An interactive public crime mapping application providing DC residents and visitors easy-to-understand data visualizations of crime locations, types and trends across all eight wards. Crime Cards was created by the DC Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO). Special thanks to the community members who participated in reviews with MPD Officers and IT staff, and those who joined us for the #SaferStrongerSmarterDC roundtable design review. All statistics presented in Crime Cards are based on preliminary DC Index crime data reported from 2009 to midnight of today’s date. They are compiled based on the date the offense was reported (Report Date) to MPD. The application displays two main crime categories: Violent Crime and Property Crime. Violent Crimes include homicide, sex abuse, assault with a dangerous weapon (ADW), and robbery. Violent crimes can be further searched by the weapon used. Property Crimes include burglary, motor vehicle theft, theft from vehicle, theft (other), and arson.CrimeCards collaboration between the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), the Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO), and community members who participated at the #SafterStrongerSmarterDC roundtable design review.
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.
The Office of Gun Violence Prevention (OGVP) shares real-time gun violence data to increase government transparency, improve the public's awareness, and support community-based gun violence prevention and reduction partners. All District crime data is available through Crime Cards. The dashboards below focus on gun violence only. The data in these dashboards is updated daily at 7:40AM with the incidents from the day before. View data covering 7-Day Look-back of Gun Violence and Year-to-date Gun Violence.All statistics presented here are based on preliminary DC criminal code offense definitions. The data do not represent official statistics submitted to the FBI under the Uniform Crime Reporting program (UCR) or National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS). All preliminary offenses are coded based on DC criminal code and not the FBI offense classifications. Please understand that any comparisons between MPD preliminary data as published on this website and the official crime statistics published by the FBI under the Uniform Crime Reporting Program (UCR) are inaccurate and misleading. The MPD does not guarantee (either expressed or implied) the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or correct sequencing of the information. The MPD will not be responsible for any error or omission, or for the use of, or the results obtained from the use of this information. Read complete data notes at buildingblocks.dc.gov/data.
The dataset contains a subset of locations and attributes of incidents reported in the ASAP (Analytical Services Application) crime report database by the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department (MPD). Visit https://crimecards.dc.gov for more information. This data is shared via an automated process where addresses are geocoded to the District's Master Address Repository and assigned to the appropriate street block. Block locations for some crime points could not be automatically assigned resulting in 0,0 for x,y coordinates. These can be interactively assigned using the MAR Geocoder.On February 1 2020, the methodology of geography assignments of crime data was modified to increase accuracy. From January 1 2020 going forward, all crime data will have Ward, ANC, SMD, BID, Neighborhood Cluster, Voting Precinct, Block Group and Census Tract values calculated prior to, rather than after, anonymization to the block level. This change impacts approximately one percent of Ward assignments.
The Urban Institute undertook a comprehensive assessment of communities approaching decay to provide public officials with strategies for identifying communities in the early stages of decay and intervening effectively to prevent continued deterioration and crime. Although community decline is a dynamic spiral downward in which the physical condition of the neighborhood, adherence to laws and conventional behavioral norms, and economic resources worsen, the question of whether decay fosters or signals increasing risk of crime, or crime fosters decay (as investors and residents flee as reactions to crime), or both, is not easily answered. Using specific indicators to identify future trends, predictor models for Washington, DC, and Cleveland were prepared, based on data available for each city. The models were designed to predict whether a census tract should be identified as at risk for very high crime and were tested using logistic regression. The classification of a tract as a "very high crime" tract was based on its crime rate compared to crime rates for other tracts in the same city. To control for differences in population and to facilitate cross-tract comparisons, counts of crime incidents and other events were converted to rates per 1,000 residents. Tracts with less than 100 residents were considered nonresidential or institutional and were deleted from the analysis. Washington, DC, variables include rates for arson and drug sales or possession, percentage of lots zoned for commercial use, percentage of housing occupied by owners, scale of family poverty, presence of public housing units for 1980, 1983, and 1988, and rates for aggravated assaults, auto thefts, burglaries, homicides, rapes, and robberies for 1980, 1983, 1988, and 1990. Cleveland variables include rates for auto thefts, burglaries, homicides, rapes, robberies, drug sales or possession, and delinquency filings in juvenile court, and scale of family poverty for 1980 through 1989. Rates for aggravated assaults are provided for 1986 through 1989 and rates for arson are provided for 1983 through 1988.
