This data collection investigates the nature of law enforcement by recording police behavior in problematic situations, primarily disturbances and traffic stops. The data collection contains two files. The first consists of information on disturbance encounters. Disturbance variables include type of disturbance, manner of investigation, designation of police response, several situational variables such as type of setting, number of victims, bystanders, suspects, and witnesses, demeanor of participants toward the police, type of police response, and demeanor of police toward participants. The second file contains data on traffic offenses. The variables include manner of investigation, incident code, officers' description of the incident, condition of the vehicle stopped, police contact with the passengers of the vehicle, demeanor of passengers toward the police, demeanor of police toward the passengers, and resolution of the situation. The data were collected based on field observation, using an instrument for recording observations.

The aim of this study was to provide a systematic empirical assessment of three basic organizational premises of Community-Oriented Policing (COP). This study constructed a comprehensive data set by synthesizing data available in separate national data sets on police agencies and communities. The base data source used was the 1999 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) survey [LAW ENFORCEMENT MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE STATISTICS (LEMAS), 1999 (ICPSR 3079)], which contained data on police organizational characteristics and on adoption of community-oriented policing procedures. The 1999 survey was supplemented with additional organizational variables from the 1997 LEMAS survey [LAW ENFORCEMENT MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE STATISTICS (LEMAS), 1997 (ICPSR 2700)] and from the 1996 Directory of Law Enforcement Agencies [DIRECTORY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, 1996: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 2260)]. Data on community characteristics were extracted from the 1994 County and City Data Book, from the 1996 to 1999 Uniform Crime Reports [UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM DATA. [UNITED STATES]: OFFENSES KNOWN AND CLEARANCES BY ARREST (1996-1997: ICPSR 9028, 1998: ICPSR 2904, 1999: ICPSR 3158)], from the 1990 and 2000 Census Gazetteer files, and from Rural-Urban Community classifications. The merging of the separate data sources was accomplished by using the Law Enforcement Agency Identifiers Crosswalk file [LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY IDENTIFIERS CROSSWALK [UNITED STATES], 1996 (ICPSR 2876)]. In all, 23 data files from eight separate sources collected by four different governmental agencies were used to create the merged data set. The entire merging process resulted in a combined final sample of 3,005 local general jurisdiction policing agencies. Variables for this study provide information regarding police organizational structure include type of government, type of agency, and number and various types of employees. Several indices from the LEMAS surveys are also provided. Community-oriented policing variables are the percent of full-time sworn employees assigned to COP positions, if the agency had a COP plan, and several indices from the 1999 LEMAS survey. Community context variables include various Census population categories, rural-urban continuum (Beale) codes, urban influence codes, and total serious crime rate for different year ranges. Geographic variables include FIPS State, county, and place codes, and region.

As part of the development of an information base for subsequent policy initiatives, the National Institute of Justice sponsored a nationwide survey of police psychologists to learn more about the characteristics of officers who abuse force, the types of measures police psychologists recommend to control police violence and the role of police psychologists in preventing and identifying individual police officers at risk for use of excessive force. Police personnel divisions in 50 large cities were contacted for names and addresses of the police psychologists who provided services to their departments. Data were collected using a telephone interview protocol that included 61 questions. In this study, excessive force was defined as a violation of a police department's use-of-force policy by an incumbent officer that was serious enough to warrant a referral to the police psychologist. Background information collected on respondents included years with the department, years as a police psychologist, if the position was salaried or consultant, and how often the psychologist met with the police chief. A battery of questions pertaining to screening was asked, including whether the psychologist performed pre-employment psychological screening and what methods were used to identify job candidates with a propensity to use excessive force. Questions regarding monitoring procedures asked if and how police officer behavior was monitored and if incumbent officers were tested for propensity to use excessive force. Items concerning police training included which officers the psychologist trained, what types of training covering excessive force were conducted, and what modules should be included in training to reduce excessive force. Information about mental health services was elicited, with questions on whether the psychologist counseled officers charged with excessive force, what models were used, how the psychologist knew if the intervention had been successful, what factors limited the effectiveness of counseling police officers, characteristics of officers prone to use excessive force, how these officers are best identified, and who or what has the most influence on these officers. General opinion questions asked about factors that increase excessive force behavior and what services could be utilized to reduce excessive force.

