This study was undertaken to enable cross-community analysis of gang trends in all areas of the United States. It was also designed to provide a comparative analysis of social, economic, and demographic differences among non-metropolitan jurisdictions in which gangs were reported to have been persistent problems, those in which gangs had been more transitory, and those that reported no gang problems. Data were collected from four separate sources and then merged into a single dataset using the county Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) code as the attribute of common identification. The data sources included: (1) local police agency responses to three waves (1996, 1997, and 1998) of the National Youth Gang Survey (NYGS), (2) rural-urban classification and county-level measures of primary economic activity from the Economic Research Service (ERS) of the United States Department of Agriculture, (3) county-level economic and demographic data from the County and City Data Book, 1994, and from USA Counties, 1998, produced by the United States Department of Commerce, and (4) county-level data on access to interstate highways provided by Tom Ricketts and Randy Randolph of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Variables include the FIPS codes for state, county, county subdivision, and sub-county, population in the agency jurisdiction, type of jurisdiction, and whether the county was dependent on farming, mining, manufacturing, or government. Other variables categorizing counties include retirement destination, federal lands, commuting, persistent poverty, and transfer payments. The year gang problems began in that jurisdiction, number of youth groups, number of active gangs, number of active gang members, percent of gang members who migrated, and the number of gangs in 1996, 1997, and 1998 are also available. Rounding out the variables are unemployment rates, median household income, percent of persons in county below poverty level, percent of family households that were one-parent households, percent of housing units in the county that were vacant, had no telephone, or were renter-occupied, resident population of the county in 1990 and 1997, change in unemployment rates, land area of county, percent of persons in the county speaking Spanish at home, and whether an interstate highway intersected the county.

The study assesses the extent of commonalities between individuals who become involved in violent extremist groups and criminal gangs, and the processes by which individuals engage in each group. Following this comparison, the extent to which the empirical results support the potential for anti-gang programs to bolster the resilience of communities against violent extremism and other forms of crime is assessed. Quantitative assessment was conducted by comparing individuals included in the Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States (PIRUS) dataset with a subset of individuals drawn from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97) along a number of demographic, social, and socioeconomic characteristics. Supplementary survey data was also collected from 45 former and current gang members in the United States concurrently with long-form interviews, covering a range of variables including background characteristics, demographic information, and attitudes among the respondents.

The goal of this study was to provide useful data on how street gang crime patterns (by amount and type of offense) relate to common patterns of street gang structure, thus providing focused, data-based guidelines for gang control and intervention. The data collection consists of two components: (1) descriptions of cities' gang activities taken from an earlier study of gang migration in 1992, IMPACT OF GANG MIGRATION: EFFECTIVE RESPONSES BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IN THE UNITED STATES, 1992 (ICPSR 2570), and (2) gang structure data from 1995 interviews with police agencies in a sample of the same cities that responded to the 1992 survey. Information taken from the 1992 study includes the year of gang emergence in the city, numbers of active gangs and gang members, ethnic distribution of gang members, numbers of gang homicides and "drive-bys" in 1991, state in which the city is located, and population of the city. Information from the 1995 gang structures survey provides detail on the ethnic distributions of gangs, whether a predominant gang structure was present, each gang structure's typical size, and the total number of each of the five gang structures identified by the principal investigators -- chronic traditional, emergent traditional, emergent integrated, expanded integrated, and specialty integrated. City crime information was collected on the spread of arrests, number of serious arrests, volume and specialization of crime, arrest profile codes and history, uniform crime rate compared to city population, ratio of serious arrests to total arrests, and ratio of arrests to city population.

Victims of gang-related homicides (total number of homicide victims; number of homicide victims - unknown gang-relation; number of homicide victims - known gang relation; number of gang-related homicide victims; percentage of gang-related homicide victims; rate (per 100,000 population) of gang-related homicide victims), Canada and regions, 1999 to 2024.

This study was the first attempt to investigate gang migration systematically and on a national level. The primary objectives of the study were (1) to identify the scope of gang migration nationally, (2) to describe the nature of gang migration, (3) to assess the impact of gang migration on destination cities, and (4) to describe the current law enforcement responses to the migration of gangs and identify those that appeared to be most effective for various types of migration. Two phases of data collection were used. The major objective of the initial phase was to identify cities that had experienced gang migration (Part 1). This was accomplished by distributing a brief mail questionnaire in 1992 to law enforcement agencies in cities identified as potential gang or gang migration sites. The second major phase of data collection involved in-depth telephone interviews with law enforcement officers in cities that had experienced gang migration in order to develop descriptions of the nature of migration and police responses to it (Part 2). For Part 1, information was collected on the year migration started, number of migrants in the past year, factors that deter gang migration, number of gang members, names of gangs, ethnic distribution of gang members and their drug market involvement, number of gang homicides, number of 1991 gang "drive-bys", and if gangs or narcotics were specified in the respondent's assignment. For Part 2, information was collected on the demographics of gang members, the ethnic percentage of drug gang members and their involvement in distributing specific drugs, and the influence of gang migrants on local gang and crime situations in terms of types and methods of crime, drug distribution activities, technology/equipment used, and targets of crime. Information on patterns of gang migration, including motivations to migrate, drug gang migration, and volume of migration, was also collected. Local responses to gang migration covered information sources, department policies relative to migration, gang specialization in department, approaches taken by the department, and information exchanges and coordination among local, state, and federal agencies.

