Search Results

This study addresses the underreporting of minor victim sex trafficking, by describing the number and characteristics of children with allegations of sex or labor trafficking investigated by Florida's Department of Children and Families (DCF). Analyses conducted within the grant include descriptive work on how children with investigated allegations of human trafficking differ from others in the child welfare population, human trafficking allegations among children with missing from care episodes, and labor trafficking of children. Analyses also use mixture models to describe risk profiles associated with trafficking victimization and the under-identification of trafficking.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. This study compared the adult criminal justice and child welfare system outcomes of four pathways through the juvenile justice system - Traditional Probation, Intensive Probation, Specialty Court Docket (Crossroads Program), and commitment to state youth correction services (Department of Youth Services). The study compared the effectiveness of a continuum of services and supervision in improving public safety, including re-arrest and re-incarceration, and in improving outcomes in engagement with child welfare as parents, including child welfare complaints and dispositions. The core research question is: "what is the relative effectiveness of four different juvenile justice interventions on improving public safety and child welfare outcomes?" The study population is all youths (n=2581) who entered the juvenile court from 2004-2008. It then included 7-10 years of follow-up in the adult justice and child welfare systems for all youths. The four interventions are on a continuum of intensity of services and supervision with Traditional Probation having the fewest services followed by Intensive Probation, Crossroads, and Division of Youth Services commitment. The study's deposits include 14 SPSS data files: arrest_final.sav CW_Custody_Adult_final.sav CW_Custody_child_final.sav CW_Intakes_Adult_final.sav CW_Intakes_child_final.sav CW_Placements_adult_final.sav CW_Placements_child_final.sav General_final.sav Jail_final.sav JC_charges_final.sav JC_detention_final.sav JC_disposition_final.sav JC_Gal_final.sav prison_final.sav

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. The study was designed to begin to build a knowledge base to address the challenges of crossover youth in Maryland - those involved at some point in their lives in the dependency and delinquency systems. Employing a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods, the research focused on the five most populous jurisdictions in the state, Baltimore City, and Anne Arundel, Montgomery, Prince George's, and Baltimore Counties. This collection includes 4 SPSS data files: CINA BCity_Archive_final_Corrected-ICPSR.sav (n=400; 64 variables) CY Stakeholder Survey_Archive_final_Corrected_Update2016-ICPSR.sav (n=164; 302 variables) Delinquency_Risk_Archive_final_Corrected_Update2016-ICPSR.sav (n=1,127; 62 variables) Needs_Archive_final-ICPSR.sav (n=700; 67 variables) Data from interviews with 26 officials in state and local agencies to collect information on policies and practices affecting crossover youth in Maryland are not available as part of this collection.

The study takes advantage of a natural experiment that randomly provides Family Unification Program (a Housing and Urban Development initiative that provides Housing Choice Vouchers to families whose inadequate housing risks out-of-home placement) services to intact families (N=192) who are compared to a child welfare services-as-usual control group (N=192). Oversampling occurs in both conditions to account for voucher uptake failure and attrition. The study obtains two baseline assessments before housing services and then re-assess at 6-, 12-, and 24-months post-baseline for a total of five time points. Caregivers and their children are administered a panel survey. Administrative data from multiple services systems linked at the individual and family level are integrated to allow comparisons to the population of child welfare-involved families in Chicago (N=700).

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. This project utilized three strategies to investigate the impact of incarceration on families. First, a statewide integrated data system was used to examine impacts of incarceration in a novel way, using administrative data from corrections, juvenile justice, mental health, social services, substance use services, healthcare, and education. Second, researchers linked multi-agency data to address specific research questions regarding impact of incarceration on families, including impact of incarceration on family physical and mental health, children's involvement with the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, family economic status, and school performance. Third, researchers conducted focus groups and family interviews with 77 inmates and 21 inmate family members sampled from three correctional facilities. Researchers identified qualitative themes regarding impact of incarceration in the lives of inmates and their families. Only data from the focus groups is included in this collection. The collection includes two SPSS data files: "Inmate_Demographic_Data.sav" with 15 variables and 77 cases and "Family_Demographic_Data.sav" with 19 variables and 21 cases. The actual focus group interviews with inmates and their family members are not available as part of this collection at this time. Administrative data from the South Carolina Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office was not made available for archiving. Users interested in obtaining these data should consult the accompanying documentation.

