Supporting StatementA_revised

14

Supporting Statement

A. Justification

1. Necessity of the Information Collection

We request clearance to conduct a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) on school crime. This supplement is an effort to assemble critical information about the overall safety environment in schools to understand the context in which school-related victimizations occur on a national level. The current Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for the School Crime Supplement (SCS) expired on 11/30/2007, so we are requesting a three-year clearance to conduct the SCS from January through June of 2009 and 2011.

The prevalence of crime in our Nations' schools is a continuing concern. Policymakers demand information on gangs, drug availability, weapons, bullying, and avoidance behavior in schools. In addition, violence in schools has been identified as a possible contributing cause of the decay in education in the U.S. Crimes at school disrupt education and may have longer lasting effects on society than crimes committed elsewhere. Any consideration of a response to crime at school must begin with an accurate, national accounting of the nature and extent of school crime and a description of its likely victims. Juveniles' attitudes toward crime in the school and its subsequent effect on their behavior must be analyzed before recommendations can be made on ways to reduce school victimizations and assess its effect on the quality of education.

NCVS data on school crime has shown that school crimes are under-reported to the police and that victims between the ages of 12 and 18 are not as likely as older victims to report victimizations to the police. Therefore, police statistics on school crime are not adequate to address the issue of the nature and prevalence of school victimization.

Presently, the NCVS collects limited information on crimes occurring at school. The supplement contains additional questions on preventative measures employed by the school; students' participation in after school activities; transportation to and from school; students' perception of rules and equality in school; the presence of street gangs in school; availability of drugs and alcohol in the school; student’s exposure to fighting, bullying, and hate-related behaviors; and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization in school. Beginning with the 2001 SCS, new questions about access to firearms, absenteeism, and future educational goals were also asked. In 2005, we added questions about student social support, perceptions of teacher respect, and perceptions of classroom disorder. Also, questions about bullying in previous iterations of the SCS were revised in 2005 in order to gather more detailed information about the circumstances surrounding incidents of bullying at school.

In 2007, questions regarding actions that are taken by another student that make other students feel bad or are hurtful to the student were added to the questionnaire. The focus of these questions were actions via the Internet or instant or text messaging. These acts are commonly referred to as cyber-bullying. The year 2007 also marked the first time the SCS was conducted in a fully-automated interviewing environment using both computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) and computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) methods.

For 2009, all SCS questions will be translated into Spanish and a Spanish language interviewing option will be available to respondents for the first time. Reiteration of the confidential statement will be performed prior to asking sensitive questions related to gangs, drugs, weapons, and skipping class. There will also be minor question wording changes based on the 2007 SCS interviewer debriefing results. Also, a question about whether students feel there is a means to anonymously notify the authorities if they saw something they think should be brought to the attention of the principal or police will be added.

The NCVS was initiated by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration to fulfill the mandate set forth by Section 515b of Public Law 93-83 to collect, evaluate, publish, and disseminate information on the progress of law enforcement within the U.S. The NCVS was transferred to the Bureau of the Justice Statistics (BJS) in December 1979. Currently, Title 42, U.S. Code, Section 3732 of the Justice Systems Improvement Act of 1979, authorizes the BJS to collect statistics on victimization.

2. Needs and Uses

In order to study the relationship between victimization at school and the school environment, and to monitor changes in student experiences with victimization, accurate information regarding its characteristics and incidence must be collected. Funded by the U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences’ National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and jointly designed with BJS, the School Crime Supplement (SCS) was developed to address this data need. Since its first collection in 1989, and in 1995, 1999 and biannually thereafter, the SCS has been NCES' primary data source on student victimization. In addition to collecting characteristics related to various types of student victimization at school, the SCS also asks students about: alcohol and drug availability; fighting, bullying, and hate-related behaviors; fear and avoidance behaviors; gun and weapon carrying; and gangs at school.

Title 1 of the Education Sciences and Reform Act (ESRA) mandates that the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) collect, report, analyze, and disseminate statistical data regarding education in the U.S. as it relates to the nature of criminal incidents at school and other indices of school safety. Specifically, the incidence, frequency, seriousness, and nature of violence affecting students, school personnel, and other individuals participating in school activities, as well as other indices of school safety are to be detailed, including information regarding the relationship between victims and perpetrators and demographic characteristics of the victims. Further, Title IV Part A of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) awards funds to states for designing programs aimed at preventing or reducing drugs, violence, and student delinquency in schools.

