The 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey (USTS) was conducted by the National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE) to examine the experiences of transgender adults in the United States. The USTS questionnaire was administered online and data were collected over a 34-day period in the summer of 2015, between August 19 and September 21. The final sample included respondents from all fifty states, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and U.S. military bases overseas. The USTS Public Use Dataset (PUDS) features survey results from 27,715 respondents and details the experiences of transgender people across a wide range of areas, such as education, employment, family life, health, housing, and interactions with police and prisons. The survey instrument had thirty-two sections that covered a broad array of topics, including questions related to the following topics (in alphabetical order): accessing restrooms; airport security; civic participation; counseling; family and peer support; health and health insurance; HIV; housing and homelessness; identity documents; immigration; intimate partner violence; military service; police and incarceration; policy priorities; public accommodations; sex work; sexual assault; substance use; suicidal thoughts and behaviors; unequal treatment, harassment, and physical attack; and voting. Demographic information includes age, racial and ethnic identity, sex assigned at birth, gender and preferred pronouns, sexual orientation, language(s) spoken at home, education, employment, income, religion/spirituality, and marital status. There are no publicly available data files for this study. The naming conventions were maintained from the original pre-ICPSR release and the PUDS file is restricted use along with the qualitative data (MS Excel) file. Before applying for access to these data please refer to the Approved Requests for USTS Data. These abstracts describe work currently in progress, and we provide them to help reduce the risk of duplication of research efforts.

The TransPop study is the first national probability sample of transgender individuals in the United States (it also includes a comparative cisgender sample). A primary goal of this study was to provide researchers with a representative sample of transgender people in the United States. The study examines a variety of health-relevant domains including health outcomes and health behaviors, experiences with interpersonal and institutional discrimination, identity, transition-related experiences, and basic demographic characteristics (age, race/ethnicity, religion, political party affiliation, marital status, employment, income, location, sex, gender, and education). Co-investigators (in alphabetical order): Walter O. Bockting, Ph.D. (Columbia University); Jody L. Herman, Ph.D. (UCLA); Sari L. Reisner, Ph.D. (Harvard University and The Fenway Institute, Fenway Health).

This collection includes a combined dataset of the Generations study wave 1 (baseline) survey and the TransPop study transgender survey. The two studies have many overlapping variables, and they examined topics such as respondents' health outcomes and behaviors, experiences with discrimination, identity, and transition-related experiences. Data from these studies were merged to allow for analysis of the combined LGBT populations. This dataset has also been reweighted to be representative of these populations. The complete Generations study data (baseline, wave 2, and wave 3 survey data) can be found under study number 37166, and the complete TransPop study data (transgender and cisgender survey data) can be found under study number 37938. For detailed information on the Generations and TransPop studies, including related publications, please refer to their respective DSDR/ICPSR study pages.

Given that an estimated 0.6% of the U.S. population is transgender (trans) and that large health disparities for this population have been documented, government and research organizations are increasingly expanding measures of sex/gender to be trans inclusive. Options suggested for trans community surveys, such as expansive check-all-that-apply gender identity lists and write-in options that offer maximum flexibility, are generally not appropriate for broad population surveys. These require limited questions and a small number of categories for analysis. Limited evaluation has been undertaken of trans-inclusive population survey measures for sex/gender, including those currently in use. Using an internet survey and follow-up of 311 participants, and cognitive interviews from a maximum-diversity sub-sample (n = 79), we conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of two existing measures: a two-step question developed in the United States and a multidimensional measure developed in Canada. We found very low levels of item missingness, and no indicators of confusion on the part of cisgender (non-trans) participants for both measures. However, a majority of interview participants indicated problems with each question item set. Agreement between the two measures in assessment of gender identity was very high (K = 0.9081), but gender identity was a poor proxy for other dimensions of sex or gender among trans participants. Issues to inform measure development or adaptation that emerged from analysis included dimensions of sex/gender measured, whether non-binary identities were trans, Indigenous and cultural identities, proxy reporting, temporality concerns, and the inability of a single item to provide a valid measure of sex/gender. Based on this evaluation, we recommend that population surveys meant for multi-purpose analysis consider a new Multidimensional Sex/Gender Measure for testing that includes three simple items (one asked only of a small sub-group) to assess gender identity and lived gender, with optional additions. We provide considerations for adaptation of this measure to different contexts.

This dataset tracks annual american indian student percentage from 1997 to 2018 for Community Based Trans Program vs. Washington and Tacoma School District

The IPUMS Contextual Determinants of Health (CDOH) data series includes measures of disparities, policies, and counts, by state or county, for historically marginalized populations in the United States including Black, Asian, Hispanic/Latina/o/e/x, and LGBTQ+ persons, and women. The IPUMS CDOH data are made available through ICPSR/DSDR for merging with the National Couples' Health and Time Study (NCHAT), United States, 2020-2021 (ICPSR 38417) by approved restricted data researchers. All other researchers can access the IPUMS CDOH data via the IPUMS CDOH website. Unlike other IPUMS products, the CDOH data are organized into multiple categories related to Race and Ethnicity, Sexual and Gender Minority, Gender, and Politics. The CDOH measures were created from a wide variety of data sources (e.g., IPUMS NHGIS, the Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Movement Advancement Project, and Myers Abortion Facility Database). Measures are currently available for states or counties from approximately 2015 to 2020. The Sexual and Gender measures in this release include the proportion of a state's population identifying as LGBTQ+ in the U.S. Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey, Phases 3.2 (07/21/2021-10/11/2021), 3.3 (12/01/2021-02/07/2022), 3.4 (03/02/2022-05/09/2022), and 3.5 (06/01/2022-08/08/2022). To work with the IPUMS CDOH data, researchers will need to first merge the NCHAT data to DS1 (MATCH ID and State FIPS Data). This merged file can then be linked to the IPUMS CDOH datafile (DS2) using the STATEFIPS variable.

BackgroundTransgender women (TGW) experience unique life traumas that may perpetuate negative sexual health outcomes, such as high rates of HIV and sexually transmitted infections. This is especially true in the US Deep South, where structural and cultural factors further marginalize gender minorities as well as people of color. Providing trauma informed care to TGW in sexual and reproductive health (SRH) settings is necessary, but strategies to measure traumatic experiences among this population are needed. We aimed to develop and psychometrically assess a multi-item survey instrument evaluating trauma-specific histories for use with TGW in SRH settings and assess differences in reported trauma histories between White and non-White TGW in the US Deep South.MethodsSurvey items were developed using three existing general trauma instruments (Life Events Checklist for DSM-5, Trauma History Questionnaire, Stressful Life Events Screening Questionnaire) and results from qualitative interviews with TGW. Survey items fell into five trauma subdomains: healthcare-related experiences, sexual/relationship experiences, crime-related/general trauma experiences, gender dysphoria experiences, and discrimination experiences. A computer-assisted self-interviewing instrument was administered to TGW. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients (α) were calculated for each subdomain to determine internal consistency. Results were stratified by race (White versus non-White), and means of trauma subdomain results were compared.ResultsBetween April 2024–September 2024, 105 TGW enrolled and completed the instrument. Median participant age was 30 years (range 19–73), and most identified as White (n = 55) or Black/African American (n = 40). Mental health conditions such as depression (n = 64) and anxiety (n = 59) were common. Psychometric analyses revealed acceptable internal constancy for the subdomains of healthcare-related experiences (α = 0.787), crime-related/general trauma experiences (α = 0.870), and discrimination experiences (α = 0.870). Subdomains measuring sexual/relationship experiences and gender dysphoria had lower reliability (α = 0.597 and 0.499, respectively). Trauma in all subdomains was common among all participants, with traumatic sexual and relationship experiences (p = 0.004) and crime-related and general trauma experiences (p 

Full text and metadata for articles used in the analyses for "Locating the Asymmetry in Information Flow between Local and National Media on Transgender Discourses", currently under review for a special issue on transphobic disinformation from the Bulletin of Applied Transgender Studies. Columns: Unnamed:0 (dataset index), media_name (media outlet where the article was published), publish_date (date of publication in YYYY-mm-DD HH:MM:SS format), title (article title), url (article URL as obtained from MediaCloud), subtitle (article subtitle), text (article text), sent_count (number of sentences), domain (domain from which the article was obtained), gender_label (does this article contain the string "gender"?), media_group (state-level or national media collection as defined in the article -- one of {'texas', 'ohio', 'illinois', 'florida', 'california', 'newyork', 'nytimes.com', 'foxnews.com'}) Abstract: Mainstream news outlets set the agenda and terms of discussion for public discourse. As transgender people experience increasingly vitriolic attacks on their fundamental rights in the U.S., understanding the dynamics governing media discussions of transgender people becomes even more salient. The interplay between news outlets with different geographical scopes—national and local—is an important aspect of media discourse circulation. Guided by inter-media agenda-setting theory, we use transfer entropy, a measure of information flow, to quantify whether, and how, transgender discourses spread across local and national media. We find that transgender discourses on a particular topic propagate from national to state-level outlets; however, we find that this process often involves two steps: national outlets influence particular state(s), which, in turn, influence the other states. Therefore, local outlets play a more complex role in agenda-setting for transgender discourses than previously thought. We combine our quantitative study of information flow between two national outlets and six state-level news collections with two comprehensive qualitative case studies, including recommendations for interventions to improve the state of the news ecosystem, to shed light on the circulation and nature of various transgender discourses across different geographical scopes within the U.S. media landscape.

This data set includes all scooter trips for the month of May, within the City of Minneapolis for the pilot program that began in March 2019. We have removed data when trips were over 7 hours and less than 0 miles or greater than 24 miles.

