Crime data assembled by census block group for the MSA from the Applied Geographic Solutions' (AGS) 1999 and 2005 'CrimeRisk' databases distributed by the Tetrad Computer Applications Inc. CrimeRisk is the result of an extensive analysis of FBI crime statistics. Based on detailed modeling of the relationships between crime and demographics, CrimeRisk provides an accurate view of the relative risk of specific crime types at the block group level. Data from 1990 - 1996,1999, and 2004-2005 were used to compute the attributes, please refer to the 'Supplemental Information' section of the metadata for more details. Attributes are available for two categories of crimes, personal crimes and property crimes, along with total and personal crime indices. Attributes for personal crimes include murder, rape, robbery, and assault. Attributes for property crimes include burglary, larceny, and mother vehicle theft. 12 block groups have no attribute information. CrimeRisk is a block group and higher level geographic database consisting of a series of standardized indexes for a range of serious crimes against both persons and property. It is derived from an extensive analysis of several years of crime reports from the vast majority of law enforcement jurisdictions nationwide. The crimes included in the database are the "Part I" crimes and include murder, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. These categories are the primary reporting categories used by the FBI in its Uniform Crime Report (UCR), with the exception of Arson, for which data is very inconsistently reported at the jurisdictional level. Part II crimes are not reported in the detail databases and are generally available only for selected areas or at high levels of geography. In accordance with the reporting procedures using in the UCR reports, aggregate indexes have been prepared for personal and property crimes separately, as well as a total index. While this provides a useful measure of the relative "overall" crime rate in an area, it must be recognized that these are unweighted indexes, in that a murder is weighted no more heavily than a purse snatching in the computation. For this reason, caution is advised when using any of the aggregate index values. The block group boundaries used in the dataset come from TeleAtlas's (formerly GDT) Dynamap data, and are consistent with all other block group boundaries in the BES geodatabase. This is part of a collection of 221 Baltimore Ecosystem Study metadata records that point to a geodatabase. The geodatabase is available online and is considerably large. Upon request, and under certain arrangements, it can be shipped on media, such as a usb hard drive. The geodatabase is roughly 51.4 Gb in size, consisting of 4,914 files in 160 folders. Although this metadata record and the others like it are not rich with attributes, it is nonetheless made available because the data that it represents could be indeed useful. This is part of a collection of 221 Baltimore Ecosystem Study metadata records that point to a geodatabase. The geodatabase is available online and is considerably large. Upon request, and under certain arrangements, it can be shipped on media, such as a usb hard drive. The geodatabase is roughly 51.4 Gb in size, consisting of 4,914 files in 160 folders. Although this metadata record and the others like it are not rich with attributes, it is nonetheless made available because the data that it represents could be indeed useful.

This dataset contains aggregate data on violent index victimizations at the quarter level of each year (i.e., January – March, April – June, July – September, October – December), from 2001 to the present (1991 to present for Homicides), with a focus on those related to gun violence. Index crimes are 10 crime types selected by the FBI (codes 1-4) for special focus due to their seriousness and frequency. This dataset includes only those index crimes that involve bodily harm or the threat of bodily harm and are reported to the Chicago Police Department (CPD). Each row is aggregated up to victimization type, age group, sex, race, and whether the victimization was domestic-related. Aggregating at the quarter level provides large enough blocks of incidents to protect anonymity while allowing the end user to observe inter-year and intra-year variation. Any row where there were fewer than three incidents during a given quarter has been deleted to help prevent re-identification of victims. For example, if there were three domestic criminal sexual assaults during January to March 2020, all victims associated with those incidents have been removed from this dataset. Human trafficking victimizations have been aggregated separately due to the extremely small number of victimizations.

