This data is a manually curated dataset that provides a standardized view into state and county policy orders (executive orders, ordinances, etc.) from the following sources:

• BU COVID-19 State Policy Database - Raifman J, Nocka K, Jones D, Bor J, Lipson S, Jay J, and Chan P. (2020). "COVID-19 US state policy database."
• wikidata - Stay At Home Policies Queried from WikiData
• Manual curation by a dedicated group of Virtual Student Federal Service Interns - Summer 2020: T Adler, J Bastian, L Beckett, M Cohen, K Honey, C Kennedy, E Nudell

This dataset has been deprecated.

The purpose of this dataset is to summarize current community solar policies and low-income stipulations by state in the United States. The dataset is updated multiple times per year. The current version is the first file located below. Previous versions of the dataset published before August of 2024 can be found in the dataset below labeled “ARCHIVE_State Policies and Programs for Community Solar_Before 08.24.“ This list has been reviewed, but errors may exist, and the list may not be comprehensive. NREL invites input to update or add to the database. Please submit updates, additions, and corrections to Kaifeng Xu (kaifeng.xu@nrel.gov) & Simon Sandler (simon.sandler@nrel.gov).

The purpose of this dataset is to summarize current community solar policies and low-income stipulations by state in the United States. The dataset is updated multiple times per year. The current version is the first file located below. Previous versions of the dataset published before August of 2024 can be found in the dataset below labeled “ARCHIVE_State Policies and Programs for Community Solar_Before 08.24.“ This list has been reviewed, but errors may exist, and the list may not be comprehensive. NREL invites input to update or add to the database. Please submit updates, additions, and corrections to Kaifeng Xu (kaifeng.xu@nrel.gov) & Simon Sandler (simon.sandler@nrel.gov).

The State Firearm Database catalogs the presence or absence of 134 firearm safety laws in 14 categories covering the 26-year period from 1991 to 2019. The classification system categorizes state firearm provisions using a methodology that both captures differences and maintains a level of comparability between states. Because of this, the database is not the most detailed nor the most comprehensive record of all state firearm policies. Other resources may provide users with a deeper understanding of individual provisions, while this database serves as an efficient way to compare the broad scope of state firearm laws across the country. These provisions covered 14 aspects of state policies, including regulation of the process by which firearm transfers take place, ammunition, firearm possession, firearm storage, firearm trafficking, and liability of firearm manufacturers. In addition, descriptions of the criteria used to code each provision have been provided so that there is transparency in how various law exemptions, exceptions, and other nuances were addressed.

This data set is no longer current – The most current data and all historical data sets can be found at https://data.nrel.gov/submissions/249

The purpose of this dataset is to summarize current community solar policies and low-income stipulations by the state in the United States as of December 2022. The "State_Program" sheet summarizes the key policy details for each state. This dataset is associated with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication "Expanding Solar Access: State Community Solar Landscape (2022)." https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy23osti/84247.pdf

This list has been reviewed, but errors may exist, and the list may not be comprehensive. NREL invites input to update or add to the database. Please submit updates, additions, or corrections please find contact information on the current data set page linked above.

In the United States, gun laws vary from one state to the next; whether residents need a permit or a background check to purchase a firearm, whether residents must undergo firearm training before making this purchase, and whether residents can openly carry their guns in public is dependent upon state legislation. As of 2024, 22 U.S. states required background checks and/or permits for the purchase of a handgun. A further 13 states had regulations on openly carrying firearms in public, however, only California, Connecticut, Florida, and Illinois had completely prohibited open carry for all firearms. In comparison, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York prohibited open carry for handguns but either did not have regulations in place or required a permit for other types of guns. A constitutional right The Second Amendment of the Constitution, which states that citizens have the right to bear arms, has made it difficult for any gun control legislation to be passed on a national level in the United States. As a result, gun control laws in the U.S. are state-based, and often differ based on political perspectives. States with strong gun laws in place, such as Massachusetts, generally experience less gun violence, however, some states with strong gun laws, such as Maryland, continue to face high rates of gun violence, which has largely been attributed to gun trafficking activity found throughout the nation. A culture of gun owners In comparison to other high-income countries with stricter gun control laws, the United States has the highest gun homicide rate at 4.38 gun homicides per 100,000 residents. However, despite increasing evidence that easy access to firearms, whether legal or illegal, encourages higher rates of gun violence, the United States continues to foster an environment in which owning a firearm is seen as a personal freedom. Almost half of U.S. households have reported owning at least one firearm and 43 percent of registered voters in the U.S. were found to believe that it was more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns, compared to 23 percent who said it was more important to limit gun ownership.

