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

The purpose of the study was to conduct a process and outcome evaluation of the Homicide Clearance Project in the Phoenix, Arizona Police Department. The primary objective of the Homicide Clearance Project was to improve homicide clearance rates by increasing investigative time through the transfer of four crime scene specialists to the homicide unit. In 2004, the Phoenix Police Department received a grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance providing support for the assignment of four crime scene specialists directly to the department's Homicide Unit. Responsibilities of the crime scene specialists were to collect evidence at homicide scenes, prepare scene reports, develop scene diagrams, and other supportive activities. Prior to the project, homicide investigators were responsible for evidence collection, which reduced the time they could devote to investigations. The crime scene specialists were assigned to two of the four investigative squads within the homicide unit. This organizational arrangement provided for a performance evaluation of the squads with crime scene specialists (experimental squads) against the performance of the other squads (comparison squads). During the course of the evaluation, research staff coded information from all homicides that occurred during the 12-month period prior to the transfers (July 1, 2003 - June 30, 2004), referred to as the baseline period, the 2-month training period (July 1, 2004 - August 31, 2004), and a 10-month test period (September 1, 2004 - June 30, 2005). Data were collected on 404 homicide cases (Part 1), 532 homicide victims and survivors (Part 2), and 3,338 records of evidence collected at homicide scenes (Part 3). The two primary sources of information for the evaluation were investigative reports from the department's records management system, called the Police Automated Computer Entry (PACE) system, and crime laboratory reports from the crime laboratory's Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS). Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 each contain variables that measure squad type, time period, and whether six general categories of evidence were collected. Part 1 contains a total of 18 variables including number of investigators, number of patrol officers at the scene, number of witnesses, number of crime scene specialists at the scene, number of investigators collecting evidence at the scene, total number of evidence collectors, whether the case was open or closed, type of arrest, and whether the case was open or closed by arrest. Part 2 contains a total of 37 variables including victim characteristics and motives. Other variables in Part 2 include an instrumental/expressive homicide indicator, whether the case was open or closed, type of arrest, whether the case was open or closed by arrest, number of investigators, number of patrol officers at the scene, number of witnesses, and investigative time to closure. Part 3 contains a total of 46 variables including primary/secondary scene indicator, scene type, number of pieces of evidence, total time at the scene, and number of photos taken. Part 3 also includes variables that measure whether 16 specific types of evidence were found and the number of items of evidence that were collected for 13 specific evidence types.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a Repeat Offender Unit in Phoenix. Repeat Offender Programs are police-initiated procedures for patrolling and apprehending likely offenders in communities. These units typically rely on the cooperation of police and prosecutors who work together to identify, convict, and incarcerate individuals who are judged likely to commit crimes, especially serious crimes, at high rates. For this study, previous offenders were assigned either to a control or an experimental group. If an individual assigned to the experimental group was later arrested, the case received special attention by the Repeat Offender Program. Staff of the Repeat Offender Program worked closely with the county attorney's office to thoroughly document the case and to obtain victim and witness cooperation. If the individual was in the control group and was later arrested, no additional action was taken by the Program staff. Variables include assignment to the experimental or control group, jail status, probation and parole status, custody status, number of felony arrests, type of case, bond amount, number of counts against the individual, type of counts against the individual, number of prior convictions, arresting agency, case outcome, type of incarceration imposed, and length of incarceration imposed.

ObjectiveGiven the limited information about how neighborhood environment relates to physical activity (PA) in Hispanic families, this work examined cross-sectional associations between perceived neighborhood environment and PA of Hispanic parents and children.MethodsParticipants were 137 Hispanic parent-child dyads (children aged 6–11 years) in South Phoenix, AZ, USA. Parents completed a survey about their own and their child's PA, and perceptions of neighborhood environment (i.e., scores of walking/cycling, neighborhood aesthetics, traffic safety, and crime rate) using NEWS survey. Participants also wore an accelerometer for 7 days.ResultsChildren engaged in 60 min of moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) on 2.3, and parents in 30 min of MVPA on 2.1 days per weeks. Additionally, children engaged in 104.4 min, and parents in 65.3 min of accelerometer-assessed MVPA per day. Participants rated their neighborhood (range 0–4) as favorable regarding walking/cycling (mean score 3.1), aesthetics (2.4), traffic safety (2.5), and crime rate (3.1). In Spearman correlation analyses, better neighborhood aesthetics was associated with higher accelerometer-assessed MVPA in children (r = 0.25, p = 0.04). Multiple linear regression analyses revealed an association between traffic safety and parent-reported MVPA in children (standardized beta coefficient 0.19, p = 0.03). No further associations between scores of neighborhood environment and physical activity in either children or parents were observed.ConclusionOur findings may underscore the importance of neighborhood aesthetics and traffic safety for PA engagement in children. Longitudinal studies are needed to confirm our observations, and to untangle potential mechanisms linking neighborhood environment and PA in understudied populations such as Hispanics.

ObjectiveGiven the limited information about how neighborhood environment relates to physical activity (PA) in Hispanic families, this work examined cross-sectional associations between perceived neighborhood environment and PA of Hispanic parents and children.MethodsParticipants were 137 Hispanic parent-child dyads (children aged 6–11 years) in South Phoenix, AZ, USA. Parents completed a survey about their own and their child's PA, and perceptions of neighborhood environment (i.e., scores of walking/cycling, neighborhood aesthetics, traffic safety, and crime rate) using NEWS survey. Participants also wore an accelerometer for 7 days.ResultsChildren engaged in 60 min of moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) on 2.3, and parents in 30 min of MVPA on 2.1 days per weeks. Additionally, children engaged in 104.4 min, and parents in 65.3 min of accelerometer-assessed MVPA per day. Participants rated their neighborhood (range 0–4) as favorable regarding walking/cycling (mean score 3.1), aesthetics (2.4), traffic safety (2.5), and crime rate (3.1). In Spearman correlation analyses, better neighborhood aesthetics was associated with higher accelerometer-assessed MVPA in children (r = 0.25, p = 0.04). Multiple linear regression analyses revealed an association between traffic safety and parent-reported MVPA in children (standardized beta coefficient 0.19, p = 0.03). No further associations between scores of neighborhood environment and physical activity in either children or parents were observed.ConclusionOur findings may underscore the importance of neighborhood aesthetics and traffic safety for PA engagement in children. Longitudinal studies are needed to confirm our observations, and to untangle potential mechanisms linking neighborhood environment and PA in understudied populations such as Hispanics.