Supporting Statement
A. Justification
Necessity of the Information Collection
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), of the U.S. Department of Justice, requests an extension of a currently approved collection, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) OMB No. 1121-0111, through July 2012. The Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) current approval expires July 31, 2009. This submission is for an extension of the current approval.
Title 42, United States Code, Section 3732 of the Justice Systems Improvement Act of 1979, authorizes BJS to collect statistics on victimization. The NCVS provides national data on personal and household victimization, both reported and not reported to police. Together with statistics on crimes reported to law enforcement agencies across the country published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the two programs provide a more complete understanding of the nation’s crime problems than either could do alone.
The NCVS is the only source of annual national data on a number of policy relevant subjects related to criminal victimization, including intimate partner violence, drugs and alcohol and crime, injury from victimization, the cost of crime, carjacking, and reporting to police. Other policy relevant topics covered by the survey include weapon use in crime and victimization of subpopulations such as the elderly and juveniles. Despite the financial and methodological challenges of the NCVS, it continues to be an invaluable source of information on the “dark figure of crime” and on victimization generally. Its importance was underscored by the Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT) of the National Research Council in its assessment of the NCVS, Surveying Victims: Options for Conducting the National Crime Victimization Survey (http://www.nap.edu/catlog.php?record_id-=12090) on page 19:
“Highly influential in shaping contemporary knowledge and theories of criminal victimization, NCVS data have informed assessments of victimization risk, victim-offender relationships, weapon use, and injury in violent crime; the costs of violent and property victimization; and the degree to which crimes are reported to the police (and the reasons for reporting or not reporting). Through the basic survey and topical supplements, NCVS data have also offered insights on new types of criminal behavior such as identity theft (Baum, 2007) as well as violence types of increasing policy importance (e.g. intimate partner violence and crime in school settings). Significantly, the NCVS has also served “as a model for victimization surveys implemented throughout the world” (as well as victimization studies in individual states or cities) “because it incorporates many innovative methodological protocols that enhance its ability to produce reliable estimates of the nature and extent of criminal victimization” (Rennison and Rand, 2007: 17).”
During the past several years, several modifications have been made to the NCVS. In some cases these modifications included adding supplements, and in others, only sections of the existing instrument were modified. All of the changes that have been made to the NCVS are detailed in the Appendix C and were made with compliance with OMB Clearance procedures including submission of 83-c forms.
In addition to these changes, several research projects are underway to support a redesign the NCVS and ongoing research is being conducted into the methodological problems associated with 2006 estimates (see Part B2 of the supporting statement). The research projects were developed in response to the recommendations that the CNSTAT panel provided for redesigning the NCVS. The panel’s initial recommendations are contained in: Surveying Victims: Options for Conducting the National Crime Victimization Survey (National Research Council 2008) which can be downloaded online at http://www.nap.edu/catlog.-php?record_id=12090. This research was submitted under a separate generic clearance while this supporting statement covers the ongoing NCVS.
Needs and Uses
The NCVS provides information on crimes that are of interest to the general public, government agencies, and the criminal justice community.
Because the NCVS is the only ongoing vehicle for producing data related to a broad spectrum of subjects related to crime and crime victimization, legislators and policymakers at all levels of government increasingly use the NCVS data. For example, Congressional debates on bills concerning victim compensation, gun control, crime and unemployment, and development of crime prevention programs for the elderly have used the NCVS data. Also, the Presidential Task Force on Victims of Crime made extensive use of NCVS data and Federal executive departments have used the NCVS data to support development of programs related to a broad variety of issues, including violence against women, intimate partner violence, school crime, juvenile justice and crime against the elderly. Some specific examples of government agencies that make use of the NCVS data include the following:
The Federal Trade Commission co-funded the 2008 Identity Theft Supplement to the NCVS. This supplement measured the prevalence of identity theft, characteristics of the crime, information about the offender, and impact on the victim. The results from this study are expected at the end of 2009.
