NCVS_Supporting_Statement_Part_A

29

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 2018. The Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) current approval expires August 31, 2015. 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.

The BJS is specifically requesting clearance for the core NCVS from August 2015 through August 2018. The core NCVS includes the administration of the NCVS-1 (screener) and NCVS-2 (crime incident report) instruments to a nationally representative sample of about 144,000 persons age 12 or older living in households in the United States, including samples of persons representative of the 22 largest states in the US. The core NCVS survey instrument currently 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.

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.

Beginning in the late 2000s, BJS initiated a substantial multi-stage redesign effort to contain survey costs while enabling the NCVS to meet stakeholder needs for reliable statistics on criminal victimization that are timely and independent of police agency reports, as well as to generate subnational estimates of criminal victimization. Since the prior OMB approval period, BJS has initiated a number of research projects to respond to recommendations from the Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT) of the National Research Council on increasing the relevance and quality of NCVS data.² These on-going projects have been conducted under separate clearance packages, and include efforts to conduct a low cost self-administered companion survey to collect local estimates of victimization (OMB No 1121-0351); testing of various approaches to improve the measurement of rape and sexual assault (OMB No. 1121-0343); the development of a subnational program with a combination of model-based estimates and direct estimates through a trial boost of NCVS sample in the 11 largest states; and a major overhaul of the NCVS survey instrument to modernize it, increase its flexibility for measuring emerging crime types and to capture indicators of safety and security and perceptions of police that go beyond experiences with victimization.

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 continuously underway to improve the utility of the data and the efficiency of the survey methodology, including: 1. Continued development of the NCVS subnational program; 2. Modernization of the survey to capture data on new and emerging crimes and methodological developments; 3. Improved responsiveness to existing data needs; 4. Improved outreach with stakeholders and the timely release of relevant topical reports.

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, BJS began testing and implementing various approaches to generating subnational estimates with the NCVS. BJS is planning to take a multipronged approach using a combination of direct and model-based estimate, to further develop the subnational program in 2016 through 2018.

Model-based estimates

From 2010 to 2015, BJS supported a series of research projects focused on the feasibility of generating indirect, or model-based, estimates of victimization for all 50 states. The intermediate deliverables were the development of a model for generating small-area estimates using existing NCVS sample and auxiliary data from the American Community Survey and the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports and several reports describing the model and assumptions behind it (see https://www.amstat.org/sections/srms/proceedings/y2012/files/304438_73111.pdf ; http://www.copafs.org/userfiles/file/fcsm/a2_diallo_2013fcsm.pdf; and http://www.fcsm.gov/12papers/Li_2012FCSM_I-B.pdf). The final deliverable was series of victimization estimates for the 50 states using three-year rolling average from 1993 through 2013. Rates of violent and property crime were generated for each state, as were rates of intimate partner violence and violence committed by a stranger.

In the fall of 2015, BJS plans to release a technical report that includes these estimates, as well as estimates for the largest counties and metropolitan areas in the US. The report will present the approach and rationale for small-area estimation and what it can tell us about crime at the state level. BJS will continue work to validate the model-based estimates against direct estimates, and assuming there are no major discrepancies between the model-based estimates and direct estimates from the completed pilot boost, BJS plans to begin releasing official model-based estimates for all 50 states in 2016. BJS is currently working with outside contractors to develop a prototype data analysis tool that could be used to disseminate these model-based estimates and make them accessible to a broad range of data users.

These estimates are of value to both federal and nonfederal data users and stakeholders. Federal stakeholders that currently allocate funding or resources for crime victims and crime prevention based on official police crime estimates, could use the model-based estimates to understand how the allocation of funding would change when unreported crime is taken into account. Policy makers could use these estimates to examine state and local variations in crime both reported and unreported to police and make comparisons among states, and law enforcement officials could use the findings to begin to understanding differences in rates of crime and reporting to police across. The data can also be used in conjunction with official police statistics to begin to understand the correlation between the NCVS and official police reports of crime.

