NIBRS_Part B

B. Collection of Information Employing Statistical Methods.

1. The potential respondent universe of the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) includes 18,233 law enforcement agencies voluntarily participating in the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. The law enforcement agencies consist of approximately 11,639 local, 725 colleges and universities, 5,157 county, 511 state, 191 tribal, and 10 federal agencies. Of those agencies that voluntarily participate in the FBI UCR Program, approximately 6,038 submit data via the NIBRS. These agencies correlate to all population group sizes and have many diverse attributes. The agencies include a mix of population density and degrees of urbanization; various compositions of population particularly youth concentration; population mobility with respect to residents’ mobility, commuting patterns, and transient factors; different economic conditions including median income, poverty level, and job availability; areas with different modes of transportation and highway systems; different cultural factors and educational, recreational, and religious characteristics; family conditions with respect to divorce and family cohesiveness; climate; effective strength of law enforcement; policies of other components of the criminal justice system; citizens’ attitudes toward crime; and crime reporting practices of the citizenry. The chart below represents the number of participating agencies in the FBI UCR Program and the number of NIBRS agencies submitting one or more months of data.

Population Group		UCR Program Participants SRS and NIBRS		NIBRS Participants
		Number of Agencies	Population Covered	Number of Agencies	Population Covered
Cities	Group I (250,000 inhabitants and more)	75	56,398,148	17	8,696,439
	Group II (100,000 to 249,999 inhabitants)	209	31,323,512	57	8,389,272
	Group III (50,000 to 99,999 inhabitants)	473	32,816,692	140	9,809,092
	Group IV (25,000 to 49,999 inhabitants)	888	30,762,527	298	10,239,606
	Group V (10,000 to 24,999 inhabitants)	1,929	30,586,844	603	9,499,555
	Group VI (Less than 10,000 inhabitants)1,2	9,499	26,669,678	3,168	8,923,889
Counties	Group VIII (Nonmetropolitan County)2	3,049	30,821,138	1,167	12,449,467
	Group IX (Metropolitan County)2	2,111	72,213,378	588	19,960,253
	Total	18,233	311,591,917	6,038	87,967,573

¹ Includes universities and colleges to which no population is attributed.

² Includes state police to which no population is attributed.

Out of the 6,038 agencies that voluntarily report data to the FBI UCR Program, approximately 5,154 submit twelve month complete data and 884 submit between one and eleven months of data. See chart below.

Number of months submitted	Number of Agencies
1 month	109
2 months	55
3 months	39
4 months	64
5 months	55
6 months	57
7 months	63
8 months	60
9 months	78
10 months	106
11 months	198
12 months	5,154
Total	6,038
Non Responding NIBRS Agencies	609

Of the 6,647 NIBRS agencies, 609 are nonreporters. These agencies are nonresponsive due to being understaffed, underfunded, or are implementing a new data record system. Even though these agencies are nonreporters they are considered participants of the Program and will submit data when the problems have been resolved.

Despite the fact that 78 percent of the NIBRS agencies respond with twelve months of complete data, participation in the NIBRS has been slow. This in turn has prompted the FBI UCR Program to enhance its outreach efforts by corroborating with Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to increase NIBRS participation, publishing the NIBRS data, providing the tools to submit NIBRS data, and by securing a NIBRS outreach subject matter expert.

The FBI’s UCR Program publishes NIBRS monographs and special studies to demonstrate the utility and richness of the NIBRS data; a 2011 NIBRS publication was released in August 2013 and the 2012 NIBRS was released December 2013. For Crime in the United States (CIUS) the FBI converts NIBRS data to the traditional Summary Reporting System (SRS) format. Once converted from NIBRS submissions, the SRS data are available as printouts to state and local agencies for review. The SRS printouts contain incident reports that are aggregated by offenses, arrests, property types and values, clearances, and details of homicides.

While NIBRS participants include a mix of population density and jurisdictions with different sociodemographic conditions, the current NIBRS participants are not a representative sample and therefore not used to calculate NIBRS national estimates of broader populations. However, the FBI UCR Program is taking steps to increase NIBRS participation through the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division’s support in the National Crime Statistics Exchange (NCS-X), an effort led by BJS. The goal of the NCS-X project is to strategically expand the number of law enforcement agencies reporting incident-based data to the FBI through the NIBRS so that accurate and detailed national estimates of crime in the United States can be calculated.

2. NIBRS data are collected/received from state UCR Program participants on a monthly basis. The FBI UCR Program has established various time frames and deadlines for acquiring the monthly data. Annual deadlines are also designated in order to collect/assess receipt of monthly submissions. There are times when special circumstances may cause an agency to request an extension. The FBI UCR Program has the authority to grant these extensions.

The NIBRS is an incident-based reporting system which means data are collected on each single crime occurrence. The NIBRS data are designed to be generated as a byproduct of local, state, and federal automated records systems. Thus, an agency can build its own system to suit its individual needs, including all the information required for administrative and operational purposes. Only the data required by NIBRS are then reported to the national UCR Program.

The NIBRS is used by participating law enforcement agencies to report offenses and relevant details by incident, using up to 58 data elements to collect details about offenses, offenders, victims, property, and arrestees reported to police. Developed in the late 1980s, the NIBRS was designed as an automated system to modernize UCR, and includes automated checks to ensure data quality.

As the NIBRS data collection is intended to collect detailed incident-based data in the U.S., sampling methodologies are not used. The FBI UCR Program does convert the NIBRS data to SRS data standards and then does apply estimation procedures based on the SRS estimation procedures to compensate for the missing jurisdictions. Using well-established procedures, the FBI UCR Program estimates for missing data for agencies with partial reports and for nonreporting agencies and then aggregates these estimates to determine the number of offenses for the total U. S. Population. Crime in the United States (CIUS) presents these approximations in Tables 1-7. The Program estimates offenses that occur within each of three areas: Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), cities outside MSAs, and nonmetropolitan counties. The national Program computes estimates by using the known crime figures of similar areas within a state and assigning the same proportion of crime volumes to nonreporting agencies or agencies with missing data. The estimation process considers the following: population size of agency; type of jurisdiction, e.g., police department versus sheriff’s office; and geographic location.

Although the program historically uses estimation procedures to account for missing data in presentations such as Crime in the United States, it did not apply any estimation procedures to the 2011 or 2012 NIBRS publications to account for missing data for jurisdictions that do not submit their UCR data via the NIBRS or of non-participating jurisdictions. It included the actual NIBRS data submitted by agencies. The purpose of the publication was to demonstrate the utility of the NIBRS data. NIBRS data has not been tested to determine if it is a national representation of crime data; therefore estimation procedures for NIBRS data have not been completed.

The difference between NIBRS and the traditional SRS is the degree of detail in reporting. In the traditional system, law enforcement agencies tally the number of occurrences of Part I offenses, as well as arrest data for both Part I and Part II offenses, and submit aggregate counts of the collected data in monthly summary reports either directly to the FBI or indirectly through state UCR Programs. Therefore, the traditional UCR Program can best be described as a summary reporting system. The types of data tallied include the number of offenses; clearances; types and values of stolen and recovered property; and the age, sex, and race of persons who are arrested. Expanded data are collected on homicides (i.e., Murder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter, Manslaughter by Negligence, and Justifiable Homicide) through the use of Supplementary Homicide Reports. Furthermore, there are no requirements to tie arrests and exceptional clearances back to previously submitted incident reports.

In NIBRS, law enforcement agencies collect detailed data regarding individual crime incidents and arrests and submit them in separate reports using prescribed data elements and data values to describe each incident and arrest. Therefore, NIBRS involves incident-based reporting. The NIBRS collects data on each incident and arrest within 23 crime categories made up of 49 specific crimes called Group A offenses. For each of the offenses coming to the attention of law enforcement, various facts about the crime are collected. In addition to the Group A offenses, there are 10 Group B offense categories for which only arrest data are reported.

The most significant difference between NIBRS and the traditional SRS is the degree of detail in reporting. In reporting data via the traditional SRS, law enforcement agencies tally the occurrences of ten Part I crimes. NIBRS is capable of producing more detailed, accurate, and meaningful data because data are collected about when and where crime takes place, what form it takes, and the characteristics of its victims and perpetrators. Although most of the general concepts for collecting, scoring, and reporting UCR data in the SRS apply in the NIBRS, such as jurisdictional rules, there are some important differences in the two systems. The most notable differences that give the NIBRS an advantage over the SRS are: No Hierarchy Rule, in a multiple-offense incident NIBRS reports every offense occurring during the incident where SRS would report just the most serious offense and the lower-listed offense would not be reported; NIBRS provides revised, expanded, and new offense definitions; NIBRS provides more specificity in reporting offenses, using NIBRS offense and arrest data for 23 Group A offense categories can be reported while in the SRS ten Part I offenses can be reported; NIBRS can distinguish between attempted and completed Group A crimes; NIBRS also provides crimes against society while the SRS does not; the victim-to-offender data, circumstance reporting , drug related offenses, offenders suspected use of drugs, and computer crime is expanded in NIBRS; the NIBRS update reports are directly tied to the original incident submitted. The Group A offense categories include arson, assault offenses, bribery, burglary/breaking and entering, counterfeiting/forgery, destruction/damage/vandalism of property, drug/narcotic offenses, embezzlement, extortion/blackmail, fraud offenses, gambling offenses, homicide offenses, human trafficking, kidnapping/abduction, larceny/theft offenses, motor vehicle theft, pornography/obscene material, prostitution offenses, robbery, sex offenses, sex offenses/nonforcible, stolen property offenses, and weapon law violations. The Group B offense categories include bad checks, curfew/loitering/vagrancy violations, disorderly conduct, DUI, drunkenness, family offenses/nonviolent, liquor law violations, peeping tom, trespass of real property, and all other offenses.

Since data collected by NIBRS are considerably more comprehensive than those of the traditional summary UCR system, agencies wishing to participate should have computerized data systems capable of processing NIBRS information. NIBRS was designed to be a byproduct of an existing automated law enforcement records system.

Full participation in NIBRS necessitates meeting all the reporting guidelines and requirements set forth. Before a local agency begins submitting NIBRS data directly to the FBI, the agency will be asked to demonstrate its ability to meet NIBRS’ reporting requirements by submitting test data to the FBI. If a local agency is going to participate indirectly through its state UCR Program, it is the state’s responsibility to ensure that the local agency is able to fulfill NIBRS’ data submission requirements.

3. Response rates are maximized through liaison with state UCR programs. Communications encouraging data submissions occur frequently because of the relationship between the FBI UCR Program staff and law enforcement agencies. FBI UCR staff have a strong understanding of contextual challenges agencies face in reporting valid and reliable data and regularly work to overcome nonresponse issues when such challenges occur. The mission of the FBI UCR Program is to promote the NIBRS by active liaison with the state UCR Programs and the national law enforcement agencies to encourage participation. To encourage the submission of data, a listing of missing reports are sent to state UCR Programs and individual law enforcement agencies twice a year and then follow up contact is also made to those agencies to further encourage the submission of missing data. FBI UCR Program staff assist agencies in submitting 12 months of complete data through continuous communication.

Currently, 78 percent of the NIBRS participating law enforcement agencies report 12 months of complete data to the national Program. The FBI is working to promote the participation in NIBRS along with the FBI CJIS UCR Redevelopment Project (UCRRP). The UCRRP will manage the acquisition, development, and integration of a new information systems solution which affects UCR participating local, state, tribal and federal law enforcement agencies. The UCRRP's goal is to improve UCR efficiency, usability, and maintainability while increasing the value to users of UCR products.

One way the FBI UCR Program is taking steps to increase NIBRS participation is through the FBI CJIS Division’s support in the National Crime Statistics Exchange (NCS-X), an effort led by BJS. The goal of the NCS-X project is to strategically expand the number of law enforcement agencies reporting incident-based data to the FBI through the NIBRS so that accurate and detailed national estimates of crime in the United States can be calculated. BJS has determined that if data can be obtained from an additional 400 scientifically sampled law enforcement agencies and added to the data from the existing 6,000 NIBRS reporters, then statistically sound and detailed national crime estimates can be generated using NIBRS data. The NCS-X project is designed to assess impediments to reporting NIBRS data faced by these 400 sample agencies and to provide funding and technical assistance to the sample agencies and to state UCR/NIBRS programs that will enable them to report these additional incident-based data to the FBI.

A known key factor in preventing fuller participation is the perception that an agencies crime rate will increase with the reporting of NIBRS. To suppress this misconception the FBI UCR Program has assigned a NIBRS outreach subject matter expert to coordinate an effort to educate and address the utility of the NIBRS data.

Marketing Tools have been created to share with law enforcement entities interested in transitioning from SRS to the NIBRS which include a NIBRS Quick Facts Document and a NIBRS Overview document. The NIBRS Quick Facts document provides information on the NIBRS. It provides information on the Group A and Group B offenses, the offense categories of Crime Against Persons, Property, and Society, and the benefits of the NIBRS such as no hierarchy rule, capture of each offense within an incident (up to 10), correlation between offenses, property, victims, offenders, and arrestees, etc.; The NIBRS Overview document provides a quick summary of the history of NIBRS, what the NIBRS is, and its value.

To address the public relations aspect of the NIBRS, a NIBRS media package has been created to share with law enforcement agencies transitioning from the SRS to the NIBRS. The media package provides law enforcement with the information to educate the public and media representatives.

A NIBRS Focus Group has been established to assist the FBI UCR Program by providing input on implementing and collecting NIBRS data for new mandates or initiatives, by providing success stories and lessons learned, assisting in demonstrating the advantages of the NIBRS over the SRS, assisting in developing data quality measures, and providing possible ventures for promoting and encouraging NIBRS participation. The Focus Group also provides suggestions on NIBRS topics for individual studies and reports.

The 2011 and 2012 NIBRS data has been published with a 2013 publication forthcoming. All the comment and suggestion feedback from the 2011 and 2012 NIBRS publications has been analyzed to identify user endorsed improvements that can be included in future NIBRS publication products.

At the fall 2011 CJIS Advisory Policy Board (APB) members generated a discussion in regard to the impacts and advantages of ending the collection of data in the SRS and making submissions to the FBI UCR Program NIBRS only. APB members asked the Crime Statistics Management Unit (CSMU) to conduct a study reviewing the impacts. In response a Management and Program Analyst has been tasked with developing an exploratory study into transitioning the FBI UCR Program from SRS to a NIBRS only data collection. The study will examine the history of UCR and the laws that govern the program, provide an analysis of SRS and NIBRS agencies, study the cost analysis of maintaining both collections, outline the uses of the NIBRS data, explore grants, reach out to stakeholders and partners for impact, outline the advantages and disadvantages of eliminating SRS, and propose a timeline for transitioning to a NIBRS only collection.

Training also encourages participation in the FBI UCR Program. The FBI has trainers who provide on-site training for any law enforcement agency that participates in the FBI UCR Program. The trainers furnish introductory, intermediate, or advanced courses in data collection procedures and guidelines. In addition, the trainers are available by telephone or e-mail to provide law enforcement agencies with answers to specific questions about classification or scoring.

Providing vital links between local law enforcement and the FBI in the conduct of the UCR Program are the Criminal Justice Information Systems Committees of the IACP and the National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA). The IACP, as it has since the Program began, represents the thousands of police departments nationwide. The NSA encourages sheriffs throughout the country to participate fully in the Program. Both committees serve in advisory capacities concerning the UCR Program’s operation. The Association of State Uniform Crime Reporting Programs (ASUCRP) focuses on UCR issues within individual state law enforcement associations and also promotes interest in the FBI UCR Program. These organizations foster widespread and responsible use of uniform crime statistics and lend assistance to data contributors when needed.

Although the FBI makes an effort through its editing procedures, training practices, and correspondence to ensure the validity of the data it receives, the accuracy of the statistics depends primarily on the adherence of each contributor to the established standards of reporting. The FBI relies on the integrity of data contributors reporting data, as well as, Quality Assurance Reviews conducted by the CJIS Audit Unit on a triennial basis. The results of the audits are not used to adjust crime data, but are used to educate reporting agencies on compliance with national UCR guidelines.

4. Since the establishment of the FBI UCR Program in 1930, the volume, diversity, and complexity of crime steadily increased while the FBI UCR Program remained virtually unchanged. Although the data collected and disseminated by the UCR Program remained virtually unchanged throughout the years, in the 1980s, a broad utility had evolved for UCR. Recognizing the need for improved statistics, law enforcement called for a thorough evaluative study to modernize the UCR Program. The FBI concurred with the need for an updated program and lent its complete support, formulating a comprehensive three-phase redesign effort. The first two phases of this effort, guided by input from representatives of the FBI, the BJS, the IACP, and the NSA, culminated with the release of a comprehensive report.

The final report, the Blueprint for the Future of the Uniform Crime Reporting Program (Blueprint), was released in May 1985. It specifically outlined three areas of enhancement to help the UCR Program meet future information needs. First, agencies would use an incident-based system to report offenses and arrests. Second, the national UCR Program would collect data on two levels (i.e., limited and full participation), and third, the national UCR Program would introduce a quality assurance program.

In January 1986, the FBI began phase III of the redesign effort guided by the general recommendations set forth in the Blueprint. Contractors developed new data guidelines and system specifications while the FBI studied various state systems to select an experimental site to implement the redesigned program. In view of its long-standing incident-based Program and well-established staff dedicated solely to UCR, the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) was chosen. Upon selecting the SLED, which enlisted the cooperation of nine local law enforcement agencies, representing in relative terms the small, medium, and large departments in South Carolina, to participate in the project, the FBI developed automated data capture specifications to adapt the SLED’s state system to the national UCR Program’s standards, and the BJS funded the revisions. The pilot demonstration ran from March 1—September 30, 1987, and resulted in further refinement of the guidelines and specifications.