Bachman, R. (2000). Comparison of Annual Incidence Rates and Contextual Characteristics of Intimate-Partner Violence Against Women from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and the National Violence Against Women Survey (NVAWS). Violence Against Women, 6, 839-867.
Addington, L. & Rennison, C.M. (2008). Do Additional Crimes Affect Victim Reporting and Police Clearance of Rape? Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 24, 205-226.
Hart, T.C., Rennison, C.M. & Gibson, C. (2005). Revisiting Respondent “Fatigue Bias” in the National Crime Victimization Survey. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 21, 345-363.
Lauritsen, J.L. & Archakova, E. (2008). Advancing the Usefulness of Research for Victims of Crime. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24, 92-102.
Planty, M. & Strom, K. (2007). Understanding the Role of Repeat Victims in the Production of Annual U.S. Victimization Rates. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 23, 179-200.
Thompson, M.P., Saltzman, L.E., & Johnson, H. (2003). Comparison of Risk Factors for Intimate Partner Violence-Related Injury Across Two National Surveys on Violence Against Women. Violence Against Women, 9, 438-457.
Ybarra, L.M.R. & Lohr, S.L. (2002). Estimates of Repeat Victimization Using the National Crime Victimization Survey. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18, 1- 21.
Citizen cooperation with officials in deterring and detecting crime.
Special police strike forces to combat those crimes which the survey indicates as being most prevalent, and
Street and park lighting programs in those areas with the highest reported crime rates.
Print and broadcast media
The media have become increasingly familiar with the NCVS data. Findings from the NCVS now appear regularly in a wide variety of contexts on television, radio, and in print when reporting on a host of crime-related topics.
Other uses of the NCVS
There are other reasons why data users want the crime victimization information produced from the NCVS. Some of the reasons include:
Planning for public education programs, police patrol strategies, and new communities and housing projects. This type of planning requires knowledge of the characteristics of victimized persons and households, as well as when and where victimizations occur.
Conducting feasibility studies and planning programs for the restitution and compensation to victims of crime. These studies and programs require information on the nature and extent of injury and loss that results from criminal victimization.
Assessing the need for property identification programs. These programs require information on the amount of property recovered after burglaries and thefts.
Understanding more about the nature and extent of biases in police data on known offenses. These studies require knowledge of the levels of nonreporting to the police, together with information on the kinds of victimization that are disproportionately not reported to the police.
REPORTS and PAPERS
BJS has a special analysis group that analyzes the data and produces several types of publications on a periodic basis. Some of the past publications released from this survey include:
Annual Publications
Criminal Victimization in the United States
http:// www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cv07.pdf
Indicators of School Crime and Safety
http:// www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/iscs08.pdf
Periodic special reports
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/aic02.pdf
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/anhpivc.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/bvvc.pdf
Crimes Against Persons Age 65 or Older
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cpa6502.pdf
If the NCVS program were discontinued, executive and legislative branch policymakers would no longer have crime and victim-related information available when making decisions on formulating legislation except from the FBI data that lack the demographic information that makes the NCVS data so valuable. Also, there would be no reliable measure of changes in the rate of serious crime for the United States that include crimes not reported to the police.
Information quality is an integral part of the pre-dissemination review of all data and information disseminated by the Census Bureau. The Census Bureau's Information Quality Guidelines are available at http://www.census.gov/quality. Additionally, BJS maintains a rigorous quality control process as documented in its Data Quality Guidelines (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/dataquality/guidelines.-htm).
3. Use of Information Technology
Respondents to the NCVS are households and individuals. The Census Bureau collects the data from in-person and telephone interviews. In July 2006, field representatives began conducting interviews using computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) methods whereby field representatives use a laptop computer to display questions and record responses. Paper and pencil interviewing was discontinued when data collection with CAPI began.