In 2010, the United States Congress authorized the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program, which started a major expansion of evidence-based home visiting programs for families living in at-risk communities. MIECHV is administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) in collaboration with the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The authorizing legislation required an evaluation of the program, which became the Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation (MIHOPE). The evaluation is being conducted for HHS by MDRC with James Bell Associates, Johns Hopkins University, Mathematica, the University of Georgia, and Columbia University. MIHOPE was designed to learn whether families benefit from MIECHV-funded early childhood home visiting programs, and if so, how. The study included the four evidence-based models that 10 or more states chose in their initial MIECHV plans in fiscal year 2010-2011: Early Head Start - Home-based option, Healthy Families America, Nurse-Family Partnership, and Parents as Teachers. MIHOPE was the first study to include all of these four evidence-based models. To provide rigorous evidence on the MIECHV-funded programs' effects, the study randomly assigned more than 4,200 families to receive either MIECHV-funded home visiting or information on community services. As is the standard method in studies that use random assignment, the primary analytical strategy in MIHOPE was to compare the outcomes of the entire program group with those of the entire control group. As per the authorizing legislation, the study measured early effects on family and child outcomes in the areas listed below, with the exception of school readiness and academic achievement (which were not included at this point because children were too young to measure those outcomes): Prenatal, maternal, and newborn health Child health and development, including child maltreatment Parenting skills School readiness and child academic achievement Crime and domestic violence Family economic self-sufficiency Referrals and service coordination Videos and Video Metadata: Two sets of videos are included in the MIHOPE restricted access files. They include: Mother-home visitor interactions at 387 home visits and Interactions between child and mother using the "Three Bags" and "Clean-Up" tasks with 2,832 families. The mother-home visitor interaction videos were recorded only for treatment group families at two points in time: the first was, on average, about eight weeks after the family's first home visit and the second was about eight months after the family's first home visit. Overall, 264 families are included in the mother-home visitor interaction videos in total, with 123 of these families recorded at both points in time. The mother-child interaction videos, during which the child and mother play with toys contained in three bags and place the toys back in the bags (the "Three Bags" and "Clean-Up" tasks), were recorded when the 15-month in-home assessments were conducted and are available for 2,832 families in the treatment and control groups. The videos are only linkable to a few pieces of metadata, (home visiting model, video ID, treatment status, and variables indicating whether the family appears in the home visit videos, the three-bag task videos, or both). The videos in the restricted access data are not linkable to any other data included in the restricted access files. Additionally, the videos may only be viewed at the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research's on-site Physical Data Enclave in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

The Oklahoma School Readiness Reach-by-Risk study builds on the development of the Oklahoma School Readiness Risk Index (SRRI) in 2011 by including data on the scope of early childhood programs in each of the state's 77 counties. This research project seeks to analyze the prevalence of particular socio-demographic indicators of school readiness, as well as promote informed policy funding decisions related to early childhood education. The purpose of this study is to highlight counties where the risk for starting school unprepared to learn is high, yet opportunities for quality early childhood programs and services are low. Within this study the researchers focused on prekindergarten students (with Hispanic background) who displayed signs of being unprepared to learn by examining two social constructs: risk and reach (identified by early childhood programs). Risk measures were assessed through a risk index comprised of 11 socioeconomic and demographic indicators found by empirical research to increase a child's risk of being unprepared for school. The Reach measures were created by gathering data from early education programs, the state's universal prekindergarten program, early childhood home visitation programs, and child care services. Early childhood program reach was determined by analyzing the county-level service density of early childhood education and home visitation programs in addition to several aspects of child care services, such as provider quality ratings and enrollment of children with child care subsidies in quality facilities.

Parent and Children Together (PACT) Responsible Fatherhood (RF) project is an examination of the effects of federally funded responsible fatherhood programs. This project was interested in learning about service implications, the needs and experiences of participants, and the effectiveness of these services. To examine how parenting, relationships, socioeconomic status, and well-being are being affected by responsible fatherhood programs. This dataset is focused on individuals representing a few in the population. The 4 programs that participated in the Responsible Fatherhood study were: Connections to Success in Kansas and Missouri, Fathers' Support Center in Missouri, FATHER Project at Goodwill-Easter Seals Minnesota, and Urban Ventures in Minnesota. This data collection covered topics such as parental involvement, parenting skills, relationship status, child engagement, employment, criminal justice involvement, housing stability, and mental well-being. The demographic variables are race, age, monthly income, and education level.