March 1—3, 1988, the FBI held a National UCR Conference to present the new system to law enforcement and to obtain feedback on its acceptability. Attendees of the National UCR Conference passed three overall recommendations without dissent: first, that there be established a new, incident-based national crime reporting system; second, that the FBI manages this program; and third, that an Advisor Policy Board composed of law enforcement executives be formed to assist in directing and implementing the new program. Furthermore, attendees recommended the implementation of a national incident-based reporting proceed at a pace commensurate with the resources and limitations of contributing law enforcement agencies.

From March 1988 through January 1989, the FBI proceeded in developing and assuming management of the UCR Program’s NIBRS. To begin implementation, the FBI awarded a contract to develop new offense definitions and data elements for the redesigned system. The work involved (a) revising the definitions of certain Part I offenses (b) identifying additional significant offenses to be reported, (c) refining definitions for both, and (d) developing data elements (incident details) for all UCR offenses in order to fulfill the requirements of incident-based reporting versus the current summary system. By April 1989, the national UCR Program received the first test submission of NIBRS data. Over the course of the next few years, the national UCR Program published information about the redesigned program in five documents:

• Data Collection Guidelines (revised August 2000) contains a system overview and descriptions of the offense codes, reports, data elements, and data values used in the system.

• Data Submission Specifications (May 1992) is for the use of local and state systems personnel who are responsible for preparing electronic submissions to the FBI.

• Approaches to Implementing an Incident-Based System (July 1992) is a guide for system designers.

• Error Message Manual (revised December 1999) contains designations of mandatory and optional data elements, data element edits, and error messages.

• Uniform Crime Reporting Handbook, NIBRS Edition (1992) provides a nontechnical program overview focusing on definitions, policies, and procedures of the NIBRS.

As more agencies inquired about the NIBRS, the FBI, in May 2002, made the Handbook

For Acquiring a Records Management System (RMS) that is Compatible with NIBRS available to agencies considering or developing automated incident-based records management systems. The handbook, developed under the sponsorship of the FBI and the BJS, provides instructions on planning for and conducting a system acquisition and offers guidelines on preparing an agency for conversion to the new system and to the NIBRS.

Originally designed with 52 data elements, the NIBRS captures up to 58 data elements via six types of data segments: administrative, offense, victim, property, offender, and arrestee. Of the 58 data elements, 22 are mandatory, 32 are conditionally mandated, and four are not mandated. Although, in the late 1980s, the FBI committed to hold all changes to the NIBRS in abeyance until a substantial amount of contributors implemented the system, modifications have been necessary. The system’s flexibility has allowed for the collection of four additional pieces of information to be captured within an incident: bias-motivated offenses (1990), the presence of gang activity (1997), data for law enforcement officers killed and assaulted (2003), and data on cargo theft (2005). It has also permitted the addition of new codes to further specify location types and property types (2010).

The FBI began accepting NIBRS data from a handful of agencies in January 1989. As more contributing law enforcement agencies became educated about the rich data available through incident-based reporting and as resources permitted, more agencies implemented the NIBRS. Based on 2011 data submissions, 15 states (Arkansas, Delaware, Idaho, Iowa, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia) submit all their data via the NIBRS. Although participation in UCR via the NIBRS has improved at a relatively slow rate over the last two decades, the last several years the national program has increased its outreach efforts to boost the number of NIBRS participants. The program is also addressing the reasons most cited for not reporting NIBRS data; these reasons include funding issues, the lack of training about the NIBRS, and the perceived notion that the agency’s crime count will rise. In response, the FBI is liaising with several states that have expressed interest in reporting via the NIBRS. As the completion of the UCR redevelopment project draws near, the program will offer contributors tools that will facilitate participation in the NIBRS. In addition, the FBI is collaborating with the BJS to transition the top 100 Most-in-Population agencies, as well as another 300 randomly selected agencies, from the SRS to the NIBRS in an attempt to make NIBRS a statistically significant representation of national crime data.

5. John H. Derbas

LESS Chief

[email protected]

304-625-3690

Amy C. Blasher

CSMU Chief

[email protected]

304-625-4840

James H. Noonan

Statistician

[email protected]

304-625-2927

Patricia S. Hanning

Technical Information Specialist

[email protected]

304-625-2957

11