Cost was one of the primary reasons for deciding to convert the NCVS to a fully automated survey. As data collection for all other demographic surveys within the Census Bureau fully utilize automated data collection methods, maintaining a PAPI collection for the NCVS had become more expensive. Additionally, a fully automated collection will enable BJS to implement requests for new content and new methods into the survey faster. Additional benefits from utilizing a fully automated collection include improving the quality of the NCVS data, streamlining the processing systems since there will no longer be a need for dual systems to accommodate two different modes of data collection, and eliminating data differences resulting from two different interviewing modes. Furthermore, due to the nature of the survey, it is not possible to utilize any other forms of information technologies to reduce respondent burden.
Efforts to Identify Duplication
The Census Bureau's current surveys' sampling frame is the universe for the NCVS sample. The NCVS does not duplicate any other effort in the field. BJS has studied and continues to study the relationship of the NCVS data to the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) data. There is no other information available to prepare national crime statistics based on the demographic characteristics of victims and victimized households regardless of whether the victimization was reported to the police.
Minimizing Burden
N/A. The NCVS is a household-based sample and does not impact small businesses or small entities.
Consequences of Less Frequent Collection
In order to produce annual estimates of crime, it is necessary to collect data on an ongoing basis. Although lengthening the reference period would reduce the data quality by increasing error associated with memory recall, the fiscal constraints of the NCVS have demanded that the impact on estimates using a year reference period be examined. If a longer reference period is used, the survey will be impacted in the following ways: 1) loss of annual change estimates, 2) need to retrain interviewers, and 3) introduce non-sampling error associated with recall as response rates would not be bounded.
7. Special Circumstances
N/A. Collection is consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.9.
8. Federal Register Publication and Outside Consultation
Recent activity by BJS on the NCVS centers on methodological work. In order to develop an agenda for reconfiguring the survey and improving its ability to effectively measure the extent and consequences of crime in the U.S., the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) sponsored an expert panel study. The CNSTAT panel reviewed the survey’s methodology and provided recommendations for redesigning the NCVS. The panel’s initial recommendations are contained in the above mentioned publication, Surveying Victims: Options for Conducting the National Crime Victimization Survey.
Over recent years, the NCVS budget has fallen short of the increasing costs of administering the survey. As a result, in 2005 BJS funded a panel of survey researchers and criminologists to explore potential cost saving changes to the survey. Participants in this effort included:
Dr. Janet Lauritsen, University of Missouri-St. Louis;
Dr. David Cantor, Research Associate Professor, Joint Program in Survey Methodology, University of Maryland, and Westat;
Dr. Robert Groves, Professor of Sociology and Director of the Survey Research Center at the Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan;
Dr. Sharon Lohr, Distinguished Professor of Statistics, Arizona State University, Tempe;
Dr. James P. Lynch, Professor, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, NY;
Dr. Trivellore Raghunathan, Professor of Biostatistics, Research Professor at the Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan; and
Dr. Roger Tourangeau, Director of the Joint Program in Survey Methodology (University of Maryland) and Research Professor in the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan.
9. Paying Respondents
N/A. Payment or gifts to respondents are not provided in return for participation in the survey.
10. Assurance of Confidentiality
All NCVS information about individuals or households is confidential by law--Title 42, United States Code, Sections 3789g and 3735 (formerly Section 3771) and Title 13, United States Code, Section 9. Only Census Bureau employees sworn to preserve this confidentiality may see the survey responses. Even BJS, as the sponsor of the survey, is not authorized to see or handle the data in its raw form. All unique and identifying information is scrambled or suppressed before it is provided to BJS to analyze. Data are maintained in secure environments and in restricted access locations within the Census Bureau. All data provided to BJS must meet the confidentiality requirements set forth by the Disclosure Review Board at the Census Bureau.
In a letter signed by the Director of the Census Bureau, sent to all participants in the survey, respondents are informed of this law and assured that it requires the Census Bureau to keep all information provided by the respondent confidential. The letter also informs respondents that this is a voluntary survey. Furthermore, in addition to the legal authority and voluntary nature of the survey, the letter informs respondents of the public reporting burden for this collection of information, the principal purposes for collecting the information, and the various uses for the data after it is collected which satisfies the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974.