To meet its obligation to Congress under the ESRA, NCES works with its diverse customer groups and relies on their feedback to determine how it can best meet their demands for timely, comprehensive, and useful information that maintains high statistical standards. Specifically, NCES has engaged and encouraged school practitioners, researchers, and data users of the SCS by convening a Technical Review Panel and via mailings to SCS users. Both efforts have requested, collected, and integrated feedback into subsequent administrations of the SCS. For example, in 2003, school crime and safety researchers and practitioners voiced a particular interest in the emergent issue of bullying, the behaviors associated with bullying, and definitions related to the behavior. In response, NCES/BJS revised the bullying series for the 2005 SCS collection and further elaborated on the 2003 TRP recommendations, in conjunction with more recent research detailing specific methods of bullying in schools, in the 2007 SCS (e.g., bullying via electronic means).

NCES continues to encourage researchers and data users by promptly responding to queries about the data and presenting results from the data at national conferences geared toward data users, researchers, and practitioners. NCES also makes the SCS readily available to school officials, school administrators, Congress, researchers, the media, and the public through several vehicles. The data sets are made available to the public on the Internet at the NCES website (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crime/-surveys.asp) and through a publicly-available data storage consortium (www.icpsr.umich.edu). Also provided on the website are detailed tables from the data and resultant reports that discuss school crime and violence. These include the annual Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2007 as well as other reports that summarize the latest statistics on student victimization at school, Student Victimization in U.S. Schools: Results From the 2005 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey; and select special topics, Student Reports of Bullying: Results from the 2001 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. These publications have been distributed via the Department of Education's Publication Clearinghouse (www.edpubs.ed.gov) to thousands of individuals in the past year, making school crime and safety data more accessible to the public.

Internally, NCES uses these data to complement other NCES publications, such as The Condition of Education, a Congressionally mandated annual report that summarizes developments and trends in education using the latest available data.

Additional users of the data are Department of Education and Department of Justice officials and officials of other Federal agencies, the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, state and local officials in conjunction with researchers and planners to analyze the current trends, and the public seeking general information about student victimization. Some of these users and the ways in which they use the SCS data are as follows:

Congress – to evaluate the prevalence and extent of school crime and disorder to meet the needs of education agencies in reducing student victimization; to develop new or improved initiatives or laws aimed at ensuring the safety of America's students and monitor the effectiveness of school policies and programs.

U.S. Department of Education – to meet its obligation to Congress under the Education Sciences Reform Act and to understand the current trends in school crime and disorder and its possible effects on student education and school systems.

Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools – to both communicate and understand the current trends in school crime and disorder. To allocate resources to assist states and local agencies to meet the needs of school officials, administrators, teachers, and parents to assess conditions within their own schools/jurisdictions relative to those at the national level, as well as determine needs and budget requirements.

U.S. Department of Justice/Bureau of Justice Statistics – The aforementioned annual report, Indicators of School Crime and Safety, is jointly published with BJS. The latest report is available at http://www.ojp.usdoj-.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/iscs07.pdf. Indicator 2, “Incidence of Victimization at School and Away from School” is the mechanism BJS uses to release these annual estimates from the NCVS for violence and theft against 12 to 18 year-olds.

State and local governments – to assess conditions within their own jurisdictions relative to those at the national level and to determine needs and budget requirements for local school districts.

Researchers and practitioners – to estimate the prevalence and impact of student victimization, as well as to investigate correlates of school crime and disorder such that prevention and programs can be developed and explored.

Media – to inform the public about all of the issues related to school crime and safety.

In addition to principal, district, or state-level data sources, students' reports of victimization and perceptions of crime, violence, and school climate are important factors in providing a comprehensive picture of school crime and safety. Currently, the SCS is the only recurring national data source that provides nationally representative student-level data detailing victimization and other school characteristics related to crime and disorder.

If the data in the School Crime Supplement were no longer collected, data users would be faced with no source of student-level data on victimization and school characteristics related to such victimization. Stakeholders would lose the ability to make comparative assessments that document the changing demands on their organizations and lose a source of information that they find useful in making requests for resources. The public would lose the ability to assess the needs to ensure school safety (e.g. security, personnel, programmatic efforts) and other demands for their tax dollars.

