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 main aim of this research is to study the criminal mobility of ethnic-based organized crime groups. The project examines whether organized crime groups are able to move abroad easily and to reproduce their territorial control in a foreign country, or whether these groups, and/or individual members, start a life of crime only after their arrival in the new territories, potentially as a result of social exclusion, economic strain, culture conflict and labeling. More specifically, the aim is to examine the criminal mobility of ethnic Albanian organized crime groups involved in a range of criminal markets and operating in and around New York City, area and to study the relevance of the importation/alien conspiracy model versus the deprivation model of organized crime in relation to Albanian organized crime. There are several analytical dimensions in this study: (1) reasons for going abroad; (2) the nature of the presence abroad; (3) level of support from ethnic constituencies in the new territories; (4) importance of cultural codes; (5) organizational structure; (6) selection of criminal activities; (7) economic incentives and political infiltration. This study utilizes a mixed-methods approach with a sequential exploratory design, in which qualitative data and documents are collected and analyzed first, followed by quantitative data. Demographic variables in this collection include age, gender, birth place, immigration status, nationality, ethnicity, education, religion, and employment status. Two main data sources were employed: (1) court documents, including indictments and court transcripts related to select organized crime cases (84 court documents on 29 groups, 254 offenders); (2) in-depth, face-to-face interviews with 9 ethnic Albanian offenders currently serving prison sentences in U.S. Federal Prisons for organized crime related activities, and with 79 adult ethnic Albanian immigrants in New York, including common people, undocumented migrants, offenders, and people with good knowledge of Albanian organized crime modus operandi. Sampling for these data were conducted in five phases, the first of which involved researchers examining court documents and identifying members of 29 major ethnic Albanian organized crime groups operating in the New York area between 1975 and 2013 who were or had served sentences in the U.S. Federal Prisons for organized crime related activities. In phase two researchers conducted eight in-depth interviews with law enforcement experts working in New York or New Jersey. Phase three involved interviews with members of the Albanian diaspora and filed observations from an ethnographic study. Researchers utilized snowball and respondent driven (RDS) recruitment methods to create the sample for the diaspora dataset. The self-reported criteria for recruitment to participate in the diaspora interviews were: (1) age 18 or over; (2) of ethnic Albanian origin (foreign-born or 1st/2nd generation); and (3) living in NYC area for at least 1 year. They also visited neighborhoods identified as high concentrations of ethnic Albanian individuals and conducted an ethnographic study to locate the target population. In phase four, data for the cultural advisors able to help with the project data was collected. In the fifth and final phase, researchers gathered data for the second wave of the diaspora data, and conducted interviews with offenders with ethnic Albanian immigrants with knowledge of the organized crime situation in New York City area. Researchers also approached about twenty organized crime figures currently serving a prison sentence, and were able to conduct 9 in-depth interviews.

This dataset compiles a comprehensive database containing 90,327 street segments in New York City, covering their street design features, streetscape design, Vision Zero treatments, and neighborhood land use. It has two scales-street and street segment group (aggregation of same type of street at neighborhood). This dataset is derived based on all publicly available data, most from NYC Open Data. The detailed methods can be found in the published paper, Pedestrian and Car Occupant Crash Casualties Over a 9-Year Span of Vision Zero in New York City. To use it, please refer to the metadata file for more information and cite our work. A full list of raw data source can be found below:

Motor Vehicle Collisions – NYC Open Data: https://data.cityofnewyork.us/Public-Safety/Motor-Vehicle-Collisions-Crashes/h9gi-nx95

Citywide Street Centerline (CSCL) – NYC Open Data: https://data.cityofnewyork.us/City-Government/NYC-Street-Centerline-CSCL-/exjm-f27b

NYC Building Footprints – NYC Open Data: https://data.cityofnewyork.us/Housing-Development/Building-Footprints/nqwf-w8eh

Practical Canopy for New York City: https://zenodo.org/record/6547492

New York City Bike Routes – NYC Open Data: https://data.cityofnewyork.us/Transportation/New-York-City-Bike-Routes/7vsa-caz7

Sidewalk Widths NYC (originally from Sidewalk – NYC Open Data): https://www.sidewalkwidths.nyc/

LION Single Line Street Base Map - The NYC Department of City Planning (DCP): https://www.nyc.gov/site/planning/data-maps/open-data/dwn-lion.page

NYC Planimetric Database Median – NYC Open Data: https://data.cityofnewyork.us/Transportation/NYC-Planimetrics/wt4d-p43d