11. Justification for Sensitive Questions
The NCVS asks about experiences such as rape that may be sensitive for some respondents. Given the objective of the NCVS--to estimate the amount of victimization in the Nation--this is inevitable. The importance of estimating crime levels, as well as the potential value of detailed information about victimization for designing crime prevention strategies, is explained to any respondent who seems hesitant to answer. BJS has structured the questions and interviewer application of them to lessen their sensitivity. All respondents have the option of refusing to answer any question.
12. Estimate Respondent Burden
Table 1 shows the estimated respondent reporting burden for interviewed and noninterviewed households in the actual survey. The estimates are based on the second half of 2008 interview/noninterview counts. The estimated total annual hours in the table below (53,565) represents a 259 hour decrease from the current inventory (53,824 hours) because the questionnaire changes implemented in July 2008 (see Appendix C) were based on an estimation of the burden for half a year of data collection. The current annual inventory is based on the actual hours required to collect the data from the revised questionnaire and accounts for a full 12-month cycle of data collection.
Figure 1. Burden Hour Calculation |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annualized burden |
|
|
||||
|
Inter- viewed |
Nonin-terviewed |
Reinterview (Interviews) |
Reinterview (Non-interview) |
|
Year 1 |
Year 2 |
Year 3 |
|
Total burden |
||
Number of respondents |
66,400 |
12,900 |
2,400 |
400 |
|
82,100 |
82,100 |
82,100 |
|
246,300 |
||
Number of responses |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total households |
132,800 |
25,800 |
2,400 |
400 |
|
161,400 |
161,400 |
161,400 |
|
484,200 |
||
Estimated number of hours per response |
0.376 |
0.120 |
0.200 |
0.005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Estimated total hours for respondent |
49,987 |
3,096 |
480 |
2 |
|
53,565 |
53,565 |
53,565 |
|
160,696 |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
TOTAL hours by year |
53,565 |
53,565 |
53,565 |
|
|
||||
|
|
|
TOTAL hours |
|
|
|
|
160,696 |
||||
14. Estimates of Costs to the Federal Government
There are no capital or start-up costs associated with the data collection.
The estimated annual cost to the Federal Government for the basic NCVS is $19.3 million in FY 2009. The Census Bureau handles all aspects of collecting and preparing data for analysis at an annual cost of $18.5 million. The largest share of costs is the labor for the interviewers who collect data from respondents ($13.5 million). Data processing is $5.8 million and sampling is $3.5 million. NCVS sampling costs are supported by BJS outside the normal annual NCVS operating costs of $19.3 million. BJS staff time costs $850,000. The laptop acquisition of $1,849,008 for FY10-FY14 is being supported by BJS. BJS of the U.S. Department of Justice bears all costs of the survey.
15. Reasons for Change in Burden
The decrease in respondent burden hours is due to the reduction in the NCVS sample that has occurred since the previous submission. A 14 percent sample reduction was due to budgetary constraints and a reduction in funds available for the NCVS.
In addition, there was a small net decrease due to two changes made to the instrument in July 2008 as discussed in an 83-c letter. Questions used in the identity theft supplement to measure the emotional response to this crime were added to the NCVS to measure the emotional response for victims of violent crime. Because the questions on the NCVS relating to vandalism have been underutilized, these questions were dropped to avoid increasing the overall respondent burden.
16. Project Schedule
BJS releases information collected in the NCVS in a variety of formats. Each spring BJS releases a report providing annual estimates from the survey, including rates and counts of violent and property crime, characteristics of crimes and victims, year-to-year change estimates and trend estimates.
BJS annually produces a detailed annual report on its website that provides crime rates by type of crime, victim and offender characteristics, and incident characteristics. This web document includes links to spreadsheets providing users the ability to further analyze the survey data. Since 2003, BJS has provided an advanced web based indexing format that greatly facilitates users accessing tables in the report.
In addition, each year BJS releases a number of in-depth analytical monographs and other papers that provide information on some of the broad range of topics covered in the survey. These reports cover such topics as victimization and victim race, injuries from violent crime, school crime, intimate partner violence, age patterns in violent victimization, Hispanic victims of crime, third party involvement in crime, and reporting to police of rape and sexual assault.
Interviewing for the national sample begins on the first of each month. The CAPI interviewing is conducted over the entire interview month. Data processing is conducted on both a monthly and quarterly basis. Because the survey uses a 6-month recall period, crime incidence data for a given calendar year are not fully collected until June of the following year. However, annual estimates are produced and published based on data collected during a calendar year (collection year) rather than on crimes occurring during a calendar year (data year) starting with the 1996 data. Annual collection year estimates are provided to BJS approximately in April of each year.
Data from the survey are archived at the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) at the University of Michigan. Researchers can download public use files of the NCVS data and codebooks to conduct their own analyses. The public use files are produced by the Census Bureau. All information that might identify individual respondents to the survey is removed from the files sent to the ICPSR.
17. Expiration Date Approval
The OMB control number and expiration date will be provided to each household in sample as part of the introductory letter sent prior to each enumeration period as well as displayed on the CAPI laptop or read during the interview describing the nature of the survey and authority to collect the information. A screen shot is included in the attachments.
18. Exceptions to the Certification
N/A. There are no exceptions to Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions. Collection is consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.9.
Appendix A
NCVS Interviewing Schedule
Frequency of Data Collection |
J |
F |
M |
A |
M |
J |
J |
A |
S |
O |
N |
D |
1/6 of sample |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
1/6 of sample |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
1/6 of sample |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
1/6 of sample |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
1/6 of sample |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
1/6 of sample |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
Appendix B
NCVS Forms
Forms Used with All Sampled Households1
(completed by interviewers in-person or on the phone)
Form Number |
Title |
Description |
Frequency |
NCVS-500 |
Control Card |
“Control Card” Lists a roster of all persons living in the household with ages and other characteristics to help interviewer determine who should be interviewed. |
Monthly (2x/yr per household) |
NCVS-1 |
Basic Screen Questionnaire |
“Screener” Screens for crime incidents. |
Monthly (2x/yr per household) |
NCVS-1(SP) |
Spanish Basic Screen Questionnaire |
“Spanish Screener” Spanish translation of NCVS-1. |
Monthly (2x/yr per household) |
NCVS-2 |
Incident Report |
“Incident Report” Collect detailed information about each incident identified in the screener |
Monthly (2x/yr per household) |
NCVS-2(SP) |
Crime Incident Report |
“Spanish Incident Report” |
Monthly (2x/yr per household) |
Forms Used with Some Households2
(completed by interviewers in-person or on the phone)
Form Number |
Title |
Description |
Frequency |
NCVS-541 |
Reinterview Basic Screen Questionnaire |
“Reinterview screener” Used by senior field representatives to evaluate the performance of a sample of field representatives. |
As needed |
Forms Used with Some Households
(Standard forms used by interviewers upon request to provide more information)
NCVS-110 |
NCVS Fact Sheet |
“Fact Sheet” This is a brochure for the field representatives to give to respondents if they have questions about the NCVS. |
As needed |
NCVS-550.1 |
NCVS At A Glance |
“At A Glance” This pamphlet contains survey information, NCVS concepts and definitions, as well as a list of FAQs |
As needed |
NCVS-554 |
Field Representatives Information Card Booklet |
“FR Booklet” Contains answers to response categories that may need further explanation. |
As needed |
Forms Used by the Field Representatives
(Interviewing Manuals and Training Materials)
