Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data (HIFLD) geospatial data sets containing information on US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Military Districts.

This dataset has records for the awarding of the United States Medal of Honor. The Medal of Honor is the United States of America’s highest military honor, awarded for personal acts of valor above and beyond the call of duty. The medal is awarded by the President of the United States in the name of the U.S. Congress to U.S. military personnel only. There are three versions of the medal, one for the Army, one for the Navy, and one for the Air Force.[5] Personnel of the Marine Corps and Coast Guard receive the Navy version. The dataset was collected from the official military site, and includes records about how the medal was awarded and characteristics of the recipient. Unfortunately, because of the nature of century-old record keeping, many of the records are incomplete. While a very interesting dataset, it does have some missing data.

Data Dictionary

Key	List of...	Comment	Example Value
death	Boolean	$MISSING_FIELD	True
name	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"Sagelhurst, John C."
awarded.General Order number	Integer	$MISSING_FIELD	-1
awarded.accredited to	String	$MISSING_FIELD	""
awarded.citation	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"Under a heavy fire from the enemy carried off the field a commissioned officer who was severely wounded and also led a charge on the enemy's rifle pits."
awarded.issued	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"01/03/1906"
birth.location name	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"Buffalo, N.Y."
metadata.link	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"http://www.cmohs.org/recipient-detail/1176/sagelhurst-john-c.php"
military record.company	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"Company B"
military record.division	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"1st New Jersey Cavalry"
military record.entered service at	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"Buffalo, N.Y."
military record.organization	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"U.S. Army"
military record.rank	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"Sergeant"
awarded.date.day	Integer	$MISSING_FIELD	6
awarded.date.full	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"1865-2-6"
awarded.date.month	Integer	$MISSING_FIELD	2
awarded.date.year	Integer	$MISSING_FIELD	1865
awarded.location.latitude	Integer	$MISSING_FIELD	38
awarded.location.longitude	Integer	$MISSING_FIELD	-77
awarded.location.name	String	$MISSING_FIELD	"Hatchers Run Court, Stafford, VA 22554, USA"
birth.date.day	Integer	$MISSING_FIELD	-1
birth.date.month	Integer	$MISSING_FIELD	-1
birth.date.year	Integer	$MISSING_FIELD	-1

Acknowledgement

Original Data

CORGIS Dataset Project

Foto von Samuel Branch auf Unsplash

This dataset investigates the Instagram engagement metrics (likes and comments) of the U.S. and British Armies to understand their strengths and weaknesses in their marketing. For the quantitative data collection, a random number generator was used to compile a 20% data sample (73 posts) from a total of 365 posts from each account. For instance, a number 1 in the random generator corresponded to the most recent post from the start date of data collection (May 23rd, 2024). By picking from 365 posts, the data collection was meant to represent roughly a year of Instagram content, assuming their Instagram accounts posted every day. This method ensured an unbiased representation of which content was included in the 20% data sample.However, the U.S Army posted almost once a day while the British Army posted only a few days a week. In the end, data was collected across 365 U.S. Army posts from May 23rd, 2024, to October 28th, 2023. For the British Army’s Instagram, the data collection span from May 23rd, 2024, to November 25th, 2021. By engaging with recent posts, the purpose was to understand how effectively these Armies responded to their recruitment crisis (which started in 2022).For the data collection, variables for each post included the following:Date of postNumber of likesPercentage of likes by follower populationNumber of commentsPercentage of comments by follower populationTo understand which Instagram posts were successful, the content with the highest number of likes and comments were defined as the most engaged. But, to accurately compare the British Army’s Instagram engagement to the U.S., the number of likes/comments was divided by the number of their followers. As of May 23, 2024, the U.S. Army had 2.9 million followers on Instagram whereas the British Army had 594,000 followers. While social media users outside of the Armies’ followers engaged with the posts, these ratios provided a basis to fairly compare their engagement metrics.

