These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.The purpose of the impact evaluation was to gauge the success of the victim's rights clinics in attaining each of the following goalsAid in enforcing rights for individual victims and getting them help for crime-related needs, thereby increasing satisfaction of victims with the justice process;Change attitudes of criminal justice officials towards victims' rights and increase their knowledge about rights;Change the legal landscape: establish victim standing and develop positive case law;Increase compliance of criminal justice officials with victims' rights; andSustain the clinic through developing alternative sources of fundingResearchers conducted surveys with prosecutors, judges, victim advocates, and defense attorneys to determine whether they had changed their attitudes toward victims' rights since the local clinic opened its doors. Surveys were fielded in South Carolina, Maryland, and Utah (Criminal Justice Official data, n=552) where clinic evaluations were conducted. An additional survey was fielded in Colorado (Colorado data, n=583) where the victim rights clinic had not yet started to accept cases. To determine the effect that clinics had on observance of victims' rights, researchers collected three samples of cases from prosecutors (NCVLI Case File Data, n=757) in the jurisdiction or jurisdictions in which each local clinic had done the most work: (a) all clinic cases closed since the start of each local clinic; (b) cases closed during the most recent 12-month period which did not involve representation by a clinic attorney; and (c) cases closed in the year prior to the start of each local clinic. Finally, to assess the impact of the clinics on victims' satisfaction with the criminal justice process and its compliance with their rights, researchers conducted telephone interviews (Victim Survey Data, n=125) with two samples of victims in each evaluation site, one drawn from the sample of cases at prosecutor offices and one drawn from the crime victim legal clinics.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigators if further information is needed. This study conducted a retrospective analysis of how child sexual abuse cases referred for prosecution in several counties in one New England state over a five year period (2009-2013) progressed through the system. In particular, the study focused on the distribution of the cases' outcomes and factors associated with these outcomes. The collection contains eight SPSS data files: D1_General-Case-Details.sav (n=500; 103 variables) D2_Background-Checks.sav (n=614; 9 variables) D3_Trial-Information.sav (n=89; 123 variables) D4_First-Victim-Details.sav (n=500; 289 variables) D5_Add-Victim-Details.sav (n=54; 289 variables) D6_First-Perp-Details.sav (n=500; 62 variables) D7_Add-Perp-Details.sav (n=60; 62 variables) D8_Medical-Information.sav (n=97; 35 variables) Demographic variables include age, birth date (month and year), gender, race, ethnicity, living arrangements, number of siblings, immigration status and ability to speak English.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. The project sought to address the shortage of sexual assault forensic examiners (SAFE) by delivering and evaluating a comprehensive SAFE training program developed by the International Association of Forensic Nurses (IAFN). To assess if the training was effective, researchers conducted an outcome evaluation using a mixed methods approach, including quantitative pre-post training and qualitative interviews with instructors and students. The evaluation had three main components: 1) to assess training completion, including the percentage of students who completed the training and the factors that contributed to their completion; 2) to ascertain whether students attained knowledge through pre-test/post-tests and the factors that contributed to knowledge attainment; and 3) to determine whether students retained their knowledge using a post-training exam approximately three months following the training, and whether the students incorporated the core concepts of the training into their SAFE practice. The researchers divided the project into 3 studies. Study 1 examined how many students completed the training and what predicted training completion. Study 2a utilized a one-group pre-test post-test design where researchers assessed students' knowledge attainment for 12 online modules. Study 2b utilized a qualitative framework to understand the instructors' pedagogical approach to teaching clinical skills. In addition, researchers conducted qualitative interviews to examine the students' perceptions of the patient care and medical forensic exam skills gained from the clinical component in the SAFE training, and how the clinical training contributed to their skill development. Study 3a explored knowledge retention using an online post-training survey given to students three months following the training. Study 3b utilized the same qualitative framework as Study 2b. Only data for studies 1, 2a, and 3a are available with this collection. The data file has 198 cases and 675 variables. The qualitative interviews for Studies 2b and 3b are not available as part of this data collection at this time.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. The study investigated the feasibility of implementing the Cardiff Model. The Cardiff Model is a unique violence surveillance system and intervention that involves data sharing and violence prevention planning between law enforcement and the medical field. Anonymized data on assaults from emergency and police departments (EDs; PDs) are combined to detail assault incidents and "hotspots." Data are discussed by a multidisciplinary consortium, which develops and implements a data-informed violence prevention action plan that includes behavioral, environmental, and policy changes to impact violence. Model actions led to decreases in injurious assaults and this model is now statutory in the United Kingdom. The Cardiff Model has never been translated to the U.S. and would require an investigation within our health care system and in different geographical and population contexts. This study investigated the feasibility of essential Cardiff Model Components in order to refine study procedures and situate this community to request further funds for full model implementation. As part of this study, researchers collected a number of feasibility measures from ED and study staff to evaluate the feasibility of translating included model components. Geospatial and statistical analyses investigated the added benefit of the combined ED, PD and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) data. The study contains 1 SPSS data files (CHW Data_1.1.15 to 7.31.16.sav (n=748; 14 variables)), 1 STATA data file (nurse survey data.dta (n=43; 26 variables)), a text document (Nurse Survey_Qualitative data.txt), and 1 excel file (CHW Incidents_Block level data only.xlsx).