NYC Vision Zero Open Data (including multiple datasets including all the implementations): https://www.nyc.gov/content/visionzero/pages/open-data

NYS Traffic Data - New York State Department of Transportation Open Data: https://data.ny.gov/Transportation/NYS-Traffic-Data-Viewer/7wmy-q6mb

Smart Location Database - US Environmental Protection Agency: https://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/smart-location-mapping

Race and ethnicity in area - American Community Survey (ACS): https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs

"Neighborhood Financial Health (NFH) Digital Mapping and Data Tool provides neighborhood financial health indicator data for every neighborhood in New York City. DCWP's Office of Financial Empowerment (OFE) also developed NFH Indexes to present patterns in the data within and across neighborhoods. NFH Index scores describe relative differences between neighborhoods across the same indicators; they do not evaluate neighborhoods against fixed standards. OFE intends for the NFH Indexes to provide an easy reference tool for comparing neighborhoods, and to establish patterns in the relationship of NFH indicators to economic and demographic factors, such as race and income. Understanding these connections is potentially useful for uncovering systems that perpetuate the racial wealth gap, an issue with direct implications for OFE’s mission to expand asset building opportunities for New Yorkers with low and moderate incomes. This data tool was borne out of the Collaborative for Neighborhood Financial Health, a community-led initiative designed to better understand how neighborhoods influence the financial health of their residents.

This survey of minority groups was part of a larger project to investigate the patterns, predictors, and consequences of midlife development in the areas of physical health, psychological well-being, and social responsibility. Conducted in Chicago and New York City, the survey was designed to assess the well-being of middle-aged, urban, ethnic minority adults living in both hyper-segregated neighborhoods and in areas with lower concentrations of minorities. Respondents' views were sought on issues relevant to quality of life, including health, childhood and family background, religion, race and ethnicity, personal beliefs, work experiences, marital and close relationships, financial situation, children, community involvement, and neighborhood characteristics. Questions on health explored the respondents' physical and emotional well-being, past and future attitudes toward health, physical limitations, energy level and appetite, amount of time spent worrying about health, and physical reactions to those worries. Questions about childhood and family background elicited information on family structure, the role of the parents with regard to child rearing, parental education, employment status, and supervisory responsibilities at work, the family financial situation including experiences with the welfare system, relationships with siblings, and whether as a child the respondent slept in the same bed as a parent or adult relative. Questions on religion covered religious preference, whether it is good to explore different religious teachings, and the role of religion in daily decision-making. Questions about race and ethnicity investigated respondents' backgrounds and experiences as minorities, including whether respondents preferred to be with people of the same racial group, how important they thought it was to marry within one's racial or ethnic group, citizenship, reasons for moving to the United States and the challenges faced since their arrival, their native language, how they would rate the work ethic of certain ethnic groups, their views on race relations, and their experiences with discrimination. Questions on personal beliefs probed for respondents' satisfaction with life and confidence in their opinions. Respondents were asked whether they had control over changing their life or their personality, and what age they viewed as the ideal age. They also rated people in their late 20s in the areas of physical health, contribution to the welfare and well-being of others, marriage and close relationships, relationships with their children, work situation, and financial situation. Questions on work experiences covered respondents' employment status, employment history, future employment goals, number of hours worked weekly, number of nights away from home due to work, exposure to the risk of accident or injury, relationships with coworkers and supervisors, work-related stress, and experience with discrimination in the workplace. A series of questions was posed on marriage and close relationships, including marital status, quality and length of relationships, whether the respondent had control over his or her relationships, and spouse/partner's education, physical and mental health, employment status, and work schedule. Questions on finance explored respondents' financial situation, financial planning, household income, retirement plans, insurance coverage, and whether the household had enough money. Questions on children included the number of children in the household, quality of respondents' relationships with their children, prospects for their children's future, child care coverage, and whether respondents had changed their work schedules to accommodate a child's illness. Additional topics focused on children's identification with their culture, their relationships with friends of different backgrounds, and their experiences with racism. Community involvement was another area of investigation, with items on respondents' role in child-rearing, participation on a jury, voting behavior, involvement in charitable organizations, volunteer experiences, whether they made monetary or clothing donations, and experiences living in an institutional setting or being homeless. Respondents were also queried about their neighborhoods, with items on neighborhood problems including racism, vandalism, crime, drugs, poor schools, teenag