This study constituted a systematic national assessment of local law enforcement perceptions of the distribution of gang and gang-like problems in large cities in the United States, law enforcement reactions to gangs, and their policies toward gang problems. One purpose of the study was to examine changes in law enforcement perceptions of the U.S. gang problem that have occurred since NATIONAL YOUTH GANG INTERVENTION AND SUPPRESSION SURVEY, 1980-1987 (ICPSR 9792) was undertaken. The overall goal was to obtain as "conservative" as possible an estimate of the magnitude of the gang problem in the United States as reflected by the official reaction, record-keeping, and reporting of local law enforcement agencies. The agencies were asked to refer the interviewer to the individual representative of the agency who could provide the most information about the agency's processing of information on gangs and other youth-based groups engaged in criminal activity. To obtain each law enforcement agency's official, not personal, perspective on gang problems, anonymity was intentionally avoided. Each respondent was first asked whether the respondent's agency officially identified a "gang problem" within their jurisdiction. Gangs were defined for this study as groups involving youths engaging in criminal activity. Respondents were then asked if their department officially recognized the presence of other kinds of organized groups that engaged in criminal activity and involved youths and that might be identified by their department as crews, posses, or some other designation. Based on affirmative answers to questions on the officially recognized presence of gangs and the kinds of record-keeping employed by their departments, agencies were sent customized questionnaire packets asking for specifics on only those aspects of the gang problem that their representative had reported the agency kept information on. Variables include city name, state, ZIP code, whether the city participated in National Youth Gang Intervention and Suppression Survey, 1980-1987, and, if so, if the city reported a gang problem. Data on gangs include the number of homicides and other violent, property, drug-related, and vice offenses attributed to youth gangs and female gangs, total number of gang incidents, gangs, gang members, female gang members, and gangs comprised only of females for 1991, number of juvenile gang-related incidents and adult gang-related incidents in 1991, number of drive-by shootings involving gang members or female gang members in 1991, and numbers or percent estimates of gang members by ethnic groups for 1990 and 1991. Respondents also indicated whether various strategies for combating gang problems had been attempted by the department, and if so, how effective each of the crime prevention measures were.

The goal of this study was to test specific hypotheses illustrating the relationships among serious victimization experiences, the mental health effects of victimization, substance abuse/use, and delinquent behavior in adolescents. The study assessed familial and nonfamilial types of violence. It was designed as a telephone survey of American youth aged 12-17 living in United States households and residing with a parent or guardian. One parent or guardian in each household was interviewed briefly to establish rapport, secure permission to interview the targeted adolescent, and to ensure the collection of comparative data to examine potential nonresponse bias from households without adolescent participation. All interviews with both parents and adolescents were conducted using Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) technology. From the surveys of parents and adolescents, the principal investigators created one data file by attaching the data from the parents to the records of their respective adolescents. Adolescents were asked whether violence and drug abuse were problems in their schools and communities and what types of violence they had personally witnessed. They were also asked about other stressful events in their lives, such as the loss of a family member, divorce, unemployment, moving to a new home or school, serious illness or injury, and natural disaster. Questions regarding history of sexual assault, physical assault, and harsh physical discipline elicited a description of the event and perpetrator, extent of injuries, age at abuse, whether alcohol or drugs were involved, and who was informed of the incident. Information was also gathered on the delinquent behavior of respondents and their friends, including destruction of property, assault, theft, sexual assault, and gang activity. Other questions covered history of personal and family substance use and mental health indicators, such as major depression, post-traumatic stress disorders, weight changes, sleeping disorders, and problems concentrating. Demographic information was gathered from the adolescents on age, race, gender, number of people living in household, and grade in school. Parents were asked whether they were concerned about violent crime, affordable child care, drug abuse, educational quality, gangs, and the safety of their children at school. In addition, they were questioned about their own victimization experiences and whether they discussed personal safety issues with their children. Parents also supplied demographic information on gender, marital status, number of children, employment status, education, race, and income.