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 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 Census Bureau includes landmarks such as military installations in the MTDB for locating special features and to help enumerators during field operations. In 2012, the Census Bureau obtained the inventory and boundaries of most military installations from the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) for Air Force, Army, Marine, and Navy installations and from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for Coast Guard installations. The military installation boundaries in this release represent the updates the Census Bureau made in 2012 in collaboration with DoD.

A dataset to advance the study of life-cycle interactions of biomedical and socioeconomic factors in the aging process. The EI project has assembled a variety of large datasets covering the life histories of approximately 39,616 white male volunteers (drawn from a random sample of 331 companies) who served in the Union Army (UA), and of about 6,000 African-American veterans from 51 randomly selected United States Colored Troops companies (USCT). Their military records were linked to pension and medical records that detailed the soldiers������?? health status and socioeconomic and family characteristics. Each soldier was searched for in the US decennial census for the years in which they were most likely to be found alive (1850, 1860, 1880, 1900, 1910). In addition, a sample consisting of 70,000 men examined for service in the Union Army between September 1864 and April 1865 has been assembled and linked only to census records. These records will be useful for life-cycle comparisons of those accepted and rejected for service. Military Data: The military service and wartime medical histories of the UA and USCT men were collected from the Union Army and United States Colored Troops military service records, carded medical records, and other wartime documents. Pension Data: Wherever possible, the UA and USCT samples have been linked to pension records, including surgeon''''s certificates. About 70% of men in the Union Army sample have a pension. These records provide the bulk of the socioeconomic and demographic information on these men from the late 1800s through the early 1900s, including family structure and employment information. In addition, the surgeon''''s certificates provide rich medical histories, with an average of 5 examinations per linked recruit for the UA, and about 2.5 exams per USCT recruit. Census Data: Both early and late-age familial and socioeconomic information is collected from the manuscript schedules of the federal censuses of 1850, 1860, 1870 (incomplete), 1880, 1900, and 1910. Data Availability: All of the datasets (Military Union Army; linked Census; Surgeon''''s Certificates; Examination Records, and supporting ecological and environmental variables) are publicly available from ICPSR. In addition, copies on CD-ROM may be obtained from the CPE, which also maintains an interactive Internet Data Archive and Documentation Library, which can be accessed on the Project Website. * Dates of Study: 1850-1910 * Study Features: Longitudinal, Minority Oversamples * Sample Size: ** Union Army: 35,747 ** Colored Troops: 6,187 ** Examination Sample: 70,800 ICPSR Link: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06836

The dataset depicts the authoritative locations of the most commonly known Department of Defense (DoD) sites, installations, ranges, and training areas in the United States and Territories. These sites encompass land which is federally owned or otherwise managed. This dataset was created from source data provided by the four Military Service Component headquarters and was compiled by the Defense Installation Spatial Data Infrastructure (DISDI) Program within the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment, Business Enterprise Integration Directorate. Sites were selected from the 2009 Base Structure Report (BSR), a summary of the DoD Real Property Inventory. This list does not necessarily represent a comprehensive collection of all Department of Defense facilities, and only those in the fifty United States and US Territories were considered for inclusion. For inventory purposes, installations are comprised of sites, where a site is defined as a specific geographic location of federally owned or managed land and is assigned to military installation. DoD installations are commonly referred to as a base, camp, post, station, yard, center, homeport facility for any ship, or other activity under the jurisdiction, custody, control of the DoD.

Military Divisions of the U.S. Army Corp of EngineersThis U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) feature layer depicts USACE's military divisions. Per USACE, "Military Missions provide premier engineering, construction, real estate, stability operations, and environmental management products and services for the Army, Air Force, other assigned U.S. Government agencies and foreign governments."South Atlantic Military DivisionData currency: current federal service (USACE Military Divisions)Data modification: noneFor more information, please visit: Military MissionsFor feedback: ArcGIScomNationalMaps@esri.comU.S. Army Corp of EngineersPer USACE, "With environmental sustainability as a guiding principle, our disciplined Corps team is working diligently to strengthen our Nation’s security by building and maintaining America’s infrastructure and providing military facilities where our servicemembers train, work and live. We are also researching and developing technology for our war fighters while protecting America’s interests abroad by using our engineering expertise to promote stability and improve quality of life."