A list of selected publications is provided below that report secondary analyses or cite BJS findings.

Addington, L.A. (2002). The Columbine effect: The impact of violent school crime on students' fear of victimization. Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York at Albany, United States -- New York. Retrieved August 11, 2008, from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text database. (Publication No. AAT 3052923).

Addington, L.A. (2003). Fear after Columbine: Findings from a randomized experiment. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19(4), 367-387.

Addington, L.A. (2005). Disentangling the effects of bounding and mobility on reports of criminal victimization. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 21(3), 321-343.

Addington, L.A. (2005). Following in her footsteps: Revisiting the record on adolescents' college plans. Gender Issues, 22(2), 31-44.

Addington, L.A., Ruddy, S.A., Miller, A.K., and DeVoe, J.F. (2002). Are America's Schools Safe? Students Speak Out: 1999 School Crime Supplement (NCES 2002-331). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Alvarez, A. and Bachman, R. (1997). Predicting the fear of assault at school and while going to and from school in an adolescent population. Violence and Victims, 12(1), 69-86.

Anderson, D.C. (1998). Curriculum, culture, and community: The challenge of school violence. Crime and Justice, 24, 317 - 363.

Bastian, L.D. and Taylor, B.M. (1991). School Crime: A National Crime Victimization Survey Report (NCJ 131641). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Burrow, J.D. and Apel, R. (2008). Youth behavior, school structure and student risk of victimization. Justice Quarterly, 25(2), 349-377.

Cao, L., Zhang, Y., and He, N. (2008). Carrying weapons to school for protection: An analysis of the 2001 school crime supplement data. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36(2), 154-164.

DeVoe, J.F. (2007). The protective behaviors of student victims: Responses to direct and indirect bullying. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, United States -- Maryland. Retrieved August 11, 2008, from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text database. (Publication No. AAT 3260335).

DeVoe, J.F. and Kaffenberger, S. (2005). Student Reports of Bullying: Results From the 2001 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCES 2005–310). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Greene, M.B. (2005). Reducing Violence and Aggression in Schools. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 6(3), 236-253.

Gruber, J.E., and Fineran, S. (2007). The impact of bullying and sexual harassment on middle and high school girls.  Violence Against Women, 13(6), 627-643.

Howell, J.C., and Lynch, J.P. (2000). Youth Gangs in Schools (NCJ 183015). Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Kaufman, P. Chen, X., Choy, S.P., Peter, K., Ruddy, S.A., Miller, A.K., Fleury, J.K., Chandler, K.A., Planty, M.G., and Rand, M.R. (2001). Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2001 (NCES 2002-113/NCJ 190075). US Departments of Education and Justice. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Kingery, P., Coggeshall, M., and Alford, A. (1998). Violence at school: Recent evidence from four national surveys. Psychology in the Schools, 35(3), 247-258.

Kuck, D., and Popp, A. (2005, November 16). Characteristics of Students and Schools as Predictors of Being a Victim of Bullying: An Opportunity Theory Analysis. Conference Papers -- American Society of Criminology.

Kupchik, A. and Ellis, N. (2008). School discipline and security: Fair for all students? Youth & Society, 39(4), 549-574.

Lab, S., and Whitehead, J. (1994, December). Avoidance Behavior as a Response to In-School Victimization. Journal of Security Administration, 17(2), 32-45.

Lynch, J.P. (2002, July). Bullying in School. Presented at the National Institute of Justice Annual Justice Research and Evaluation Conference, Washington, DC.

Lynch, J.P (2002, November). Exploring the Precipitants and Consequences of Bullying in School: Lessons from the 1999 School Crime Supplement. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Chicago, IL.

Mayer, M.J. (2001). The relationship of secure building strategies and students' understanding of the school's system of law to school violence and disruption. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland College Park, United States -- Maryland. Retrieved August 11, 2008, from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text database. (Publication No. AAT 3035800).

Mayer, M.J. and Leone, P.E. (1999). A Structural Analysis of School Violence and Disruption: Implications for Creating Safer Schools. Education & Treatment of Children, 22(3), 333-56.