This study was designed to permit a "meta-evaluation" of the impact of alternative policing programs on social disorder. Examples of social disorder include bands of teenagers deserting school and congregating on street corners, solicitation by prostitutes and panhandlers, public drinking, vandalism, verbal harassment of women on the street, street violence, and open gambling and drug use. The data used in this study were taken from studies conducted between 1983 and 1990 in seven cities. For this collection, a common set of questions was identified and recoded into a consistent format across studies. The studies were conducted using similar sampling and interviewing procedures, and in almost every case used a quasi-experimental research design. For each target area studied, a different, matched area was designated as a comparison area where no new policing programs were begun. Surveys of residents were conducted in the target and comparison areas before the programs began (Wave I) and again after they had been in operation for a period ranging from ten months to two-and-a-half years (Wave II). The data contain information regarding police visibility and contact, encounters with police, victimization, fear and worry about crime, household protection and personal precautions, neighborhood conditions and problems, and demographic characteristics of respondents including race, marital status, employment status, education, sex, age, and income. The policing methods researched included community-oriented policing and traditional intensive enforcement programs.

This study, funded under the Measuring What Matters Program, was conducted to identify general neighborhood strengthening, or community building, processes and police contributions to them. The purpose of the study, also known as the Police-Community Interaction Project (PCIP), was to conceive, identify, or define recognizable patterns of interaction and to find ways to treat these as quantities that vary in amount and can be shown to fluctuate over time or across places. To that end, researchers conducted surveys of block clubs, neighborhood associations, and umbrella groups to gauge the issues that were important to them, steps they were taking to address these issues, and the ways in which they interacted with the police. Researchers also attended the meetings and events held by the Westside Cooperative Organization (WESCO), an umbrella group, and gathered coded data about the meetings, events and issues discussed. Specific variables in the study include demographic variables about the blocks, neighborhoods, and districts represented by the organizations, descriptive variables on the organizations themselves, variables describing issues of importance to the organizations and steps those organizations were taking to address the issues, variables to describe the interaction between the organizations and police, and variables describing police involvement in community activities.

To explore the idea of community policing and to get an understanding of citizens' policing needs, representatives from the Ada County Sheriff's Office and Boise State University formed a research partnership and conducted surveys of county residents and sheriff's deputies. The county-wide survey of residents (Part 1) was designed to enhance the sheriff's current community policing program and to assist in the deployment of community policing officers by measuring citizens' perceptions and fear of crime, perceptions of deputies, knowledge of sheriff's services, and support for community policing. Questions in the citizen survey focused on feelings of safety in Ada County, such as perception of drugs, gangs, safety of youth, and safety at night, satisfaction with the Sheriff's Office, including ratings of the friendliness and fairness of the department and how well deputies and citizens worked together, attitudes regarding community-oriented policing, such as whether this type of policing would be a good use of resources and would reduce crime, and neighborhood problems, including how problematic auto theft, vandalism, physical decay, and excessive noise were for citizens. Other questions were asked regarding the sheriff's deputy website, including whether citizens would like the site to post current crime reports, and whether the site should have more information about the jail. Respondents were also queried about their encounters with police, including their ratings of recent services they received for traffic violations, requests for service, and visits to the jail, and familiarity with several programs, such as the inmate substance abuse program and the employee robbery prevention program. Demographic variables in the citizen survey include ethnicity, gender, level of schooling, occupation, income, age, and length of time residing in Ada County. The second survey (Part 2), created for the sheriff's deputies, used questions from the citizen survey about the Sheriff's Office service needs. Deputies were asked to respond to questions in the way they thought that citizens would answer these same questions in the citizen survey. The purpose was to investigate the extent to which sheriff's deputies' attitudes mirrored citizens' attitudes about the quality of service.

