This data collection investigates the ways in which police use reports of drug-related crimes provided by residents of high drug/crime areas and how willing residents of these areas are to report such crimes to the police. Structured interviews were conducted by telephone with police representatives in most of the nation's 50 largest cities and in person with residents and police officers in high drug/crime districts in each of four major cities: Newark, Chicago, El Paso, and Philadelphia. Police department representatives were queried about the usefulness of citizen reports, reasons for citizens' reluctance to make reports, how the rate of citizen reports could be improved, and how citizen reports worked with other community crime prevention strategies. Residents were asked about their tenure in the neighborhood, attitudes toward the quality of life in the neighborhood, major social problems facing the neighborhood, and quality of city services such as police and fire protection, garbage collection, and public health services. Additional questions were asked about the amount of crime in the neighborhood, the amount of drug use and drug-related crime, and the fear of crime. Basic demographic information such as sex, race, and language in which the interview was conducted is also provided.

This study investigates rates of serious crime for selected public housing developments in Washington, DC, Phoenix, Arizona, and Los Angeles, California, for the years 1986 to 1989. Offense rates in housing developments were compared to rates in nearby areas of private housing as well as to city-wide rates. In addition, the extent of law enforcement activity in housing developments as represented by arrests was considered and compared to arrest levels in other areas. This process allowed both intra-city and inter-city comparisons to be made. Variables cover study site, origin of data, year of event, offense codes, and location of event. Los Angeles files also include police division.

These data were collected to explore connections between street gangs and drug distribution. The research objectives for this study were (1) to assess the magnitude of gang involvement in cocaine and other drug sales in two suburban cities, (2) to compare the characteristics of gang-involved drug sale incidents with those without gang involvement, (3) to assess the generalizability of findings on cocaine to other drugs, and from urban to more suburban settings, and (4) to translate the implications of the research findings into the development of law enforcement strategies. Law enforcement arrest records and gang membership records were obtained for two study sites, Pasadena and Pomona, California. Part 1, the incident-level file, supplies information on arrest incidents qualifying as drug sales. Variables in the file include presence at arrest of violence, guns, cash, and drugs, types of charges, gang characteristics of the incident, racial/ethnic makeup of arrestees, gender of arrestees, and gang affiliation of arrestees. Part 2, the participant-level file, supplies data on each participant in each incident. Variables in this file include gender, ethnicity, gang membership status, and charges.

This study investigated changes in the geographic concentration of drug crimes in Cleveland from 1990 to 2001. The study looked at both the locations of drug incidents and where drug offenders lived in order to explore factors that bring residents from one neighborhood into other neighborhoods to engage in drug-related activities. This study was based on data collected for the 224 census tracts in Cleveland, Ohio, in the 1990 decennial Census for the years 1990 to 1997 and 1999 to 2001. Data on drug crimes for 1990 to 1997 and 1999 to 2001 were obtained from Cleveland Police Department (CPD) arrest records and used to produce counts of the number of drug offenses that occurred in each tract in each year and the number of arrestees for drug offenses who lived in each tract. Other variables include counts and rates of other crimes committed in each census tract in each year, the social characteristics and housing conditions of each census tract, and net migration for each census tract.

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.

This study attempted to measure spatial displacement or diffusion of crime to areas near the targeted sites of police intervention. Data were drawn from a controlled study of displacement and diffusion in Jersey City, New Jersey. Two sites with substantial street-level crime and disorder were targeted and carefully monitored during an experimental period. Two neighboring areas were selected as "catchment areas" from which to assess immediate spatial displacement or diffusion. Intensive police interventions were applied to each target site but not to the catchment areas. More than 6,000 20-minute social observations were conducted in the target and catchment areas. Physical observations of the areas were conducted before, during, and after the interventions as well. These data were supplemented by interviews with local residents and ethnographic field observations.

These data were collected in Oakland, California, and Birmingham, Alabama, to examine the effectiveness of alternative drug enforcement strategies. A further objective was to compare the relative effectiveness of strategies drawn from professional- versus community-oriented models of policing. The professional model emphasizes police responsibility for crime control, whereas the community model stresses the importance of a police-citizen partnership in crime control. At each site, experimental treatments were applied to selected police beats. The Oakland Police Department implemented a high-visibility enforcement effort consisting of undercover buy-bust operations, aggressive patrols, and motor vehicle stops, while the Birmingham Police Department engaged in somewhat less visible buy-busts and sting operations. Both departments attempted a community-oriented approach involving door-to-door contacts with residents. In Oakland, four beats were studied: one beat used a special drug enforcement unit, another used a door-to-door community policing strategy, a third used a combination of these approaches, and the fourth beat served as a control group. In Birmingham, three beats were chosen: Drug enforcement was conducted by the narcotics unit in one beat, door-to-door policing, as in Oakland, was used in another beat, and a police substation was established in the third beat. To evaluate the effectiveness of these alternative strategies, data were collected from three sources. First, a panel survey was administered in two waves on a pre-test/post-test basis. The panel survey data addressed the ways in which citizens' perceptions of drug activity, crime problems, neighborhood safety, and police service were affected by the various policing strategies. Second, structured observations of police and citizen encounters were made in Oakland during the periods the treatments were in effect. Observers trained by the researchers recorded information regarding the roles and behaviors of police and citizens as well as police compliance with the experiment's procedures. And third, to assess the impact of the alternative strategies on crime rates, reported crime data were collected for time periods before and during the experimental treatment periods, both in the targeted beats and city-wide.

These data on 19th- and early 20th-century police department and arrest behavior were collected between 1975 and 1978 for a study of police and crime in the United States. Raw and aggregated time-series data are presented in Parts 1 and 3 on 23 American cities for most years during the period 1860-1920. The data were drawn from annual reports of police departments found in the Library of Congress or in newspapers and legislative reports located elsewhere. Variables in Part 1, for which the city is the unit of analysis, include arrests for drunkenness, conditional offenses and homicides, persons dismissed or held, police personnel, and population. Part 3 aggregates the data by year and reports some of these variables on a per capita basis, using a linear interpolation from the last decennial census to estimate population. Part 2 contains data for 267 United States cities for the period 1880-1890 and was generated from the 1880 federal census volume, REPORT ON THE DEFECTIVE, DEPENDENT, AND DELINQUENT CLASSES, published in 1888, and from the 1890 federal census volume, SOCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES. Information includes police personnel and expenditures, arrests, persons held overnight, trains entering town, and population.

This collection evaluates the impact of a new foot patrol plan, implemented by the Boston Police Department, on incidents of crime and neighborhood disturbances. Part 1 contains information on service calls by types of criminal offenses such as murder, rape, aggravated assault, simple assault, robbery, larceny, burglary, and auto theft. It also contains data on types of community disturbances such as noisy party, gang, or minor disturbance and response priority of the incidents. Response priorities are classified according to a four-level scale: Priority 1: emergency calls including crimes in progress, high risk or personal injury, and medical emergencies, Priority 2: calls of intermediate urgency, Priority 3: calls not requiring immediate response, Priority 4: calls of undetermined priority. Parts 2 and 3 include information about patrol time used in each of the three daily shifts during the pre- and post-intervention periods. Part 4 presents information similar to Parts 2 and 3 but the data span a longer period of time--approximately seven years.