The National Police Research Platform, Phase 2 [United States], 2013-2015 Archival Version

DOI

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.The purpose of the study was to implement a "platform-based" methodology for collecting data about police organizations and the communities they serve with the goals of generating in-depth standardized information about police organizations, personnel and practices and to help move policing in the direction of evidence-based "learning-organizations" by providing judicious feedback to police agencies and policy makers. The research team conducted three web-based Law Enforcement Organizations (LEO) surveys of sworn and civilian law enforcement employees (LEO Survey A Data, n=22,765; LEO Survey B Data, n=15,825; and LEO Survey C Data, n=16,483). The sample was drawn from the 2007 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) database. Agencies with 100 to 3,000 sworn police personnel were eligible for participation. To collect data for the Police-Community Interaction (PCI) survey (PCI Data, n=16,659), each week department employees extracted names and addresses of persons who had recent contact with a police officer because of a reported crime incident, traffic accident or traffic stop. Typically, the surveys were completed within two to four weeks of the encounter. The purpose of the study was to implement a "platform-based" methodology for collecting data about police organizations and the communities they serve with the goals of generating in-depth standardized information about police organizations, personnel and practices and to help move policing in the direction of evidence-based "learning-organizations" by providing judicious feedback to police agencies and policy makers. In Phase II of the National Police Research Platform (NPRP) project, the research team conducted three Law Enforcement Organizations (LEO) surveys of sworn and civilian law enforcement employees (LEO Survey A Data, n=22,765; LEO Survey B Data, n=15,825; and LEO Survey C Data, n=16,483). Web surveys were administered using Qualtrics software. All sworn and civilian employees were invited by email to participate. Occasional reminder emails were sent to employees by their agency heads during the survey field period, which lasted about 30 days.To collect data for the Police-Community Interaction (PCI) survey (PCI Data, n=16,659), each week department employees extracted names and addresses of persons who had recent contact with a police officer because of a reported crime incident, traffic accident or traffic stop. The chief of police or sheriff then sent a letter to those individuals encouraging them to evaluate their encounter with the officer, either online or via automated telephone response. Typically, the surveys were completed within two to four weeks of the encounter. Law Enforcement Organizations Survey A (LEO Survey A Data, 147 variables, n=22,765) includes variables on job satisfaction, supervision and work culture. Respondent demographic variables include age, gender, race, formal education, and job assignment.Law Enforcement Organizations Survey B (LEO Survey B Data, 128 variables, n=15,825) includes variables on procedural justice approaches used by the agency, supervision, stress and well-being, and interaction with the community. Respondent demographic variables include age, gender, race, formal education, and military service.Law Enforcement Organizations Survey C (LEO Survey C Data, 188 variables n=16,483) includes variables on communication and innovation, supervision, workplace culture, job satisfaction and stress, health and well-being. Respondent demographic variables include age, gender, race, formal education, and job assignment.The Police-Community Interaction Survey (PCI Data, 73 variables, n=16,659) includes demographic variables (age, race, gender, and homeownership), variables asking about the recent contact the respondent had with the police including type of incident, the respondent's role in the incident, the relationship between the respondent and the victim, and if an arrest was made. Additional variables asked if the respondent felt the officer was polite, fair, objective, if the officer seemed concerned about the respondent's feeling during the incident, if the officer answered any questions the respondent had or explained what would happen next, and if the respondent felt the officer acted professionally. None Presence of Common Scales: None Response Rates: For the Law Enforcement Organizations (LEO) surveys, a total of 53,670 surveys were collected (11,948 civilian and 41,722 sworn) across the three waves of surveys. The mean agency response rate was 37.1 percent for sworn personnel and 36.2 percent for civilians. The first wave of the survey saw the highest participation; subsequent waves had slightly lower response rates.Response rates for the Police-Community Interaction (PCI) survey varied by agency. The mean response rate for agencies with 180 or fewer sworn employees was 7.75 percent, while the mean response rate for agencies with 181 to 500 sworn employees was 6.27 percent and the mean response rate for agencies with more than 500 sworn employees was 4.78 percent. Across all categories, the mean response rate was 6.29 percent. The universe for the Law Enforcement Organizations (LEO) surveys was all law enforcement agencies in the United States with between 100 and 3,000 sworn personnel between 2013 and 2015. The universe for the Police-Community Interaction (PCI) survey was any person in the United States who had contact with a police officer from an enforcement agency in the LEO sample because of a reported crime incident, traffic accident or traffic stop between 2013 and 2014. Smallest Geographic Unit: jurisdiction For the Law Enforcement Organizations (LEO) surveys, participating agencies were recruited from a random sample of police and sheriff's offices. The sample was drawn from the 2007 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) database. Agencies with 100 to 3,000 sworn police personnel were eligible for participation. Organizations were sampled to fill strata defined by region of the country and agency size. One hundred and one agencies participated in the LEO A (LEO Survey A Data, n= 22,765) survey. Of these same agencies, 98 participated in the LEO B (LEO Survey B Data, n=15,825) survey approximately two months later, and 89 participated in the LEO C (LEO Survey C Data, n=16,483) survey approximately one year later. A total of 55,073 surveys were collected (11,875 civilian and 43,198 sworn) across the three waves of surveys.The Police-Community Interaction (PCI) survey (PCI Data, n= 16,659) was implemented on a national scale with 54 of the 100 Platform agencies. Of these, 47 were from the random sample and seven were from the nonrandom sample. The participating agencies varied in size: 19 agencies had 180 or fewer sworn employees, 16 had between 181 and 500 sworn employees and 18 had 501 or more sworn employees. Funding insitution(s): United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice (2008-DN-BX-0005). telephone audio computer-assisted self interview (TACASI), web-based surveyThese data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.Phase I of the National Police Research Platform project is available as ICPSR 34518 (http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34518v1).