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. The qualitative Case Study data is not available as part of this data collection at this time.The purpose of the study was to examine: (1) which entities pay for sexual assault medical forensic exams (MFEs) in state and local jurisdictions throughout the United States, and the policies and practices around determining payment; (2) what services are provided in the exam process and how exams are linked to counseling, advocacy, and other services; (3) whether exams are provided to victims regardless of their reporting or intention to report the assault to the criminal justice system; (4) how MFE kits are being stored for victims who choose not to participate in the criminal justice system process; and (5) whether Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) 2005 requirements are generally being met throughout the country.Researchers conducted national surveys to obtain state-level information from state Services Training Officers Prosecutors (STOP) administrators (SSAs), victim compensation fund administrators, and state-level sexual assault coalitions. Surveys were distributed to potential respondents in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and United States territories that held these state-level positions. Researchers also distributed local-level surveys though an extensive listserv maintained by the National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC). Researchers also conducted case studies in 19 local jurisdictions across six states were selected for case studies.Interviewees included the victim compensation fund administrator, state STOP administrator, state coalition director (or an appointed staff member) and sometimes crime lab or other state justice agency personnel, at the state level, and;law enforcement, prosecution, victim advocacy staff, and healthcare-based exam providers at the local level. Finally, researchers concluded each local jurisdiction visit with a focus group with victims of sexual assault. Data collection efforts included: a national survey of crime victim compensation fund administrators (Compensation Data, n = 26); a national survey of Services Training Officers Prosecutors (STOP) grant program administrators (SSA Data, n = 52); a national survey of state sexual assault coalitions (Coalitions Data, n = 47); and a survey of local community-based victim service providers (Local Provider Data, n = 489).

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. This research examined the reliability of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) arrests data. Data on crime incidents, including data on whether an arrest was made or a summons issued, are collected from hundreds of law enforcement agencies (LEAs) across the country and then combined by the FBI into a national data set that is frequently used by researchers. This study compared arrest data in a sample of cases from NIBRS data files with arrest and summons data collected on the same cases directly from LEAs. The dataset consists of information collected from the Massachusetts NIBRS database combined with data from LEAs through a survey and includes data on arrests, summons, exceptional clearances, applicable statutes and offense names, arrest dates, and arrestees' sex, race, ethnicity and age for a sample of assault incidents between 2011 and 2013 from the NIBRS. The collection contains one SPSS data file (n=480; 32 variables). Qualitative data are not available as part of this collection.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.The purpose of the study was to determine the effects of intensive judicial monitoring on offender compliance with court orders and perpetration of future violence. Offenders were processed in either of two specialized domestic violence courts based in Rochester, New York between October 2006 and December 2009. Study-eligible defendants had to be either (1) convicted and sentenced to a conditional discharge or probation or (2) disposed with an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal. Eligible defendants also had to be ordered to participate in a program (e.g., batterer program, substance abuse treatment). Once an eligible plea/disposition was entered, court staff randomly assigned defendants to either Group 1 (monitoring plus program, n = 77) or Group 2 (program only/no monitoring, n = 70). All of the offenders included in the sample were male. Offender interviews (n = 39) were completed between March 2008 and July 2010. The research intern present in court for compliance calendars approached offenders assigned to one of the two study groups to ask them to participate in the research interview on their last court appearance on the instant case (i.e., at successful dismissal from on-going monitoring or at re-sentencing). Victim interviews (n = 10) were conducted six months and one year post-offender disposition. Victims were contacted by staff from Alternatives for Battered Women (ABW), a local victim advocacy agency that was already in contact with many of the women coming through the domestic violence court.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.The purpose of the study was to compare how the quantity versus the quality of evidence influences the likelihood of trial convictions and plea decisions and examine whether evidence has differential impacts on the perceived likelihood of trial convictions and plea values. In Phase I (Phase I Data, n=2,593) defense attorneys, prosecutors, and judges, representing all 50 states and the District of Columbia, completed an online survey of a hypothetical legal case in which the presence of three types of evidence (confession, eyewitness, and DNA) and length of defendant criminal history were manipulated. In Phase II (Phase II Data, n=502), researchers worked with two District Attorneys' offices in New York state to code the contents of case files. Researchers coded 502 closed cases from 2005 and 2006, all of which originated as felony arrests. Researchers also obtained criminal history record information on the defendants involved in the cases.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information in needed. This study conducts an environmental scan of current Family Justice Centers (FJCs) across the United States as part of a multi-phase effort to develop a formal evaluation plan to measure the effectiveness of FJCs and similar multi-agency co-located collaboratives. The collection contains 1 SAS data file (fjc_analysis_nacjd_20180226.sas7bdat (n=52; 813 variables)) and 1 syntax file.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. Before the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) of 2003, it was not clear the extent to which state departments of corrections (DOCs) were addressing sexual violence in systematic ways. In fact, little information existed about what strategies were being put into practice in prison systems across the country. PREA changed the way DOCs addressed prison sexual violence (PSV). Mandatory recordkeeping and a push for eliminating such incidents moved many DOCs to develop specific responses to PSV or to further refine approaches already in place. The purpose of this project was to provide a national snapshot of DOC initiatives to address PSV, as well as to identify specific practices that seemed to be, in the absence of formal evaluations, particularly promising or innovative in nature. Researchers conducted three tasks: (1) The Survey of State Correctional Administrators (SSCA) involving written surveys and follow-up phone interviews with leaders of state DOCs. During the survey, state administrators described the state's overall approach to PSV and nominated specific strategies as particularly promising; (2) The Survey of Promising Practices (SPP) involving phone interviews with DOC representatives who spoke about promising practices nominated during the SSCA. Interviews were conducted with facility directors, service providers, or other state personnel affiliated with nominated approaches; and (3) Case studies involving site visits to states that researchers determined could provide the most informative lessons on addressing sexual violence in prison to the largest audience of practitioners, researchers, and policymakers. The collection includes 2 Access databases, one each for the SSCA (ASCA_4_6_2006.directors.mdb) and the SSP (ASCA_FAC_4_6_2006.prompractices.mdb). The data related to the Case Studies are not available at this time.