The study analyzes the forces leading to or impeding the assimilation of 18- to 32-year-olds from immigrant backgrounds that vary in terms of race, language, and the mix of skills and liabilities their parents brought to the United States. To make sure that what we find derives specifically from growing up in an immigrant family, rather than simply being a young person in New York, a comparison group of people from native born White, Black, and Puerto Rican backgrounds was also studied. The sample was drawn from New York City (except for Staten Island) and the surrounding counties in the inner part of the New York-New Jersey metropolitan region where the vast majority of immigrants and native born minority group members live and grow up. The study groups make possible a number of interesting comparisons. Unlike many other immigrant groups, the West Indian first generation speaks English, but the dominant society racially classifies them as Black. The study explored how their experiences resemble or differ from native born African Americans. Dominicans and the Colombian-Peruvian-Ecuadoran population both speak Spanish, but live in different parts of New York, have different class backgrounds prior to immigration, and, quite often, different skin tones. The study compared them to Puerto Rican young people, who, along with their parents, have the benefit of citizenship. Chinese immigrants from the mainland tend to have little education, while young people with overseas Chinese parents come from families with higher incomes, more education, and more English fluency. Respondents were divided into eight groups depending on their parents' origin. Those of immigrant ancestry include: Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union; Chinese immigrants from the mainland, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the Chinese Diaspora; immigrants from the Dominican Republic; immigrants from the English-speaking countries of the West Indies (including Guyana but excluding Haiti and those of Indian origin); and immigrants from Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. These groups composed 44 percent of the 2000 second-generation population in the defined sample area. For comparative purposes, Whites, Blacks, and Puerto Ricans who were born in the United States and whose parents were born in the United States or Puerto Rico were also interviewed. To be eligible, a respondent had to have a parent from one of these groups. If the respondent was eligible for two groups, he or she was asked which designation he or she preferred. The ability to compare these groups with native born Whites, Blacks, and Puerto Ricans permits researchers to investigate the effects of nativity while controlling for race and language background. About two-thirds of second-generation respondents were born in the United States, mostly in New York City, while one-third were born abroad but arrived in the United States by age 12 and had lived in the country for at least 10 years, except for those from the former Soviet Union, some of whom arrived past the age of 12. The project began with a pilot study in July 1996. Survey data collection took place between November 1999 and December 1999. The study includes demographic variables such as race, ethnicity, language, age, education, income, family size, country of origin, and citizenship status.

This dataset provides a Demographic breakdown of only DYCD-funded participants within a Zip Code of NYC. The data displays the counts, and percentages of the participants in each of the following categories: ● Gender (Male, Female, Unknown) ● Ethnicity (Hispanic/Latino, non-Hispanic/non-Latino) ● Race (Pacific Islander, American Indian, Asian, White, Black, Other, Unknown) This data is used to measure the numbers of the different population groups that are served by DYCD for a Borough, and Community.

These tables will stop being updated after June 1, 2023. COVID-19 vaccination reporting is expected to resume when a new COVID-19 vaccination formulation is authorized.

As 4/22/2023, CDC recommends bivalent vaccine for everyone regardless of age and whether or not the person has had prior monovalent vaccine.

This table shows the cumulative number and percentage of people who have received an updated (bivalent) COVID-19 vaccination by race/ethnicity and age group for people 5 years and over.

• Data are reported weekly on Thursday and include doses administered to Saturday of the previous week.

• All data in this report are preliminary. Data for previous weeks may be changed because of delays in reporting, deduplication, or correction of errors.

• The table groups people based on their current age and excludes people known to be deceased.

• The analyses here are based on data reported to CT WiZ which is the immunization information system for CT. Connecticut COVID-19 Vaccine Program providers are required to report to CT WiZ all COVID-19 doses administered in CT including to CT residents and to residents of other jurisdictions. CT Wiz also receives records on CT residents vaccinated in other jurisdictions and by federal entities which share data with CT WiZ electronically (currently: RI, NJ, New York City, DE, Philadelphia, NV, Indian Health Service, Department of Veterans Affairs (doses administered since 11/2022)). Electronic data exchange is being added jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction. Once a jurisdiction is added to CT WiZ, the records for residents of that jurisdiction vaccinated in CT are removed. For example, when CT residents vaccinated in NYC were added, NYC residents vaccinated in CT were removed.

• Population size estimates used to calculate cumulative percentages are based on 2020 DPH provisional census estimates*.

• Race and ethnicity data may be self-reported or taken from an existing electronic health care record. Reported race and ethnicity information is used to create a single race/ethnicity variable. People with Hispanic ethnicity are classified as Hispanic regardless of reported race. People with a missing ethnicity are classified as non-Hispanic. People with more than one race are classified as multiple races. A vaccine coverage percentage cannot be calculated for people classified as NH (non-Hispanic) Other race or NH Unknown race since there are no population size estimates for these groups. Data quality assurance activities suggest that in at least some cases NH Other may represent a missing value. Vaccine coverage estimates in specific race/ethnicity groups may be underestimated as result of the classification of records as NH Unknown Race or NH Other Race.