https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/6235/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/6235/terms
This study investigates rates of serious crime for selected public housing developments in Washington, DC, Phoenix, Arizona, and Los Angeles, California, for the years 1986 to 1989. Offense rates in housing developments were compared to rates in nearby areas of private housing as well as to city-wide rates. In addition, the extent of law enforcement activity in housing developments as represented by arrests was considered and compared to arrest levels in other areas. This process allowed both intra-city and inter-city comparisons to be made. Variables cover study site, origin of data, year of event, offense codes, and location of event. Los Angeles files also include police division.
These data were prepared in conjunction with a project using Bureau of Labor Statistics data (not provided with this collection) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program data to examine the relationship between unemployment and violent crime. Three separate time-series data files were created as part of this project: a national time series (Part 1), a state time series (Part 2), and a time series of data for 12 selected cities: Baltimore, Buffalo, Chicago, Columbus, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, Newark, New York City, Paterson (New Jersey), and Philadelphia (Part 3). Each data file was constructed to include 82 monthly time series: 26 series containing the number of Part I (crime index) offenses known to police (excluding arson) by weapon used, 26 series of the number of offenses cleared by arrest or other exceptional means by weapon used in the offense, 26 series of the number of offenses cleared by arrest or other exceptional means for persons under 18 years of age by weapon used in the offense, a population estimate series, and three date indicator series. For the national and state data, agencies from the 50 states and Washington, DC, were included in the aggregated data file if they reported at least one month of information during the year. In addition, agencies that did not report their own data (and thus had no monthly observations on crime or arrests) were included to make the aggregated population estimate as close to Census estimates as possible. For the city time series, law enforcement agencies with jurisdiction over the 12 central cities were identified and the monthly data were extracted from each UCR annual file for each of the 12 agencies. The national time-series file contains 82 time series, the state file contains 4,083 time series, and the city file contains 963 time series, each with 228 monthly observations per time series. The unit of analysis is the month of observation. Monthly crime and clearance totals are provided for homicide, negligent manslaughter, total rape, forcible rape, attempted forcible rape, total robbery, firearm robbery, knife/cutting instrument robbery, other dangerous weapon robbery, strong-arm robbery, total assault, firearm assault, knife/cutting instrument assault, other dangerous weapon assault, simple nonaggravated assault, assaults with hands/fists/feet, total burglary, burglary with forcible entry, unlawful entry-no force, attempted forcible entry, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, auto theft, truck and bus theft, other vehicle theft, and grand total of all actual offenses.
The dataset contains records of felony crime incidents recorded by the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department in 2016. Visit mpdc.dc.gov/page/data-and-statistics for more information.
U.S. Government Workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
License information was derived automatically
The Urban Institute undertook a comprehensive assessment of communities approaching decay to provide public officials with strategies for identifying communities in the early stages of decay and intervening effectively to prevent continued deterioration and crime. Although community decline is a dynamic spiral downward in which the physical condition of the neighborhood, adherence to laws and conventional behavioral norms, and economic resources worsen, the question of whether decay fosters or signals increasing risk of crime, or crime fosters decay (as investors and residents flee as reactions to crime), or both, is not easily answered. Using specific indicators to identify future trends, predictor models for Washington, DC, and Cleveland were prepared, based on data available for each city. The models were designed to predict whether a census tract should be identified as at risk for very high crime and were tested using logistic regression. The classification of a tract as a "very high crime" tract was based on its crime rate compared to crime rates for other tracts in the same city. To control for differences in population and to facilitate cross-tract comparisons, counts of crime incidents and other events were converted to rates per 1,000 residents. Tracts with less than 100 residents were considered nonresidential or institutional and were deleted from the analysis. Washington, DC, variables include rates for arson and drug sales or possession, percentage of lots zoned for commercial use, percentage of housing occupied by owners, scale of family poverty, presence of public housing units for 1980, 1983, and 1988, and rates for aggravated assaults, auto thefts, burglaries, homicides, rapes, and robberies for 1980, 1983, 1988, and 1990. Cleveland variables include rates for auto thefts, burglaries, homicides, rapes, robberies, drug sales or possession, and delinquency filings in juvenile court, and scale of family poverty for 1980 through 1989. Rates for aggravated assaults are provided for 1986 through 1989 and rates for arson are provided for 1983 through 1988.
