CENSUS_BLCKGRPS_TIGER00_POPDENS_IN contains populaton densities calculated for all Indiana blockgroups identified by the US Bureau of the Census. Data is from U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Tiger Line Files and SF1 tables.

A dataset listing Indiana zip codes by population for 2024.

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. Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some States and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2010 Census and beyond, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.

A dataset listing Indiana counties by population for 2024.

Historical census data for minor civil divisions (also known as "civil townships") in Indiana were provided by personnel of the Indiana Business Research Center to personnel of the Indiana Geological Survey (IGS). The data were joined by personnel of IGS to a shapefile of minor civil divisions. The historical census data consisted of population statistics from 1890 to 2000. The boundaries of civil townships are not believed to have changed greatly during the past 110 years. Using these data, personnel of the IGS calculated population density for each civil township during census years and changes of density for each decadal period.

The 2015 cartographic boundary KMLs are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. The records in this file allow users to map the parts of Urban Areas that overlap a particular county. After each decennial census, the Census Bureau delineates urban areas that represent densely developed territory, encompassing residential, commercial, and other nonresidential urban land uses. In general, this territory consists of areas of high population density and urban land use resulting in a representation of the "urban footprint." There are two types of urban areas: urbanized areas (UAs) that contain 50,000 or more people and urban clusters (UCs) that contain at least 2,500 people, but fewer than 50,000 people (except in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam which each contain urban clusters with populations greater than 50,000). Each urban area is identified by a 5-character numeric census code that may contain leading zeroes. The primary legal divisions of most states are termed counties. In Louisiana, these divisions are known as parishes. In Alaska, which has no counties, the equivalent entities are the organized boroughs, city and boroughs, municipalities, and for the unorganized area, census areas. The latter are delineated cooperatively for statistical purposes by the State of Alaska and the Census Bureau. In four states (Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia), there are one or more incorporated places that are independent of any county organization and thus constitute primary divisions of their states. These incorporated places are known as independent cities and are treated as equivalent entities for purposes of data presentation. The District of Columbia and Guam have no primary divisions, and each area is considered an equivalent entity for purposes of data presentation. The Census Bureau treats the following entities as equivalents of counties for purposes of data presentation: Municipios in Puerto Rico, Districts and Islands in American Samoa, Municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Islands in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas is covered by counties or equivalent entities. The boundaries for counties and equivalent entities are as of January 1, 2010.

This shapefile contains landscape factors representing human disturbances summarized to local and network catchments of river reaches for the state of Indiana. This dataset is the result of clipping the feature class 'NFHAP 2010 HCI Scores and Human Disturbance Data for the Conterminous United States linked to NHDPLUSV1.gdb' to the state boundary of Indiana. Landscape factors include land uses, population density, roads, dams, mines, and point-source pollution sites. The source datasets that were compiled and attributed to catchments were identified as being: (1) meaningful for assessing fish habitat; (2) consistent across the entire study area in the way that they were assembled; (3) representative of conditions in the past 10 years, and (4) of sufficient spatial resolution that they could be used to make valid comparisons among local catchment units. In this data set, these variables are linked to the catchments of the National Hydrography Dataset Plus Version 1 (NHDPlusV1) using the COMID identifier. They can also be linked to the reaches of the NHDPlusV1 using the COMID identifier. Catchment attributes are available for both local catchments (defined as the land area draining directly to a reach; attributes begin with "L_" prefix) and network catchments (defined by all upstream contributing catchments to the reach's outlet, including the reach's own local catchment; attributes begin with "N_" prefix). This shapefile also includes habitat condition scores created based on responsiveness of biological metrics to anthropogenic landscape disturbances throughout ecoregions. Separate scores were created by considering disturbances within local catchments, network catchments, and a cumulative score that accounted for the most limiting disturbance operating on a given biological metric in either local or network catchments. This assessment only scored reaches representing streams and rivers (see the process section for more details). Please use the following citation: Esselman, P., D.M. Infante, L. Wang, W. Taylor, W. Daniel, R. Tingley, J. Fenner, A. Cooper, D. Wieferich, D. Thornbrugh and J. Ross. (April 2011) National Fish Habitat Action Plan (NFHAP) 2010 HCI Scores and Human Disturbance Data (linked to NHDPLUSV1) for Indiana. National Fish Habitat Partnership Data System. http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.5066/F7HH6H2T

Context

Crime data analysis is essential for understanding patterns of criminal activity, identifying risk factors, and informing public safety policies. This dataset provides a detailed look at reported offenses in Indiana for the year 2023, offering valuable insights into demographic trends, geographic crime distribution, and seasonal variations. By analyzing this dataset, researchers, policymakers, and data enthusiasts can uncover key factors influencing crime rates and develop data-driven strategies for prevention and intervention.