Direct estimates

Along with model-based subnational estimates, NCVS redesign work also demonstrated that direct city-level and state-level estimates are feasible for a lower cost than was originally anticipated (see http://www.fcsm.gov/12papers/Fay_2012FCSM_I-B.pdf ). Beginning in July of 2013, the Census Bureau implemented a pilot sample boost in the 11 largest states: California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, and New Jersey. With the trial boost, BJS maintains the current NCVS national sample design, but has the ability to assess the costs and quality of the data produced in each of the states. The goal of the pilot boost is to generate three-year rolling average violent victimization estimates with under a 10% relative standard error. The test boost has allowed BJS to validate and correct the assumptions used in the preliminary sample design simulations and to gain an understanding of the field costs associated with the boost. In the 11 states that received the test boost, the infrastructure is already in place for producing direct state-level estimates after the pilot test ends.

Based on preliminary findings from the pilot boost, from 2016 to 2018, BJS plans to boost the NCVS core sample in 22 states and begin producing three year rolling average, state-level estimates of victimization. The decision to go to 22 states was based on the current sample allocation and the cost associated with boosting the state sample enough to get sufficient precision and representative estimates. The 22 states account for 79% of the total US population and approximately 80% of violent crime reported in the FBI’s Part 1 Uniform Crime Reports. The burden hours requested in this clearance, take into account this state boost in up to 22 states.

Because three-years of data are necessary for sufficient precision for state-level estimates of violent crime, BJS will begin disseminating data from the full 22-state boost in 2019. In the meantime, data from the pilot boost and preliminary findings from the full boost will be used to assess and validate the model-based estimates and develop a plan for combining indirect and direct subnational estimates in states and cities with limited existing sample.

Additionally, BJS will continue with on-going technical work to produce an annual report presenting patterns and trends in victimization in generic geographic 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. In 2014 and 2015 BJS conducted research with the restricted-use, area-identified data maintained by the U.S. Census Bureau to ensure that the sample in geographic generic areas is representative of the actual population of these areas. Generic area typologies were then developed using variables available on the public-use files, namely region, size, and urbanicity.

BJS will publish a technical report on the development and coverage of generic areas, as well as an annual substantive report, beginning in 2015. In additional to geographic generic areas, BJS also began publishing reports that divide the country based on other characteristics of areas, such as the report, Violent Victimization in New and Emerging Hispanic Areas, 2007-2010 (http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vvneha0710.pdf), which groups counties and metropolitan areas depending on the growth of the area’s Hispanic population.

Modernization and methodological developments

In early 2014, BJS initiated the NCVS Instrument Redesign and Testing Project through a competitive award to Westat, Inc. The NCVS Instrument Redesign and Testing Project is a major multi-year effort to overhaul the existing survey instrument. The overarching objective of the project is to provide scientific and technical support for the redesign and testing of the National Crime Victimization (NCVS) roster control card, crime screener (NCVS-1), and crime incident (NCVS-2) instruments in support of BJS’ efforts related to increasing the efficiency, reliability, and utility of the NCVS. Through the project, BJS aims to evaluate and modernize the organization and content of the NCVS; improve the efficiency of the instruments and the current core-supplement design; and develop a procedure for introducing routine improvements to the survey in order to capture emerging crime types and time-relevant topics.

One of the first steps in the project was a comprehensive assessment of the instrument to determine which survey items are being utilized and how, which survey items are problematic in their language and placement, and where there are gaps in the content of the instrument. The initial assessment provided a better understanding of the substantive and procedural issues with the instrument and helped to identify areas where the content could be improved to enhance current knowledge of victimization and its correlates.

Through the initial assessment work, several major areas in need of modernization became apparent. The first involves enhancing the socio-demographic information collected about respondents to better address policy-relevant questions about victimization. The types of socio-demographic variables being considered for inclusion are veteran status, citizenship, sexual orientation, and expanded information about cognitive and physical disabilities. Because these measures have been identified in other research as correlates of victimization, their inclusion in the NCVS will allow researchers to better understand the relationship between these variables and experiences with criminal victimization.