https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/6254/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/6254/terms
This data collection effort examined the influence of drug use on three key aspects of offenders' criminal careers in violence: participation, frequency of offending, and termination rate. A random sample of arrestees was taken from those arrested in Washington, DC, during the period July 1, 1985, to June 6, 1986. The sample was stratified to overrepresent groups other than Black males. Drug use was determined by urinalysis results at the time of arrest, as contrasted with previous studies that relied on self-reports of drug use. The research addresses the following questions: (1) Does drug use have an influence on participation in violent criminal activity? (2) Does drug use influence the frequency of violent offending? (3) Is there a difference in the types and rates of violent offending between drug-using offenders who use stimulants and those who use depressants? Variables regarding arrests include date of arrest, drug test result, charges filed, disposition date, disposition type, and sentence length imposed. Demographic variables include race, sex, birthdate, and place of birth.
U.S. Government Workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
License information was derived automatically
This study investigates rates of serious crime for selected public housing developments in Washington, DC, Phoenix, Arizona, and Los Angeles, California, for the years 1986 to 1989. Offense rates in housing developments were compared to rates in nearby areas of private housing as well as to city-wide rates. In addition, the extent of law enforcement activity in housing developments as represented by arrests was considered and compared to arrest levels in other areas. This process allowed both intra-city and inter-city comparisons to be made. Variables cover study site, origin of data, year of event, offense codes, and location of event. Los Angeles files also include police division.
Two major changes to the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) county-level files were implemented beginning with the 1994 data. A new imputation algorithm to adjust for incomplete reporting by individual law enforcement jurisdictions was adopted. Within each county, data from agencies reporting 3 to 11 months of information were weighted to yield 12-month equivalents. Data for agencies reporting less than 3 months of data were replaced with data estimated by rates calculated from agencies reporting 12 months of data located in the agency's geographic stratum within its state. Secondly, a new Coverage Indicator was created to provide users with a diagnostic measure of aggregated data quality in a particular county. Data from agencies reporting only statewide figures were allocated to the counties in the state in proportion to each county's share of the state population.In the arrest files (Parts 1-3 and 5-7), data were estimated for agencies reporting 0 months based on the procedures mentioned above. However, due to the structure of the data received from the FBI, estimations could not be produced for agencies reporting 0 months in the crimes reported files (Parts 4 and 8). Offense data for agencies reporting 1 or 2 months are estimated using the above procedures. Users are encouraged to refer to the codebook for more information.No arrest data were provided for Washington, DC, and Florida. Limited arrest data were available for Illinois and Kentucky. Limited offense data were available for Illinois, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, and South Dakota.UCR program staff at the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) were consulted in developing the new adjustment procedures. However, these UCR county-level files are not official FBI UCR releases and are being provided for research purposes only. Users with questions regarding these UCR county-level data files can contact the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data at ICPSR.Users should note that there are no records in the data for the borough of Denali, Alaska (FIPS code 02068) in any of the collections of the Uniform Crime Reporting Program Data [United States]: County-Level Detailed Arrest and Offense Data from 1990 to 2003. The borough of Denali, Alaska (FIPS code 02068) was created from part of the Yukon-Koyukuk Census Area (FIPS code 02290) an unpopulated part of the Southeast Fairbanks Census Area (FIPS code 02240) effective December 7, 1990. Since no agency records for either arrests or crimes reported from Denali were present in any of the original FBI files, no data for the borough of Denali, Alaska appear in any the ICPSR collections for these years. This data collection contains county-level counts of arrests and offenses for Part I offenses (murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, auto theft, and arson) and counts of arrests for Part II offenses (forgery, fraud, embezzlement, vandalism, weapons violations, sex offenses, drug and alcohol abuse violations, gambling, vagrancy, curfew violations, and runaways). Datasets: DS0: Study-Level Files DS1: Arrests, All Ages DS2: Arrests, Adult DS3: Arrests, Juveniles DS4: Crimes Reported DS5: Allocated Statewide Data for Arrests, All Ages DS6: Allocated Statewide Data for Arrests, Adults DS7: Allocated Statewide Data for Arrests, Juveniles DS8: Allocated Statewide Data for Crimes Reported County law enforcement agencies in the United States.