Forms Used by the Field Representatives – (continued)
Form Number |
Title |
Description |
Frequency |
NCVS-522.1 |
NCVS CAPI Blaise Initial Training Classroom Workbook |
“Classroom Workbook” Workbook used during classroom training. |
As needed |
NCVS-546 |
NCVS CAPI Reinterviewer’s Manual |
“NCVS Reinterview Manual” Contains the Procedures and Instructions for conducting the reinterview process (quality control) and navigating through the CAPI reinterview instrument. |
As needed |
NCVS-547 |
NCVS CAPI Reinterview – Reinterviewer’s Self-Study |
“Self-Study Guide for NCVS Reinterview” Self-Study for the Reinterview process. |
As needed |
NCVS-570 |
NCVS RO Manual |
Regional office manual for performance guidelines |
As needed |
Forms mailed as Letters
NCVS-572(L) |
Introductory letter |
“Introductory letter” Introductory letter mailed to households prior to data collection. |
Incoming households |
NCVS-572(L)SP |
Spanish Introductory letter |
“Spanish Introductory letter” Spanish translation of the introductory letter mailed to households prior to data collection. |
Incoming households |
NCVS-572(L)CHIN-S |
Chinese (Simplified) Introductory letter |
“Chinese (Simplified) Introductory letter” Chinese (simplified) translation of the introductory letter mailed to households prior to data collection. |
Incoming households |
NCVS-572(L)CHIN-T |
Chinese (Traditional) Introductory letter |
“Chinese (Traditional) Introductory letter” Chinese (traditional) translation of the introductory letter mailed to households prior to data collection. |
Incoming households |
NCVS-572(L)KOR |
Korean Introductory letter |
“Korean Introductory letter” Korean translation of the introductory letter mailed to households prior to data collection. |
Incoming households |
NCVS-572(L)VIET |
Vietnamese Introductory letter |
“Vietnamese Introductory letter” Vietnamese translation of the introductory letter mailed to households prior to data collection. |
Incoming households |
NCVS-573(L) |
Follow-up letter |
“Follow-up letter” Letter sent to households in rotations 2-7 and includes Frequently Asked Questions about the NCVS. |
Monthly (2x/yr per household) |
NCVS-573(L)SP |
Spanish Follow-up letter |
“Spanish Follow-up letter” Spanish translation of the letter sent to households in rotations 2-7 and includes Frequently Asked Questions about the NCVS. |
Monthly (2x/yr per household) |
NCVS-593(L) |
Thank-you letter |
“Thank-you letter” Letter sent to households that completed an interview. |
Monthly (2x/yr per household) |
NCVS-593(L)SP |
Spanish thank-you letter |
“Spanish Thank-you letter” Spanish translation of the thank-you letter. |
Monthly (2x/yr per household) |
NCVS-594(L) |
Final letter |
“Final letter” Final letter sent to thank households after the 7th enumeration period. |
Outgoing households |
NCVS-594(L)SP |
Spanish final letter |
“Spanish Final letter” Spanish translation of the final letter. |
Outgoing households |
Appendix C
OMB approved revisions and supplements to the NCVS
The NCVS has been used as the vehicle for developing questions to obtain information about a variety of initiatives related to crime and crime victimization. In 1999, a set of questions was added to the survey to obtain information about hate crime victimization. In 2000, in response to a Congressional mandate, questions were added on a test basis to collect information about the victimization of people with developmental disabilities. The Census Bureau, in conjunction with BJS, developed questions to collect this information as part of the NCVS beginning in July 2000. Also, beginning in July 2000, questions pertaining to the respondent's lifestyle and home protection were removed from the NCVS to enable adding the disability questions without increasing respondent burden. After a period of testing, BJS modified the disability questions in 2007 to match those used in the American Community Survey.
Per Executive Order 13221 signed by the President on October 16, 2001, BJS worked to develop questions designed to elicit information from NCVS respondents about the vulnerability to as well as occurrences of computer related crime. With the ever-expanding growth and use of the Internet, including a rapid growth of Internet related commerce, there is growing concern about vulnerability of people to a variety of offenses related to its use. Such offenses include attacks by computer viruses, fraud in purchasing online, threats via email and unrequested lewd or pornographic emails.