SELECTED SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS IN THE UNITED STATES MARITAL STATUS - DP02 Universe - Population 15 Year and over Survey-Program - American Community Survey 5-year estimates Years - 2020, 2021, 2022 The marital status question is asked to determine the status of the person at the time of interview. Many government programs need accurate information on marital status, such as the number of married women in the labor force, elderly widowed individuals, or young single people who may establish homes of their own. The marital history data enables multiple agencies to more accurately measure the effects of federal and state policies and programs that focus on the well-being of families. Marital history data can provide estimates of marriage and divorce rates and duration, as well as flows into and out of marriage. This information is critical for more refined analyses of eligibility for program services and benefits, and of changes resulting from federal policies and programs.

Bullying is a vexing social and policy problem in the United States. Education scholars consistently advocate for comprehensive anti-bullying policies, however the 49 states that have adopted anti-bullying programs vary in their embrace of this approach. This article addresses the question of why this is the case. First, it provides a new measure of bullying policy comprehensiveness using Item Response Theory. Second, it examines how social and demographic characteristics, as well as neighbor-state policies, relate to this new measure. I find that a state’s support for enumerated groups and the availability of slack financial resources are the strongest explanations for variation in anti-bullying measures. There is also weak evidence consistent with a backlash effect, whereby states whose neighbors have more comprehensive policies adopt less comprehensive legislation. Thus, bullying policies are driven, in part, by state responsiveness to vulnerable populations, but are also constrained by the realities of finite resources.

The Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues, through the Office of State Planning Coordination, originally developed the first Delaware Strategies for State Policies and Spending document published in 1999 to provide policy guidance for state activities and serve as a framework for coordinating the plans and actions of local governments. The importance of such coordination lies in the fact that land-use decisions are made at the local level, while the bulk of infrastructure (e.g., roads and schools) and services (e.g., emergency services and social services) that support land-use decisions are funded by the state. Thus the development of this document with local governments and citizens helps to create a unified view toward growth and preservation priorities that all governments can use to allocate resources.

In the United States, gun laws differ from state to state. While all citizens have the 'right to bear arms' ingrained in their Constitution, Americans who have a criminal record or suffer from mental illness may be restricted from gun ownership depending on the state they are living in. As of 2024, 38 states had prohibited people with felony convictions from having a gun, while 32 states barred firearm access by convicted domestic abusers. However, only 12 states had restricted gun possession by domestic abusers under temporary restraining orders, despite commonly cited concerns that victims may face the most danger directly after leaving their abuser. In comparison, owning a firearm was outlawed by 29 states for certain people with serious mental illness, defined as those who were involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital or found to be a danger to themselves or others. Although federal law already restricts such mentally ill individuals, as well as most convicted domestic abusers, from obtaining firearms, having statewide legislation is still considered crucial to ensure that the policy is properly enforced.