This dataset includes a " GUNSHOT_INJURY_I " column to indicate whether the victimization involved a shooting, showing either Yes ("Y"), No ("N"), or Unknown ("UKNOWN.") For homicides, injury descriptions are available dating back to 1991, so the "shooting" column will read either "Y" or "N" to indicate whether the homicide was a fatal shooting or not. For non-fatal shootings, data is only available as of 2010. As a result, for any non-fatal shootings that occurred from 2010 to the present, the shooting column will read as “Y.” Non-fatal shooting victims will not be included in this dataset prior to 2010; they will be included in the authorized dataset, but with "UNKNOWN" in the shooting column.

The dataset is refreshed daily, but excludes the most recent complete day to allow CPD time to gather the best available information. Each time the dataset is refreshed, records can change as CPD learns more about each victimization, especially those victimizations that are most recent. The data on the Mayor's Office Violence Reduction Dashboard is updated daily with an approximately 48-hour lag. As cases are passed from the initial reporting officer to the investigating detectives, some recorded data about incidents and victimizations may change once additional information arises. Regularly updated datasets on the City's public portal may change to reflect new or corrected information.

How does this dataset classify victims?

The methodology by which this dataset classifies victims of violent crime differs by victimization type:

Homicide and non-fatal shooting victims: A victimization is considered a homicide victimization or non-fatal shooting victimization depending on its presence in CPD's homicide victims data table or its shooting victims data table. A victimization is considered a homicide only if it is present in CPD's homicide data table, while a victimization is considered a non-fatal shooting only if it is present in CPD's shooting data tables and absent from CPD's homicide data table.

To determine the IUCR code of homicide and non-fatal shooting victimizations, we defer to the incident IUCR code available in CPD's Crimes, 2001-present dataset (available on the City's open data portal). If the IUCR code in CPD's Crimes dataset is inconsistent with the homicide/non-fatal shooting categorization, we defer to CPD's Victims dataset.

For a criminal homicide, the only sensible IUCR codes are 0110 (first-degree murder) or 0130 (second-degree murder). For a non-fatal shooting, a sensible IUCR code must signify a criminal sexual assault, a robbery, or, most commonly, an aggravated battery. In rare instances, the IUCR code in CPD's Crimes and Victims dataset do not align with the homicide/non-fatal shooting categorization:

1. In instances where a homicide victimization does not correspond to an IUCR code 0110 or 0130, we set the IUCR code to "01XX" to indicate that the victimization was a homicide but we do not know whether it was a first-degree murder (IUCR code = 0110) or a second-degree murder (IUCR code = 0130).
2. When a non-fatal shooting victimization does not correspond to an IUCR code that signifies a criminal sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated battery, we enter “UNK” in the IUCR column, “YES” in the GUNSHOT_I column, and “NON-FATAL” in the PRIMARY column to indicate that the victim was non-fatally shot, but the precise IUCR code is unknown.

Other violent crime victims: For other violent crime types, we refer to the IUCR classification that exists in CPD's victim table, with only one exception:

1. When there is an incident that is associated with no victim with a matching IUCR code, we assume that this is an error. Every crime should have at least 1 victim with a matching IUCR code. In these cases, we change the IUCR code to reflect the incident IUCR code because CPD's incident table is considered to be more reliable than the victim table.

Note: All businesses identified as victims in CPD data have been removed from this dataset.

Note: The definition of “homicide” (shooting or otherwise) does not include justifiable homicide or involuntary manslaughter. This dataset also excludes any cases that CPD considers to be “unfounded” or “noncriminal.”

Note: In some instances, the police department's raw incident-level data and victim-level data that were inputs into this dataset do not align on the type of crime that occurred. In those instances, this dataset attempts to correct mismatches between incident and victim specific crime types. When it is not possible to determine which victims are associated with the most recent crime determination, the dataset will show empty cells in the respective demographic fields (age, sex, race, etc.).

Note: The initial reporting officer usually asks victims to report demographic data. If victims are unable to recall, the reporting officer will use their best judgment. “Unknown” can be reported if it is truly unknown.

These data examine the effects on total crime rates of changes in the demographic composition of the population and changes in criminality of specific age and race groups. The collection contains estimates from national data of annual age-by-race specific arrest rates and crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary over the 21-year period 1965-1985. The data address the following questions: (1) Are the crime rates reported by the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) data series valid indicators of national crime trends? (2) How much of the change between 1965 and 1985 in total crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary is attributable to changes in the age and race composition of the population, and how much is accounted for by changes in crime rates within age-by-race specific subgroups? (3) What are the effects of age and race on subgroup crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary? (4) What is the effect of time period on subgroup crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary? (5) What is the effect of birth cohort, particularly the effect of the very large (baby-boom) cohorts following World War II, on subgroup crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary? (6) What is the effect of interactions among age, race, time period, and cohort on subgroup crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary? (7) How do patterns of age-by-race specific crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary compare for different demographic subgroups? The variables in this study fall into four categories. The first category includes variables that define the race-age cohort of the unit of observation. The values of these variables are directly available from UCR and include year of observation (from 1965-1985), age group, and race. The second category of variables were computed using UCR data pertaining to the first category of variables. These are period, birth cohort of age group in each year, and average cohort size for each single age within each single group. The third category includes variables that describe the annual age-by-race specific arrest rates for the different crime types. These variables were estimated for race, age, group, crime type, and year using data directly available from UCR and population estimates from Census publications. The fourth category includes variables similar to the third group. Data for estimating these variables were derived from available UCR data on the total number of offenses known to the police and total arrests in combination with the age-by-race specific arrest rates for the different crime types.

Incident-based crime statistics (actual incidents, rate per 100,000 population, percentage change in rate, unfounded incidents, percent unfounded, total cleared, cleared by charge, cleared otherwise, persons charged, adults charged, youth charged / not charged), by detailed violations (violent, property, traffic, drugs, other Federal Statutes), Canada, provinces, territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Canadian Forces Military Police, 1998 to 2024.

When incidents happened, information about offenders, the victim’s perception of the incident, and what items were stolen. Annual data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW).

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 was a secondary analysis of data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and National Incidents Based Reporting System (NIBRS) for the period 1998-2007. The analysis calculates two separate measures of the incidents of violence that occurred during burglaries. The study addressed the following research questions: Is burglary a violent crime? Are different levels of violence associated with residential versus nonresidential burglaries? How frequently is a household member present during a residential burglary? How frequently does violence occur in the commission of a burglary? What forms does burglary-related violence take? Are there differences in rates of violence between attempted and completed burglaries? What constitutes the crime of burglary in current statutory law? How do the federal government and the various states define burglary (grades and elements)? Does statutory law comport with empirical observations of what the typical characteristics of acts of burglary are? The SPSS code distributed here alters an existing dataset drawn from pre-existing studies. In order to use this code users must first create the original data file drawn from National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and National Incidents Based Reporting System (NIBRS) data from the period of 1998-2007. All data used for this study are publicly available through ICPSR. See the variable description section for a comprehensive list of, and direct links to, all datasets used to create this original dataset.

The property crime rate indicator includes both the total number of property crime incidents per year in Champaign County, and the number of property crime incidents per 100,000 people per year in Champaign County. “Property crimes” are those counted in the following categories in the Illinois State Police’s annual Crime in Illinois report: Burglary, Theft (Larceny), Motor Vehicle Theft, and Arson. Like violent crime, property crime is also a major indicator of community safety.

The property crime data spans the same time period as the violent crime data: 1996 to 2021. The total number of offenses and rate per 100,000 population are both substantially lower as of 2021 than at the beginning of the study period in 1996. 2021 actually saw the lowest number of offenses and the lowest rate per 100,000 population in the study period. There are significantly more property crime offenses in Champaign County than violent crime incidents.

This data is sourced from the Illinois State Police’s annually released Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report, available on the Uniform Crime Report Index Offense Explorer.

