Contributors: Buchbinder, Mara
... Legislative support for physician aid-in-dying (PAD) in the US has risen steadily in recent years. In May 2013, Vermont became the fourth state to legalize PAD, through the "Patient Choice and Control at End of Life" Act (Act 39). The law authorized physicians to prescribe a lethal dose of medication to a mentally competent, terminally ill, adult patient for the purpose of ending the patient's life. With ongoing legislative activities in many other states, these laws are expected to spread nationally. This shifting legislative climate raises questions about how societies respond to changes in the sociocultural and biopolitical organization of death. While social scientists have examined the social and political forces that shape 'right to die' movements and counter-movements, sanctioning the right to die is only the first step in institutionalizing PAD as a new cultural and medical practice. What happens once these rights are legally authorized? The purpose of this study was to learn about how people in Vermont have been affected by Act 39. This 2-year ethnographic study (July 2016-June 2018) addressed the following overarching research questions: How do ordinary people understand, access, experience, and contest the 'right to die' through PAD once it has been granted? How do healthcare providers and policy stakeholders accommodate or resist PAD as a new end-of-life practice? How does PAD affect the cultural landscape of care for the dying in the US? Due to the recent enactment of Act 39, and Vermont's small size and the geographic proximity of key institutions, Vermont offered an ideal setting to explore these questions and document emergent responses to a new socio-legal phenomenon across multiple sites. By tracing the social life of Act 39 from the Vermont State House to the institutions, experts, and ordinary people responsible for managing death, this study yielded valuable information about the broad sociocultural consequences of legalizing PAD, including unintended consequences, that will be relevant to US policymakers, clinicians, patients, and families. This collection includes semi-structured interviews with seriously ill Vermont patients, survivors of people who have used Act 39, healthcare providers and administrators, activists, and legislators, as well as participant observation in settings in which PAD is likely to be discussed. Participants were asked about their personal and professional backgrounds, attitudes on death and the legalization of PAD, understandings of the physician's role and responsibilities regarding end-of-life care, and interactions between healthcare providers, patients, and caregivers about PAD. The age, gender, and race of the participants are also provided.
Contributors: United States. Bureau of the Census, United States Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Corporation for National and Community Service
... This data collection is comprised of responses from two sets of survey questionnaires, the basic Current Population Survey (CPS) and a survey on the topic of volunteer service, which was administered as a supplement to the September CPS questionnaire. The Corporation for National and Community Service jointly sponsored the supplemental questions for September. The CPS, administered monthly, is a labor force survey providing current estimates of the economic status and activities of the population of the United States. Specifically, the CPS provides estimates of total employment (both farm and nonfarm), nonfarm self-employed persons, domestics, and unpaid helpers in nonfarm family enterprises, wage and salaried employees, and estimates of total unemployment. Data from the CPS are provided for the week prior to the survey. All persons eligible for the labor force items of the basic CPS were also eligible for the volunteer supplement. Altogether, 147,268 interviews were conducted during the period of September 10-19, 2017. Proxy responses were allowed if attempts for a self-response were unsuccessful. The supplement contained questions about the household member's participation in volunteer service from September 1, 2016, to the date of the interview. Household members were queried about the frequency of volunteer activity, the kinds of organizations they volunteered with, the types of activities they chose, whether any volunteering was done in a foreign country, and involvement in their community. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, marital status, veteran status, educational attainment, occupation, and income.
Contributors: Miller, Jon D.
... The Longitudinal Study of American Youth (LSAY) is a project that was originally funded by the National Science Foundation in 1985 and was designed to examine the development of: (1) student attitudes toward and achievement in science, (2) student attitudes toward and achievement in mathematics, and (3) student interest in and plans for a career in science, mathematics, or engineering, during middle school, high school, and the first four years post-high school. The relative influence parents, home, teachers, school, peers, media, and selected informal learning experiences had on these developmental patterns was considered as well. The LSAY was designed to select and follow two cohorts of students in 1987. Cohort One was a national sample of approximately 3,000 tenth grade students in public high schools throughout the United States. Cohort Two, consisted of a national sample of 3,116 seventh grade students in public schools that served as feeder schools to the same high schools in which the older cohort was enrolled. Data collection continues for Cohorts One and Two, 31 years after the study began. In the fall of 2015, data collection began on a third cohort: Cohort Three. Cohort Three consisted of 3,721 students in the seventh grade in public schools throughout the United States. The data in this release provides seventh grade comparison data across a 28-year timespan: Cohort Two (1987-1988) and Cohort Three (2015-2016). This study includes arts-related variables about student and parent participation in music, art, literary, dance, and theatrical pursuits. For a more details please see Description of Variables.
