NCVS_Supporting_Statement_Part_A 8-20-12

35

Supporting Statement

A. Justification

1. 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 September of 2015. The Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) current approval expires September 30, 2012. 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 (see attachment 1). The NCVS provides national data on personal and household victimization, both reported and not reported to police. The data collection allows the BJS to fulfill its mission of collecting, analyzing, publishing, and disseminating information on victims of crime. Together with the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI), statistics on crimes reported to law enforcement agencies, the NCVS provides an understanding of the nature of and changes in the nation’s crime problems.

The NCVS is currently the only source of annual national data on a number of policy relevant subjects related to criminal victimization, including intimate partner violence, hate crime, workplace violence, injury from victimization, guns and crime, the cost of crime, reporting to police, and crime against vulnerable populations, such as the elderly, juveniles, and persons with disabilities. The NCVS is also a vehicle for the implementation of routine survey supplements that provide detailed information on timely and relevant topics such as identity theft, school crime, and contacts between the police and the public.

2. Needs and Uses

Since 1972, the NCVS and its predecessor, the National Crime Survey (NCS), have provided national data on the level and change of personal and property crimes both reported and not reported to police. It is one of the two main sources of data on crime in the United States and the only source that provides detailed information on the level, nature and consequences of crime. By capturing crimes not reported to police, known as the “dark figure of crime,”¹ as well as those known to law enforcement, the NCVS serves as the primary, independent source of information on crime in the U.S. Understanding the “dark figure of crime” also helps to inform the appropriate allocation of criminal justice system and victim service resources and provides a better understanding of victim decision-making, responses to crime, and the resulting consequences.

In the mid-2000s, budget cuts led to a reduction in the NCVS sample and this combined with declining crime rates resulted in the survey capturing fewer crimes. Coupled with an overall declining crime rate, smaller sample sizes resulted in less precision and reliability around the weighted national estimates. In order to enhance the utility of the NCVS, increase the precision of estimates, and contain costs, BJS initiated a substantial redesign effort that will enable the NCVS to meet needs for reliable statistics on criminal victimization that are independent of police agency reports and build the capacity of the NCVS to generate subnational estimates of criminal victimization.

For the first stage of the redesign, BJS commissioned a panel of experts provided by the Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT) of the National Research Council to assess the survey, including its strengths and shortcomings. The panel’s initial recommendations are contained in two reports, 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 and Ensuring the Quality, Credibility, and Relevance of U.S. Justice Statistics (National Research Council, 2009), which is available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12671. Based on the panel’s recommendations for improvements to the NCVS, in 2009 the BJS began a number of experimental research projects known collectively as Methodological Research to Support the Redesign of the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS_RR). These on-going projects have been conducted under a separate generic clearance (OMB No. 1121-0325).

While the redesign and other NCVS-related work are discussed throughout this supporting statement as they have implications for the core, the BJS is specifically requesting clearance for the core NCVS. The core NCVS includes the administration of the NCVS-1 (screener) and NVCS-2 (crime incident report) instruments to a nationally representative sample of about 85,000 persons age 12 or older living in households in the United States. The core NCVS survey instrument covers eight general areas: 1. incidence of rape/sexual assault, robbery, assault, personal larceny, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and other theft; 2. characteristics of these victimizations, including location, time, presence of a weapon, injury, and property/monetary loss; 3. characteristics of the victims, including age, race, gender, disability, and occupation; 4. relationship between victim and offender and offender characteristics; 5. emotional impact of victimization; 6. victim self-defense and bystander intervention; 7. offender characteristics; 8. reporting to police and police response; 9. bias- or hate-motivated victimizations. Core work also includes the analysis and dissemination of data products and reports stemming from the core collection, as well as technical and methodological analyses and reports based on the sampling for, administration of, and analysis of data from the NCVS-1 and NCVS-2 instruments.

Some of the redesign work, such as the sample size restoration, has already been implemented into the core and is also covered under this clearance request. Other work, which is tangential to the core work but has not yet become a component of the annual data collection, is discussed in the supporting statement but is or will be covered under a separate OMB number, at least initially.

In order for BJS to fulfill its mission of generating and disseminating data on victims of crime and to maintain the NCVS as the primary source of data on victimization and the dark figure of crime, efforts are required to implement or continue to implement the redesign efforts that have been conducted to date. These efforts are geared towards 1. sample size restoration with goal of improving the precision and reliability of NCVS national victimization estimates; 2. improving field operations; 3. containing survey costs; 4. producing subnational victimization estimates; 5. improving the survey’s responsiveness to new and emerging topics, methodological issues, and data needs; and 6. improving outreach and the usability of the data.

Sample size restoration with goal of improving precision and reliability of national estimates

Beginning in 2010 and continuing throughout 2011, BJS began reinstating NCVS sample that had been previously reduced due to budgetary constraints (ICR Ref No. 201008-1121-002). The 2007 reductions in sample resulted in larger variance around the victimization estimates, and the major goal of the reinstatement was to improve the reliability of estimates. The sample reinstatement will also increase the utility of the NCVS by allowing for more detailed data analysis than could be conducted with smaller sample sizes and by increasing the precision of estimates, which increases the ability to make meaningful, more reliable comparisons across victim and offense characteristics.

The sample size restoration began as redesign work but maintaining the reinstated sample is now a component of the core work. This means that the cost of administering the NCVS from 2012 to 2015 will be at least $2 million a year greater than it was in 2009 when the sample was about 24% smaller.

Finally, in order to address the need to improve the reliability and precision of the NCVS and enhance the utility of the data, BJS has also invested in a support center for the NCVS called the National Victimization Survey Support Program (NVSSP). The researchers in the NVSSP, on contract from RTI International, have substantial expertise in survey methodology and data analysis and two of their first projects are an assessment of the current NCVS weighting and variance estimation and the NCVS bounding adjustment. The primary goal of the first project is to improve approaches for calculating the variance around victimization estimates. Improving the variance estimation methods will increase the ability to make more reliable comparisons across victim and offense characteristics. The goal of the second project is to assess whether the current bounding adjustment properly adjusts the victimization rate for persons and households at time-in-sample one (households new to the NCVS), to account for telescoping (error associated with reporting victimizations in the first interview that are outside of the six-month reference period). Improvements to the bounding adjustment based on the work of the NVSSP will also improve the reliability and precision of NCVS estimates.

Field operations

In addition to the sample restoration efforts, in 2011 and 2012, BJS undertook efforts to improve field operations that coincided with the U.S. Census Bureau’s regional office reorganization and Census headquarters reorganization. These efforts aim to improve the quality of crime reports collected while also aiming to reduce interviewer variability and reduce bias.

First, the Census Bureau began the process of reorganizing their Regional Offices to improve the oversight of field representative and develop survey-specific capabilities. Throughout 2012, the Census Bureau Regional Office (RO) management structure will slowly transition from twelve to six ROs and add one Survey Statistician in the Field (SSF) to represent each Census Bureau demographic survey to each regional office. The Census Bureau also conducted an intensive two-day refresher training for the field representatives (see Attachments: Refresher Training Guide and Refresher Training Workbook). This type of intensive refresher training had not been conducted in over ten years and was geared towards ensuring uniform and correct implementation of the NCVS survey. The training was conducted in two waves during the last quarter in 2011 and the first quarter in 2012 to allow for an assessment of the impact of training on victimization rates.

Concurrent to the refresher training and the Census Bureau’s RO realignment, the Bureau also implemented new performance standards for field representatives (FRs) based on a more comprehensive range of survey administration criteria than previously used. The new performance standards require the FRs to focus on aspects of survey administration beyond just overall response rates, such as item nonresponse, survey administration time (reading items slowly and as worded), and recording contact history information (CHI). The continued implementation of these new performance standards will help to reduce total survey error and further improve the reliability of NCVS estimates.

Post-training assessments revealed important improvements in the administration of the survey as intended and worded. While these assessments revealed no conclusive evidence that the training had enough of a significant impact on crime rates to warrant adjustments to the last quarter of 2011 data, BJS continues to monitor these changes in 2012.

Cost containment

In addition to improving the precision, reliability, and utility of NCVS national victimization estimates, the 2012 to 2015 NCVS survey work will also focus on the need to contain survey costs. Several ongoing NCVS_RR projects covered under the generic clearance are exploring approaches for containing costs by maximizing survey response hit rates without increasing the sample. The results from these projects will be available in the next one to two years and as the projects are completed, the findings will feed into other redesign work and will begin to be incorporated into the core.

BJS is currently testing the utility of using enhanced contextual priming (ECP) questions to trigger respondents’ memories and reduce measurement error associated with unreported victimization. Research conducted early in the history of the National Crime Survey (NCS), the predecessor to the NCVS, indicated that persons asked a set of attitudinal questions before the crime screening questions reported experiencing more crime. To the extent that this type of priming is able to illicit a greater number victimizations and reduce measurement error, the reliability of victimization estimates is also increased. Moreover, the addition of attitudinal questions is expected to increase the analytical value of the survey by providing contextual data, which may then be used in analyses examining the correlates of crime.

When the results of the ECP project are delivered around the end of 2012 or beginning of 2013, BJS will begin to incorporate the findings from the project into other on-going redesign work to improve the NCVS screener and crime incident report. For instance, if initial findings suggest that adding attitudinal questions on the crime screener may cue respondents’ memories and generate more reports of victimization, future instrument redesign work and testing will reflect this finding.

The Mixed Mode Data Collection project is another effort designed to increase screener productivity while reducing costs. The Mixed Mode project is exploring the viability of offering a self-administered survey with interviewer follow-up, to provide the respondent with options for completing the survey on his or her own time and in privacy when responding to sensitive items. BJS is also investigating address based sampling (ABS) and the use of nominal incentives as components of the mixed mode projects. ABS is attractive as a less costly option because the sampling strategy relies upon the Delivery Sequence File (DSF), which is used by the USPS. Likewise, nominal incentives may diminish the need for expensive interviewer-based follow-ups by enticing sample members to respond early. If determined to be feasible for the NCVS, these methodologies could free up resources that could then be directed to other components of the survey program. Again, the findings from this project will feed into the redesign work on improving the screener and the crime incident report.

BJS is also taking advantage of the reorganization of the U.S. Census Bureau to fully assess the costs associated with each survey task. The Census Bureau Headquarters are being reorganized so that each survey has a survey director who manages and oversees all aspects of the data collection process. The survey director maps out the specific tasks that have to be carried out during each step of the process and then draws eligible Census employees from nine activity teams to complete each task. This new approach to the allocation of tasks will allow BJS to know exactly how much of the NCVS budget is going to each task. By costing out each task and the related staffing, BJS will be better able to weigh the costs versus utility of particular tasks as well as the allocation of resources and further contain the survey costs. The Census Bureau’s new approach to budgeting and staff allocation is expected to be fully implemented for the NCVS by the end of the summer 2012.

Subnational estimates

Though the NCVS was originally designed to provide national level estimates of criminal victimization, BJS has recognized an increasing need for victimization data at the state and local level. Research conducted under the NCVS-RR generic clearance (OMB No. 1121-0325) demonstrated that the NCVS could be enhanced to produce several types of subnational estimates without substantially increasing the cost of survey administration (http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/westat_lae_5-19-10.pdf). From 2012 to 2015, findings from the research on generating subnational estimates with the NCVS will begin to be implemented. Currently, BJS has identified and is examining five strategies for producing subnational victimization estimates. The last two strategies discussed in this section demonstrate ways in which redesign work has already been implemented into core NCVS work, while the other strategies will initially be implemented under separate OMB clearances.

First, NCVS-RR research, as well as consultation with other federal statistical agencies, revealed that the NCVS could be used to produce indirect, model-based subnational estimates that would be of value to various data users and stakeholders. Preliminary model-based estimates are being produced for all 50 states as well as major cities (http://www.fcsm.gov/12papers/Li_2012FCSM_I-B.pdf)

Along with model-based subnational estimates, redesign work has also shown that direct city-level and state-level estimates are feasible for a lower cost than was originally expected. Initial simulations from the NCVS-RR research demonstrated that NCVS sample in certain large states can be reallocated to produce cost effective, direct state-level victimization estimates. By implementing a relatively small sample boost in these large states, the national sample can be maintained, while still allowing for the production of direct state-level estimates. Simulations have been generated for producing 3-year rolling averages for violent and property victimization rates for the 7, 22 and all 50 states and DC under various sample size and reallocation strategies (http://www.fcsm.gov/12papers/Fay_2012FCSM_I-B.pdf).

In states and cities with limited existing sample, using a combination of both indirect and direct subnational estimates of criminal victimization could keep NCVS costs to a minimum while providing the enhanced utility of subnational estimates. Additional research and discussions with the federal statistical agencies that produce subnational estimates will help to determine the most cost effective and reliable combination of direct and indirect victimization estimates to incorporate into the NCVS 2016 sample redesign. Additionally, BJS has determined that in 2016 when the Census Bureau begins to select the NCVS sample based on the 2010 decennial census, the NCVS will shift from the currently used Ernst method for selecting the primary sampling units (PSUs) to the Ohlsson method. The Ohlsson method requires that the first stage sample be selected independently which allows for annual sampling and affords greater flexibility and efficiency in terms of producing small area estimates and responding to sample cuts or boosts.

In 2016, a minimum of seven of the largest states will receive a sample boost to allow for direct state level and city level estimates of victimization in those states. Depending on the costs and operational requirements of boosting the sample further, BJS will have the flexibility to increase the boost to 22 states, or all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, and move back down without impacting the national estimates.

Prior to the sample redesign in 2016, BJS will begin conducting a test sample boost in the seven largest states in July, 2013. The boosted sample in these states will be independent from the core NCVS sample so that the national estimates will not be affected by any issues that may arise in the administration of the survey in boosted areas. The 2013 through 2015 test boost will allow BJS to anticipate any problems in full scale implementation, validate the assumptions used in the preliminary sample design simulations, and gain an understanding of the field costs associated with the boost, which can then be used for determining the cost of national implementation. In the states that receive the test boost, the infrastructure will also already be in place for producing direct state-level estimates after the 2016 redesign. Finally, using two- or three-year rolling averages, the test boost will also aim to produce state-level victimization estimates with coefficients of variation of 10%. Prior to the boost, BJS will submit a change request to OMB that will detail the research and methodology used to ensure that the test boost will produce reliable state-level estimates.

In an effort to examine cost effective alternatives to the current NCVS data collection process, the 2016 sample redesign will also be informed by the findings from the NCVS Companion Study currently being conducted by Westat (OMB No. 1121-0325). This ABS study is currently being piloted in the Chicago MSA and will be expanded to five areas in 2013. Because of the complexity of the 2013 Companion Study and the anticipated large sample sizes, the study will require full OMB review, separate from the generic clearance used for other redesign work. The preliminary purpose of the Companion Study is to test the ability to use low cost screening methods in combination with methods for blending the results of the survey with the NCVS. If successful, the methods would allow BJS to make better estimates of change for specific large jurisdictions. Currently, the other strategies for making subnational estimates will not yield precise change estimates in a reasonable amount of time. The single MSA pilot study will also examine the utility of including non-crime questions in the NCVS for to provide enhanced contextual priming, as well as value information that could be used for sample stratification, indirect modeling of state-level and city-level victimization estimates.

Finally, BJS will begin exploring ways to produce subnational estimates with the core NCVS survey, at no additional cost. BJS will continue with on-going technical work to produce an annual report presenting patterns and trends in victimization in generic areas (i.e. cities with a population of 25,000-50,000 in the Northeast). These generic area estimates of victimization will allow data users to identify “like” areas that share similar size and regional characteristics as their own location and to use the smaller generic areas as a baseline for comparison. Generic area typologies will be developed first with public use file data and then with the restricted-use, area-identified data maintained by the U.S. Census Bureau. Generic area estimates complement but are often used in other data collections, such as the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, in addition to state or city-level estimates.

Concurrent with the generic area work, BJS will also begin technical work exploring the feasibility of producing a data file and corresponding reports on property and violence crime victimization in the 40 largest metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). These 40 largest MSAs are a combination of the largest cities and counties in the United States. Prior to the NCVS sample reductions in the early 2000s, data were collected from a representative sample of respondents from the 40 largest MSAs and were released as a separate data file through the University of Michigan’s Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). These files were primarily used by the research community and BJS did not produce regular estimates of victimization rates for these 40 MSAs. With the sample reinstatement, BJS anticipates being able to, once again, identify the 40 largest MSAs. BJS will assess the reliability of the file for estimation purposes and determine whether it is feasible to use two- or three- year rolling averages to routinely generate victimization rates for these areas.

Improved survey responsiveness

In order to be at the forefront of criminal justice issues and inform discussions and policy on new and emerging crime types, BJS also needs to improve the NCVS’s responsiveness. One approach to improving the responsiveness of the survey and collecting data on growing crime types and criminal justice issues is through the administration of supplements. BJS often works with other Federal agencies, such as the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) and the National Institute of Justice, to develop NCVS supplements on topics related to data and research needs, such as the stalking, identity theft, and victimizations against persons in residential care and nursing home facilities.

For 2012 through 2015, the NCVS will have three primary rotating supplements (each with unique OMB numbers), which will remain in the field for six months. These supplements allow for the collection of detailed data on topics that are not included in the core NCVS. BJS also produces reports from each of the supplements and archives the data at ICPSR (www.icpsr.umich.edu). Each supplement is conducted under a separate NCVS review, and the tentative schedule for the administration of these routine supplements is as follows:

July – December, 2012 Identity Theft Supplement

January - June, 2013 School Crime Supplement

January - June, 2014 Police-Public Contact Survey

July - December, 2014 Identity Theft Supplement

January – June, 2015 School Crime Supplement

Another major effort for improving the survey’s responsiveness is a comprehensive assessment of the items on the Crime Incident Report (NCVS-2), including the utility of each item, the placement of items on the instrument, and whether items accurately and efficiently measure what they were intended to measure. In 2011, Dr. Lynn Addington, a visiting fellow from American University, joined BJS to assess the Crime Incident Report. Dr. Addington will continue the item-by-item assessment throughout 2012 and will then begin developing a plan and recommendations for core and topical items, data collection procedures, and protocol for reviewing and testing items on a routine basis. The proceeds of Dr. Addington’s work will be incorporated into a technical report detailing her research efforts and recommendations for a changed survey instrument. It is anticipated that Dr. Addington’s report will be completed by September, 2014. Another key deliverable that Dr. Addington will produce is a process or protocol for a routine technical review of the NCVS instruments and items on a set cycle. Once the new instrument has been fielded, a technical review panel will meet periodically to assess the performance and utility of existing items, give consideration to additions and deletions, and propose strategies for item construction, placement, and testing.  

Prior to the initial fielding of the new instrument, however, the instrument will be subjected to cognitive testing, as well as an assessment of its effects on crime rates. Depending upon funding, BJS will either conduct a small scale study of the two instruments or conduct tests with outgoing rotations of the NCVS sample. This latter decision is contingent upon Dr. Addington’s proposed protocols and BJS decisions related to the optimal number of times to reinterview households selected into the NCVS sample. Given the timing of Dr. Addington’s report, the time required to conduct the tests, and scope of BJS’ current efforts related to NCVS redesign and subnational estimation program, we do not expect to complete this work before 2015.

BJS is also improving the responsiveness of the NCVS to measurement issues with the collection of data on sensitive topics like intimate partner violence and rape and sexual assault. To this end, BJS has initiated two projects to identify, develop, and test the optimal methods for collecting self-report data on rape and sexual assault.

In June 2011, BJS charged an expert panel from the National Research Council's Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT) to examine conceptual and methodological issues surrounding existing U.S. survey statistics on rape and sexual assault and to recommend the optimal methods for obtaining this type of sensitive data on an ongoing basis. The first public meeting of the CNSTAT panel was held on December 8, 2011. The panel is expected to produce initial recommendations by August of 2013 and these recommendations will be used to inform the approach used by the NCVS to collect data on rape and sexual assault.

In September 2011, BJS also made a competitive award to Westat, Inc., to develop and test two different survey designs for collecting self-report data on rape and sexual assault. One design is to be an optimal design identified in collaboration with the CNSTAT panel. The other will be similar to designs used in the public health field that collect data on rape and sexual assault (e.g., National Women’s Study and the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Surveillance System). BJS will compare estimates from these two alternative designs with estimates from the current NCVS. This project is in the early stages with cognitive interviewing scheduled to begin in August 2012, and feasibility testing expected to begin in May 2013.

To supplement the NCVS data and further improve the responsiveness of the BJS Victimization Statistics Unit to priority victimization issues, BJS is also assessing the feasibility of new data collections on victims separate from but related to the NCVS. BJS has put out solicitations related to: 1. Collecting data from victim service agencies on the types of services provided and victims served;² 2. Collecting data on victimizations against persons with disabilities living in residential care facilities³, nursing homes, and other group quarters; 3. Expanding the collection of data on the victimization of juveniles. These new data collections will not only enhance the information generated by the Victimization Statistics Unit, they will also be useful for improving the NCVS questionnaire and the sampling and methodology related to the collection of data from vulnerable populations.

Improved Outreach

One of the other major goals for the NCVS in 2012 through 2015 is improved outreach and accessibility of the data. Beginning in 2012, BJS began providing wider access to NCVS statistics though an on-line data analysis tool, the National Victimization Analysis Tool (NVAT). The NVAT tool is now a component of the core NCVS that allows users to examine NCVS data and generate tables on violent and property victimization by select victim, household, and incident characteristics. The NVAT data will be updated annually and BJS will continue to improve upon the performance and capabilities of the tool and expand on the available variables.

From 2012 through 2015, BJS statisticians will use also NCVS data to produce a number of timely and relevant reports and products. These reports are tied to the priorities of the Department of Justice and the Office of Justice Programs, expressed needs and interests of other government agencies and the criminal justice community, current events, and methods for improving the usability and reliability of the NCVS, including research related to redesign projects. They are widely disseminated through the BJS website, the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, the BJS JUSTSTATS listserv, which has about 1,600 members, and press releases circulated to the Associated Press and other major news sources. They also demonstrate the breadth of information collected through the NCVS, covering topics that stem from the design of the instrument and relate to each of the major sections of the survey instrument, including, 1. The estimation of rates of rape/sexual assault, robbery, assault, personal larceny, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and other theft; 2. characteristics of these incidents, including location, time, items stolen, and presence of weapon; 3. characteristics of the victims, including age, race, gender, disability, and occupation; 4. the relationship between victim and offender and offender characteristics; 5. physical and emotional impact of victimization; 6. reporting to police and police response; 7. bias- or hate-motivated victimizations. Examples of planned topical reports and products by each section of the NCVS include:

Topical Reports

1. Enumeration of crime rates

• Criminal Victimization- Presents annual estimates of rates and levels of violent and property crime victimization in the U.S.

(http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf)

• NCVS Victimization Analysis Tool (NVAT)- Online dynamic analysis tool that allows users to examine NCVS data and generate tables on violent and property victimization by select victim, household, and incident characteristics.

• Rape and Sexual Assault – Presents estimates of rates of sexual violence, the characteristics of sexual violence victimizations and victims, and victim responses to sexual violence for the last two decades of the NCVS.

2. Incident characteristics

• Trends in household property crime losses – Presents patterns and trends in the types of items stolen and the total and recovered losses attributed to household burglary, motor vehicle theft, and other theft.

• Violence in the Workplace – Presents estimates on the extent of violence in the workplace.

3. Victim characteristics

• Children in Households with Violence- Presents estimates of the number and characteristics of children living in households in which one or more household member has experienced violent victimization.

• Crime Against the Elderly- Presents estimates of the prevalence and victim, crime, and offender characteristics of victimizations against persons age 65 or older.

• Crime Against Persons with Disabilities- Presents estimates of nonfatal violent victimizations against person 12 years old or older with disabilities (http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/capd10st.pdf)

• Indicators of School Crime and Safety- Presents estimates of crime occurring at school or on the way to and from school against persons age 12 to 18 years of age (http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/iscs11.pdf)

4. Victim-Offender relationship

• Relationship between victim and offender race- Examines the newly expanded race of offender categories, by crime and victim characteristics.

5. Physical and emotional impact of victimization

• Violent Crime and Emotional Distress – Examines the psychological and physiological consequences of violent crime victimization.

6. Reporting to police and police response

• Police Response and Follow-up Activities- Presents information on police response and follow-up activities after a reported victimization.

• Victimizations Not Reported to Police- Presents patterns and trends in victimizations that go unreported and the reasons why victims do not report to police.

7. Bias-motivated victimizations

• Hate Crime – Presents patterns and trends in victimizations motivated by racial, ethnic, gender, sexual orientation, or disability bias.

Each of these products provides unique information that cannot be ascertained from other sources of data and that the public, government agencies, and the criminal justice community rely upon. BJS also plans to produce a number of technical and methodological reports as a part of the core NCVS work.

Technical/Methodological Research

• Criminal Victimization Preliminary Estimates and Projections- Presents mid-year estimates of crime violent and property rates and levels and projects end-of-the-year crime rates based on key crime predictors and prior year patterns

• Offender Race- Presents research and development in creating a crosswalk to assess change in offender race prior to and after the expansion of offender race categories.

• Poverty and Victimization- Presents research and developments in measuring the relationship between various measures of socio-economic wellbeing and victimization using the NCVS.

• Victimizations Against Children- Presents research on surveying children and a feasibility analysis of expanding the NCVS to collect victimization data for children under 12 years old.

• Criminal Victimization by Place- Presents research on the feasibility of and initial efforts at examining patterns and trends in crime for subnational, generic areas based on region, MSA, and population.

• Criminal Victimization in the 40 Largest MSAs – Presents research on the feasibility of using core NCVS data to produce reliable estimates of victimization within each of the 40 largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the U.S.

• Variance Estimation - Examines the benefits and downsides to each of the approaches for variance estimation, including issues related to variance estimation for counts, rates, percentages, grouped years of data (e.g., rolling averages, multi-year aggregation), and supplements, data file configuration and internal and external usability.

• Bounding Adjustment - Examines how BJS should handle unbounded interviews, sample fatigue, and attrition/nonresponse when generating point estimates

• Prevalence of victimization – BJS Visiting Fellow Dr. Janet Lauritsen is working on approaches to go beyond the victimization rate currently reported in BJS reports and measuring the prevalence of victimization.

EXTERNAL DATA USERS AND STAKEHOLDERS

The reports and data generated through the NCVS are of use and interest to a wide range of audiences, including the government agencies, the criminal justice community, and the public.

Government Agencies

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 rely on 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, violence against racial and ethnic groups including American Indians, 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:

Department of Justice

BJS is responsible for collecting, analyzing, publishing, and disseminating statistical information on crime, its perpetrators and victims, and the operation of justice systems at all levels of government. BJS is also responsible for providing timely and accurate data about crime and the administration of justice to the President, Congress, other government officials, and the general public. The Attorney General has used data from the NCVS to provide estimates of crimes involving weapons and violent crime trends. The Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) has used the NCVS data to estimate the ratio of victims that receive crime victim fund assistance to the total number of victimizations and to identify vulnerable populations not receiving assistance. OVC has also used NCVS data to discuss improvements and gaps in the provision of victim services for congressional hearings and has links to a number of BJS reports on homicide trends, identity theft, the provision of victim services, and hate crime on their website (http://ovc.ncjrs.gov/Publications.aspx?TopicID=2).

Department of Education

The NCVS is used to measure nonfatal victimizations at school in order to inform the nation on the current nature of crime in schools and the prevalence of students victimized at school. These findings are released in the annual report, Indicators of School Crime and Safety. In addition, the National Center for Education Statistics sponsors the School Crime Supplement to the NCVS in alternate years.

Federal Trade Commission

The Federal Trade Commission has worked with BJS to develop and fund the Identity Theft Supplement (ITS) to the NCVS. The FTC relies on the ITS for data on the prevalence of identity theft, how personal information is obtained by perpetrators, and the characteristics of victims. These types of data can assist the FTC in identifying populations that may be particularly vulnerable and appropriately targeting knowledge and prevention campaigns. A report based on the 2008 ITS is available at http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/vit08.pdf. The 2012 ITS will be in the field from July through December of 2012.

Department of Health and Human Services

The Department of Health and Human Services relies on NCVS data on nonfatal workplace victimizations to identify occupations and workplaces at high-risk for violence and develop guidelines for dealing with workplace violence. The most recent BJS report on this topic, Workplace Violence, 1993-2009, is available at http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/wv09.pdf.

Educational Institutions

Many researchers use the NCVS data to prepare reports and scholarly publications. NCVS public-use data files housed at the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) at the University of Michigan were downloaded nearly 15,000 times from 2007 to 2012. The downloaded data are used in conjunction with research projects in a number of academic disciplines, including sociology, criminology, psychology, and political science. Researchers use the NCVS information to advance the study of various issues including why certain persons are victimized more than others are; the reasons why persons do or do not report crime incidents to the police; victimizations against particular subpopulations, domestic violence, rape, gang crime, multiple victimizations, and so forth. A list of some of the most recent articles is below:

Addington, L. & Rennison, C.M. (2008). Do Additional Crimes Affect Victim Reporting and Police Clearance of Rape? Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 24, 205-226.

Averdijk, M. (2011) Reciprocal effects of victimization and routine activities. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 27:125-149.

Baumer, E.P. & Lauritsen, J.L. (2010). Reporting Crime to the Police, 1973-2005: A Multivariate Analysis of Long-Terms Trends in the National Crime Survey (NCS) and National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). Criminology, 48, 131-185.

Englebrecht, C.M. & Bradford R. (2011). Gender Differences in Acknowledgment of Stalking Victimization: Results From the NCVS Stalking Supplement. Violence & Victims, 26, 560-591.

Farrell, G., A. Tseloni, J. Mailley & N. Tilley (2011). The crime drop and the security hypothesis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 48:147-175.

Goodlin, W. & C. Dunn (2010). Three Patterns of Domestic Violence in Households: Single Victimization, Repeat Victimization, and Co-occurring Victimization. Journal of Family Violence, 25, 107-122.

Guerette, R.T (2010) Explaining victim self-protective behavior effects on crime incident outcomes: A test of Opportunity Theory. Crime and Delinquency 56:198-226.

Hart, T.C. & T.D. Miethe (2011). Violence Against College Students and Its Situational Contexts: Prevalence, Patterns, and Policy Implications. Victims & Offenders, 6, 157-180.

Kang, J.H. and J.P. Lynch (2010). Calling the police in instances of family violence: Effects of victim offender relationship and life stages. Crime and Delinquency. OnlineFirst January 27, 2010, 1-26

Land, K.C. & H. Zheng (2010) Questions about the relationship of economic conditions to violent victimization. Criminology and Public Policy 9: 699-704.

Lauritsen, J.L. & Archakova, E. (2008). Advancing the Usefulness of Research for Victims of Crime. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24, 92-102.

Lauritsen, J.L., K. Heimer, & J.P. Lynch (2009). Trends in the Gender Gap in Violent Offending: New Evidence from the National Crime Victimization Survey. Criminology, 47, 361-399.

Lauritsen, J.L. & K. Carbone-Lopez (2011). Gender Differences in Risk Factors for Violent Victimization: An Examination of Individual-, Family-, and Community-Level Predictors. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 48, 538-565.

Like-Haislip, T.Z. & K.T. Miofsky. Race, ethnicity, gender, and violent victimization. Race and Justice 1: 254-276.

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.

Rennison, C.M. (2009) A new look at the gender gap in offending. Women and Criminal Justice, 19: 171-190.

Rennison, C.M. (2010) An investigation of reporting violence to the police: A focus on Hispanic victims. Journal of Criminal Justice 38:390-399.

Rennison, C.M. & C. Melde (2009) Exploring the Use of Victim Surveys to Study Gang Crime: Prospects and Possibilities. Criminal Justice Review, 34, 489-514.

Steffensmeier, D., B. Feldmeyer, C.T. Harris & J.T. Ulmer (2011). Reassessing Trends in Black Violent Crime, 1980-2008: Sorting out the ‘Hispanic Effect’ in Uniform Crime Reports Arrests, National Crime Victimization Survey Offender Estimates, and U.S. Prisoner Counts. Criminology, 49, 197-251.

Weiss, K.G. (2009) 'Boys will be boys' and other gendered accounts: An exploration of excuses and justifications for unwanted sexual contact and coercion. Violence against Women 15:810-834.

Wong, T.M.L & R. Van de Schoot (2012) The effect of sex offenders' sex on reporting crimes to the police. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 27: 1276-1292.

Xie, M. & J.L. Lauritsen (2012) Racial context and crime reporting: A test of Black's stratification hypothesis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 28: 265-293.

Others

Independent groups also use the NCVS for policy analysis, policy recommendations, testimony before Congress, and documentation for use in courts. Examples include the following:

National Crime Prevention Council

Uses the NCVS data to develop programs on crime prevention and to train and educate individuals, communities, and organizations throughout the United States on effective crime prevention practices.

Victim Advocacy Groups

Use the data to identify vulnerable populations, crime victims that do not receive necessary criminal justice system resources, and to draw attention to the emotional, physical, and economic consequences of victimization.

Community groups

Use the data to develop neighborhood watch programs.

Law enforcement agencies

Use the NCVS findings to gain a better understand the types of crimes that are and are not reported to the police and what percentage of crime goes unreported. Also use the NCVS findings to understand the reasons why victims do not report to the police

Print and broadcast media

The media have become increasingly familiar with the NCVS data and the public regularly views news articles and press releases containing NCVS data. Findings from the NCVS appear regularly in a wide variety of contexts on television, radio, in print, and online when reporting on a host of crime-related topics.

3. Use of Information Technology

Respondents to the NCVS are individuals living in households. 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 (PAPI) was discontinued when data collection with CAPI began.

Cost was one of the primary reasons for deciding to convert the NCVS from PAPI to a fully automated CAPI 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.

4. Efforts to Identify Duplication

The NCVS does not duplicate any other effort in the field. There is no other omnibus survey that can be used to generate national statistics on a range of crimes and victim responses to crimes regardless of whether the victimization was reported to the police.

The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) data covers a similar range of crimes as the NCVS, but is limited to only those crimes known to the police. The UCR data is also limited by a lack of information on the demographic characteristics of victims and victimized households.

The FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) also includes similar crimes as the NCVS (as well as a number of additional offense types) and collects basic demographic data on the age, sex, and race of persons arrested (offenders). Like the UCR, NIBRS includes only crimes known to police. It is also limited by a lack of information on the characteristics of victims and the victim response to criminal incidents. To date, 43% of law enforcement agencies report NIBRS data to the FBI.⁴ The reporting agencies cover about 29% of the population of the United States, meaning that the data are not nationally representative

4. Minimizing Burden

N/A. The NCVS is a household-based sample and does not impact small businesses or small entities.

4. Consequences of Less Frequent Collection

In order to produce annual estimates and track year-to-year change in crime, it is necessary to collect data on an ongoing basis. Furthermore, because of the relatively rarity of crime and declining crime rates, rolling averages often must be used to increase the precision of estimates that are based on small sample sizes, such as estimates for populations like Asian Americans and victims of sexual assault. In order to produce rolling averages and generate victimization estimates for subpopulations and specific crime characteristics, annual data is necessary. If the data were collected at a single point in time biannually or annually rather than on a continuous basis, the survey would be more costly due to start-up and training costs.

If the NCVS program were discontinued or conducted on a less frequent basis, executive and legislative branch policymakers would no longer have detailed crime and victimization data, including the demographic, victim response, and incident characteristic information not collected through the FBI, available when making decisions on formulating legislation. Additionally, there would be no reliable measure of change in the rate of serious crime for the United States that includes crimes not known to the police.

7. Special Circumstances

N/A. Collection is consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.9.

8. Federal Register Publication and Outside Consultation

The research under this clearance is consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.6. Comments on this data collection effort were solicited in the Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 58, on March 26, 2012 and in Vol. 77, No. 105, May 31, 2012. No comments were received in response to the information provided.

In the process of moving from the redesign experimentation phase to the implementation of redesign findings into the administration of the NCVS, BJS has consulted with a number of data users, as well as federal government and outside experts with knowledge and experience in survey methodology.

JRSA Vetting of Subnational Estimates In relation to work on the production of subnational estimates, in November of 2011, the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) worked with BJS to convene an initial, day-long meeting of representatives from federal statistical agencies that produce small area estimates to discuss strategies for vetting and disseminating small area estimates. JRSA continues to work with BJS to plan additional vetting meetings with the panel for 2012. Members of the panel include:

• Scott Boggess, Chief of the American Community Survey Coordination Staff, U.S. Census Bureau

• Wes Basel, Chief of the Small Area Estimates Branch, U.S. Census Bureau

• Sandi Mason, Chief of the Division of Local Area Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics

• Linda Balluz, Chief of the Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

• Art Hughes, statistician on the National Survey of Drug Use and Health, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

• Robin A. Cohen, statistician on the National Health Interview Survey, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

• Rocky Feuer, Chief of the Statistical Methodology and Applications Branch, National Cancer Institute

Measurement of Rape and Sexual Assault Panel

BJS has commissioned the Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT) of the National Research Council to convene an expert panel assessing the measurement of rape and sexual assault. The panel, which began work in December of 2011, is tasked with determining the optimal procedures and methodology for the collection of self-report data on rape and sexual assault. The panel is expected to produce initial recommendations by the end of 2012 and these recommendations will be used to inform the approach used by the NCVS to collect data on rape and sexual assault.

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 under 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. NCVS interviewers receive training and guidance on how to ask sensitive questions. 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. 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 2011 interview/noninterview counts. 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.

3. Estimate of Cost Burden

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

14. Estimates of Costs to the Federal Government

There are no capital or start-up costs associated with the data collection.

Table 2 shows a breakdown of the estimated annual cost to the Federal Government. The estimated annual cost to the Federal Government for the basic NCVS is $25 million in FY 2012. The Census Bureau handles all aspects of collecting and preparing data for analysis at an annual cost of $23.9 million. The largest share of costs is the labor for the interviewers who collect data from respondents ($17.3 million). Data processing is about $3 million and sampling is $2.3 million. BJS staff time costs about $1.1 million. BJS of the U.S. Department of Justice bears all costs of the survey.

Table 2. Estimated costs for NCVS
Census Bureau Costs
Division											Estimated cost
	DSD (Data processing)										$2,992,000
	DSMD (Sampling)										$2,250,000
	Field (Data collection)										$17,276,000
	NPC										$205,000
	TMO (Instrument pre-testing and programming)										$1,127,000
	CSRM										$70,000
							Census subtotal				$23,920,000
BJS Costs
	Staff salaries		Base salary (step 5)		Fringe		Salary estimates
		GS15 – Victimization Unit Chief (1@100%)		$140,259		$39,273		$179,532
		GS-15 Chief Editor for BJS (1@25%)		$140,259		$39,273		$44,883
		GS13 - Statistician for BJS (3 @ 100%)		$100,904		$28,253		$387,471
		GS12 – Statistician for BJS (1@100%)		$84,855		$23,759		$108,614
		BJS Visiting Fellow (2 @ 70%)		$106,232		$29,745		$190,368
		BJS Intergovernmental Personnel Agreement Employee (1@70%)		$108,000		$30,240		$96,760
	Subtotal: Salary & fringe						$1,007,628
	Other administrative costs -salary & fringe (25%)						$80,000
Subtotal: BJS costs @ 1 years									$1,087,628
Subtotal: Annual estimated BJS and Census Bureau costs									$25,007,628
Total: Estimated costs @ 3 years									$75,022,884

15. Reasons for Change in Burden

The estimated total annual hours for 2012 through 2015 (68,905) is greater than the 53,565 requested in 2009 because of a 24 percent sample restoration and changes to the survey instrument. The sample restoration, which primarily occurred during 2011, returned the NCVS to the sample levels attained prior to the 2007 cuts due to budgetary constraints. OMB previously approved the increase in burden due to reinstated sample on September 28, 2010, raising the NCVS burden hours to 69,542 (ICR REFERENCE NUMBER: 201008-1121-002).

In 2012, BJS requested OMB approval to remove the household identity theft questions from the instrument. This revision to the instrument was based on the BJS decision to conduct routine, more detailed supplements to collect person-level identity theft data. The removal of these questions resulted in a slight reduction in burden hours, down to 67,657, and prevented household respondents from being asked duplicative questions about household and personal identity theft victimization. The apparent increase in burden hours from 67,657 to the 68,905 requested for 2012 to 2015, is due to a recalculation of the number of respondents based on the actual sample reinstatement and an inclusion of reinterviews in the burden hours estimate. The previous estimates of respondents and burden hours were based on anticipated numbers prior to the sample reinstatement. The current estimates for 2012 through 2015 are based on the actual number of respondents and burden hours required after the sample reinstatement.

16. Project Schedule

For collection years 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015, the NCVS is in the field from January 1 through December 31^st. 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.

BJS releases information collected in the NCVS in a variety of formats. Because the NCVS redesign demonstrated the need for more timely data to enhance the utility of the survey, beginning in 2013 BJS will start producing yearly projections of crime estimates based on the first half of the year of data. If these initial estimates are reasonably accurate, they will be made available each fall and will be based on data from January through June of that year, as well as historical patterns in the relationship between victimizations in the first and the second six months of the year.

Each summer BJS then releases a bulletin, Criminal Victimization, which provides annual estimates from the preceding year of survey data collection, including rates and counts of violent and property crime, characteristics of crimes and victims, year-to-year change estimates and trend estimates. Simultaneous with the release of the annual Criminal Victimization bulletin, the online National Victimization Analysis Tool (NVAT) is updated with the most recent year of data.

Once the data are released by BJS through Criminal Victimization and the NVAT, the data 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 and ICPSR. All information that might identify individual respondents to the survey is removed from the files prior to being sent to the ICPSR.

In order to further enhance the utility of the data, in addition to the public use files housed at ICPSR, the geographically identified NCVS files are also now available in a secure research data center (RDC). The RDC files can be accessed by researchers who submit a proposal for the research they plan to conduct using the data and agree to all confidentiality and protected use constraints. Data are available through ICPSR and the RDCs by the fall of the year following collection.

During the course of each year, BJS also releases an average of 15 in-depth analytical reports and other papers that provide information on some of the broad range of topics covered in the survey. These reports reflect findings from redesign work regarding topics of interest to the public, as well as methodological reports on improving the usability and reliability of victimization estimates without increasing survey costs. Topics include series or repeat victimization; patterns and trends in victim and offender race; harm caused by violent crime; intimate partner violence; age patterns in violent victimization; Hispanic victims of crime; victimization of persons with disabilities; children exposed to violence; violence against persons in nursing homes and residential care facilities; workplace violence; hate crime; rape and sexual assault; criminal victimization by place; and police response and follow-up activities. See the specific list of planned topical reports under section 2. Needs and Uses.

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 Households⁵

(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” Spanish translation of the Incident Report.	Monthly (2x/yr per household)

Forms Used with Some Households⁶

(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 by the Field Representatives

(Interviewing Manuals and Training Materials)

Form Number	Title	Description	Frequency
NCVS-550	NCVS CAPI Interviewing Manual for Field Representatives	“NCVS Manual” Contains the NCVS Procedures and Instructions for conducting interviews and navigating through the CAPI instrument.	As needed
NCVS-521	NCVS CAPI Blaise Self-Study for New NCVS Field Representatives	“Self-Study Training Guide” Self-Study for Field Representatives to be completed prior to attending the classroom training.	As needed
NCVS-522(I)	NCVS CAPI Classroom Training Guide for NCVS Field Representatives	“Trainer’s Guide” The classroom training guide used by the trainer.	As needed

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

1999-2000

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.

2001

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.

2003

In January of 2003, BJS directed implementation 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 12^th grade high school educational level and higher educational degrees as well.

2004

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.

Because small sample sized limited the utility and reliability of the computer crime data, in July 2004, the computer crime questions were removed from the survey and household identity theft question 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 measure the level and change in identity theft victimization among households over time.

2005

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.

2007

In January 2007 BJS modified questions regarding respondent disabilities , in order to match the set of disability questions asked on the American Community Survey (ACS). BJS also modified the response category to the NCVS-2 question about the relationship of the offender to the respondent by adding the category “Teacher/School staff.”

2008

When BJS conducted the first 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 reinserted into the NCVS-1. Additionally, a set of questions pertaining to the emotional and psychological impact of victimization and victim help-seeking behaviors was added to the NCVS-2. This set of questions was originally asked as part of the ITS.

To offset any respondent burden added by the inclusion of the emotional toll questions, the set of questions involving vandalism and hate-motivatedvandalism were removed at this same time. Small sample sizes limited the utility of the data on vandalism and hate-motivated vandalism.

2010

In October 2010, in order to restore the NCVS’s ability to measure the extent and characteristics of crime and to measure year-to-year change in victimization rates, sample that was removed in 2007 began to be reinstated. The sample reinstatement increased the monthly sample about 26%, from about 8,500 households to about 10,700 households.

2012

In January 2012, BJS revised the set of questions collecting data on the race(s) and ethnicity of offender(s). This modification brought the race of offender questions into compliance with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity. The revised set of questions asks first about the offender(s)’ relationship to the victim, followed by questions about the offender(s)’ gender, age, ethnicity, and race; and finish with questions about gang involvement and drug or alcohol use. There are two modules: one for crimes committed by a lone offender and one for crimes committed by multiple offenders.

Supplements

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. The School Crime Supplement was last conducted from January-June of 2011.

• A one-time Workplace Risk Supplement was conducted for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health in 2002.

• In 2001, a supplement was added 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 and was last conducted from July-December of 2011.

• A supplement to examine stalking behaviors was implemented in January-June, 2006.

• An Identity Theft Supplement (ITS) was conducted from January-June 2008 to measure the prevalence and economic cost of Identity Theft. The ITS was revised after the first implementation and will be conducted every two years beginning in July-December of 2012.

1 For a definition see Biderman, Albert D and Albert J. Reiss Jr. 1967. On exploring the “dark figure” of crime. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 374(1): 1-15.

2 The 2012 National Survey of Victim Service Organizations (NSVSO) is proposed as a two-year project which includes a design component and pre-testing during year one and the administration of a survey instrument to a sample of victim service organizations (following OMB approval) during year two. The NSVSO solicitation is available at http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/nsvso12sol.pdf.

3 The initial solicitation for the Criminal Victimization of Persons with Disabilities Residing in Group Quarters project covers a 12-month period during which time the design and methodological work pertaining to a later data collection will be conducted. Contingent on funding, phase II of the project would require OBM approval of a pilot field test and based on findings from phase II and the availability of funds, phase III, the actual data collection, would then occur during 2014. The solicitation for the project is available at http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvpdrgq12_sol.pdf.

4 Details on NIBRS reporting are available through the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) Resource Center at http://www.jrsa.org/ibrrc/background-status/nibrs_states.shtml (last accessed July 31, 2012).

5 In July 2006, the NCVS was fully automated and, as such, paper forms are no longer used to complete the survey.

6 In July 2006, the NCVS was fully automated and, paper forms are no longer used to complete the survey.