 

Myers, K.A. (2006). School violence and its effects on academic achievement among eighth graders. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana State University, United States -- Indiana. Retrieved August 11, 2008, from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text database. (Publication No. AAT 3231699).

Noonan, M. (2005, November 16). Guns in schools: Results from the 2003 School Crime Supplement. Conference Papers -- American Society of Criminology.

Pearson, F.S. and Toby, J. (1991). Fear of School-related Predatory Crime. Sociology and Social Research, 75(3), 117-125.

Ringwalt, C., Messerschmidt, P., Graham, L., Collins, J., and Institute, R. (1992). Youth's victimization experiences, fear of attack or harm, and school avoidance behaviors: Summary of findings. Research Triangle Institute.

Van Dorn, R.A. (2004). Correlates of violent and nonviolent victimization in a sample of public high school students. Violence and Victims, 19(3), 303-320.

Van Dorn, R. (2002, November 13). Unrecognized Warning Signs. Education Week, 22(11), 41-41.

3. Use of Information Technology

No particular information technology improvements will be used to reduce respondent burden.

NCVS respondents between the ages of 12 and 18 who have attended school at any time during the six months preceding the interview will be asked the supplement questions after their NCVS interview. The NCVS is conducted in 6-month intervals at selected households for a total of seven interviews. The first month interviews are conducted in person while the second through seventh month interviews are conducted over the telephone. All interviews are conducted using computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) technology.

The supplement will be conducted in households scheduled to be interviewed in January through June 2009 and 2011. We will administer the SCS to all persons in the household who are 12 through 18 years old. We estimate that approximately 9,445 respondents between the ages of 12 and 18 will be eligible for the supplement in 2009. This is a decrease of over 15.5 percent compared to the total number of persons 12-18 years of age that were eligible for the 2007 SCS. The decrease is directly attributable to the ongoing sample reductions to the parent survey to the SCS, the National Crime Victimization Survey.

4. Efforts to Identify Duplication

The SCS does not duplicate existing data collections. The Office of Research in the Department of Education conducted the Safe School Study in 1977. In 1991 and 1993, the NCES conducted the National Household Education Survey (NHES). The topics addressed by the 1991 NHES related to early childhood education experiences as well as adult education experiences. The 1993 NHES addressed school readiness as well as school safety and discipline. In 1991, the NCES also sponsored the Principal Survey on Safe, Disciplined, and Drug-free Schools. This survey was administered to public school district superintendents, teachers, and principals to obtain their perspective on issues relating to school safety, discipline, and prevention of drug use in public elementary and secondary schools. NCES also sponsored the Principal/School Disciplinarian Survey on School Violence as a one-time survey intended to collect data on school violence and other discipline issues for the 1996-97 school year.

In 2000, 2006, and 2008, the NCES sponsored the School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) a survey of 3,000 school principals and school administrators on a variety of topics related to crime and safety, including: school policies and procedures, school safety practices, incidences of crime and disruption; disciplinary problems and actions; and other school characteristics related to school crime.

The efforts of NCES to collect school crime and safety data are limited to school-level surveys from the perspective of the principal. That is, the principal is best equipped to answer questions on school policies, disciplinary measures, and raw counts of criminal incidents and disruption. The SCS, on the other hand, provides the unique opportunity for NCES to collect data from the student. Such data include victimizations that often go unreported to the principal or police and data relevant to student perceptions of school environment and other risk factors that might mediate or aggravate the likelihood of criminal victimization such as perceived safety, fear, gang presence, or lower-level types of disorder such as bullying and fighting. Another purpose of this supplement is to continue to provide data that are more comparable to the current criminal victimization data. We are not aware of any other surveys performed by other agencies doing that collect data on student victimization at school. The Center for Disease Control’s Youth Risk Behavior Survey does collect information on risky behaviors and offending, there is minimal overlap of YRBS content with that of the supplement (i.e. carried a weapon on school property, in a fight on school property, and did not go to school because of safety concerns).

5. Minimizing Burden

N/A. The SCS is part of the NCVS which is a household-based sample. In 2007, all SCS interviews were conducted using CATI and CAPI technology. In 2009, all SCS interviews will be conducted solely using CAPI technology. Respondent and interviewer burden are inherently reduced using both CATI and CAPI technologies simply due to the fact that automated instruments automatically present the next ‘on-path’ question. This prevents any need for the interviewer to delay the interview in order to assess and proceed with the correct skip pattern. This creates less delays throughout the interview which results in shorter interview lengths and ultimately a commensurate reduction in respondent and interviewer burden.