In addition to adding the computer crime questions to the NCVS, BJS requested implementation of revised employment questions and the expansion of the victim-offender relationship answer categories on the NCVS-2, Crime Incident Report. The new employment questions are used to obtain more detailed information about the industry and occupation of employed respondents who were victims of crime. The revised answer categories for the victim-offender relationship questions provide more detailed information about employee-employer type relationships of victims to their offenders.
Existing questions on the survey were also revised during the past few years. BJS also directed implementation in January 2003 of several changes to data collected from the NCVS-500 Control Card and the NCVS-1 Basic Screen Questionnaire for the NCVS in order to comply with the OMB’s new guidelines for collecting data on race and ethnicity from the respondent. These changes included:
Replacing the existing single-response race question with a multiple-response race question and allowing a maximum of four categories (races) to be selected by the respondent.
Incorporating revised race answer categories for the race question.
Modifying the question wording of the current ethnicity question.
Asking the ethnicity question prior to the race question, rather than after the race question.
At the request of BJS, in 2003 the Census Bureau replaced the education questions, “Education-highest grade” and “Education-complete that year?” with a single question that asks about “Education-highest grade completed?” This new question included expanded answer categories for the 12th grade high school educational level and higher educational degrees as well. In January 2004, two new questions were added to determine if a sample unit is located within a gated/walled or restricted access community. Also, at this time, two new questions were added to the crime incident report to collect information about the number of guns stolen and number of other firearms stolen.
In July 2004, the computer crime questions were removed from the survey and questions about identity theft were added. These questions on use or unauthorized use of credit cards, existing accounts, or personal information were added to the NCVS-1, Basic Screen Questionnaire in an effort to identify better ways to help victims of identity theft and to find more effective methods of eliminating this type of crime.
As research shows that pregnant women may be at a higher risk of being a victim of violent crime, in July 2005 a question was added to the NCVS crime incident report to determine the pregnancy status, of all female respondents age 18 to 49, at the time the incident occurred.
As discussed above, in January 2007 BJS modified questions regarding disabilities the respondent may have in order to match the set of questions asked on the American Community Survey (ACS). BJS also modified the answer list to the relationship of the offender to the respondent questions by adding the category “Teacher/School staff”.
Because BJS conducted the Identity Theft Supplement from January-June 2008, the set of questions on identity theft from the NCVS-1 screener were removed for that period. In addition, changes were made to the set of questions regarding disabilities based on changes implemented in the ACS.
In July 2008 the set of questions dealing with Identity Theft from the NCVS-1 screener question section were revised and inserted back into the NCVS-1. The set of questions involving vandalism and hate crime related to the vandalism were removed at that time to offset any respondent burden added by the inclusion of a set of questions targeting the emotional toll of being a victim of a violent crime. This set of questions was originally asked as part of the ITS.
The NCVS has been used as the vehicle for a number of supplements to provide additional information about crime and victimization. The School Crime Supplement was conducted for the National Center for Education Statistics in 1989 and 1995, and every two years since 1999. A Workplace Risk Supplement was conducted for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health in 2002. A supplement was added in 2001 to obtain information about public contacts with the police. This supplement, which has been used to inform the nation on the subject of racial profiling in traffic stops, is conducted every three years basis. A supplement to examine stalking behaviors was implemented in January-June, 2006. The Identity Theft Supplement (ITS) was conducted from January-June 2008 to measure the prevalence and economic cost of Identity Theft.
1 In July 2006, the NCVS was fully automated and, as such, paper forms are no longer used to complete the survey.
2 In July 2006, the NCVS was fully automated and, paper forms are no longer used to complete the survey.
| File Type | application/msword |
| File Title | SUPPORTING STATEMENT |
| Author | Lisa Price-Grear |
| Last Modified By | pricel |
| File Modified | 2009-07-13 |
| File Created | 2009-07-13 |