Sources: Illinois State Police. (2021). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2021. Illinois State Police. (2020). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2020. Illinois State Police. (2019). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2019. Illinois State Police. (2018). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2018. Illinois State Police. (2017). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2017. Illinois State Police. (2018). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2018. Illinois State Police. (2017). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2017. Illinois State Police. (2016). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2016. Illinois State Police. (2015). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2015. Illinois State Police. (2014). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2014.; Illinois State Police. (2012). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2012.; Illinois State Police. (2011). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2010-2011.; Illinois State Police. (2009). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2009.; Illinois State Police. (2007). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2007.; Illinois State Police. (2005). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2005.; Illinois State Police. (2003). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2003.; Illinois State Police. (2001). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2001.; Illinois State Police. (1999). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 1999.; Illinois State Police. (1997). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 1997.

Incident-based crime statistics (actual incidents, rate per 100,000 population, percentage change in rate, unfounded incidents, percent unfounded, total cleared, cleared by charge, cleared otherwise, persons charged, adults charged, youth charged / not charged), by detailed violations (violent, property, traffic, drugs, other Federal Statutes), police services in Ontario, 1998 to 2024.

The research team collected data on homicide, robbery, and assault offending from 1984-2006 for youth 13 to 24 years of age in 91 of the 100 largest cities in the United States (based on the 1980 Census) from various existing data sources. Data on youth homicide perpetration were acquired from the Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) and data on nonlethal youth violence (robbery and assault) were obtained from the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR). Annual homicide, robbery, and assault arrest rates per 100,000 age-specific populations (i.e., 13 to 17 and 18 to 24 year olds) were calculated by year for each city in the study. Data on city characteristics were derived from several sources including the County and City Data Books, SHR, and the Vital Statistics Multiple Cause of Death File. The research team constructed a dataset representing lethal and nonlethal offending at the city level for 91 cities over the 23-year period from 1984 to 2006, resulting in 2,093 city year observations.

When incidents happened, information about offenders, the victim’s perception of the incident, injuries sustained, use of weapons and if the offender was under the influence of alcohol and drugs. Annual data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW).

GapMaps provides Crime Risk data sourced from Applied Geographic Solutions (AGS) which has been used by thousands of companies for over 20 years, providing valuable comparative information on the spatial patterns of crime.

Crime Risk Data includes crime risk indexes and projections on detailed crime types like murder and motor vehicle theft, and summary indexes of crimes against persons, crimes against property and overall crime risk. Crime Risk Data is available at the highly detailed census block level to capture the different risk levels across business and residential places. It is derived from an extensive analysis of several years of crime reports from the vast majority of law enforcement jurisdictions nationwide.

The crimes included in the Crime Risk Data database are the “Part 1” crimes and include murder, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. These categories are the primary reporting categories used by the FBI in its Uniform Crime Report (UCR), with the exception of Arson, for which data is very inconsistently reported at the jurisdictional level. In accordance with the reporting procedures using in the UCR reports, aggregate indexes have been prepared for personal and property crimes separately, as well as a total index. While this provides a useful measure of the relative “overall” crime rate in an area, it must be recognized that these are unweighted indexes, in that a murder is weighted no more heavily than a purse snatching in the computation. For this reason, caution is advised when using any of the aggregate index values. In 2020, 5-Year Projections were added to the database.

Use cases: 1. Insurance underwriting and risk mitigation. 2. Evaluating the security measures needed to protect employees and customers at retail facilities. 3. The study of the effects of neighborhood crime on wellness and health care outcomes.

Methodology: Crime is tracked for multiple years using both FBI aggregate crime reports and for many parts of the country at the individual incident level. A complex set of statistical models are used to estimate and forecast risk of each individual crime type by using land use data in conjunction with demographic and business characteristics.

Annual data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) and metal theft offences recorded by the police, including demographic and offence type breakdowns and time series data.