• Cumulative percentage estimates have been capped at 100%. Observed percentages may be higher than 100% for multiple reasons, inaccuracies in the census denominators or reporting errors.

• DPH Provisional State and County Characteristics Estimates April 1, 2020. Hayes L, Abdellatif E, Jiang Y, Backus K (2022) Connecticut DPH Provisional April 1, 2020, State Population Estimates by 18 age groups, sex, and 6 combined race and ethnicity groups. Connecticut Department of Public Health, Health Statistics & Surveillance, SAR, Hartford, CT.

Summary File 2 contains 100-percent United States decennial Census data, which is the information compiled from the questions asked of all people and about every housing unit. Population items include sex, age, race, Hispanic or Latino origin, household relationship, and group quarters occupancy. Housing items include occupancy status, vacancy status, and tenure (owner-occupied or renter- occupied). The 100-percent data are presented in 36 population tables ("PCT") and 11 housing tables ("HCT") down to the census tract level. Each table is iterated for 250 population groups: the total population, 132 race groups, 78 American Indian and Alaska Native tribe categories (reflecting 39 individual tribes), and 39 Hispanic or Latino groups. The presentation of tables for any of the 250 population groups is subject to a population threshold of 100 or more people, that is, if there were fewer than 100 people in a specific population group in a specific geographic area, their population and housing characteristics data are not available for that geographic area.

In contrast to the model-minority myth, which conceptualizes Asian American youth as more educationally successful, respectful of teachers, hardworking, and cooperative that other ethnic minority youth (Chang and Sue, 2003), research has demonstrated that Asian American youth are at an increased risk for depression and suicide than their White or Black counterparts (Sen, 2004). Specifically, Asian American females aged 15-24 have the highest rate of completed suicides (14.1%) compared to other racial and ethnic groups (e.g., White 9.3%, Black 3.3%, and Hispanic 7.4%). Asian males of the same age group have the second highest rate of suicide deaths (12.7%) compared to other racial/ethnic group males (e.g., White 17.5%, Black 6.7%, and Hispanic 10%) (CDC 2008). In addition to these specific mental health problems, these youth face additional culturally-specific concerns, including racial discrimination (Lee et al., 2009). Despite such needs, Asian Americans underutilize traditional mental health services (Abe-Kim et al., 2007). Compared to youth (aged 18 or younger) from other racial or ethnic groups, Asian American youth are less likely than White, Black, or Hispanic children to actually receive mental health care (Ku and Matani, 2000). Additionally, research has demonstrated that Asian American youth also tend to underutilize mental health services in school settings (Amaral, Geierstanger, Soleimanpour, and Brindis, 2011; Anyon, Ong, and Whitaker, 2014; Walker, Kerns, Lyon, Bruns, and Cosgrove, 2010), despite the delivery of mental health services in schools seemingly overcoming certain structural barriers to seeking and obtaining mental health services, including transportation, insurance coverage, and cost (Cauce et al., 2002). Using exploratory focus groups, this qualitative study sought to explore perceptions of barriers to seeking school-based mental health services among first- and second-generation Asian youth of immigrant origin (33 participants in 7 focus groups). The specific research questions were: What are the sources of stress that may contribute to mental health concerns among Asian and Asian American youth, and what are their perceptions of barriers to mental health service use?

The purpose of this study was to examine interrelated issues surrounding the use of the criminal justice system by immigrant victims and to identify ways to improve the criminal justice response to immigrants' needs and problems. Two cities, New York City and Philadelphia, were selected for intensive investigation of victimization of immigrants. In each of these cities, three immigrant communities in a neighborhood were chosen for participation. In New York's Jackson Heights area, Colombians, Dominicans, and Indians were the ethnic groups studied. In Philadelphia's Logan section, Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Koreans were surveyed. In all, 87 Jackson Heights victims were interviewed and 26 Philadelphia victims were interviewed. The victim survey questions addressed can be broadly divided into two categories: issues pertaining to crime reporting and involvement with the court system by immigrant victims. Variables include type of crime, respondent's role in the incident, relationship to the perpetrator, whether the incident was reported to police, and who reported the incident. Respondents were also asked whether they were asked to go to court, whether they understood what the people in court said to them, whether they understood what was happening in their case, and, if victimized again, whether they would report the incident to the police.