The lever-pulling model was first developed as part of a broad-based, problem-solving effort implemented in Boston in the mid-1990s. The lever-pulling strategy was a foundational element of many collaborative partnerships across the country and it was a central element of the strategic plans of many Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) jurisdictions. This effort attempted to deter the future violent behavior of chronic offenders by first communicating directly to them about the impact that violence had on the community and the implementation of new efforts to respond to it, and then giving credibility to this communication effort by using all available legal sanctions (i.e., levers) against these offenders when violence occurred. The purpose of the study was to perform an experimental evaluation of a lever-pulling strategy implemented in Indianapolis, Indiana. Probationers were randomly assigned to the law enforcement focused lever-pulling group, the community leader lever-pulling group, or a regular probation control group during six months between June 2003 and March 2004. There were a total of 540 probationers in the study--180 probationers in each group. Probationers in the law enforcement focused lever-pulling group had face-to-face meetings with federal and local law enforcement officials and primarily received a deterrence-based message, but community officials also discussed various types of job and treatment opportunities. In contrast, probationers in the community leader lever-pulling group attended meetings with community leaders and service providers who exclusively focused on the impact of violence on the community and available services. Three types of data were collected to assess perceptions about the meeting: offending behavior, program participation behavior, and the levers pulled. First, data were collected using a self-report survey instrument (Part 1). Second, the complete criminal history for probationers (Part 2) was collected one-year after their meeting date. Third, all available probation data (Part 3) were collected 365 days after the meeting date. Part 1, Self-Report Survey Data, includes a total of 316 variables related to the following three types of data: Section I: meeting evaluation and perception of risk, Section II: Self-reported offense and gun use behavior, and Section III: Demographics. Part 2, Criminal History Data, includes a total of 94 variables collected about the probationer's complete offending history as well as their criminal activities after the treatment for one year. Part 3, Probation Data, includes a total of 249 variables related to probation history and other outcome data.
The Uniform Crime Report is a
program administered by the federal government in which crime statistics from
across the country are reported to the FBI in a uniform manner based on crime
definitions determined by the FBI. UCR Part 1 crime groups are murder, rape,
robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, and vehicle theft.
Additional Information regarding the downloadable
files is available in .pdf format.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Putnam County, IN (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC018133) from 2004 to 2011 about Putnam County, IN; Indianapolis; crime; violent crime; property crime; IN; and USA.
In 2023, the District of Columbia had the highest reported violent crime rate in the United States, with 1,150.9 violent crimes per 100,000 of the population. Maine had the lowest reported violent crime rate, with 102.5 offenses per 100,000 of the population. Life in the District The District of Columbia has seen a fluctuating population over the past few decades. Its population decreased throughout the 1990s, when its crime rate was at its peak, but has been steadily recovering since then. While unemployment in the District has also been falling, it still has had a high poverty rate in recent years. The gentrification of certain areas within Washington, D.C. over the past few years has made the contrast between rich and poor even greater and is also pushing crime out into the Maryland and Virginia suburbs around the District. Law enforcement in the U.S. Crime in the U.S. is trending downwards compared to years past, despite Americans feeling that crime is a problem in their country. In addition, the number of full-time law enforcement officers in the U.S. has increased recently, who, in keeping with the lower rate of crime, have also made fewer arrests than in years past.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Shelby County, IN (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC018145) from 2004 to 2019 about Shelby County, IN; Indianapolis; crime; violent crime; property crime; IN; and USA.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Hancock County, IN (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC018059) from 2004 to 2021 about Hancock County, IN; Indianapolis; crime; violent crime; property crime; IN; and USA.
NOTE: If the data set is empty, the data is not processed and published, yet. Please see UCR data from previous years. The Uniform Crime Report is a program administered by the federal government in which crime statistics from across the country are reported to the FBI in a uniform manner based on crime definitions determined by the FBI. UCR Part 1 crime groups are murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, and vehicle theft. Additional information regarding the downloadable files is available in .pdf format.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Fulton County, IN (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC018049) from 2010 to 2021 about Fulton County, IN; crime; violent crime; property crime; IN; and USA.
Number of property crimes of Indiana jumped by 8.74% from 125,037 number in 2022 to 135,968 number in 2023. Since the 0.74% rise in 2015, number of property crimes shot up by 7,071.31% in 2023.
Number of crimes of Indiana slumped by 7.66% from 22,661 cases in 2021 to 20,925 cases in 2022. Since the 4.50% rise in 2016, number of crimes sank by 21.09% in 2022.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Indiana County, PA (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC042063) from 2011 to 2018 about Indiana County, PA; crime; violent crime; property crime; PA; and USA.
The purpose of the study was to investigate the role and impact of forensic science evidence on the criminal justice process. The study utilized a prospective analysis of official record data that followed criminal cases in five jurisdictions (Los Angeles County, California; Indianapolis, Indiana; Evansville, Indiana; Fort Wayne, Indiana; and South Bend, Indiana) from the time of police incident report to final criminal disposition. The data were based on a random sample of the population of reported crime incidents between 2003 and 2006, stratified by crime type and jurisdiction. A total of 4,205 cases were sampled including 859 aggravated assaults, 1,263 burglaries, 400 homicides, 602 rapes, and 1,081 robberies. Descriptive and impact data were collected from three sources: police incident and investigation reports, crime lab reports, and prosecutor case files. The data contain a total of 175 variables including site, crime type, forensic variables, criminal offense variables, and crime dispositions variables.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Gibson County, IN (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC018051) from 2004 to 2021 about Gibson County, IN; Evansville; crime; violent crime; property crime; IN; and USA.
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
The lever-pulling model was first developed as part of a broad-based, problem-solving effort implemented in Boston in the mid-1990s. The lever-pulling strategy was a foundational element of many collaborative partnerships across the country and it was a central element of the strategic plans of many Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) jurisdictions. This effort attempted to deter the future violent behavior of chronic offenders by first communicating directly to them about the impact that violence had on the community and the implementation of new efforts to respond to it, and then giving credibility to this communication effort by using all available legal sanctions (i.e., levers) against these offenders when violence occurred. The purpose of the study was to perform an experimental evaluation of a lever-pulling strategy implemented in Indianapolis, Indiana. Probationers were randomly assigned to the law enforcement focused lever-pulling group, the community leader lever-pulling group, or a regular probation control group during six months between June 2003 and March 2004. There were a total of 540 probationers in the study--180 probationers in each group. Probationers in the law enforcement focused lever-pulling group had face-to-face meetings with federal and local law enforcement officials and primarily received a deterrence-based message, but community officials also discussed various types of job and treatment opportunities. In contrast, probationers in the community leader lever-pulling group attended meetings with community leaders and service providers who exclusively focused on the impact of violence on the community and available services. Three types of data were collected to assess perceptions about the meeting: offending behavior, program participation behavior, and the levers pulled. First, data were collected using a self-report survey instrument (Part 1). Second, the complete criminal history for probationers (Part 2) was collected one-year after their meeting date. Third, all available probation data (Part 3) were collected 365 days after the meeting date. Part 1, Self-Report Survey Data, includes a total of 316 variables related to the following three types of data: Section I: meeting evaluation and perception of risk, Section II: Self-reported offense and gun use behavior, and Section III: Demographics. Part 2, Criminal History Data, includes a total of 94 variables collected about the probationer's complete offending history as well as their criminal activities after the treatment for one year. Part 3, Probation Data, includes a total of 249 variables related to probation history and other outcome data.