Another area of focus is on improving the measurement of and increasing the crime types covered by the survey. The current NCVS captures rape and sexual assault, robbery, physical assault, burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle through the core survey instrument and uses routine supplements to collect information on other crime types like identity theft and stalking. However, the rates of victimization for these supplemental crimes are not incorporated into the overall victimization rates. Other growing crimes like financial fraud are not measured by the survey at all. One of the goals of the redesign is to expand the crime screener to incorporate a broader range of crimes, including some, like fraud, that are not typically reported through official police statistics. Additional efforts are on improving the measurement of highly sensitive crimes like rape and sexual assault and intimate partner violence. The anticipated changes to and improvement of the types of crimes measured by the NCVS, may require changes to the survey methodology to ensure that the information collected is accurate and reliable. Through the NCVS redesign project, BJS is examining the feasibility of using self-administered approaches to obtaining responses to at least the most sensitive of the questions.

Additionally, in order to improve the NCVS methodology, 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. In addition to work related to the development of the NCVS subnational program, these researchers are working on a number of projects to improve the precision and reliability of victimization estimates. First, BJS will focus on a project toward improving the current approach 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. Another project is examining the current bounding adjustment to assess whether it 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. A third project is assessing the current NCVS design to determine if seven interview waves is optimal for containing costs and maintaining the precision of victimization estimates or if the number of interviews could be reduced without negative impacts on cost or precision. Finally, a fourth project is examining the survey’s coverage of children and youth populations. The NCVS currently interviews adolescents ages 12 to 17 but excludes children ages 11 and younger. This coverage error results in a direct underestimation of the annual number of crimes occurring in the United States and may also result in a distortion of the distribution of crime types. The project will analyze both substantive and technical aspects of the data collection operation related to juveniles using NCVS data files and paradata provided by the Census Bureau.

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 and redesigning the core survey instrument. BJS has been working with other Federal agencies, such as the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC), the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), the Department of Education (ED), and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), to improve the ability of the NCVS to respond to timely data and research needs.

One of the ways that BJS has used the NCVS to respond to timely data needs is through the administration of supplements to the core survey. For 2015 through 2018, the NCVS will have several 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, 2015 Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS)

January - June, 2016 Identity Theft Supplement (ITS)

July - December, 2016 Stalking Supplement (SVS)

January - June, 2017 School Crime Supplement (SCS)

January – June, 2018 Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS)

In addition to the use of supplements to respond to stakeholder data needs, the Instrument Redesign Project has a series of specific goals that directly respond to and address stakeholder needs.

One key component of the redesigned instrument will be series of questions pertaining to citizens’ perception of safety, disorder, police legitimacy and satisfaction with police, known as ‘noncrime’ questions. Recent events in places such as Ferguson, MO and Baltimore, MD have demonstrated the need for data on residents’ perceptions of police and for understanding the relationship between experiencing victimization, reporting crime to police, and perceived police legitimacy. Questions on satisfaction with police, police legitimacy, fear, perceptions of community disorder, and feelings of safety will be asked of all NCVS sample, not just those who experienced a victimization. They are intended to increase the relevance of the survey for the majority of respondents who never experience a victimization. Additionally, because the items are answered by all respondents the estimates are expected to have stronger precision at the subnational level compared to victimization rates.

The data from these ‘noncrime’ question will have utility for members of the law enforcement community, as well as researchers and policy makers. The BJS Crime Indicators Working Group (CIWG), which is comprised of members of the law enforcement community providing knowledge and insight into contemporary challenges facing the law enforcement fields, has noted that public perceptions of crime and safety are often as important as indicators of crime problems, as the crime rates themselves. The noncrime questions could be used to address the expressed needs of the CIWG and other law enforcement officials to be able to assess the relationship between demographic characteristics of residents and their perceptions of neighborhood safety and satisfaction with police.

The redesigned instrument will also better address stakeholder needs with a more extensive series of questions formal and informal help-seeking behavior. Despite the fact that the federal government allocates billions of dollars a year to provide services and compensation to crime victims, very little data currently exists about who receives this money and where there are gaps in the services and compensation provided. The current NCVS instrument asks only two questions related to whether the victim received victim services.

The Office for Victims of Crime laid out the need for more comprehensive data in their Vision 21 report (http://ovc.ncjrs.gov/vision21/pdfs/Vision21_Report.pdf) and BJS’s redesigned instrument will enhance the capacity of the survey to measure both formal and informal victim help-seeking behaviors. Plans for the redesigned instrument include expanding on the information collected about why victims do or do not receive formal services, and among those that do, the type of assistance they received. The redesign effort will also seek to improve current NCVS questions about the receipt of medical and mental health care following a victimization and add questions about informal help-seeking behaviors, such as speaking to a family member, friend, or religious leader.

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. The findings from these projects will be incorporated into the instrument redesign work.

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. In 2014, the panel produced recommendations for the measurement of rape and sexual assault in the NCVS in a publication titled, Estimating the Incidence of Rape and Sexual Assault.³

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. Field testing of these alternative designs is currently ongoing with findings expected to be delivered in early 2016.

To supplement the NCVS data and further improve the responsiveness of the BJS Victimization Statistics Unit to priority victimization issues, BJS has also been working to develop new data collections or improve existing data collections related to victims that separate from the NCVS but can be used in conjunction with NCVS data. To this end, BJS is in the process of conducting work to: 1. Collect data from victim service agencies on the types of services provided and victims served;⁴ 2. Collecting data on victimizations against persons with disabilities living in residential care facilities, nursing homes, and other group quarters; 3. Collect data on deaths that occur in the process of arrest, including through police use of force;⁵ 4. Improve the weighting of the FBI’s Supplemental Homicide Data to better account for coverage error, and 5. Develop a lower cost companion survey to the NCVS that can be used to generate comparable local level estimates of victimization (OMB Number 1121-0351). These project and data collections will enhance the information generated by the Victimization Statistics Unit and when used in conjunction with NCVS data, particularly at the subnational level, will provide a more comprehensive picture of victimization and the response to victimization in the US.

Improved Outreach

One of the other major goals for the NCVS in 2016 through 2018 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. Additionally, BJS and the Census Bureau are continuing to work on adding NCVS data files going back to 1993 to the Center for Economic Studies Research Data Centers (RDCs). The RDCs currently house NCVS data from 2006 to 2013. This allows researchers who submit a justifiable proposal, to access the geo-identified, restricted-use NCVS data files.

From 2016 through 2018, 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 recent and 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/cv13.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 Against College-Aged Females– Compares the characteristics of rape and sexual assault victimization against females ages 18 to 24 who are enrolled and not enrolled in college.

• Long term trends - Combines data from the NCVS with its predecessor the National Crime Survey (NCS) to examine trends in victimization going back to the 1970s.

• Historical trend online data tool, 1973-1992 – Online dynamic analysis tool that allows users to examine data from the predecessor of the NCVS, the NCS.

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.

• Firearm violence – Examines patterns and trends in nonfatal and fatal violent victimizations that involved a firearm.

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 American Indians – Presents estimates of the characteristics of victimizations against American Indians and Alaskan Natives compared to persons of other races.

• Crime Against Persons with Disabilities- Presents estimates of nonfatal violent victimizations against person 12 years old or older with disabilities (http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/capd0913st.pdf).

• Household Poverty and Nonfatal Violent Victimization- Presents findings on the relationship between households that were above or below the federal poverty level and nonfatal violent victimization.

• 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 and offender characteristics

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

• Violent victimizations committed by juveniles- Examines the types of violent crime committed by juveniles and the characteristics of victims.

• Nonfatal Domestic Violence- Presents estimates on nonfatal domestic violence, which includes victimization committed by current or former intimate partners (spouses, boyfriends or girlfriends), parents, children, siblings and other relatives.

• Intimate Partner Violence: Attributes of Victimization- Presents trends in nonfatal intimate partner violence among U.S. households. Intimate partner violence includes rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault by a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend.

5. Physical and emotional impact of victimization

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

• Victim Injury and Medical Treatment – Presents information on the injuries suffered as a result of violent victimization and the medical treatment received.

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 in the 50 States – Presents work on the use of small-area estimation to generate estimates of violent and property victimization in the 50 largest states and largest counties in the US.

• 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.

• 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 7 Largest States and 20 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.

• NCVS Panel Design- Presents simulation research on the implications of moving from a seven-panel design to 5, 4, 3, or 1 wave design.

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 2012 ITS is available at http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vit12.pdf. The 2014 ITS report is due out in 2015 and the 2016 ITS will be in the field from January through July of 2016.

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 reports on this topic, Workplace Violence, 1993-2009, and Workplace Violence Against Government Employees, 1994-2011 are available at http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=56.

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 are downloaded thousands of times a year. 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 more recent articles is below:

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.

Eckberg, D. (2014) Trends in Conflict Uniform Crime Reports, the National Crime Victimization Surveys, and the Lethality of Violent Crime. Homicide Studies, 19: 58-87.

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. (2013). Violent victimization of college students: Findings from the National Crime Victimization Survey in Campus Crime: Legal, Social, and Policy Perspectives. J. Sloan & B. Fisher (eds). Charles C. Thomas pp. 141-157

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.

Hemenway, D. & S.J. Solnick (2015) The epidemiology of self-defense gun use: Evidence from the National Crime Victimization Surveys 2007–2011. Preventative Medicine. Available online doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.03.029.

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.

Lauritsen, J.L., M.L. Rezey, & K. Heimer (2014) Violence and Economic Conditions in the United States, 1973-2011: Gender, Race, and Ethnicity Patterns in the National Crime Victimization Survey. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 30: 7-28.

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.

Rennison, C.M., W.S. DeKeseredy & M. Dragiewicz (2012) Urban, Suburban, and Rural Variations in Separation/Divorce Rape/Sexual Assault: Results from the National Crime Victimization Survey. Feminist Criminology, 7, 282–297.

Rennison, C. M., W.S. DeKeseredy, & M. Dragiewicz (2013). Intimate Relationship Status Variations in Violence against Women: Urban, Suburban and Rural Differences. Violence Against Women. 19, 1312–1330.

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.

Xie, M. & D. Macdowall (2014) Impact of Victimization on Residential Mobility: Explaining Racial and Ethnic Patterns Using the National Crime Victimization Survey. Criminology. 52: 553–587.

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. Additional benefits from utilizing a fully automated collection include improving the quality of the NCVS data, streamlining the processing systems since there is no longer a need for dual systems to accommodate two different modes of data collection, and eliminating data differences resulting from two different interviewing modes.

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 annual 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 characteristics of victims and incidents.

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 victim and offenders. Like the UCR, NIBRS includes only crimes known to police. It is also limited by a lack of information on the victim response to criminal incidents. To date, 43% of law enforcement agencies report NIBRS data to the FBI.⁶ 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

There are several reasons why it is necessary to collect NCVS data on an ongoing basis. First, in order to produce annual estimates and track year-to-year change in crime, data must be collected on an ongoing basis. Second, because of the relative rarity of crime and declining crime rates, rolling averages often must be used to increase the precision of national estimates that are based on small sample sizes, such as estimates for populations like the elderly and victims of sexual assault. Rolling averages are also necessary for generating precise state-level estimates of victimization. In order to produce rolling averages and generate victimization estimates for subpopulations, specific crime characteristics, and at the state and local level, annual data are necessary. Third, 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. 80, No. 71 on April 14, 2015 and in Vol. 80, No. 118, June 19, 2015. In response to the Federal Register submission, the follow comments were received:

• The Human Rights Campaign, National LGBTQ Task Force, Anti-Defamation League, Williams Institute , and the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs suggested adding questions about sexual orientation and gender identity to the NCVS Crime Screener;

• The Human Rights Campaign and the Anti-Defamation League requested that the hate crime categories presented in the NCVS Crime Incident Report be expanded to include gender identity as a category for which a person could experience bias motivated crime;

• The National LGBTQ Task Force proposed that the marital status categories presented on the NCVS Crime Screener be expanded to include same-sex registered domestic partnerships and civil unions and that household relationship categories be adjusted to be gender-neutral (e.g. father/mother changed to parent; daughter/son changed to child);

• The National LGBTQ Task Force also proposed that the NCVS Crime Incident Report question pertaining to pregnancy be edited to use gender neutral language.

BJS responded via email to each of these suggestions. BJS plans to begin testing items to capture the respondent’s sexual orientation and gender identity during 2015. Considerations for testing these items include the placement of the items on the survey instrument and the minimum age at which respondents receive these questions.

Through the instrument redesign work BJS will consider the expansion of marital status categories, of bias motivation categories, the use of gender neutral relationship categories, and the editing or removal of the pregnancy question.

In the process of developing the subnational program, increasing the efficiency and productivity of the survey methodology, and redesigning and modernizing the survey instrument, BJS has consulted with a number of data users, as well as federal government and outside experts with knowledge and experience in criminal justice research and 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. Members of the panel included:

• 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

Additionally, in May of 2014, JRSA hosted a webinar, open to state statistical agencies, researchers, policy makers, and other association members, for BJS to present preliminary findings from the subnational work, discuss the long-term goals for the program, and take questions and comments regarding the utility of the data. Over 100 persons registered for and participated in the webinar and provided feedback on the state-level data and presentation of the data.

Measurement of Rape and Sexual Assault Panel

In 2011, BJS 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 was tasked with determining the optimal procedures and methodology for the collection of self-report data on rape and sexual assault. The final report was released in November of 2013 and provided a number of recommendations for how the NCVS could be improved to better collect data on rape and sexual assault. These recommendations are consistent with the BJS-led research effort to test different strategies for measuring rape and sexual assault in general population surveys and in high-risk groups such as college campus population. The results will be used to inform the NCVS instrument redesign work, taking place under a separate award.

NCVS Data Review Panel

In December of 2012, BJS held the first formal meeting of the NCVS Data Review Panel (DRB). The DRB was composed of representatives from other federal statistical agencies, including the Bureau of Labor Statistics, National Center for Education Statistics, and Census Bureau. The purpose of the DRB was to have external researchers review analytics about the NCVS survey methodology and data collection from a total survey error perspective and advise BJS about any data quality concerns and recommendations for improvement. The DRB met approximately every six months with the last meeting occurring in April of 2014.

NCVS Technical Review Panel

In October of 2014, BJS held the first meeting of the NCVS Technical Review Panel (TRP). The TRP brings together a group of relevant federal and nonfederal NCVS stakeholders on a routine basis to weigh in on issues and developments related to the NCVS. The TRP’s primary objectives are to assist BJS in the assessment of the NCVS instruments; to evaluate the goals, purpose, performance, burden, and value of each item and topical section; and review and comment on proposed item additions/deletions and the testing of such recommendation. However, while the initial work of the TRP revolves around the instrument redesign, the TRP is seen as a long-standing panel that will assist with ongoing maintenance of and improvements to the NCVS. The second TRP panel was convened in May of 2015. Panel members include:

• Rachel Hansen, Statistician, National Center for Education Statistics

• Dr. Dan Hartley, Coordinator for Workplace Violence Prevention Research, National Institute for Occupation Safety and Health

• Dr. Allyson Holbrook, University of Illinois at Chicago

• Dr. Kristy Holtfreter, Arizona State University

• Dr. Frauke Kreuter, Survey Methodologist, Joint Program of Survey Methodology

• Dr. Janet Lauritsen, University of Missouri, St. Louis

• Dr. Colin Loftin, University of Albany

• Dr. James Lynch, Chair, Department of Criminology, University of Maryland

• Anne Menard, Chief Executive Officer, National Resource Center on Domestic Violence

• Meagan Meuchel, NCVS Survey Director, US Census Bureau

• Dr. Michael Reisig, Arizona State University

• Dr. Wes Skogan, Northwestern University

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.

In 2015, the Office for Justice Programs Institutional Review Board (IRB) declared the NCVS exempt from review and approval by an Institutional Review Board. Pursuant to the OJP Instruction for Protection of Human Subjects and Privacy Certification Requirements, the NCVS was declared exempt from review because the research is covered by provisions of the confidentiality statute at 42 USC 3789g and the respondents’ confidentiality is protected under Title 13 USC 9. The only involvement of human subjects consists of the administration of an interview questionnaire and the only predictable potential harm is release of the information with identifiers.

12. Estimate Respondent Burden

Table 1 shows the estimated respondent reporting burden for interviewed and noninterviewed households. The estimates are based on anticipated 2018 interview/noninterview counts, assuming that the 22-state sample boost will be in place from January of 2016 on. The current annual inventory is based on the actual hours required to collect the data from the NCVS and accounts for a full 12-month cycle of data collection.

13. 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 for activities associated with the national NCVS data collection and the sample boost in 22 states. The Census Bureau handles all aspects of collecting and preparing data for analysis at an estimated cost of $27.7 million in FY 2016, including supplements, which account for about $1.5 million of the annual budget. The largest share of costs is the labor for the interviewers who collect data from respondents ($21.6 million). Data processing is about $1 million, sampling is about $1 million and Census Bureau project management is about $2 million. BJS staff time costs about $1.3 million. BJS of the U.S. Department of Justice bears all costs of the survey. The estimated annual cost to the Federal Government for the NCVS is $29.3 million in FY 2016.

Table 2. Estimated costs for NCVS
Census Bureau Costs
Division													Estimated cost
	DSD (Data processing)													$ 1,039,000
	DSMD (Sampling)													$ 993,000
	Field (Data collection)											$ 21,638,000
	NPC													$ 819,000
	TMO (Instrument pre-testing and programming)													$ 841,000
	CSRM													$50,000
	ADDP													$2,148,000
								Census subtotal						$27,663,000
BJS Costs
	Staff salaries			Base salary		Fringe		Salary estimates
			GS15 – Victimization Unit Chief (1@100%)		$145,000		$40,000		$185,000
			GS-15 Chief Editor for BJS (1@25%)		$145,000		$40,000		$46,250
			GS14 - Statistician for BJS (1 @ 100%)		$115,000		$30,000		$145,000
			GS13 – Statistician for BJS (5@100%)		$100,000		$25,000		$525,000
			GS12 – Statistician for BJS (1@100%		$80,000		$15,000		$95,000
			BJS Visiting Fellow (2 @ 70%)		$110,000		$30,000		$196,000
			BJS Intergovernmental Personnel Agreement Employee (1@70%)		$108,000		$30,000		$96,600
	Subtotal: Salary & fringe							$1,288,850
	Other administrative costs -salary & fringe (25%)							$322,000
Subtotal: BJS costs @ 1 years										$1,610,850
Subtotal: Annual estimated BJS and Census Bureau costs										$29,273,850
Total: Estimated costs @ 3 years										$87,821,550

15. Reasons for Change in Burden

The estimated total annual hours for 2016 through 2018 (106,399) is greater than the 68,905 requested in 2012 because of the boost to the NCVS sample in the 22 largest states. The boost will allow BJS to generate three-year rolling average estimates of victimization in these 22 states with adequate precision (average RSE 10%), in addition to the regular national level estimates. The degree to which the sample will be boosted in each of the 22-states is dependent on the current level of sample in that state, as well as how representative the sample is of the state population. OMB previously approved an increase in burden due to a pilot test of the sample boost in 11 states on September 28, 2010, raising the NCVS burden hours to 80,450 (ICR Reference Number 201305-1121-002).

16. Project Schedule and Publication Plan

For collection years 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018, the NCVS is in the field from January 1 through December 31^st. Interviewing for the national sample and boost sample occurs simultaneously and 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 for the nation are provided to BJS approximately in April of each year.

BJS releases information collected in the NCVS in a variety of formats. Each summer BJS releases a bulletin, Criminal Victimization, which provides annual national 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

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.

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 recommendations are contained in two reports, Surveying Victims: Options for Conducting the National Crime Victimization Survey (National Research Council, 2008, 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, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12671).

3 Available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18605/estimating-the-incidence-of-rape-and-sexual-assault.

4http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=98.

5 http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ardpatr.pdf.

6 Details on NIBRS reporting are available through the FBI’s website: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/nibrs .