The purpose of this data collection was to investigate the effects of changes in police evidence procedures and the effects of providing feedback to officers on felony case charge reductions or dismissals due to evidentiary problems. The data were designed to permit an experimental assessment of the effectiveness of two police evidence collection programs implemented on April 1, 1985. One of these was an investigative and post-arrest procedural guide. The other was an individualized feedback report prepared by prosecutors for police officers. The officer file includes information on each officer's sex and race, length of police service, and assignment changes during the study period. Data on the offender and the case files include time of arrest, information on arresting officer, original investigating officer and principal investigating officer, offense and victim characteristics, arrestee characteristics, available evidence, case processing information, and arrestee's criminal history.

A leading sociological theory of crime is the "routine activities" approach (Cohen and Felson, 1979). The premise of this theory is that the rate of occurrence of crime is affected by the convergence in time and space of three elements: motivated offenders, suitable targets, and the absence of guardianship against crime. The purpose of this study was to provide empirical evidence for the routine activities theory by investigating criminal data on places. This study deviates from traditional criminology research by analyzing places instead of collectivities as units of spatial analysis. There are two phases to this study. The purpose of the first phase was to test whether crime occurs randomly in space or is concentrated in "hot spots". Telephone calls for police service made in 1985 and 1986 to the Minneapolis Police Department were analyzed for patterns and concentration of repeat calls and were statistically tested for randomness. For the second phase of the study, two field experiments were designed to test the effectiveness of a proactive police strategy called Repeat Complaint Address Policing (RECAP). Samples of residential and commercial addresses that generated the most concentrated and most frequent repeat calls were divided into groups of experimental and control addresses, resulting in matched pairs. The experimental addresses were then subjected to a more focused proactive policing. The purposes of the RECAP experimentation were to test the effectiveness of proactive police strategy, as measured through the reduction in the incidence of calls to the police and, in so doing, to provide empirical evidence on the routine activities theory. Variables in this collection include the number of calls for police service in both 1986 and 1987 to the control addresses for each experimental pair, the number of calls for police service in both 1986 and 1987 to the experimental addresses for each experimental pair, numerical differences between calls in 1987 and 1986 for both the control addresses and experimental addresses in each experimental pair, percentage difference between calls in 1987 and 1986 for both the control addresses and the experimental addresses in each experimental pair, and a variable that indicates whether the experimental pair was used in the experimental analysis. The unit of observation for the first phase of the study is the recorded telephone call to the Minneapolis Police Department for police service and assistance. The unit of analysis for the second phase is the matched pair of control and experimental addresses for both the residential and commercial address samples of the RECAP experiments.

This project aimed to develop new insights into offender decision-making in hot spots in New York City, and to test whether these insights could inform interventions to reduce crime in hot spots. There were two phases to the project. In the first phase a set of hypotheses were developed about offender decision-making based on semi-structured interviews with individuals who were currently incarcerated, formerly incarcerated individuals, individuals currently on probation, and community members of high crime areas with no justice-involvement. These interviews suggested several factors worthy of further testing. For instance, offenders believed they were less likely to get away with a crime if they knew more about the officers in their community. That is, when police officers were less anonymous, offenders were less likely to go forward with a crime. In the second phase a field intervention was developed and conducted to test whether reducing officer anonymity might deter crime. Through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) while working with NYPD neighborhood coordination officers, who work in New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) developments, it was tested whether sending information about officers to residents in housing developments would deter crime in those developments.

The survey was designed to explore the thesis that effective prevention and control of crime requires a community-wide effort that involves law enforcement agencies, other elements of government, and the citizens in a coordinated attack on problems of crime. The data include information on program start-up, implementation, and the community itself, as well as information on the specific activities undertaken by the programs.