This paper amends and expands the classic notion of states as “laboratories of democracy,” whereby mechanisms of learning and competition lead to the diffusion of successful state policy experiments across the federal system. Drawing from policy feedback literature, I develop a new framework for studying policy interdependence. State-level reforms that benefit particular organized interests also strengthen them politically. These interests, in turn, might have an economic incentive to apply newfound strength to seek to propagate the reforms that benefit them. As a result, state policies can “feed into” the interest group politics in other states, potentially driving policy diffusion. I study the case of rooftop solar policy, an area in which state-level decisions have been fundamental to industry growth and the emergence of installers as political actors. Bringing together a variety administrative, lobbying, and policy data, I demonstrate that solar installers used resources amassed in leading states to seek to shape policy elsewhere. Quantitative and qualitative evidence suggest these efforts had implications for state policy decisions. Theoretically, this paper expands conceptions of interconnection across federal systems of government. For reformers, it suggests that subnational policy can be a crucial ingredient in building coalitions for (geographically) broader policy reform.

The dataset is to show locations of current proposed infrastructure projects for the Coordinator-General’s assessment and approval under the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971 (SDPWO Act). A proponent of a project with one or more of the following characteristics may apply to have it declared a 'coordinated project' under the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971 (SDPWO Act):- complex approval requirements, involving local, state and federal governments- significant environmental effects- strategic significance to the locality, region or state, including for the infrastructure, economic and social benefits, capital investment or employment opportunities it may provide- significant infrastructure requirements.The Coordinator-General chooses the weight attributed to each of the above factors. The Coordinator-General is not bound to declare a project a coordinated project merely because it satisfies one or more of these characteristics.In making the declaration decision, the Coordinator-General must have regard to:- detailed information about the project given by the proponent in an initial advice statement- relevant planning schemes or policy frameworks of a local government, the State or the Commonwealth- relevant State policies and government priorities- a pre-feasibility assessment of the project, including how it satisfies an identified need or demand- the capacity of the proponent to undertake and complete the environmental impact statement (EIS) or impact assessment report (IAR) for the project- any other matter considered relevant.

Estimated change in the number of deaths in 2019 among adults ages 25–64 for hypothetical policy scenarios.

This paper studies the role played by the digitization level of inclusive finance for the aging population. We leverage an unexpected Chinese national strategy that promotes mobile internet and other internet related integration in China to identify the impact of changes in state policies on the digitization level for inclusive finance in a regression discontinuity design. Although aging population is negatively correlated with the digitization level of inclusive finance, our empirical analysis reveals that the policy shock significantly increased the digitization level of inclusive finance among the aging population. We also find two opposite mechanisms: the income effect and the caring effect. Finally, our study suggests that the economic and social outcomes of the digitization level among aging population are bifurcated: happiness decreased but real estate investment increased.

These data track state Medicaid programs' policies for paying Medicare's cost sharing for low-income individuals who have Medicare and Medicaid ("dual eligibles"). Our database focuses on Medicaid policies for paying the cost sharing for outpatient and physician services covered by the Medicare Part B program. We track state policies longitudinally from 2004-2018 based on information abstracted from online Medicaid policy documents, legal databases, and policy data reported to us by 22 state Medicaid programs. We also developed a Medicaid payment index, which reflects the proportion of the Medicare Part B allowed amount (i.e., price) for physician office visits that providers would expect to be paid per service provided to a dual eligible patient, in aggregate from Medicare and Medicaid, given these state policies. One version of this index reflects payments to physicians who qualified for higher Medicaid fees under the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid Fee Bump (implemented nationally from 2013-14) and one version reflects payments to physicians who were ineligible for the fee bump.Download the attached Excel files to retrieve the database and additional documentation. The compressed folder 'final document library' contains the original source policy documents (in PDF format) that are catalogued in the database.More detail about this database and our findings can be found in the article:Roberts ET, Nimgaonkar A, Aarons J, Tomko H, Shartzer A, Zuckerman SB, and James AE. "New Evidence of State Variation in Medicaid Payment Policies for Low-Income Medicare Beneficiaries," Health Services Research 2020 (doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13545).

URL: https://geoscience.data.qld.gov.au/dataset/cr063426

ACID SULFATE SOILS STATE POLICIES, STRATEGIES AND CHECKLISTS

Random effects panel logistic regression models: Whether a country has ever had a counter climate change organization, 1990–2018.