This dataset reflects reported incidents of crime that have occurred in the City of Chicago over the past year, minus the most recent seven days of data. Data is extracted from the Chicago Police Department's CLEAR (Citizen Law Enforcement Analysis and Reporting) system. In order to protect the privacy of crime victims, addresses are shown at the block level only and specific locations are not identified. Should you have questions about this dataset, you may contact the Research & Development Division of the Chicago Police Department at 312.745.6071 or RandD@chicagopolice.org. Disclaimer: These crimes may be based upon preliminary information supplied to the Police Department by the reporting parties that have not been verified. The preliminary crime classifications may be changed at a later date based upon additional investigation and there is always the possibility of mechanical or human error. Therefore, the Chicago Police Department does not guarantee (either expressed or implied) the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or correct sequencing of the information and the information should not be used for comparison purposes over time. The Chicago Police Department will not be responsible for any error or omission, or for the use of, or the results obtained from the use of this information. All data visualizations on maps should be considered approximate and attempts to derive specific addresses are strictly prohibited.

The Chicago Police Department is not responsible for the content of any off-site pages that are referenced by or that reference this web page other than an official City of Chicago or Chicago Police Department web page. The user specifically acknowledges that the Chicago Police Department is not responsible for any defamatory, offensive, misleading, or illegal conduct of other users, links, or third parties and that the risk of injury from the foregoing rests entirely with the user. Any use of the information for commercial purposes is strictly prohibited. The unauthorized use of the words "Chicago Police Department," "Chicago Police," or any colorable imitation of these words or the unauthorized use of the Chicago Police Department logo is unlawful. This web page does not, in any way, authorize such use. Data is updated daily Tuesday through Sunday. The dataset contains more than 65,000 records/rows of data and cannot be viewed in full in Microsoft Excel. Therefore, when downloading the file, select CSV from the Export menu. Open the file in an ASCII text editor, such as Wordpad, to view and search.

This dataset contains county-level totals for the years 2002-2014 for eight types of crime: murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft, and arson. These crimes are classed as Part I criminal offenses by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) in their Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program. Each record in the dataset represents the total of each type of criminal offense reported in (or, in the case of missing data, attributed to) the county in a given year.

The Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) collects crime reports from more than 500 New York State police and sheriffs’ departments. DCJS compiles these reports as New York’s official crime statistics and submits them to the FBI under the National Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. UCR uses standard offense definitions to count crime in localities across America regardless of variations in crime laws from state to state. In New York State, law enforcement agencies use the UCR system to report their monthly crime totals to DCJS. The UCR reporting system collects information on seven crimes classified as Index offenses which are most commonly used to gauge overall crime volume. These include the violent crimes of murder/non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault; and the property crimes of burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. Firearm counts are derived from taking the number of violent crimes which involve a firearm. Population data are provided every year by the FBI, based on US Census information. Police agencies may experience reporting problems that preclude accurate or complete reporting. The counts represent only crimes reported to the police but not total crimes that occurred. DCJS posts preliminary data in the spring and final data in the fall.

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 was a secondary analysis of data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and National Incidents Based Reporting System (NIBRS) for the period 1998-2007. The analysis calculates two separate measures of the incidents of violence that occurred during burglaries. The study addressed the following research questions: Is burglary a violent crime? Are different levels of violence associated with residential versus nonresidential burglaries? How frequently is a household member present during a residential burglary? How frequently does violence occur in the commission of a burglary? What forms does burglary-related violence take? Are there differences in rates of violence between attempted and completed burglaries? What constitutes the crime of burglary in current statutory law? How do the federal government and the various states define burglary (grades and elements)? Does statutory law comport with empirical observations of what the typical characteristics of acts of burglary are? The SPSS code distributed here alters an existing dataset drawn from pre-existing studies. In order to use this code users must first create the original data file drawn from National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and National Incidents Based Reporting System (NIBRS) data from the period of 1998-2007. All data used for this study are publicly available through ICPSR. See the variable description section for a comprehensive list of, and direct links to, all datasets used to create this original dataset.