A web map used for the Police Service Area Details web application.In addition to Police Districts, every resident lives in a Police Service Area (PSA), and every PSA has a team of police officers and officials assigned to it. Residents should get to know their PSA team members and learn how to work with them to fight crime and disorder in their neighborhoods. Each police district has between seven and nine PSAs. There are a total of 56 PSAs in the District of Columbia.Printable PDF versions of each district map are available on the district pages. Residents and visitors may also access the PSA Finder to easily locate a PSA and other resources within a geographic area. Just enter an address or place name and click the magnifying glass to search, or just click on the map. The results will provide the geopolitical and public safety information for the address; it will also display a map of the nearest police station(s).Each Police Service Area generally holds meetings once a month. To learn more about the meeting time and location in your PSA, please contact your Community Outreach Coordinator. To reach a coordinator, choose your police district from the list below. The coordinators are included as part of each district's Roster.Visit https://mpdc.dc.gov for more information.
https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/24162/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/24162/terms
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were terminated by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2003. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
V8 release notes: Adds 2017 data.V7 release notes: Removes SPSS (.sav) and Excel (.csv) files. Changes column names for clearances to "tot_clr_..." to make explicit that this is all clearances, not just adult clearances. The formatting of the monthly data has changed from wide to long. This means that each agency-month has a single row. The old data had each agency being a single row with each month-crime (e.g. jan_act_murder) being a column. Now there will just be a single column for each crime (e.g. act_murder) and the month can be identified in the month column. Adds a month column and a date column. This date column is always set to the first of the month. It is NOT the date that a crime occurred or was reported. It is only there to make it easier to create time-series graphs that require a date input. Removes all card columns. This was done to reduce file size. Reorders crime columns to the order of assaults/deaths of officers, actual crimes, total clearance, clearance under age 18, unfounded. Within each category the columns are alphabetized.Monthly data and yearly data are now in different zip folders to download.V6 release notes: Fix bug where Philadelphia Police Department had incorrect FIPS county code. V5 release notes: Changes the word "larceny" to "theft" in column names - eg. from "act_larceny" to "act_theft."Fixes bug where state abbrebation was NA for Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Canal Zone.Fixes bug where officers_killed_by_accident was not appearing in yearly data. Note that 1979 does not have any officers killed (by felony or accident) or officers assaulted data.Adds aggravated assault columns to the monthly data. Aggravated assault is the sum of all assaults other than simple assault (assaults using gun, knife, hand/feet, and other weapon). Note that summing all crime columns to get a total crime count will double count aggravated assault as it is already the sum of existing columns. Reorder columns to put all month descriptors (e.g. "jan_month_included", "jan_card_1_type") before any crime data.Due to extremely irregular data in the unfounded columns for New Orleans (ORI = LANPD00) for years 2014-2016, I have change all unfounded column data for New Orleans for these years to NA. As an example, New Orleans reported about 45,000 unfounded total burglaries in 2016 (the 3rd highest they ever reported). This is 18 times largest than the number of actual total burglaries they reported that year (2,561) and nearly 8 times larger than the next largest reported unfounded total burglaries in any agency or year. Prior to 2014 there were no more than 10 unfounded total burglaries reported in New Orleans in any year. There were 10 obvious data entry errors in officers killed by felony/accident that I changed to NA.In 1974 the agency "Boston" (ORI = MA01301) reported 23 officers killed by accident during November.In 1978 the agency "Pittsburgh" (ORI = PAPPD00) reported 576 officers killed by accident during March.In 