Content

This dataset compiles crime records from Indiana in 2023, structured to facilitate in-depth analysis across various dimensions. It includes:

• Demographics – Age, race, and gender details of individuals involved in reported offenses, enabling a deeper understanding of crime patterns among different population groups.
• Offense Details – Categorized crime types, including theft, violent crimes, drug-related offenses, and property crimes, to reveal crime distribution across Indiana.
• Temporal Patterns – A breakdown of crimes by month to identify seasonal crime trends and fluctuations throughout the year.
• Geographic Distribution – County-level crime data that highlight high-crime areas and differences in crime rates between urban and rural regions.
• Arrest Rates – Information on arrests linked to various offenses, providing insights into law enforcement actions and policy effectiveness.

Inspiration

This dataset presents several opportunities for exploration and analysis:

• Which demographics are most affected by specific types of crime?
• How do crime rates vary across different counties, and what factors contribute to regional differences?
• Are there seasonal patterns in criminal activity that could inform law enforcement strategies?
• What are the relationships between arrest rates and specific types of offenses?

Potential Applications

This dataset is well-suited for various analytical and research purposes, including:

• Demographic Analysis – Examining which age, race, and gender groups are most affected by certain offenses.
• Geographic Insights – Analyzing county-level crime rates to understand how population density and urbanization impact crime trends.
• Temporal Analysis – Identifying seasonal crime patterns to assist in resource allocation and crime prevention strategies.
• Policy Recommendations – Using data insights to propose interventions aimed at reducing crime and improving community safety.
• Machine Learning Applications – Developing predictive models for crime forecasting and classification.

Ideal For

• Beginners and intermediate analysts looking to apply data cleaning, visualization, and storytelling skills.
• Machine learning enthusiasts interested in crime prediction models.
• Policymakers, law enforcement agencies, and public safety organizations seeking data-driven insights for decision-making.

Dataset Origin

This dataset was curated from publicly available Indiana crime records and compiled for educational and analytical purposes. All personally identifiable information has been anonymized to ensure privacy.

Licensing and Restrictions

This dataset is open for non-commercial projects. Attribution to the original source is appreciated when sharing findings or insights.

We conducted a survey of multiple soybean fields in 2004-2006 to obtain population density estimates for arthropods in the canopy throughout the soybean growing season. The fields were located in north-central Indiana and were cultivated according to standard agronomic practices for the region. In 2004, 14 fields were selected along two transects, extending 70 km due north and 110 km northeast of the Purdue University campus (West Lafayette, Indiana; see TRANS_2004-2006_datefield.csv and TRANS_2004_plant.csv). In 2005, eight fields were selected along the northeast transect, up to 140 km from campus (see TRANS_2004-2006_datefield.csv, TRANS_2005_ESplant.csv, and TRANS_2005_LSplant.csv). In 2006, six fields were selected along the northeast transect (see TRANS_2004-2006_datefield.csv and TRANS_2006_plant.csv). In all of these "transect" fields, a rectangular plot (0.3 ha in 2004, 0.4 ha in 2005 and 0.2 ha in 2006) was selected at least 10 m from the field edge. In each year of the survey, one additional "large-sample" field was monitored using larger sample sizes than in transect fields (N = 10-20 plants in each transect field and N = 48-96 plants in each large-sample field). These large-sample plots were unmanipulated control plots used in various field experiments conducted each year at the Purdue University Agronomy Center for Research and Education (ACRE) in Tippecanoe County, IN (see ACRE_2004-2006_field.csv, ACRE_2004-2006_dateplot.csv, and ACRE_2004-2006_plant.csv).