6. Consequences of Less Frequent Collection

To produce a regular series of data on school crime victimization requires regular data collection. Because of the importance of the student perspective in this picture of school crime, and the necessity of analyzing this perspective over time, the SCS became a biennial survey starting in 1999. A less frequent data collection would not provide for trend analysis of the prevalence of crime in our nation's schools, from the perspective of the victim.

7. Special Circumstances

N/A. Collection is consistent with the guidelines in 5 C.F.R. 1320.6.

8. Consultations Outside the Agency

The U.S. Census Bureau, the BJS, and the NCES cooperated to develop the questionnaire and procedures used to collect this supplemental information. Mr. Michael Rand and Dr. Katrina Baum, from the BJS, and Ms. Kathryn Chandler, from the NCES, were the principal consultants. Those persons consulted from the Census Bureau included Mr. Jeremy Shimer, Ms. Terry DeMaio, and Ms. Jennifer Beck.

9. Paying Respondents

N/A. Payment or gifts to respondents is not provided in return for participation in the survey.

10. Assurance of Confidentiality

All information which can identify individuals will be held strictly confidential by the Census Bureau and the BJS according to the provisions stated in Title 13, U.S. Code, Section 9 and Title 42, U.S. Code, Sections 3789g and 3735 (formerly Section 3771). Only Census Bureau employees sworn to preserve this confidentiality may see the completed questionnaires. The respondents are assured confidentiality and informed that their participation is voluntary in a letter from the Director of the Census Bureau.

11. Justification for Sensitive Questions

Questions will be asked relating to drug use, gangs, and students’ access to weapons since these are topics of great interest for schools. No questions relating to sexual behaviors, religious beliefs, or other matters commonly considered private or of a sensitive nature are asked.

12. Estimated Respondent Burden

We estimate that 9,445 persons ages 12-18 will be eligible to be interviewed between January and June 2009. We estimate each interview will take 0.167 hours (10 minutes) to complete. Total respondent burden is approximately 1,577 hours. This is an expected net reduction of 436 hours in respondent burden when compared to the 2007 total respondent burden estimate of 2,013 hours. This net reduction is primarily driven by the reduction in total NCVS sample.

13. Estimate of Cost Burden

There are no costs to respondents other than that of their time to respond.

14. Estimates of Cost to the Federal Government

We estimate the annual cost to the federal government for the supplement to be approximately $860,000 (Figure 1). The NCES will bear all costs of data collection for the supplement incurred by the Census Bureau.

Each year the Indicators of School Crime & Safety report is published. This report is published jointly with NCES. Over the course of the year, staff at BJS compile statistics for two of the indicators and review the entire report to ensure that it meets the statistical standards at BJS. This report is made available to the public on the BJS website and spreadsheets of each table may be downloaded to facilitate further analysis by the user.

Figure 1. Cost to the Federal Government for Collecting and Disseminating the School Crime Supplement
Data collection
Census Bureau					$ 860,000
Supplement project management			Base salary	Fringe
GS14 - Statistician - 280 hrs			$ 13,636	$ 3,818	$ 17,454
GS15 - Chief, Victimization Statistics - 20 hrs			$ 1,294	$ 362	$ 1,656
Annual report production
GS13 - Digital information specialist - 20 hrs			$ 931	$ 261	$ 1,191
GS12 - Production writer/editor - 10 hrs			$ 380	$ 106	$ 487
GS14 - Information technologist - 2 hrs			$ 97	$ 27	$ 125
GS15 - Chief, Publications/Dissemination - 1 hrs			$ 57	$ 16	$ 73
				Total	$ 880,986

15. Reasons for Changes in Burden

The decrease in the respondent burden from 2,013 hours to 1,577 hours is

attributed to the reduction in NCVS sample since the last time we conducted the SCS in 2007. Specifically, the NCVS experienced a 14 percent across the board sample reduction in July 2007 which directly affects the total number of SCS eligible respondents. The NCVS has also experienced an increase in the person level nonresponse for the 12-18 year old age group. In 2005 and 2007, the person level nonresponse for the 12-18 year old age group was 29.3 and 30.0 percent, respectively which also contributes to the decrease in respondent burden.