1978 the agency "Bronx Transit Authority" (ORI = NY06240) reported 56 officers killed by accident during April.In 1978 the agency "Bronx Transit Authority" (ORI = NY06240) reported 56 officers killed by accident during June.In 1978 the agency "Bronx Transit Authority" (ORI = NY06240) reported 56 officers killed by felony during April.In 1978 the agency "Bronx Transit Authority" (ORI = NY06240) reported 56 officers killed by felony during June.In 1978 the agency "Queens Transit Authority" (ORI = NY04040) reported 56 officers killed by accident during May.In 1978 the agency "Queens Transit Authority" (ORI = NY04040) reported 56 officers killed by felony during May.In 1996 the agency "Ruston" in Louisiana (ORI = LA03102) reported 30 officers killed by felony during September.In 1997 the agency "Washington University" in Missouri (ORI = MO0950E) reported 26 officers killed by felony during March.V4 release notes: Merges data with LEAIC data to add FIPS codes, census codes, agency type variables, and ORI9 variable.Makes all column names lowercase.Change some variable namesMakes values in character columns lowercase.Adds months_reported variable to yearly data.Combines monthly and yearly files into a single zip file (per data type).V3 release notes: fixes a bug in Version 2 where 1993 data did not properly deal with missing values, leading to enormous counts of crime being report
Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
License information was derived automatically
Crime Mapper is an online application that provides the geographic distribution of recorded crime across South Australia. Two units of measurement are reported: 1. Number of offences - provides a count of all offences listed on all incident reports recorded by South Australia Police . 2. Rate per 1,000 estimated resident population - provides the number of offences as a rate per 1,000 population residing in each given location. Offences are categorised as follows: • Offences against the person (homicide; major assault; other); • Sexual offences (rape; indecent assault; unlawful sexual intercourse; other); • Robbery and extortion offences (armed robbery; unarmed robbery; extortion); • Offences against property (serious criminal trespass/break and enter; fraud and misappropriation; receiving/illegal possession of stolen goods; larceny/illegal use of a motor vehicle; other larceny; larceny from shops; larceny from a motor vehicle; arson/explosives; property damage and environmental offences); • Offences against good order; • Drug offences (possess/use drugs; sell/trade drugs; produce/manufacture drugs; possess implement for drug use; other); • Driving offences (driving under the influence of alcohol/drugs; dangerous driving; driving licence offences; traffic offences; motor vehicle registration offences; other); or • Other offences. When using Crime Mapper it is important to understand that the statistics it contains may not provide an accurate measure of the true prevalence or incidence of crime in a community. Crime Mapper statistics represent only those offences reported to police or which come to the attention of police. They can, therefore, be influenced by a number of factors, including victim reporting rates, the identification or detection of offences by police (in the case of ‘victimless’ crimes) and police interpretation and decision as to whether a crime has occurred. In addition, Crime Mapper does not include offences that are dealt with by way of expiation (e.g., speeding, littering, etc.). Please also see explanatory notes: http://www.ocsar.sa.gov.au/about2.html
Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
License information was derived automatically
Crime Mapper is an online application that provides the geographic distribution of recorded crime across South Australia. Two units of measurement are reported: 1. Number of offences - provides a count of all offences listed on all incident reports recorded by South Australia Police . 2. Rate per 1,000 estimated resident population - provides the number of offences as a rate per 1,000 population residing in each given location. Offences are categorised as follows: • Offences against the person (homicide; major assault; other); • Sexual offences (rape; indecent assault; unlawful sexual intercourse; other); • Robbery and extortion offences (armed robbery; unarmed robbery; extortion); • Offences against property (serious criminal trespass/break and enter; fraud and misappropriation; receiving/illegal possession of stolen goods; larceny/illegal use of a motor vehicle; other larceny; larceny from shops; larceny from a motor vehicle; arson/explosives; property damage and environmental offences); • Offences against good order; • Drug offences (possess/use drugs; sell/trade drugs; produce/manufacture drugs; possess implement for drug use; other); • Driving offences (driving under the influence of alcohol/drugs; dangerous driving; driving licence offences; traffic offences; motor vehicle registration offences; other); or • Other offences. When using Crime Mapper it is important to understand that the statistics it contains may not provide an accurate measure of the true prevalence or incidence of crime in a community. Crime Mapper statistics represent only those offences reported to police or which come to the attention of police. They can, therefore, be influenced by a number of factors, including victim reporting rates, the identification or detection of offences by police (in the case of ‘victimless’ crimes) and police interpretation and decision as to whether a crime has occurred. In addition, Crime Mapper does not include offences that are dealt with by way of expiation (e.g., speeding, littering, etc.). Please also see explanatory notes: http://www.ocsar.sa.gov.au/about2.html
This collection presents survey data from 12 cities in the United States regarding criminal victimization, perceptions of community safety, and satisfaction with local police. Participating cities included Chicago, IL, Kansas City, MO, Knoxville, TN, Los Angeles, CA, Madison, WI, New York, NY, San Diego, CA, Savannah, GA, Spokane, WA, Springfield, MA, Tucson, AZ, and Washington, DC. The survey used the current National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) questionnaire with a series of supplemental questions measuring the attitudes in each city. Respondents were asked about incidents that occurred within the past 12 months. Information on the following crimes was collected: violent crimes of rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault, personal crimes of theft, and household crimes of burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. Part 1, Household-Level Data, covers the number of household respondents, their ages, type of housing, size of residence, number of telephone lines and numbers, and language spoken in the household. Part 2, Person-Level Data, includes information on respondents' sex, relationship to householder, age, marital status, education, race, time spent in the housing unit, personal crime and victimization experiences, perceptions of neighborhood crime, job and professional demographics, and experience and satisfaction with local police. Variables in Part 3, Incident-Level Data, concern the details of crimes in which the respondents were involved, and the police response to the crimes.
https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/24082/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/24082/terms
The data contain records of suspects in federal criminal matters concluded by United States attorneys or United States magistrates during fiscal year 1999. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central System file. Records include suspects in criminal matters, and are limited to suspects whose matters were not declined immediately by the United States attorneys. According to the EOUSA, the United States attorneys conduct approximately 95 percent of the prosecutions handled by the Department of Justice. The Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, Tables 1.2-1.5. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
V6 release notes: Fix bug where Philadelphia Police Department had incorrect FIPS county code. V5 release notes: Changes the word "larceny" to "theft" in column names - eg. from "act_larceny" to "act_theft."Fixes bug where state abbrebation was NA for Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Canal Zone.Fixes bug where officers_killed_by_accident was not appearing in yearly data. Note that 1979 does not have any officers killed (by felony or accident) or officers assaulted data.Adds aggravated assault columns to the monthly data. Aggravated assault is the sum of all assaults other than simple assault (assaults using gun, knife, hand/feet, and other weapon). Note that summing all crime columns to get a total crime count will double count aggravated assault as it is already the sum of existing columns. Reorder columns to put all month descriptors (e.g. "jan_month_included", "jan_card_1_type") before any crime data.Due to extremely irregular data in the unfounded columns for New Orleans (ORI = LANPD00) for years 2014-2016, I