Do post-incarceration partner violence experiences in justice-involved couples conform to the most widely used evidence based typology of partner violence in the general population (Johnson, 2008)? What aspects of social context at the individual, couple/family, and community levels shape post-incarceration partner violence experiences? Do couple/family-level social context factors mediate the observed relationship between the identified community-level influences and experiences of partner violence? What social context factors at the individual, couple/family, and community levels do members of justice-involved couples see as shaping their experiences of partner violence? Victim advocates and criminal justice system personnel have long recognized the importance of context in guiding victim services and criminal justice system responses to violence, yet little evidence exists to guide such approaches. Despite the very high prevalence of post-incarceration partner violence observed in the first study to rigorously measure it (the Multi-site Study on Incarceration, Parenting, and Partnering), little is known of the social contextual factors that shape violent victimization in justice-involved couples. The Post-Incarceration Partner Violence: Examining the Social Context of Victimization to Inform Victim Services and Prevention study addressed this gap by assessing the role of contextual factors that empirical and theoretical work suggests could affect partner violence in this vulnerable population. This secondary analysis study drew on longitudinal data from the MFS-IP dataset and other public sources to develop an actionable understanding of the social contexts that influence the observed high prevalence of violence in a sample of couples that have contact with the criminal justice system but are disconnected from formal service delivery systems or other sources of help. The researcher conducted a theory-driven typology analysis to describe the social context of post-incarceration partner violence at the couple level, and utilized quantitative modeling and in-depth qualitative analysis to assess the individual-, couple/family-, and community-level contexts that shape partner violence.

Across the country, child welfare and juvenile justice systems now recognize that youth involved in both systems (i.e., dual system youth) are a vulnerable population who go unrecognized because of challenges in information-sharing and cross-system collaboration. These challenges currently prevent the development of accurate estimations of the number of dual system youth nationally and limit understanding of best practices used by jurisdictions implementing integrated systems models. OJJDP funded this secondary analysis study to address this gap in knowledge. All data used in the Dual System Youth Design Study were owned or accessed by various partners. No primary data collection occurred in the study. In addition, most of the data accessed by the study partners was confidential, de-identified data that required memorandums of agreement and/or court orders to access and use. Some sites have ongoing or standing agreements with the public agencies who own the data which allow access and use for specific projects. Because, most frequently, the data are owned by the public service agencies and include sensitive information the data are not available to be publicly archived. Instead, here a descriptive overview is provided of the data used and accessed by each study partner as well as contact information of a person at each site that will be able to share syntax and/or coding parameters for those who are considering to replicate the findings or methods. Researchers interested in inquiring the data and syntax used in this project should refer to the study partners section of the downloadable study documentation. Data provider agency names along with the specific study data that were requested are listed in the documentation.

The Hennepin County Department of Community Corrections and Rehabilitation Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluations surveyed 150 youth to examine the role of trauma and violence on justice-involved lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning/unsure or asexual (LGBTQA) and gender non-conforming youth (GNC). Youth were surveyed and administrative human services and juvenile justice data were also analyzed. The correctional staff were surveyed with an organizational self-assessment on employee perceptions of trauma-informed practices and policies. A subset of youth (N = 60) were interviewed using the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire Revised Version 2 (JVQ-R2) and the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) tool to assess trauma and victimization. This survey also collected demographic information as well as the participants' history of harassment, bullying, suspension, expulsion, housing arrangements, and foster care involvement.

This study examines how child characteristics, measures of trauma, risks, strengths, type and duration of child welfare involvement, and community factors affect the likelihood of child welfare system-involved youth encountering the juvenile justice system in Chicago, IL. This study draws on four sources of administrative data. Data were obtained from the Illinois Department of Child and Family Services (IDCFS) and the Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice (IDJJ); from one county juvenile court and probation services division (Juvenile Probation and Court Services [JPCS] of the Cook County Circuit Court); and from one municipal police department (the Chicago Police Department [CPD]). The researchers used these data to match youth across systems and to provide detailed knowledge about child welfare system involvement, trauma experiences, child strengths and risks, and particular juvenile justice outcomes. Arrest data is available through September 2017. Child welfare and juvenile court data are available through December 2017. Data for juvenile corrections from the IDJJ is only available through June 2016; however, the researchers used a corresponding indicator in the juvenile court data to capture this outcome through December 2017.