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 implement a "platform-based" methodology for collecting data about police organizations and the communities they serve with the goals of generating in-depth standardized information about police organizations, personnel and practices and to help move policing in the direction of evidence-based "learning-organizations" by providing judicious feedback to police agencies and policy makers. The research team conducted three web-based Law Enforcement Organizations (LEO) surveys of sworn and civilian law enforcement employees (LEO Survey A Data, n=22,765; LEO Survey B Data, n=15,825; and LEO Survey C Data, n=16,483). The sample was drawn from the 2007 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) database. Agencies with 100 to 3,000 sworn police personnel were eligible for participation. To collect data for the Police-Community Interaction (PCI) survey (PCI Data, n=16,659), each week department employees extracted names and addresses of persons who had recent contact with a police officer because of a reported crime incident, traffic accident or traffic stop. Typically, the surveys were completed within two to four weeks of the encounter.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they are 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 accompany 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 this study is to examine the prevalence of police practitioner-research partnerships in the United States and examine the factors that prevent or facilitate development and sustainability of these partnerships. This study used a mixed method approach to examine the relationship between law enforcement in the United States and researchers. A nationally-representative sample of law enforcement agencies were randomly selected and given a survey in order to capture the prevalence of police practitioner-researcher partnerships and associated information. Then, representatives from 89 separate partnerships were interviewed, which were identified through the national survey. The primary purpose of these interviews was to gain insight into the barriers and facilitators of police and practitioner relationships as well as the benefits of this partnering. Lastly four case studies were conducted on model partnerships that were identified during interviews with practitioners and researchers.

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 contains data from a survey of 480 large (200+ sworn officers) state and local law enforcement agencies, and 63 additional smaller county and municipal agencies that experienced violent extremism. These data were collected as part of a project to perform a comprehensive assessment of challenges and opportunities when developing partnerships between police and communities to counter violent extremism. Qualitative data collected as a part of this project are not included in this release. This collection includes one tab-delimited data file: "file6-NIJ-2012-3163-Survey-Responses.csv" with 194 variables and 382 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 is needed. The purpose of this study was to develop a research-based framework to guide police agencies in future selection, implementation, and use of technology. This project was conducted in three phases. First, an expert panel was convened to identify key policing technology and to ensure that the survey captured critical indicators of technology performance. Second, a nationally representative survey was administered to over 1,200 state and local law enforcement agencies. The survey explored policing strategies and activities as well as technology acquisition, use, and challenges.

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 study examined how police managers would use information about their officers' performance in procedural justice terms. The project provided for the injection of citizen assessment of service quality into systems of police performance measurement and accountability. Information on the quality of police-citizen encounters was drawn from surveys of citizens who had contact with the police in each of two cities, Schenectady and Syracuse, New York. Following the accumulation of survey data to form a baseline, survey results on citizens' satisfaction and judgments about procedural justice in their police contacts were summarized and reported to command staffs on a monthly basis through the departments' respective Compstat meetings. In this way the project provided for measures of police performance with respect to procedural justice with sufficient periodicity that the information was potentially useful in managing performance. The study addressed four specific questions: Does performance on these outcomes - procedural justice and citizen satisfaction - improve when information on these outcomes is incorporated into departments' systems of performance measurement and accountability?What do police managers do with this information, and how (if at all) are field supervisors and patrol officers affected by it?Are survey-based measures of citizens' subjective experiences valid measures of police performance, that is, do they reflect the procedural justice with which police act?Can survey based measures be deployed economically (e.g., through targeted sampling), and can other, less expensive measures of the quality of police-citizen encounters be substituted for survey-based measures? To answer these questions, researches used a mixed methods data collection plan. In both Schenectady and Syracuse, a survey was administered to people who had recent contact with the police. Semi-monthly samples were randomly drawn from police records of calls for service, stops, and arrests from mid-July, 2011, through mid-January, 2013. Across the 18 months of surveying, 3,603 interviews were completed. Also carried out, was a survey of key informants in each city - neighborhood association leaders - in order to extend the assessment of public perceptions of the local police beyond those who have direct contact with police to the larger community. Interviews with patrol officers and supervisors were also conducted in both sites, once at about the mid-point of the 18-month police services survey and again at the conclusion of the surveying. Interviews were conducted with the commanders shortly after the project was introduced to them in October of 2011. Finally, in Schenectady, "armchair" observation of a subset of the 1,800 encounters about which the citizen had already been interviewed was conducted. The collection contains 7 SPSS data files and 6 Syntax files:archive_Census_beat.sav (n=30; 28 variables)archive_keyinformant_analysis.spsarchive_keyinformant_survey.sav (n=90; 28 variables)archive_obs_byenc.sav (n=476; 79 variables)archive_obs_byobserver.sav (n=1,078; 476 variables)archive_obs_enc_analysis.spsarchive_obs_enc_var_construction.spsarchive_police_data.sav (n=3,603; 9 variables)archive_policeservices_survey_analysis.spsarchive_policeservices_survey_closed.sav (n=3,603; 148 variables)archive_policeservices_survey_open.sav (n=1,218; 23 variables)archive_policeservices_survey_var_construction.spsSyntax to replicate results - list by table.pdf For confidentiality reasons, the qualitative interviews with citizens, police

These data are part of the 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 excepted as noted below. All direct identifiers have been removed and replaced with text enclosed in square brackets (e.g.[MASKED]). Due to the masking of select information, variables/content described in the data documentation may not actually be available as part of the collection. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. This collection is one part of the Department of Justice's response to 42 USC 14142, a law which requires the U.S. Attorney General to 1) "acquire data about the use of excessive force by law enforcement officers" and 2) "publish an annual summary of the data." Researchers compared agency-level data reported in the 2003 (ICPSR 4411) and 2007 (ICPSR 31161) waves of the Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) surveys with available external sources including publicly available reports and direct contact with agency personnel. The purpose of this study was to assess validity and reliability of the available agency-level reported data on citizen complaints about police use of force.

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. For this study, researchers conducted an experimental evaluation of a training program aimed at promoting the use of procedural justice by officers in the Seattle Police Department (SPD). After identifying eligible officers using a specially designed High Risk Circumstance (HRC) model, researchers arranged non-disciplinary supervisory meetings for participants in which procedural justice behaviors were modeled. Participating officers were then asked to fill out comment cards about the experience. Using the control and engagement groups, researchers evaluated the impact that procedural justice training had on a number of outcomes including arrests, warnings and citations, use of force, and citizen complaints. In addition to participant comment cards, researchers assessed outcomes by analyzing the administrative data collected by the Seattle Police Department.

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 study examined the impact of technology on social, organizational, and behavioral aspects of policing. The present data represents an officer-level survey of four law enforcement agencies, designed to answer the following questions: (1) how are technologies used in police agencies across ranks and organizational sub-units? (2) how does technology influence organizational and personal aspects of police including - operations, culture, behavior, and satisfaction? (3) how do organizational and individual aspects of policing concurrently shape the use and effectiveness of technology? (4) how does technology affect crime control efforts and police-community relationships? (5) what organizational practices help to optimize the use of technology with an emphasis on enhance effectiveness and legitimacy?

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. This study used an experimental design to evaluate law enforcement officers' driving, visual attention, and situation awareness during patrol driving. The conditions were varied to determine the impact of information presentation formats on officers' ability to execute patrols. In addition, the effectiveness of in-vehicle technologies that may provide additional support to the officer and reduce the impact of information overload were investigated.