DOI: 10.3886/icpsr02878.v3
title: Use of Computerized Crime Mapping by Law Enforcement in the United States, 1997-1998
title: Version 3

description: As a first step in understanding law enforcement agencies'
 use and knowledge of crime mapping, the Crime Mapping Research Center
 (CMRC) of the National Institute of Justice conducted a nationwide
 survey to determine which agencies were using geographic information
 systems (GIS), how they were using them, and, among agencies that were
 not using GIS, the reasons for that choice. Data were gathered using a
 survey instrument developed by National Institute of Justice staff,
 reviewed by practitioners and researchers with crime mapping
 knowledge, and approved by the Office of Management and Budget. The
 survey was mailed in March 1997 to a sample of law enforcement
 agencies in the United States. Surveys were accepted until May 1,
 1998. Questions asked of all respondents included type of agency,
 population of community, number of personnel, types of crimes for
 which the agency kept incident-based records, types of crime analyses
 conducted, and whether the agency performed computerized crime
 mapping. Those agencies that reported using computerized crime mapping
 were asked which staff conducted the mapping, types of training their
 staff received in mapping, types of software and computers used,
 whether the agency used a global positioning system, types of data
 geocoded and mapped, types of spatial analyses performed and how
 often, use of hot spot analyses, how mapping results were used, how
 maps were maintained, whether the department kept an archive of
 geocoded data, what external data sources were used, whether the
 agency collaborated with other departments, what types of Department
 of Justice training would benefit the agency, what problems the agency
 had encountered in implementing mapping, and which external sources
 had funded crime mapping at the agency. Departments that reported no
 use of computerized crime mapping were asked why that was the case,
 whether they used electronic crime data, what types of software they
 used, and what types of Department of Justice training would benefit
their agencies.
description: Computerized crime mapping technology enables law
 enforcement agencies to analyze and correlate data sources to create a
 detailed snapshot of crime incidents and related factors within a
 community or other geographic area. In particular, it enables agencies
 to target resources for more effective crime control strategies,
 identify likely suspects, evaluate the results of interventions, and
 more efficiently and effectively allocate officers to geographic areas
 in which they are needed. While interest in this technology within the
 law enforcement community appears to be growing, until recently little
 data existed on how widely computerized crime mapping was used, in
 what capacity, and what influenced an agency's implementation of a
 geographic information system (GIS). As a first step in understanding
 law enforcement agencies' use and knowledge of crime mapping, the
 Crime Mapping Research Center of the National Institute of Justice
 conducted a nationwide crime mapping survey to determine which
 agencies were using GIS, how they were using it, and, among agencies
that were not using GIS, the reasons for that choice.
description: The survey instrument was developed by National
 Institute of Justice staff, reviewed by practitioners and researchers
 with crime mapping knowledge, and cleared by the Office of Management
 and Budget. All agencies with 50 or more sworn officers were contacted
 by telephone to obtain the name of the crime analyst or other
 appropriate person to whom the survey should be addressed. All other
 surveys were sent to the attention of the agency chief. The survey
 was mailed in March 1997 to a sample of law enforcement agencies in
 the United States. Agencies that did not respond to the first mailing
 were sent a second survey. Surveys were accepted until May 1, 1998. It
 took responding agencies an estimated average of 33 minutes to answer
 the survey, including time to review instructions, gather needed data,
and complete and review the collection of information.
description: Questions asked of all respondents included type of
 agency, population of community, number of personnel, types of crimes
 for which the agency kept incident-based records, types of crime
 analyses conducted, and whether the agency performed computerized
 crime mapping. Those agencies that reported using computerized crime
 mapping were asked which staff conducted the mapping, types of
 training their staff received in mapping, types of software and
 computers used, whether the agency used a global positioning system,
 types of data geocoded and mapped, types of spatial analyses performed
 and how often, use of hot spot analyses, how mapping results were
 used, how maps were maintained, whether the department kept an archive
 of geocoded data, what external data sources were used, whether the
 agency collaborated with other departments, what types of Department
 of Justice training would benefit the agency, what problems the agency
 had encountered in implementing mapping, and which external sources
 had funded crime mapping at the agency. Departments that reported no
 use of computerized crime mapping were asked why that was the case,
 whether they used electronic crime data, what types of software they
 used, and what types of Department of Justice training would benefit
their agencies.
description: Response Rates: The response rate after two mailings was 72
percent.
description: Presence of Common Scales: Several Likert-type scales were used.
description: Stratified random sampling.
description: Datasets: 
DS1: Use of Computerized Crime Mapping by Law Enforcement in the United States, 1997-1998
description: All law enforcement agencies in the United States.