The violent crime rate indicator includes both the total number of violent crime incidents per year in Champaign County, and the number of violent crime incidents per 100,000 people per year in Champaign County. “Violent crimes” are those counted in the following categories in the Illinois State Police’s annual Crime in Illinois report: Criminal Homicide, Criminal Sexual Assault (Rape), Robbery, Aggravated Assault, and Aggravated Battery. The incidence of violent crime is an integral part of understanding the safety of a given community.

Both the total number of offenses in Champaign County and the rate per 100,000 population were significantly lower in 2021 than at the start of the measured time period, 1996. The most recent rise in both of these figures was in 2019-2020, before falling again in 2021. The year with the lowest number of total offenses and the rate per 100,000 population in the study period was 2015; both measures are slightly higher since then.

This data is sourced from the Illinois State Police’s annually released Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report, available on the Uniform Crime Report Index Offense Explorer.

Sources: Illinois State Police. (2021). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2021. Illinois State Police. (2020). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2020. Illinois State Police. (2019). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2019. Illinois State Police. (2018). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2018. Illinois State Police. (2017). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2017.Illinois State Police. (2016). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2016. Illinois State Police. (2015). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2015. Illinois State Police. (2014). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2014.; Illinois State Police. (2012). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2012.; Illinois State Police. (2011). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2010-2011.; Illinois State Police. (2009). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2009.; Illinois State Police. (2007). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2007.; Illinois State Police. (2005). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2005.; Illinois State Police. (2003). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2003.; Illinois State Police. (2001). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 2001.; Illinois State Police. (1999). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 1999.; Illinois State Police. (1997). Crime in Illinois: Annual Uniform Crime Report 1997.

The UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM DATA: OFFENSES KNOWN AND CLEARANCES BY ARREST, 2016 dataset is a compilation of offenses reported to law enforcement agencies in the United States. Due to the vast number of categories of crime committed in the United States, the FBI has limited the type of crimes included in this compilation to those crimes which people are most likely to report to police and those crimes which occur frequently enough to be analyzed across time. Crimes included are criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft. Much information about these crimes is provided in this dataset. The number of times an offense has been reported, the number of reported offenses that have been cleared by arrests, and the number of cleared offenses which involved offenders under the age of 18 are the major items of information collected.

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Series, previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1973. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft, and vandalism. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations. This version of the NCVS, referred to as the collection year, contains records from interviews conducted in the 12 months of the given year. This dataset represents the revised version of the NCVS on a collection year basis for 2016. A collection year contains records from interviews conducted in the 12 months of the given year. Under the collection year format, victimizations are counted in the year the interview is conducted, regardless of the year when the crime incident occurred. The 2016 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) violent and property crime estimates were significantly higher than 2015, but it was not possible to determine the degree to which the change in rates resulted from the sample redesign rather than real changes in U.S. victimization levels. Therefore, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) examined the 2015 and 2016 victimization rates separately for new and continuing sample counties in the 2016 Criminal Victimization bulletin. The BJS requested that the Census Bureau create a 2016 revised file with outgoing county interviews from July-December 2015, continuing county interviews from January-June 2016, and all interviews (continuing and new counties) from July-December 2016. In other words, the outgoing 2015 cases replaced the new 2016 cases in the first half of 2016. The files in this study serve as a separate research file to allow data users to make comparisons between 2015, 2016, and 2017 NCVS estimates using a nationally representative sample. It provides a sample that still represents the entire country but does not have the inflated crime rates seen in the new counties in 2016.

The dataset contains year- and type-of-crime-wise data on the number of Indian Penal Code (IPC) crimes registered, as per the NCRB data. The types of crimes covered in the dataset include Murder, Dacoity, Robbery, Burglary, Theft, Riots, Abetment of Suicide, Affray, Arson, Assault on Women, Culpable Homicide, Dacoity/Robbery, Murder, Rape, Commit Suicide, Buying of Minors for Prostitution, Causing Death by Negligence, Cheating by Impersonation, Circulate False/Fake News/Rumours, Counterfeiting, Cruelty by Husband or his Relatives, Dowry Deaths, Extortion & Blackmailing, Human Trafficking, Hurt, among others