100+ datasets found
  1. f

    Boundaries Survey Analysis

    • figshare.com
    pptx
    Updated Oct 2, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Kim Chosie (2024). Boundaries Survey Analysis [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.27135534.v1
    Explore at:
    pptxAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Oct 2, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    figshare
    Authors
    Kim Chosie
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    Boundary issues in academia are rarely addressed by college or university policy despite the risk of problematic or unethical faculty-student interactions (Owen and Castro 2007). These twelve tips are suggested for the development of an institutional boundary guideline and training program and are based on the outcomes and feedback from an existing institutional boundary training program. For this work, we developed and administered a survey to faculty and staff both before a group discussion session and again after the training session. Based on a review of the literature and the survey responses, these 12 “tips” or best practices to mitigate possible ethical and legal issues that can arise between faculty/staff and students are suggested as guidance for developing an institutional boundary policy.

  2. Boundaries Case Scenarios.2.docx

    • figshare.com
    • datasetcatalog.nlm.nih.gov
    docx
    Updated Oct 2, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Kim Chosie (2024). Boundaries Case Scenarios.2.docx [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.27135531.v1
    Explore at:
    docxAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Oct 2, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    Figsharehttp://figshare.com/
    Authors
    Kim Chosie
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    Boundary issues in academia are rarely addressed by college or university policy despite the risk of problematic or unethical faculty-student interactions (Owen and Castro 2007). These twelve tips are suggested for the development of an institutional boundary guideline and training program and are based on the outcomes and feedback from an existing institutional boundary training program. For this work, we developed and administered a survey to faculty and staff both before a group discussion session and again after the training session. Based on a review of the literature and the survey responses, these 12 “tips” or best practices to mitigate possible ethical and legal issues that can arise between faculty/staff and students are suggested as guidance for developing an institutional boundary policy.

  3. Opinions on professional boundaries among colleagues in the workplace in...

    • statista.com
    Updated Jul 10, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2025). Opinions on professional boundaries among colleagues in the workplace in Poland 2020 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1133892/poland-opinions-on-professional-boundaries-among-colleagues/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 10, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Time period covered
    2020
    Area covered
    Poland
    Description

    In 2020, a total share of ** percent of Poles believed that relationships between co-workers should be kept strictly within the professional boundaries.

  4. Large Scale International Boundaries

    • catalog.data.gov
    • geodata.state.gov
    • +1more
    Updated Aug 30, 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Department of State (Point of Contact) (2025). Large Scale International Boundaries [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/large-scale-international-boundaries
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Aug 30, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    United States Department of Statehttp://state.gov/
    Description

    Overview The Office of the Geographer and Global Issues at the U.S. Department of State produces the Large Scale International Boundaries (LSIB) dataset. The current edition is version 11.4 (published 24 February 2025). The 11.4 release contains updated boundary lines and data refinements designed to extend the functionality of the dataset. These data and generalized derivatives are the only international boundary lines approved for U.S. Government use. The contents of this dataset reflect U.S. Government policy on international boundary alignment, political recognition, and dispute status. They do not necessarily reflect de facto limits of control. National Geospatial Data Asset This dataset is a National Geospatial Data Asset (NGDAID 194) managed by the Department of State. It is a part of the International Boundaries Theme created by the Federal Geographic Data Committee. Dataset Source Details Sources for these data include treaties, relevant maps, and data from boundary commissions, as well as national mapping agencies. Where available and applicable, the dataset incorporates information from courts, tribunals, and international arbitrations. The research and recovery process includes analysis of satellite imagery and elevation data. Due to the limitations of source materials and processing techniques, most lines are within 100 meters of their true position on the ground. Cartographic Visualization The LSIB is a geospatial dataset that, when used for cartographic purposes, requires additional styling. The LSIB download package contains example style files for commonly used software applications. The attribute table also contains embedded information to guide the cartographic representation. Additional discussion of these considerations can be found in the Use of Core Attributes in Cartographic Visualization section below. Additional cartographic information pertaining to the depiction and description of international boundaries or areas of special sovereignty can be found in Guidance Bulletins published by the Office of the Geographer and Global Issues: https://data.geodata.state.gov/guidance/index.html Contact Direct inquiries to internationalboundaries@state.gov. Direct download: https://data.geodata.state.gov/LSIB.zip Attribute Structure The dataset uses the following attributes divided into two categories: ATTRIBUTE NAME | ATTRIBUTE STATUS CC1 | Core CC1_GENC3 | Extension CC1_WPID | Extension COUNTRY1 | Core CC2 | Core CC2_GENC3 | Extension CC2_WPID | Extension COUNTRY2 | Core RANK | Core LABEL | Core STATUS | Core NOTES | Core LSIB_ID | Extension ANTECIDS | Extension PREVIDS | Extension PARENTID | Extension PARENTSEG | Extension These attributes have external data sources that update separately from the LSIB: ATTRIBUTE NAME | ATTRIBUTE STATUS CC1 | GENC CC1_GENC3 | GENC CC1_WPID | World Polygons COUNTRY1 | DoS Lists CC2 | GENC CC2_GENC3 | GENC CC2_WPID | World Polygons COUNTRY2 | DoS Lists LSIB_ID | BASE ANTECIDS | BASE PREVIDS | BASE PARENTID | BASE PARENTSEG | BASE The core attributes listed above describe the boundary lines contained within the LSIB dataset. Removal of core attributes from the dataset will change the meaning of the lines. An attribute status of “Extension” represents a field containing data interoperability information. Other attributes not listed above include “FID”, “Shape_length” and “Shape.” These are components of the shapefile format and do not form an intrinsic part of the LSIB. Core Attributes The eight core attributes listed above contain unique information which, when combined with the line geometry, comprise the LSIB dataset. These Core Attributes are further divided into Country Code and Name Fields and Descriptive Fields. County Code and Country Name Fields “CC1” and “CC2” fields are machine readable fields that contain political entity codes. These are two-character codes derived from the Geopolitical Entities, Names, and Codes Standard (GENC), Edition 3 Update 18. “CC1_GENC3” and “CC2_GENC3” fields contain the corresponding three-character GENC codes and are extension attributes discussed below. The codes “Q2” or “QX2” denote a line in the LSIB representing a boundary associated with areas not contained within the GENC standard. The “COUNTRY1” and “COUNTRY2” fields contain the names of corresponding political entities. These fields contain names approved by the U.S. Board on Geographic Names (BGN) as incorporated in the ‘"Independent States in the World" and "Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty" lists maintained by the Department of State. To ensure maximum compatibility, names are presented without diacritics and certain names are rendered using common cartographic abbreviations. Names for lines associated with the code "Q2" are descriptive and not necessarily BGN-approved. Names rendered in all CAPITAL LETTERS denote independent states. Names rendered in normal text represent dependencies, areas of special sovereignty, or are otherwise presented for the convenience of the user. Descriptive Fields The following text fields are a part of the core attributes of the LSIB dataset and do not update from external sources. They provide additional information about each of the lines and are as follows: ATTRIBUTE NAME | CONTAINS NULLS RANK | No STATUS | No LABEL | Yes NOTES | Yes Neither the "RANK" nor "STATUS" fields contain null values; the "LABEL" and "NOTES" fields do. The "RANK" field is a numeric expression of the "STATUS" field. Combined with the line geometry, these fields encode the views of the United States Government on the political status of the boundary line. ATTRIBUTE NAME | | VALUE | RANK | 1 | 2 | 3 STATUS | International Boundary | Other Line of International Separation | Special Line A value of “1” in the “RANK” field corresponds to an "International Boundary" value in the “STATUS” field. Values of ”2” and “3” correspond to “Other Line of International Separation” and “Special Line,” respectively. The “LABEL” field contains required text to describe the line segment on all finished cartographic products, including but not limited to print and interactive maps. The “NOTES” field contains an explanation of special circumstances modifying the lines. This information can pertain to the origins of the boundary lines, limitations regarding the purpose of the lines, or the original source of the line. Use of Core Attributes in Cartographic Visualization Several of the Core Attributes provide information required for the proper cartographic representation of the LSIB dataset. The cartographic usage of the LSIB requires a visual differentiation between the three categories of boundary lines. Specifically, this differentiation must be between: International Boundaries (Rank 1); Other Lines of International Separation (Rank 2); and Special Lines (Rank 3). Rank 1 lines must be the most visually prominent. Rank 2 lines must be less visually prominent than Rank 1 lines. Rank 3 lines must be shown in a manner visually subordinate to Ranks 1 and 2. Where scale permits, Rank 2 and 3 lines must be labeled in accordance with the “Label” field. Data marked with a Rank 2 or 3 designation does not necessarily correspond to a disputed boundary. Please consult the style files in the download package for examples of this depiction. The requirement to incorporate the contents of the "LABEL" field on cartographic products is scale dependent. If a label is legible at the scale of a given static product, a proper use of this dataset would encourage the application of that label. Using the contents of the "COUNTRY1" and "COUNTRY2" fields in the generation of a line segment label is not required. The "STATUS" field contains the preferred description for the three LSIB line types when they are incorporated into a map legend but is otherwise not to be used for labeling. Use of the “CC1,” “CC1_GENC3,” “CC2,” “CC2_GENC3,” “RANK,” or “NOTES” fields for cartographic labeling purposes is prohibited. Extension Attributes Certain elements of the attributes within the LSIB dataset extend data functionality to make the data more interoperable or to provide clearer linkages to other datasets. The fields “CC1_GENC3” and “CC2_GENC” contain the corresponding three-character GENC code to the “CC1” and “CC2” attributes. The code “QX2” is the three-character counterpart of the code “Q2,” which denotes a line in the LSIB representing a boundary associated with a geographic area not contained within the GENC standard. To allow for linkage between individual lines in the LSIB and World Polygons dataset, the “CC1_WPID” and “CC2_WPID” fields contain a Universally Unique Identifier (UUID), version 4, which provides a stable description of each geographic entity in a boundary pair relationship. Each UUID corresponds to a geographic entity listed in the World Polygons dataset. These fields allow for linkage between individual lines in the LSIB and the overall World Polygons dataset. Five additional fields in the LSIB expand on the UUID concept and either describe features that have changed across space and time or indicate relationships between previous versions of the feature. The “LSIB_ID” attribute is a UUID value that defines a specific instance of a feature. Any change to the feature in a lineset requires a new “LSIB_ID.” The “ANTECIDS,” or antecedent ID, is a UUID that references line geometries from which a given line is descended in time. It is used when there is a feature that is entirely new, not when there is a new version of a previous feature. This is generally used to reference countries that have dissolved. The “PREVIDS,” or Previous ID, is a UUID field that contains old versions of a line. This is an additive field, that houses all Previous IDs. A new version of a feature is defined by any change to the

  5. q

    Reaching Across Boundaries: Building Relationships, Sharing, & Learning...

    • qubeshub.org
    Updated Jan 3, 2018
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Ruth Kermish-Allen (2018). Reaching Across Boundaries: Building Relationships, Sharing, & Learning Online [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.25334/Q4KM3Z
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jan 3, 2018
    Dataset provided by
    QUBES
    Authors
    Ruth Kermish-Allen
    Description

    Presentation given as part of a Minisymposium at BEER 2015.

  6. f

    Research materials and data.

    • figshare.com
    zip
    Updated Aug 26, 2024
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Meng Le Zhang; Aneta Piekut; Zanib Rasool; Lydia Warden; Henry Staples; Gwilym Pryce (2024). Research materials and data. [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305774.s001
    Explore at:
    zipAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Aug 26, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    PLOS ONE
    Authors
    Meng Le Zhang; Aneta Piekut; Zanib Rasool; Lydia Warden; Henry Staples; Gwilym Pryce
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    Several studies have explored the relationship between socially constructed neighbourhood boundaries (henceforth social boundaries) and ethnic tensions. To measure these relationships, studies have used area-level demographic data to predict the location of social boundaries and their characteristics. The most common approach uses areal wombling to locate neighbouring areas with large differences in residential characteristics. Areas with large differences (or higher boundary values) are used as a proxy for well-defined social boundaries. However, to date, the results of these predictions have never been empirically validated. This article presents results from a simple discrete choice experiment designed to test whether the areal wombling approach to boundary detection produces social boundaries that are recognisable to local residents and experts as such. We conducted a small feasibility trial with residents and experts in Rotherham, England. Our results shows that participants were more likely to recognise boundaries with higher boundary values as local community borders. We end with a discussion on the scalability of the design and suggest future improvements.

  7. 2020 Cartographic Boundary File (KML), Current Block Group for Puerto Rico,...

    • catalog.data.gov
    • s.cnmilf.com
    Updated Dec 14, 2023
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Customer Engagement Branch (Point of Contact) (2023). 2020 Cartographic Boundary File (KML), Current Block Group for Puerto Rico, 1:500,000 [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/2020-cartographic-boundary-file-kml-current-block-group-for-puerto-rico-1-500000
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Dec 14, 2023
    Dataset provided by
    United States Census Bureauhttp://census.gov/
    Area covered
    Puerto Rico
    Description

    The 2020 cartographic boundary KMLs are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. Block Groups (BGs) are clusters of blocks within the same census tract. Each census tract contains at least one BG, and BGs are uniquely numbered within census tracts. BGs have a valid code range of 0 through 9. BGs have the same first digit of their 4-digit census block number from the same decennial census. For example, tabulation blocks numbered 3001, 3002, 3003,.., 3999 within census tract 1210.02 are also within BG 3 within that census tract. BGs coded 0 are intended to only include water area, no land area, and they are generally in territorial seas, coastal water, and Great Lakes water areas. Block groups generally contain between 600 and 3,000 people. A BG usually covers a contiguous area but never crosses county or census tract boundaries. They may, however, cross the boundaries of other geographic entities like county subdivisions, places, urban areas, voting districts, congressional districts, and American Indian / Alaska Native / Native Hawaiian areas. The generalized BG boundaries in this release are based on those that were delineated as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) for the 2020 Census.

  8. w

    Dataset of books called The indefinite boundary : an investigation into the...

    • workwithdata.com
    Updated Apr 17, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Work With Data (2025). Dataset of books called The indefinite boundary : an investigation into the relationship between matter and spirit [Dataset]. https://www.workwithdata.com/datasets/books?f=1&fcol0=book&fop0=%3D&fval0=The+indefinite+boundary+%3A+an+investigation+into+the+relationship+between+matter+and+spirit
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Apr 17, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Work With Data
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    This dataset is about books. It has 1 row and is filtered where the book is The indefinite boundary : an investigation into the relationship between matter and spirit. It features 7 columns including author, publication date, language, and book publisher.

  9. d

    LNWB Ch10 Stream Flow - boundary flow relationships

    • search.dataone.org
    • hydroshare.org
    Updated Apr 15, 2022
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Christina Bandaragoda; Llyn Doremus; Joanne Greenberg (2022). LNWB Ch10 Stream Flow - boundary flow relationships [Dataset]. https://search.dataone.org/view/sha256%3A206a24bafce5d1c6add5ecbf4cc42d85a18359a9b830fe1c29c842df22d0230f
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Apr 15, 2022
    Dataset provided by
    Hydroshare
    Authors
    Christina Bandaragoda; Llyn Doremus; Joanne Greenberg
    Description

    Analysis and charts with boundary flow relationship development and data outputs.

    This resource is a subset of the LNWB Ch10 Stream Flow Collection Resource.

  10. TIGER/Line Shapefile, 2022, County, Boundary County, ID, Address...

    • catalog.data.gov
    Updated Jan 27, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Spatial Data Collection and Products Branch (Point of Contact) (2024). TIGER/Line Shapefile, 2022, County, Boundary County, ID, Address Range-Feature Name Relationship File [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/tiger-line-shapefile-2022-county-boundary-county-id-address-range-feature-name-relationship-fil
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jan 27, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    United States Census Bureauhttp://census.gov/
    Area covered
    Boundary County
    Description

    The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national filewith no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independentdata set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Address Range / Feature Name Relationship File (ADDRFN.dbf) contains a record for each address range / linear feature name relationship. The purpose of this relationship file is to identify all street names associated with each address range. An edge can have several feature names; an address range located on an edge can be associated with one or any combination of the available feature names (an address range can be linked to multiple feature names). The address range is identified by the address range identifier (ARID) attribute that can be used to link to the Address Ranges Relationship File (ADDR.dbf). The linear feature name is identified by the linear feature identifier (LINEARID) attribute that can be used to link to the Feature Names Relationship File (FEATNAMES.dbf).

  11. r

    ABS Census - E31 Relationship In Household By Age By Sex (SLA) 1991

    • researchdata.edu.au
    null
    Updated Jun 28, 2023
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Government of the Commonwealth of Australia - Australian Bureau of Statistics (2023). ABS Census - E31 Relationship In Household By Age By Sex (SLA) 1991 [Dataset]. https://researchdata.edu.au/abs-census-e31-sla-1991/2749758
    Explore at:
    nullAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Jun 28, 2023
    Dataset provided by
    Australian Urban Research Infrastructure Network (AURIN)
    Authors
    Government of the Commonwealth of Australia - Australian Bureau of Statistics
    License

    Attribution 2.5 (CC BY 2.5)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/
    License information was derived automatically

    Area covered
    Description

    The 1991 Census Expanded Community Profiles present 44 tables comprising more detailed information than that of the basic community profiles which provide characteristics of persons and/or dwellings for Statistical Local Areas (SLA) in Australia.

    This table contains data relating to relationship in household by age and sex. Counts are of all persons (a), based on place of enumeration on census night which; includes overseas visitors; excludes Australians overseas; and excludes adjustment for under-enumeration. The data is by SLA 1991 boundaries. Periodicity: 5-Yearly.

    This data is ABS data (cat. no. 2101.0 & original geographic boundary cat. no. 1261.0.30.001) used with permission from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. The tabular data was processed and supplied to AURIN by the Australian Data Archives. The cleaned, high resolution 1991 geographic boundaries are available from data.gov.au.

    For more information please refer to the 1991 Census Dictionary.

    Please note:

    • (a) Excludes temporarily absent persons unless such person were, despite being from their usual residence, enumerated elsewhere in this geographical area. Information on temporary absentees was used to determines the correct family/household type at the dwelling of usual residence.
  12. English Longitudinal Study of Ageing: Waves -10, 2002-2023: Local Authority...

    • beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk
    Updated 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    NatCen Social Research (2025). English Longitudinal Study of Ageing: Waves -10, 2002-2023: Local Authority District Pre-2009 Boundaries (Recoded): Special Licence Access [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.5255/ukda-sn-8429-2
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    2025
    Dataset provided by
    DataCitehttps://www.datacite.org/
    UK Data Servicehttps://ukdataservice.ac.uk/
    Authors
    NatCen Social Research
    Description
    The English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) study is a longitudinal survey of ageing and quality of life among older people that explores the dynamic relationships between health and functioning, social networks and participation, and economic position as people plan for, move into and progress beyond retirement. The main objectives of ELSA are to:
    • construct waves of accessible and well-documented panel data;
    • provide these data in a convenient and timely fashion to the scientific and policy research community;
    • describe health trajectories, disability and healthy life expectancy in a representative sample of the English population aged 50 and over;
    • examine the relationship between economic position and health;
    • nvestigate the determinants of economic position in older age;
    • describe the timing of retirement and post-retirement labour market activity; and
    • understand the relationships between social support, household structure and the transfer of assets.

    Further information may be found on the the ELSA project website or the Natcen Social Research: ELSA web pages.

    Health conditions research with ELSA - June 2021

    The ELSA Data team have found some issues with historical data measuring health conditions. If you are intending to do any analysis looking at the following health conditions, then please contact the ELSA Data team at NatCen on elsadata@natcen.ac.uk for advice on how you should approach your analysis. The affected conditions are: eye conditions (glaucoma; diabetic eye disease; macular degeneration; cataract), CVD conditions (high blood pressure; angina; heart attack; Congestive Heart Failure; heart murmur; abnormal heart rhythm; diabetes; stroke; high cholesterol; other heart trouble) and chronic health conditions (chronic lung disease; asthma; arthritis; osteoporosis; cancer; Parkinson's Disease; emotional, nervous or psychiatric problems; Alzheimer's Disease; dementia; malignant blood disorder; multiple sclerosis or motor neurone disease).


    Special Licence Data:

    Special Licence Access versions of ELSA have more restrictive access conditions than versions available under the standard End User Licence (see 'Access' section below). Users are advised to obtain the latest edition of SN 5050 (the End User Licence version) before making an application for Special Licence data, to see whether that is suitable for their needs. A separate application must be made for each Special Licence study.

    Special Licence Access versions of ELSA include:

    • Primary data from Wave 8 onwards (SN 8346) includes all the variables in the EUL primary dataset (SN 5050) as well as year and month of birth, consolidated ethnicity and country of birth, marital status, and more detailed medical history variables.
    • Wave 8 Pension Age Data (SN 8375) includes all the variables in the EUL pension age data (SN 5050) as well as year and age reached state pension age variables.
    • Wave 8 Sexual Self-Completion Data (SN 8376) includes sensitive variables from the sexual self-completion questionnaire.
    • Wave 3 (2007) Harmonized Life History (SN 8831) includes retrospective information on previous histories, specifically, detailed data on previous partnership, children, residential, health, and work histories.
    • Detailed geographical identifier files for Waves 1-10 which are grouped by identifier held under SN 8429 (Local Authority District Pre-2009 Boundaries), SN 8439 (Local Authority District Post-2009 Boundaries), SN 8430 (Local Authority Type Pre-2009 Boundaries), SN 8441 (Local Authority Type Post-2009 Boundaries), SN 8431 (Quintile Index of Multiple Deprivation Score), SN 8432 (Quintile Population Density for Postcode Sectors), SN 8433 (Census 2001 Rural-Urban Indicators), SN 8437 (Census 2011 Rural-Urban Indicators).

    Where boundary changes have occurred, the geographic identifier has been split into two separate studies to reduce the risk of disclosure. Users are also only allowed one version of each identifier:

    • either SN 8429 (Local Authority District Pre-2009 Boundaries) or SN 8439 (Local Authority District Post-2009 Boundaries)
    • either SN 8430 (Local Authority Type Pre-2009 Boundaries) or SN 8441(Local Authority Type Post-2009 Boundaries)
    • either SN 8433 (Census 2001 Rural-Urban Indicators) or SN 8437 (Census 2011 Rural-Urban Indicators)

    ELSA Wave 6 and Wave 8 Self-Completion Questionnaires included an open-ended question where respondents could add any other comments they may wish to note down. These responses have been transcribed and anonymised. Researchers can request access to these transcribed responses for research purposes by contacting the ELSA Data Team at NatCen.

    English Longitudinal Study of Ageing: Waves 1-10, 2002-2023: Local Authority District Pre-2009 Boundaries (Recoded): Special Licence Access
    This dataset contains a pre-2009 boundary Local Authority District variable which has been recoded to 150 categories for disclosure control for each Wave of ELSA to date, and a unique individual serial number variable is also included for matching to the main data files. These data have more restrictive access conditions than those available under the standard End User Licence (see 'Access' section).

    Latest edition information
    For the second edition (October 2024), data for waves 9 and 10 have been added to the study and data for waves 1 to 8 have been updated. An Excel Data Dictionary has also been added.

  13. s

    Syracuse City Boundary

    • data.syr.gov
    • arc-gis-hub-home-arcgishub.hub.arcgis.com
    • +1more
    Updated Jun 7, 2017
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    admin_syr (2017). Syracuse City Boundary [Dataset]. https://data.syr.gov/maps/19f7a97333214e76a3bf17b2312befad_0/about
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jun 7, 2017
    Dataset authored and provided by
    admin_syr
    Area covered
    Description

    The TIGER/Line Files are shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) that are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line File is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2010 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some States and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2010 Census, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.

  14. g

    Michigan Native American Treaty boundaries

    • hub.glahf.org
    Updated Oct 16, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Michigan State University Online ArcGIS (2024). Michigan Native American Treaty boundaries [Dataset]. https://hub.glahf.org/datasets/michigan-native-american-treaty-boundaries
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Oct 16, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Michigan State University Online ArcGIS
    Area covered
    Description

    Boundaries for Native American Treaties with the State of Michigan and the US were created from Treaty lines based on old maps and treaty descriptions to illustrate spatial relationships of statewide Treaty Boundaries.Use with caution. Authenticity is questionable. Designed for Cartographic purposes to illustrate spatial relationships of statewide Treaty Boundaries. Treaty lines are based on old maps and treaty descriptions used by Jim Ekdahl, Treaty Master.The boundaries fornative American Treaties with the State of Michigan and the US wasreprojected from Michigan georef to Decimal Degrees using the MI DNR Projection Extension.

  15. Census Tract Relationships

    • psrc-psregcncl.hub.arcgis.com
    Updated Aug 23, 2023
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Puget Sound Regional Council (2023). Census Tract Relationships [Dataset]. https://psrc-psregcncl.hub.arcgis.com/datasets/census-tract-relationships/about
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Aug 23, 2023
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Puget Sound Regional Councilhttp://www.psrc.org/
    Description

    Crosswalk tables allow data analyses across decennial census boundaries. This crosswalk allows census tract-level data, created using 2020 decennial census boundaries, to be compared to data created using 2010 decennial census boundaries.

  16. TIGER/Line Shapefile, 2023, County, Boundary County, ID, Address...

    • catalog.data.gov
    Updated Aug 10, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geospatial Products Branch (Point of Contact) (2025). TIGER/Line Shapefile, 2023, County, Boundary County, ID, Address Range-Feature Name Relationship File [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/tiger-line-shapefile-2023-county-boundary-county-id-address-range-feature-name-relationship-fil
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Aug 10, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    United States Census Bureauhttp://census.gov/
    Area covered
    Boundary County
    Description

    The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national filewith no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independentdata set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Address Range / Feature Name Relationship File (ADDRFN.dbf) contains a record for each address range / linear feature name relationship. The purpose of this relationship file is to identify all street names associated with each address range. An edge can have several feature names; an address range located on an edge can be associated with one or any combination of the available feature names (an address range can be linked to multiple feature names). The address range is identified by the address range identifier (ARID) attribute that can be used to link to the Address Ranges Relationship File (ADDR.dbf). The linear feature name is identified by the linear feature identifier (LINEARID) attribute that can be used to link to the Feature Names Relationship File (FEATNAMES.dbf).

  17. a

    Census Tract Boundaries - SCAG Region

    • hub.arcgis.com
    • hub.scag.ca.gov
    Updated Mar 11, 2021
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    rdpgisadmin (2021). Census Tract Boundaries - SCAG Region [Dataset]. https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/c56e565a2657448ba1a549c1a8cb8186
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Mar 11, 2021
    Dataset authored and provided by
    rdpgisadmin
    Area covered
    Description

    Census tracts generally have a population size of 1,200 to 8,000 people with an optimum size of 4,000 people. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Ideally, census tract boundaries remain stable over time to facilitate statistical comparisons from census to census. However, physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, significant changes in population may result in splitting or combining census tracts. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. Census tract boundaries may follow legal boundaries (e.g., MCD or incorporated place boundaries in some states to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses). State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas.

  18. f

    Ratings of agreement as to the appropriateness of ‘finding a relationship’...

    • plos.figshare.com
    xls
    Updated May 8, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Angelica Emery-Rhowbotham; Helen Killaspy; Sharon Eager; Brynmor Lloyd-Evans (2025). Ratings of agreement as to the appropriateness of ‘finding a relationship’ conversations. [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmen.0000184.t002
    Explore at:
    xlsAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    May 8, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    PLOS Mental Health
    Authors
    Angelica Emery-Rhowbotham; Helen Killaspy; Sharon Eager; Brynmor Lloyd-Evans
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    Ratings of agreement as to the appropriateness of ‘finding a relationship’ conversations.

  19. 2023 Cartographic Boundary File (SHP), Census Tract for Texas, 1:500,000

    • catalog.data.gov
    • datasets.ai
    • +2more
    Updated May 16, 2024
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division (Point of Contact) (2024). 2023 Cartographic Boundary File (SHP), Census Tract for Texas, 1:500,000 [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/2023-cartographic-boundary-file-shp-census-tract-for-texas-1-500000
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    May 16, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    United States Census Bureauhttp://census.gov/
    United States Department of Commercehttp://commerce.gov/
    Description

    The 2023 cartographic boundary shapefiles are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some states and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2010 Census and beyond, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.

  20. TIGER/Line Shapefile, Current, County, Boundary County, ID, Address...

    • catalog.data.gov
    Updated Aug 9, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division (Point of Contact) (2025). TIGER/Line Shapefile, Current, County, Boundary County, ID, Address Range-Feature Name Relationship File [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/tiger-line-shapefile-current-county-boundary-county-id-address-range-feature-name-relationship-
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Aug 9, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    United States Census Bureauhttp://census.gov/
    Area covered
    Boundary County
    Description

    The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) System (MTS). The MTS represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Address Range/Feature Name Relationship File contains a record for each address range/linear feature name relationship. The purpose of this relationship file is to identify all street names associated with each address range. An edge can have several feature names; an address range located on an edge can be associated with one or any combination of the available feature names (an address range can be linked to multiple feature names). The address range is identified by the address range identifier (ARID) attribute that can be used to link to the Address Range Relationship File (addr.dbf). The linear feature name is identified by the linear feature identifier (LINEARID) attribute which can be used to link to the Feature Names Relationship File (featnames.dbf).

Share
FacebookFacebook
TwitterTwitter
Email
Click to copy link
Link copied
Close
Cite
Kim Chosie (2024). Boundaries Survey Analysis [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.27135534.v1

Boundaries Survey Analysis

Explore at:
pptxAvailable download formats
Dataset updated
Oct 2, 2024
Dataset provided by
figshare
Authors
Kim Chosie
License

Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically

Description

Boundary issues in academia are rarely addressed by college or university policy despite the risk of problematic or unethical faculty-student interactions (Owen and Castro 2007). These twelve tips are suggested for the development of an institutional boundary guideline and training program and are based on the outcomes and feedback from an existing institutional boundary training program. For this work, we developed and administered a survey to faculty and staff both before a group discussion session and again after the training session. Based on a review of the literature and the survey responses, these 12 “tips” or best practices to mitigate possible ethical and legal issues that can arise between faculty/staff and students are suggested as guidance for developing an institutional boundary policy.

Search
Clear search
Close search
Google apps
Main menu