16. Project Schedule

The BJS and the NCES will be responsible for release of the data to the public (hereafter referred to as the “datafile”), the statistical analysis of the data, and the production of resultant web-based publications and tabulations. This microdata is made available as a public-use file (PUF) after it has been approved by the Census Bureau’s Disclosure Review Board (DRB). The datafile itself is released via the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/) and includes a codebook, setup program in SAS language, text file of the raw data, as well as the datafile in SPSS, SAS, STATA data formats. An example of the SCS data release documentation and datasets can be found at ICPSR for the following years:

1989: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/cocoon/ICPSR/STUDY/09394.xml

1995: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/cocoon/ICPSR/STUDY/06739.xml

1999: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/cocoon/ICPSR/STUDY/03137.xml

2001: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/cocoon/ICPSR/STUDY/03477.xml

2003: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/cocoon/ICPSR/STUDY/04182.xml

2005: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/cocoon/ICPSR/STUDY/04429.xml

SCS 2007 Datafile:

The data file from the 2007 School Crime Supplement is scheduled to be similarly released via ICPSR in January 2009.

SCS 2007 web-based tabulations:

NCES publishes approximately 20 web-based tables showing all results from the most recently released SCS. Web-based tables from the 2007 SCS will be released in the summer of 2009. Examples of these tables from the 2003 and 2005 SCS can be found at: http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ssocs/ssocs_tables.asp Users must scroll to the bottom of the page and select either the SCS 2003 or SCS 2005 and their topic of interest.

SCS 2007 Publications:

The following publications will be released using data from the SCS 2007 and a summary of each specific tabular presentation is provided below:

1. Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2008 (spring 2009)

   1. Indicator 3: Prevalence of Victimization at School

   2. Indicator 8: Students' Reports of Gangs at School

   3. Indicator 10: Students' Reports of Being Called Hate-Related Words and Seeing Hate-Related Graffiti

   4. Indicator 11: Bullying At School

   5. Indicator 16: Students' Perceptions of Personal Safety at School and Away From School

   6. Indicator 17: Students' Reports of Avoiding School Activities or Specific Places in School

   7. Indicator 20: Students' Reports of Safety and Security Measures Observed at School

   8. Sample tables for each are attached.

   9. An exemplar of these indicators from the 2007 report (based on the 2005 SCS data) is attached and can also be viewed at: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2007/

2. Student Victimization in U.S. Schools: Results From the 2007 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (fall of 2010)

• An exemplar of this report (based on the 2005 SCS data) is attached and can also be viewed at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009306.pdf

• Table shells for this publication are also attached.

SCS 2009 Datafile:

Interviewing for the 2009 supplement will be conducted during January through June 2009. Processing of the survey will take place between January and December 2009. Computer-based clerical editing and coding will be completed by June 2010 and the computer processing, editing, imputation, and weighting of the data will be completed by the end of November 2010. The Census Bureau will prepare a microdata user file with documentation which is scheduled to be sent to the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) by January 2011.

SCS 2009 web-based tabulations:

NCES publishes approximately 20 web-based tables showing all results from the most recently released SCS. Web-based tables from the 2009 SCS will be released in the summer of 2011. Examples of these tables from the 2003 and 2005 SCS can be found at: http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ssocs/ssocs_tables.asp Users must scroll to the bottom of the page and select either the SCS 2003 or SCS 2005 and their topic of interest.

SCS 2009 Publications:

The following publications will be released using data from the SCS 2009 and a summary of each specific tabular presentation is provided below:

1. Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2010 (spring 2011) – see A above

3. Student Victimization in U.S. Schools: Results From the 2009 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (fall of 2010) – see B above

4. Student Victimization in U.S. Schools, A Decade of Information: Results From the 1999 to 2009 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (summer of 2011).

• Subject to NCES publication plan approval, NCES is proposing this publication to be released in January 2011. This trend-based publication would examine trends in victimization by student characteristics (gender, race/ethnicity, grade level, household income, urbanicity and academic grades), school characteristics (sector, gang presence, gun presence, drug availability), and climate (security measures, rule consistency, fear at school, school avoidance, etc.).

