Skip to Main Content
ICPSR
  • Help
  • Log In
  • Home
  • Find Data
    • Find Data
    • Search/Compare Variables
    • Data-Related Publications
    • Thematic Data Collections
  • Share Data
    • Start Deposit
    • Data Preparation Guide
    • Confidentiality
    • Share NIH Data
    • Suggest Data to Archive
  • Membership
    • Overview
    • Member List
    • How to Join
    • Official Rep Tools
    • Promoting ICPSR
    • News & Publications
    • Biennial Meeting
  • Summer Program
    • Home
    • Program Overview
    • Courses
    • Registration & Fees
    • Scholarships
    • Travel and Lodging
    • Testimonials
    • Giving
    • FAQ
  • Teaching & Learning
    • Overview
    • Classroom Exercises
    • Resources for Students
  • Data Management
    • Overview
    • Quality
    • Preservation
    • Access
    • Confidentiality
    • Citation
  • About
    • Overview and Mission
    • People
    • Governance
    • Building a Culture of Respect and Representation
    • News
    • Events
    • Careers
    • History
    • Data Stewardship and Research Projects
    • Giving
  • Help
  • Log In

Filters

  • process evaluationremove filter
  • victim safety2
  • victim services2
  • Internet1
  • battered women1
view all
 Hide

  • United States3
  • Delaware2
  • Colorado1
  • Denver1
  • District of Columbia1
view all
 Hide

  • Public Use2
  • Restricted Use1
 Hide

  • Online analysis2
  • SAS2
  • SPSS2
  • Stata2
 Hide

  • admin3
  • survey3
  • machine1
 Hide

  • quantitative2
  •  Filter FAQ
 Hide

  • Cross-sectional1
  • Cross-sectional ad-hoc follow-up1
 Hide

 Hide

  • New/updated this week0
  • New/updated this month0
  • New/updated this quarter0
  • New/updated this year0
 Hide

  • United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice4
 Hide

  • National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD)4
 Hide

  • Public Data4
 Hide

  • ICPSR.XVII.E.4
  • NACJD.XIII.2
  • NACJD.XVI.2
  • NACJD.II.1
  • NACJD.V.1
view all
 Hide

  • Carey, Shannon1
  • DuPree, Cheron1
  • Efkeman, Hillery S.1
  • Hannaford, Paula L.1
  • Jones, Lisa1
view all
 Hide

  • face-to-face interview2
  • record abstracts2
  • web-based survey1
 Hide

  • study4
 Hide

  • ICPSR4
  • NACJD4
 Hide

  • Center for Court Innovation1
  • Institute for Law and Justice1
  • NPC Research1
  • National Center for State Courts1
  • RTI International1
view all
 Hide

 Hide

Search Results

Showing 1 - 4 of 4 results.

search tips
  • Search terms can be anywhere in the study: title, description, variables, etc.
  • Because our holdings are large, we recommend using at least two query terms:
    rural economy
    home ownership
    higher education
  • Keywords help delimit the breadth of results. Therefore, use as many as required to achieve your desired results:
    elementary education federal funding
  • Our search will find studies with derivative expressions of your query terms: A search for "nation"will find results containing "national"
  • Use quotes to search for an exact expression:
    "social mobility"
  • You can combine exact expressions with loose terms:
    "united states" inmates
  • Exclude results by using a MINUS sign:
    elections -sweden -germany
    will exclude swedish and german election studies
  • On the results page, you will be able to sort and filter to further refine results.
     Hidden