Identifier
DOI http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.3886/ICPSR36497
Related Identifier DOI: 10.3886/ICPSR36497.v1
Metadata Access https://www.da-ra.de/oaip/oai?verb=GetRecord&metadataPrefix=oai_dc&identifier=oai:oai.da-ra.de:520801
Provenance
Creator Cordner, Gary;Skogan, Wesley G;McCarty, William;Mastrofski, Stephen D;Alderden, Megan;Rosenbaum, Dennis P;Fridell, Lorie;McDevitt, Jack;Hartnett, Susan M
Publisher ICPSR - Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research
Contributor United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice
Publication Year 2016
Rights Delivery;One or more files in this study are not available for download due to special restrictions; consult the study documentation to learn more on how to obtain the data.
Contact ICPSR - Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research
Representation
Language English
Resource Type Dataset;survey data
Coverage
Discipline Not stated
Spatial Coverage {"United States","2013-07 - 2013-11","Time period: 2013-07--2013-11","2013-09 - 2014-01","Time period: 2013-09--2014-01","2014-10 - 2015-02","Time period: 2014-10--2015-02","2013 - 2014","Time period: 2013--2014","2013-07 - 2013-11","Collection date: 2013-07--2013-11","2013-09 - 2014-01","Collection date: 2013-09--2014-01","2014-10 - 2015-02","Collection date: 2014-10--2015-02","2013 - 2014","Collection date: 2013--2014"}
Temporal Coverage {"United States","2013-07 - 2013-11","Time period: 2013-07--2013-11","2013-09 - 2014-01","Time period: 2013-09--2014-01","2014-10 - 2015-02","Time period: 2014-10--2015-02","2013 - 2014","Time period: 2013--2014","2013-07 - 2013-11","Collection date: 2013-07--2013-11","2013-09 - 2014-01","Collection date: 2013-09--2014-01","2014-10 - 2015-02","Collection date: 2014-10--2015-02","2013 - 2014","Collection date: 2013--2014"}