17. Request to Not Display Expiration Date

N/A.

18. Exceptions to the Certification

N/A. There are no exceptions to the certification.

B. Description of Statistical Methodology

1. Respondent Universe

The sample universe is all children ages 12 through 18 who have attended school during the previous six months (Grade 12 or less). Approximately 9,445 children between the ages of 12 and 18 who live in NCVS households will be eligible for the survey. In the national sample interviewers are able to obtain interviews with approximately 70 percent of household members ages 12-18 in 90-91 percent of the occupied units in sample in any given month.

2. Statistical Methodology

In the national sample there are approximately 51,000 designated households, in clusters of four, in 694 primary sampling units located throughout the U.S. The sample consists of six parts, each of which is designated for an interview in a given month and again at six-month intervals; for example, July and January, August and February, September and March, and so forth. From 2005 through 2007 the NCVS sample is based on the 1990 and the 2000 decennial census as well as new construction universes. January 2005 marked the beginning of a two year phase-in of the 2000 sample design, which is based upon the 2000 decennial census. In January 2008 the 1990 design sample will have been completely phased-out and replaced by households selected from the 2000 sample design. Therefore, the 2009 SCS is based solely on 2000 decennial sample.

The NCVS uses a rotating sample. The sample consists of six groups for each month of enumeration. Each of these groups stays in sample for an initial interview and six subsequent interviews. The initial interview is essentially a bounding interview to establish a reference period to reduce telescoping, and it enables the interviewer to avoid recording duplicate reports on subsequent visits. During the course of a six-month period, we interview a full sample of six rotation groups — one-sixth each month. In addition, one rotation group enters the sample for its bounding interview each month.

Each interview period, the interviewer fills or updates the NCVS control card questions in the CAPI instrument for the household and fills the personal characteristics and crime screen question for each member 12 years old or older. The interviewer then fills a crime incident report for each reported crime incident. Each household member provides the information by self-response.

The first contact with a household is by personal visit. For the second through seventh visits, we use a mixture of personal visits and telephone interviews.

The full NCVS experienced methodological changes in 2006 including: a new sample, a change in the method of handling first-time interviews with households, and a change in the method of interviewing (see http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cv06.htm). The data from the 2007 SCS was just received at BJS at the end of August 2008, so there has not been sufficient time to determine whether the 2007 SCS was subject similar mode and instrumentation effects as the full NCVS. In fact, recent findings from an evaluation of the full NCVS data in 2007 indicate that we are observing a reversal in the same areas, enough to consider any remaining effects small enough to be confounded with sampling error.

3. Maximizing Response Rates

Census Bureau staff mails an introductory letter (NCVS-572(L), NCVS-573(L)) explaining the NCVS to the household before the interviewer's visit or call. The Census Bureau trains interviewers to obtain respondent cooperation and instructs them to make repeated attempts to contact respondents and complete all interviews. The interviewer obtains demographic characteristics of noninterview persons and the race of noninterview households for use in the adjustment for nonresponse. Household response rates are monitored on a daily basis within the automated survey control system. Person level response is measured weekly based on the receipt of weekly output data files. Household and person level response rates are compared to the previous months average to ensure their reasonableness. Regional office staff and field representatives are notified to take appropriate corrective action anytime household or person level nonresponse show a troubling trend.

The response rates for the last two (2005 and 2007) administrations of the School Crime Supplement were 79.9% and 59.6%, respectively. Two nonresponse bias analysis reports were produced for the 2005 SCS examining unit and item level nonresponse. These same reports will be prepared for the 2007 and 2009 supplements.

4. Test of Procedures

Any new or modified questions were cognitively tested and documented in “Pretesting of the 2009 School Crime Supplement: Final Results and Recommendations.” Most of the questions used in the previous five surveys have been incorporated in this current supplement.

5. Consultants on Statistical Aspects of the Design

The Census Bureau will collect all information. Mr. Stephen Ash and Ms. Barbara Blass of the Demographic Statistical Methods Division of the Census Bureau provided consultation on the statistical aspects of the supplement. Mr. Jeremy Shimer heads the Crime Surveys Branch of the Demographic Surveys Division, which manages and coordinates the NCVS and the SCS supplement.