have change all unfounded column data for New Orleans for these years to NA. As an example, New Orleans reported about 45,000 unfounded total burglaries in 2016 (the 3rd highest they ever reported). This is 18 times largest than the number of actual total burglaries they reported that year (2,561) and nearly 8 times larger than the next largest reported unfounded total burglaries in any agency or year. Prior to 2014 there were no more than 10 unfounded total burglaries reported in New Orleans in any year. There were 10 obvious data entry errors in officers killed by felony/accident that I changed to NA.In 1974 the agency "Boston" (ORI = MA01301) reported 23 officers killed by accident during November.In 1978 the agency "Pittsburgh" (ORI = PAPPD00) reported 576 officers killed by accident during March.In 1978 the agency "Bronx Transit Authority" (ORI = NY06240) reported 56 officers killed by accident during April.In 1978 the agency "Bronx Transit Authority" (ORI = NY06240) reported 56 officers killed by accident during June.In 1978 the agency "Bronx Transit Authority" (ORI = NY06240) reported 56 officers killed by felony during April.In 1978 the agency "Bronx Transit Authority" (ORI = NY06240) reported 56 officers killed by felony during June.In 1978 the agency "Queens Transit Authority" (ORI = NY04040) reported 56 officers killed by accident during May.In 1978 the agency "Queens Transit Authority" (ORI = NY04040) reported 56 officers killed by felony during May.In 1996 the agency "Ruston" in Louisiana (ORI = LA03102) reported 30 officers killed by felony during September.In 1997 the agency "Washington University" in Missouri (ORI = MO0950E) reported 26 officers killed by felony during March.V4 release notes: Merges data with LEAIC data to add FIPS codes, census codes, agency type variables, and ORI9 variable.Makes all column names lowercase.Change some variable namesMakes values in character columns lowercase.Adds months_reported variable to yearly data.Combines monthly and yearly files into a single zip file (per data type).V3 release notes: fixes a bug in Version 2 where 1993 data did not properly deal with missing values, leading to enormous counts of crime being reported. Summary: This is a collection of Offenses Known and Clearances By Arrest data from 1960 to 2016. Each zip file contains monthly and yearly data files. The monthly files contain one data file per year (57 total, 1960-2016) as well as a codebook for each year. These files have been read into R using the ASCII and setup files from ICPSR (or from the FBI for 2016 data) using the package asciiSetupReader. The end of the zip folder's name says what data type (R, SPSS, SAS, Microsoft Excel CSV, Stata) the data is in. The files are lightly cleaned. What this means specifically is that column names and value labels are standardized. In the original data column names were different between years (e.g. the December burglaries cleared column is "DEC_TOT_CLR_BRGLRY_TOT" in 1975 and "DEC_TOT_CLR_BURG_TOTAL" in 1977). The data here have standardized columns so you can compare between years and combine years together. The same thing is done for values inside of columns. For example, the state column gave state names in some years, abbreviations in others. For the code uses to clean and read the data, please see my GitHub file h
An interactive public crime mapping application providing DC residents and visitors easy-to-understand data visualizations of crime locations, types and trends across all eight wards. Crime Cards was created by the DC Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO). Special thanks to the community members who participated in reviews with MPD Officers and IT staff, and those who joined us for the #SaferStrongerSmarterDC roundtable design review. All statistics presented in Crime Cards are based on preliminary DC Index crime data reported from 2009 to midnight of today’s date. They are compiled based on the date the offense was reported (Report Date) to MPD. The application displays two main crime categories: Violent Crime and Property Crime. Violent Crimes include homicide, sex abuse, assault with a dangerous weapon (ADW), and robbery. Violent crimes can be further searched by the weapon used. Property Crimes include burglary, motor vehicle theft, theft from vehicle, theft (other), and arson.CrimeCards collaboration between the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), the Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO), and community members who participated at the #SafterStrongerSmarterDC roundtable design review.