    Study Title/Investigator
    Released/Updated
    1.
    Benefits and Limitations of Civil Protection Orders for Victims of Domestic Violence in Wilmington, Delaware, Denver, Colorado, and the District of Columbia, 1994-1995 (ICPSR 2557)
    Keilitz, Susan; Hannaford, Paula L.; Efkeman, Hillery S.
    This study was designed to explore whether civil protection orders were effective in providing safer environments for victims of domestic violence and enhancing their opportunities for escaping violent relationships. The researchers looked at the factors that might influence civil protection orders, such as accessibility to the court process, linkages to public and private services and sources of support, and the criminal record of the victim's abuser, and then examined how courts in three jurisdictions processed civil protection orders. Wilmington, Delaware, Denver, Colorado, and the District of Columbia were chosen as sites because of structural differences among them that were believed to be linked to the effectiveness of civil protection orders. Since these jurisdictions each had different court processes and service models, the researchers expected that these models would produce various results and that these variations might hold implications for improving practices in other jurisdictions. Data were collected through initial and follow-up interviews with women who had filed civil protection orders. The effectiveness of the civil protection orders was measured by the amount of improvement in the quality of the women's lives after the order was in place, versus the extent of problems created by the protection orders. Variables from the survey of women include police involvement at the incident leading to the protection order, the relationship of the petitioner and respondent to the petition prior to the order, history of abuse, the provisions asked for and granted in the order, if a permanent order was not filed for by the petitioner, the reasons why, the court experience, protective measures the petitioner undertook after the order, and how the petitioner's life changed after the order. Case file data were gathered on when the order was filed and issued, contempt motions and hearings, stipulations of the order, and social service referrals. Data on the arrest and conviction history of the petition respondent were also collected.
    2005-11-04
    2.
    Evaluation of Internet Safety Materials Used by Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Forces in School and Community Settings, 2011-2012 [United States] (ICPSR 34371)
    Jones, Lisa; Mitchell, Kimberly J.; Walsh, Wendy A.
    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 purpose of this study was to conduct content and process evaluations of current internet safety education (ISE) program materials and their use by law enforcement presenters and schools. The study was divided into four sub-projects. First, a systematic review or "meta-synthesis" was conducted to identify effective elements of prevention identified by the research across different youth problem areas such as drug abuse, sex education, smoking prevention, suicide, youth violence, and school failure. The process resulted in the development of a KEEP (Known Elements of Effective Prevention) Checklist. Second, a content analysis was conducted on four of the most well-developed and long-standing youth internet safety curricula: i-SAFE, iKeepSafe, Netsmartz, and Web Wise Kids. Third, a process evaluation was conducted to better understand how internet safety education programs are being implemented. The process evaluation was conducted via national surveys with three different groups of respondents: Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force commanders (N=43), ICAC Task Force presenters (N=91), and a sample of school professionals (N=139). Finally, researchers developed an internet safety education outcome survey focused on online harassment and digital citizenship. The intention for creating and piloting this survey was to provide the field with a research-based tool that can be used in future evaluation and program monitoring efforts.
    2016-03-31
    3.
    Multi-site National Institute of Justice Evaluation of Second Chance Act Reentry Courts in Seven States, 2012-2016 (ICPSR 36748)
    Carey, Shannon; Rempel, Michael; Lindquist, Christine
    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 study used a multi-method approach including 1. a process evaluation in all eight sites involving yearly site visits from 2012 to 2014 with key stakeholder interviews, observations, and participant focus groups; 2. a prospective impact evaluation (in four sites) including interviews at release from jail or prison and at 12 months after release (as well as oral swab drug tests) with reentry court participants and a matched comparison group; 3. a recidivism impact evaluation (in seven sites) with a matched comparison group tracking recidivism for 2 years post reentry court entry and 4. a cost-benefit evaluation (in seven sites) involving a transactional and institutional cost analysis (TICA) approach. Final administrative data were collected through the end of 2016. This collection includes four SPSS data files: "interview_archive2.sav" with 746 variables and 412 cases, "NESCCARC_Archive_File_3.sav" with 518 variables and 3,710 cases, "Interview Data1.sav" with 1,356 variables and 412 cases, "NESCCARC Admin Data File.sav" with 517 variables and 3,710 cases, and three SPSS syntax files: "Interview Syntax.sps", "archive_2-17.sps", and "NESCCARC Admin Data Syntax.sps".
    2018-07-24
    4.
    National Evaluation of the National Institute of Justice Grants to Combat Violent Crimes Against Women on Campus Program, 2000-2002 (ICPSR 3814)
    DuPree, Cheron
    This study was undertaken as a process evaluation of the Grants to Combat Violence Against Women on Campus Program (Campus Program), which was conducted by the Institute for Law and Justice under a grant from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and funding from the Violence Against Women Office (VAWO). The Campus Program was comprised of 38 colleges or universities, which received funding in 1999 and 2000. Part 1 data consist of basic demographic information about each campus and the violence against women programs and services available at each site. Data for Part 2, collected from questionnaires administered to grant project staff, documented perceptions about the Campus Program project and participation and collaboration from those involved in the partnership with each college or university (i.e., non-profit, non-governmental victim service providers).
    2006-03-30
      Facebook Instagram X formerly Twitter Linked In YouTube
      Accessibility |  Privacy Policy  |  Contact Us  |  Help |  ICPSR-help@umich.edu  |  734-647-2200
      Sign up for our newsletter
      Logo for University of Michigan
      © 2025 The Regents of the University of Michigan. ICPSR is part of the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan.