNA
results were reported by 72% of full-time
large offices, 65% of full-time medium
offices, 34% of full-time small offices, 
and 15% of part-time offices.  Inconclusive
DNA results were reported by 15% of all
offices, improper collection of evidence
by the police 7%, and difficulty at least
once in getting DNA results admitted in
court as evidence 1%.

Community prosecution in
prosecutors' offices

Community prosecution has been defined
by prosecutors as a way to involve the
community to solve crime and coordinate
their office, law enforcement, local
residents, and organizations to improve
public safety and quality of life.
***Footnote 9: For more information on
community prosecution see Nugent, Elaine
and Gerard A. Rainville, "The State of
Community Prosecution: Results from a
National Survey", The Prosecutor, March/
April 2001, pp. 26-33 and the Office of
Justice Programs website 
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/
prosecution/commlinks.htm>.***

During the previous year 68% of all
prosecutors' offices used tools other than
traditional criminal prosecution to address
community problems, 55% involved the
community to identify crime or problem
areas, and 18% assigned prosecutors to
specific geographic areas.  Assigning
prosecutors to specific geographic areas
was done most often by full-time large
offices (66%) compared to their full and
part-time counterparts.

Virtually all the offices (99%) indicated a
formal or informal relationship with law
enforcement agencies.  Eighty-seven
percent of the offices reported a formal or
informal relationship with other
governmental agencies, 69% community
associations, and 61% private
organizations. 

About three-quarters of all offices met
regularly with school groups.  Half of the
offices reported meeting regularly with
youth service organizations and business
groups.  About a third met regularly with
neighborhood  associations.  Nine
percent of all offices indicated meeting
regularly with tenant associations.

Twenty-three percent of all offices
assigned prosecutors to handle
community-related activities.  Of the
offices assigning prosecutors to handle
community-related activities, 30%
reported that these prosecutors were
located outside of the central prosecutors'
offices in places such as the police
department or a community-based office
(not shown in a table).

The types of offenses handled most often
by prosecutors assigned to community-related 
activities were drug crime (80%), violent crime 
(65%), juvenile crime (63%), property crime
(62%), and public-order crime (46%).

Over three-fourths of the offices that
assigned prosecutors to community-related 
activities indicated that these prosecutors 
carried a full caseload.

Methodology

Respondent selection

The 2001 National Survey of Prosecutors
(NSP) was a census of the 2,341 chief
prosecutors in the United States that
handled felony cases in State courts of
general jurisdiction. In 2001, there were
2,341 prosecutorial districts in the Nation,
each with one chief prosecutor.   
Data collection

The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) 
conducted the data collection for the 2001 NSP 
through a mailed questionnaire.  
The 2001 NSP questionnaire is available at the 
BJS website < http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/
pub/pdf/nsp01.pdf>. 

In May 2001, the 2001 NSP
questionnaire was mailed to the 114
prosecutors' offices that served districts
with a  population of 500,000 or more. 
The remaining 2,228 prosecutors' offices
were sent questionnaires in June 2001.
After the initial mailings, an extensive
follow-up was required to obtain a
returned survey from each of the
prosecutors' offices.  The follow-up
process involved phone calls, e-mail and
fax communication, re-mailing
questionnaires, and sending follow-up
letters. Staff of the National District
Attorneys Associations as well as the
Prosecutor Coordinator Office in each
State also assisted NORC in providing
follow-up.

NORC conducted additional telephone,
fax, and e-mail follow-up on completed
surveys to obtain responses to
unanswered items and to clarify some
responses.

Survey response

Overall, 2,243 or 96% of the 2,341
prosecutors' offices nationwide
responded to the 2001 NSP. 

Data were not collected for the 98 
prosecutors' offices listed below:
Alabama (judicial circuits) 6th, 12th, 20th,
28th; Arizona (judicial district) 9th West;
California (counties) Plumas; 
Georgia (judicial circuits)  Dublin,
Piedmont, Bell-Forsyth; Idaho (counties)
Clark; Indiana (judicial circuits) 20th;
Iowa (counties) Howard;
Kansas (counties) Harper, Kingman, 
Neosho, Osage, Phillips; 
Kentucky (judicial circuits) 1st,  26th,
28th, 31st,  33rd, 35th, 39th, 41st, 44th;
Louisiana (judicial districts) 8th, 12th,
16th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 26th, 34th, 40th;
Minnesota (counties) Pipestone,
Ramsey, Roseau; 
Missouri (counties) Carter, Crawford,
Dade, Douglas, Howell, Lewis, Lincoln,
Madison, Pike, St. Francois, Ste.
Genevieve, Stoddard, Taney;
Nebraska (counties) Dodge, Gage,
Garden, Harlan, Holt, Howard, Nemaha,
Stanton, Washington, Wheeler; 
North Carolina (prosecutorial districts)
23, 25; 
North Dakota (counties) Mountrail,
Dunn; 
Oklahoma (judicial districts) 13th;
Oregon (counties) Clackamas, Klamath, 
Lincoln, Linn, Tillamook, Umatilla,  Union;
South Carolina (judicial circuits) 10th;
South Dakota (counties) McCook, Miner,
Perkins, Shannon; 
Texas (counties) Coleman, Floyd, Jim
Wells, Matagorda, Val Verde, Wilbarger,
Winkler; 
Virginia (counties) Buckingham,
Nottoway, Rappahannock; 
Washington (counties) Asotin, Kitsap,
Lewis, Mason, Pacific, Spokane; 
West Virginia (counties) Lewis,
Pleasants; 
Wisconsin (counties) Bayfield, Richland.

Data imputations

Data on the total budget for prosecutorial
functions for 10 of the 98 nonrespondents
were retrieved from a secondary source
and (such as, office web page,
telephoning the county budget or
treasurer's office) entered into the data
set.  Similarly, data on the number of
full-time assistant prosecutors and the
total number of full-time staff for 11 of the
98 nonrespondents were collected from a
secondary source and entered  into the
data set. Since these data were retrieved
from proxy sources other than the
prosecutors' offices, they are treated as
imputed data.

The simple hot deck method --
copying a value from a donor case
having similar values or related variables
-- was used to impute various variables
for the 2001 NSP.  Initially, the number of
full-time chief prosecutors, the number of
part-time chief prosecutors, the number
of part-time assistant prosecutors, the
total number of part-time staff, and the
number of various full-time and part-time
staff members (that is, investigators,
victim advocate, support staff) were
imputed for 98 prosecutors' offices; the
number of full-time assistant prosecutors
and the number of full-time staff for 87
offices; the total budget for prosecutorial
function for 120 offices; and the number
of felony cases closed for 288 offices. 
The number of juvenile cases proceeded
against in criminal court was imputed for
4 offices that served a district with a
population over 500,000.

To impute any variable by the hot deck
method, the prosecutorial district size
was used to sort the completed cases
(that is, prosecutor office surveys) in
descending order.  A missing value for
each variable was imputed as the value
of the variable on the case immediately
preceding the case with missing data. 
For example, a missing value for felony
cases closed was imputed as the value of
felony cases closed on the case that
immediately proceeded the case with
missing data. 

For the 98 prosecutors' offices where the
full-time or part-time status of the chief
prosecutor was imputed, BJS staff
verified this information with the
Prosecutor Coordinator's office in each of
the 24 States where the 98 offices were
located.    

------------------------------------------
The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the
statistical agency of the U.S. Department
of Justice.  
Lawrence A. Greenfeld is 
acting director.

Carol J. DeFrances wrote this report
under the supervision of Steven K.
Smith.  At BJS, Keonna Feaster
provided statistical review; David Carlis,
Dorothea Proctor, and Keonna Feaster
assisted in compiling the list of 2,341
chief prosecutors; Keonna Feaster also
assisted in data collection.  Marika F.X.
Litras constructed the map.

Data collection and processing were
performed by the National Opinion
Research Center  (NORC); Natalie Suter
was the project director, and Annemarie
Rosenlund, the assistant project director. 
At NORC, other project staff included
Haider Baig, Pauletta Baxter, Angeline
Bregianes, Nakia Brown, Lashanda
Carter, Valarie Cook, Angela Herrmann,
Irv Horowitz, Robert Johnson, Ellen
Kaplowitz, Adam Levine, Patricia
Mikkelson, Gloria Rauens, Lyanette
Scott, Joanna Small, Victoria Sudler,
Lakecia Whimper, and Michael Yang. 
Paula Wulff of the National District
Attorneys Association, as well as the
Prosecutor Coordinator Office in each
State assisted with data collection. 
Elaine Nugent from the American
Prosecutors Research Institute, James
Polley, IV from the National District
Attorneys Association, and Paula Wulff
reviewed the report.  Tina Dorsey and
Tom Hester produced and edited the
report.  Jayne Robinson prepared the
report for printing.

May 2002, NCJ 193441
-------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------
This report in portable document 
format and in ASCII, its tables, survey
questionnaire, and related statistical data
are available at the BJS World Wide Web
Internet site:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/
--------------------------------------------


End of file
05/15/02 ih