Field Descriptions

TripID: a unique identifier for each trip created by the City of Minneapolis

TripDuration: trip time in seconds

TripDistance: trip distance in meters

StartTime: time the trip started, rounded to the nearest half hour

EndTime: time the trip ended, rounded to the nearest half hour

StartCenterlineID: the street centerline GBSID or trail centerline Feature Unique ID the trip started on. Refer to the Street Centerline dataset here: http://opendata.minneapolismn.gov/datasets/mpls-centerline, and the trail centerline dataset here: https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metrogis-trans-metro-colabtiv-trails-bike

StartCenterlineType: The type of centerline the trip started on, either street or trail.

EndCenterlineID: the street centerline GBSID or trail centerline Feature Unique ID the trip ended on. Refer to the Street Centerline dataset here: http://opendata.minneapolismn.gov/datasets/mpls-centerline, and the trail centerline dataset here: https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metrogis-trans-metro-colabtiv-trails-bike

EndCenterlineType: The type of centerline the trip ended on, either street or trail.

The vector data is updated utilizing positions calculated from plats using coordinate geometry programs. Plated, Public road centerlines are captured within this database. Private roads may not be shown.

The centerlines usually represent the center of the physical roadway pavement. The center of physical roadway pavement may or may not represent the center of the road right of way. Road right of ways may taper or change width.

This file has been further modified using several sources including survey field data and digitizing off aerial photos. Attributes have been included to allow geo-coding and the support of Washington County Sheriff's Office Communication Center. Regional Data is available through the MN Geocommons. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metrogis-trans-road-centerlines-gac

Contains average daily transit boardings and alightings for all Metro Transit, Met Council, and Maple Grove Transit fixed-route transit service.

Note: Records are provided for all regional transit service and stops, but boarding and alighting data are only shown for Metro Transit and Met Council provided services and for service from other providers that have agreed to the inclusion of their service in this data set.

The Road feature class represents a route system depicting all roads within or in close proximity to Forest Service administrative units. Road data is maintained by individual Forest Service units. This dataset includes all Forest Service roads and selected State, county, private and permitted roads. The data is compiled into a single feature class. Some roads may exist in more than one unit?s database and may be duplicated in this product. No attempt has been made to ensure that junctions created by merging adjacent unit?s data are topologically correct.

This dataset tracks annual american indian student percentage from 2013 to 2022 for Escuela Verde vs. Wisconsin and Trans Center For Youth Inc School District

This historic dataset represents road centerlines for all public roads within the state of Minnesota as of 2012. The roads are broken from intersection to intersection and attributed with information based on their designated route. Key attribute fields include route system (Interstate, US Highway, Minnesota Highway, County State Aid Highway, County Road, Township Road, etc.), Route Number (35W, 10, 53), and Name. A detailed description of the Roads layer attributes is included in Section 5 of this document - Entity and Attribute Overview.

Some route numbers are temporary. '900' Routes are for route segments that formerly were part of a trunk highway which was turned back to a local entity. These are temporary numbers assigned while MnDOT waits for an official local designation. These numbers are assigned in the 900-999 range and are not official route numbers but just for temporarily assigning data to unnumbered routes.

***The route IDs and measures contained in this data set are part of the old TIS system and are no longer supported at MnDOT. To download the current data set containing MnDOT's new LRS route IDs and more accurate measures, go to: https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/trans-roads-centerlines

IMPORTANT NOTICE:
This dataset will be retired on 4/17/2020
Please transition to Park & Rides and Transit Centers:
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metc-trans-park-rides-transit-centers

The Metropolitan Council Transporation Policy plan defines a transit center as: A transit stop or station at the meeting point of several routes or lines or of different modes of transportation. It is located on or off the street and is designed to handle the movement of transit units (vehicles or trains) and the boarding, alighting, and transferring of passengers between routes or lines (in which case it is also known as a transfer center) or different modes (also known as a modal interchange center, intermodal transfer facility or an hub).

The TransitCenters dataset includes all ACTIVE and INACTIVE locations identified by Metropolitan Council's Transportation Policy Plan, mapped on the Regional System Map, identified in a memo, NTD reporting or included in facilities managment. Field attributes include sources where these facilities were identified as Transit Centers. Some locations have additional facilities such as shelters, park and rides and rail stations. In many cases these are places where:

1. Two or more routes connect to transfer passengers
2. Buses connect off street, or in clearly designated on-street spaces
3. There are multiple marked 'gates' for different routes and directions
4. The location serves a major activity center, such as a shopping center.
5. There is a standing facility or, in some cases, a collection of bus shelters

AADT represents current (most recent) Annual Average Daily Traffic on sampled road systems. This information is displayed using the Traffic Segments Active feature class as of the annual HPMS freeze in January. Historical AADT is found in another table. Please note that updates to this dataset are on an annual basis, therefore the data may not match ground conditions or may not be available for new roadways. Resource Contact: Christy Prentice, Traffic Forecasting & Analysis (TFA), http://www.dot.state.mn.us/tda/contacts.html#TFA

Check other metadata records in this package for more information on Annual Average Daily Traffic Segments Information.


Link to ESRI Feature Service:

Annual Average Daily Traffic Segments in Minnesota: Annual Average Daily Traffic Segments