Military Districts of the U.S. Army Corp of EngineersThis U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) feature layer depicts USACE military districts. According to USACE, their mission is to "Deliver vital engineering solutions, in collaboration with our partners, to secure our Nation, energize our economy, and reduce disaster risk." USACE workforce is spread throughout the United States and in more than 91 foreign countries, providing reimbursable engineering expertise throughout the World.Mobile DistrictData currency: Federal service (USACE Military Districts)Data modification: NoneFor more information: Military MissionsFor feedback: ArcGIScomNationalMaps@esri.comU.S. Army Corp of EngineersPer USACE, "With environmental sustainability as a guiding principle, our disciplined Corps team is working diligently to strengthen our Nation’s security by building and maintaining America’s infrastructure and providing military facilities where our servicemembers train, work and live. We are also researching and developing technology for our war fighters while protecting America’s interests abroad by using our engineering expertise to promote stability and improve quality of life."

This geospatial dataset contains the authoritative boundaries of Department of Defense sites, commonly referred to as installations, ranges, training areas, bases, forts, camps, armories, centers, etc. These installations are, in many cases, comprised of a number of subordinate sites. This list does not necessarily represent a comprehensive collection of all Department of Defense facilities, and only those reported in the 2015 Base Structure Report (BSR) were considered for inclusion. Points are placed either at or near the center of each site and do not reflect any particular landmark. Boundaries encompass federally owned or otherwise managed lands, as defined in the BSR. The point and boundary location datasets are intended for planning purposes only, and do not represent the legal or surveyed land parcel boundaries.

Context

Dataframe containing country-year observations of US military deployments to Europe countries from 2006 through 2015.

Content

This dataset consists of 279 rows and nine columns, which contain the following information:

1. country: name of the country.
2. code: three-digit numerical code defined by the United Nations.
3. iso3c: alpha-3 - Three-character alpha code defined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
4. year: the year of the observation.
5. troops: number of US military personnel deployed to the host country.
6. army: army personnel deployed to the host country.
7. navy: navy personnel deployed to the host country.
8. air: air force personnel deployed to the host country.
9. marine: marine corps personnel deployed to the host country.

Acknowledgements

Allen, Michael A., Michael E. Flynn, and Carla Martinez Machain. 2021. “Global U.S. military deployment data: 1950-2020.” Conflict Management and Peace Science. TBD.

KAV 10224 cover memo. Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/sha256%3A97ad163f992af56957261f298ff57dd15167c75f237dd0799b24582d36c314f9 for complete metadata about this dataset.

Acoustic sampling for occurrence of the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) was conducted at 12 locations on U. S. Army facilities on O‘ahu Island, Hawai‘i. Bats were confirmed as present at 10 of these locations: Dillingham Military Reservation, Helemano Military Reservation, Kahuku Training Area, Kawailoa Training Area, Mākua Military Reservation, Schofield Barracks East Range, Schofield Barracks West Range, Schofield Barracks (Mendonca Park Housing), Tripler Army Medical Center, and Wheeler Army Airfield. Our acoustic sampling did not record bat vocalizations at Fort DeRussy or Fort Shafter. Despite the presence of bats at the above 10 locations, foraging activity as identified from characteristic feeding buzzes was observed only at East Range and West Range of Schofield Barracks. Within-night bat activity pooled for all nights and detectors at each location showed bat activity was mostly confined to the first several hours of the night. Recordings were analyzed with Kaleidoscope version 4.1.0 (Wildlife Acoustics, Maynard, MA). All files were aurally and visually inspected for bat acoustic activity. The cumulative number of Hawaiian hoary bat echolocation pulses, call-events and feeding buzzes were summed for each monitoring station and night within a month.

This study involved family members of military troops in the Persian Gulf. Questions were asked about bombing of military sites, Israel's involvement, media coverage, anti-war protests, length of the war, use of nuclear weapons, terrorism, volunteer versus draft, public support, President Bush's handling of the war, prominent leaders in the war effort, anti-war demonstrators, and removal of Saddam Hussein from power

Little is known about military attitudes toward weapons taboos, or the durability of non-use norms in wartime. Chemical weapons are a key case given public revulsion and clear international prohibitions. We explore soldiers’ attitudes in a salient setting: the Pacific theater of World War II. We draw on a declassified survey covering a representative sample of enlisted US soldiers in Hawai‘i in 1944. This unique context, during a total war against an adversary that had employed chemical weapons, represents a hard test for the chemical weapons taboo. Up to 91% of soldiers supported using chemical weapons against Japan, including 24% who favored initiation and 67% who favored retaliatory use. To understand the influence of military instruction, we exploit a novel regimen still used in basic training, which saw some troops exposed to lachrymatory gas. We find exposure to chemical weapons in training reduced support for use. Visceral experiences can mobilize support for weapons taboos in otherwise permissive environments.

R data files for annual indices of heat of 25 Continental U.S. (CONUS) U.S. Army installations from 1990-2018 in list and long formats.

Annual indices were derived from hourly meteorological estimates from the North American Land Data Assimilation System 2 (NLDAS-2) forcing dataset served as the primary source of weather and atmospheric data. We selected NLDAS grid cells containing the centroid of each installation based on shapefiles from the Department of Defense (DoD) Military Installations, Ranges, and Training Areas (MIRTA) Dataset. We calculated relative humidity from specific humidity, temperature, and atmospheric pressure; heat index (HI) from temperature and relative humidity based on a US National Weather Service algorithm; and outdoor WBGT from air temperature, relative humidity, solar irradiance, barometric pressure, and wind speed using the method of Liljegren et al.

These instructional materials were prepared for use with UNION ARMY RECRUITS IN BLACK REGIMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1862-1865 (ICPSR 9426), compiled by Jacob Metzer and Robert A. Margo. The data file and accompanying documentation are provided to assist educators in instructing students about the demographic, military, and medical history of African-American men who volunteered for service in the Union Army during the American Civil War. An instructor's handout has also been included. This handout contains the following sections, among others: (1) General goals for student analysis of quantitative datasets, (2) Specific goals in studying this dataset, (3) Suggested appropriate courses for use of the dataset, (4) Tips for using the dataset, and (5) Related secondary source readings. This data collection was designed to examine the characteristics of free Blacks and ex-slaves mustered into the Union Army between 1862 and the end of the Civil War. In addition to variables on personal characteristics (such as skin, eye, and hair color, height, age, birthplace, and occupation before enlistment), the data also contain Army-related variables (such as regiment and company number, rank, enlistment date and place, changes in rank, and date and cause of end of service).

The Commercial Strategic Seaports dataset was compiled on October 04, 2021 from the U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) and is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)/Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) National Transportation Atlas Database (NTAD). The National Port Readiness Network (NPRN) consists of Strategic Commercial Seaports able to support force deployment during contingencies and other defense emergencies. Nine federal agencies and organizations, USDOT/Maritime Administration (MARAD), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC), U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), Military Sea-lift Command (MSC), U.S. Army Forces Command (USFORSCOM), Transportation Security Administration (TSA), U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM), and U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) are responsible for providing guidance to the NPRN program and for supporting the secure movement of military forces through U.S. ports. This dataset includes all 18 commercial ports that currently belong to the NPRN.

USACE Military Division boundaries. Polygons were derived from National Atlas states and/or from data provided by the district.

Context

Veteran Employment Outcomes (VEO) are new experimental U.S. Census Bureau statistics on labor market outcomes for recently discharged Army veterans. These statistics are tabulated by military specialization, service characteristics, employer industry (if employed), and veteran demographics. They are generated by matching service member information with a national database of jobs, using state-of-the-art confidentiality protection mechanisms to protect the underlying data.

https://lehd.ces.census.gov/data/veo_experimental.html

Content

"The VEO are made possible through data sharing partnerships between the U.S. Army, State Labor Market Information offices, and the U.S. Census Bureau. VEO data are currently available at the state and national level."

"Veteran Employment Outcomes (VEO) are experimental tabulations developed by the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) program in collaboration with the U.S. Army and state agencies. VEO data provides earnings and employment outcomes for Army veterans by rank and military occupation, as well as veteran and employer characteristics. VEO are currently released as a research data product in "experimental" form."

"The source of veteran information in the VEO is administrative record data from the Department of the Army, Office of Economic and Manpower Analysis. This personnel data contains fields on service member characteristics, such as service start and end dates, occupation, pay grade, characteristics at entry (e.g. education and test scores), and demographic characteristics (e.g. sex, race, and ethnicity). Once service member records are transferred to the Census Bureau, personally-identifying information is stripped and veterans are assigned a Protected Identification Key (PIK) that allows for them to be matched with their employment outcomes in Census Bureau jobs data."

Earnings, and Employment Concepts

Earnings "Earnings are total annual earnings for attached workers from all jobs, converted to 2018 dollars using the CPI-U. For the annual earnings tabulations, we impose two labor force attachment restrictions. First, we drop veterans who earn less than the annual equivalent of full-time work at the prevailing federal minimum wage. Additionally, we drop veterans with two or more quarters with no earnings in the reference year. These workers are likely to be either marginally attached to the labor force or employed in non-covered employment."

Employment

"While most VEO tabulations include earnings from all jobs, tabulations by employer characteristics only consider the veteran's main job for that year. Main jobs are defined as the job for which veterans had the highest earnings in the reference year. To attach employer characteristics to that job, we assign industry and geography from the highest earnings quarter with that employer in the year. For multi-establishment firms, we use LEHD unit-to-worker imputations to assign workers to establishments, and then assign industry and geography."

https://lehd.ces.census.gov/data/veo_experimental.html

Acknowledgements

United States Census Bureau

https://lehd.ces.census.gov/data/veo_experimental.html

Photo by Robert Linder on Unsplash

Inspiration

U.S. Veterans.

FUDS Property points represent the location of properties that were formerly owned by, leased to or otherwise possessed by the United States and under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense prior to October 1986. Such properties are known as Formerly Used Defense Sites or FUDS. The U.S. Army is DOD’s lead agent for the FUDS Program. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers executes the FUDS Program on behalf of the U.S. Army and DOD. The U.S. Army and DOD are dedicated to protecting human health and the environment by investigating and, if required, cleaning up potential contamination or munitions that may remain on these properties from past DOD activities. Currently, not all properties have location information available.

FUDS Property polygon contains polygon features representing approximate boundaries of Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) Properties. These polygons represent the location of properties that were formerly owned by, leased to or otherwise possessed by the United States and under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense prior to October 1986. Such properties are known as Formerly Used Defense Sites or FUDS. The U.S. Army is DOD’s lead agent for the FUDS Program. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers executes the FUDS Program on behalf of the U.S. Army and DOD. The U.S. Army and DOD are dedicated to protecting human health and the environment by investigating and, if required, cleaning up potential contamination or munitions that may remain on these properties from past DOD activities. Currently, not all properties have location information available.

The FUDS MRS dataset contains location information for the Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) Munitions Response Sites (MRSs). MRSs are discrete sites associated with a FUDS property that may require a muntions response (response actions, including investigation, removal actions, and remedial actions, to address the explosives safety, human health, or environmental risks presented by UXO, discarded military munitions (DMM), or munitions constituents (MC), or to support a determination that no removal or remedial action is required.) Location information is subject to change as new data become available.

FUDS Project point describes the approximate location of a potential environmental restoration activity. These projects are associated with a single FUDS property (a property may have several or zero projects associated with it). Location information is not available for all properties, additional information will be added as it becomes available. Types of projects include: Hazardous, toxic and radioactive waste (HTRW); Building demolition and/or debris removal (BD/DR); Military munitions response program (MMRP); Containerized hazardous, toxic and radioactive waste (CON/HTRW), such as underground storage tanks; and, Principal responsible party actions (PRP), which involves defense of government interests or cost recovery on behalf of the government associated with CERCLA contamination requiring cleanup on a FUDS property.