Contributors: National Center for State Courts, Conference of State Court Administrators
... This data collection provides detailed comparative information about the structure, policies, and procedures of state-wide trial and appellate court systems for the 50 states and the District of Columbia in the United States for 2011. Information gathered includes: the number of courts and judges, judicial selection, governance of court systems (including judicial funding, administration, staffing, and procedures), jury qualifications and verdict rules, and processing and sentencing procedures of criminal cases. Data collection was carried out by the National Center for State Courts. These data are part of a related collection from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, and U.S. Virgin Islands in the United States for the years 1980, 1987, 1993, 1998, and 2004. In 2011, State Court Organization added new variables to the data collection process. The State Court Organization 2011 file contains the historical variables for 2011, as well as the new variables that were introduced in the 2004 collection. The new variables included data about the courts' information technology systems, including the functions of the court's IT staff, e-filing procedures, accessibility of court information through online systems, and the implementation of case management systems as a means of organizing and managing a court's caseload. The data are reported for trial and appellate courts. The SCO Trial Court Level Data 2011 file includes a subset of the State Court Organization 2011 file, but only for trial level courts. Some variables in the State Court Organization 2011 file were recoded in the Trial Court Level Data 2011 file.
Contributors: National Center for State Courts, Conference of State Court Administrators
... This data collection provides detailed comparative information about the structure, policies, and procedures of state-wide trial and appellate court systems for the 50 states and the District of Columbia within the United States for the years 1980, 1987, 1993, 1998, 2004, and 2011. Information gathered includes: the number of courts and judges, judicial selection, governance of court systems (including judicial funding, administration, staffing, and procedures), jury qualifications and verdict rules, and processing and sentencing procedures of criminal cases. Data collection was carried out by the National Center for State Courts.
Contributors: United States Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
... Beginning in July 2000, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in collaboration with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) expanded the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) to collect data on all types and causes of injuries treated in a representative sample of United States hospitals with emergency departments (EDs). This system is called the NEISS-All Injury Program (NEISS-AIP). The NEISS-AIP is designed to provide national incidence estimates of all types and external causes of nonfatal injuries and poisonings treated in U.S. hospital EDs. Data on injury-related visits are being obtained from a national sample of U.S. NEISS hospitals, which were selected as a stratified probability sample of hospitals in the United States and its territories with a minimum of six beds and a 24-hour ED. The sample includes separate strata for very large, large, medium, and small hospitals, defined by the number of annual ED visits per hospital, and children's hospitals. The scope of reporting goes beyond routine reporting of injuries associated with consumer-related products in CPSC's jurisdiction to include all injuries and poisonings. The data can be used to (1) measure the magnitude and distribution of nonfatal injuries in the United States; (2) monitor unintentional and violence-related nonfatal injuries over time; (3) identify emerging injury problems; (4) identify specific cases for follow-up investigations of particular injury-related problems; and (5) set national priorities. A fundamental principle of this expansion effort is that preliminary surveillance data will be made available in a timely manner to a number of different federal agencies with unique and overlapping public health responsibilities and concerns. Also, annually, the final edited data will be released as public use data files for use by other public health professionals and researchers. NEISS-AIP data on nonfatal injuries were collected from January through December each year except the year 2000 when data were collected from July through December (ICPSR 3582). NEISS AIP is providing data on approximately over 500,000 cases annually. Data obtained on each case include age, race/ethnicity, gender, principal diagnosis, primary body part affected, consumer products involved, disposition at ED discharge (i.e., hospitalized, transferred, treated and released, observation, died), locale where the injury occurred, work-relatedness, and a narrative description of the injury circumstances. Also, major categories of external cause of injury (e.g., motor vehicle, falls, cut/pierce, poisoning, fire/burn) and of intent of injury (e.g., unintentional, assault, intentional self-harm, legal intervention) are being coded for each case in a manner consistent with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) coding rules and guidelines. NEISS has been managed and operated by the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission since 1972 and is used by the Commission for identifying and monitoring consumer product-related injuries and for assessing risk to all United States residents. These product-related injury data are used for educating consumers about hazardous products and for identifying injury-related cases used in detailed studies of specific products and associated hazard patterns. These studies set the stage for developing both voluntary and mandatory safety standards. Since the early 1980s, CPSC has assisted other federal agencies by using NEISS to collect injury- related data of special interest to them. In 1990, an interagency agreement was established between NCIPC and CPSC to (1) collect NEISS data on nonfatal firearm-related injuries for the CDC Firearm Injury Surveillance Study; (2) publish NEISS data on a variety of injury-related topics, such as in-line skating, firearms, BB and pellet guns, bicycles, boat propellers, personal water craft, and playground injuries; and (3) to address common concerns. CPSC also uses NEISS to collect data on work-related injuries for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), CDC. In 1997, the interagency agreement was modified to conduct the three-month NEISS All Injury Pilot Study at 21 NEISS hospitals (see Quinlan KP, Thompson MP, Annest JL, et al. Expanding the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System to Monitor All Nonfatal Injuries Treated in US Hospital Emergency Departments. Annals Emerg. Med. 1999;34:637-643.) This study demonstrated the feasibility of expanding NEISS to collect data on all injuries. National estimates based on this study indicated product-related injuries that fall into CPSC's jurisdiction accounted for approximately 50 percent of injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The study also indicated that NEISS is a cost-effective system for capturing data on all injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The NEISS-AIP provides an excellent data source for monitoring national estimates of nonfatal injuries over time. Analysis and dissemination of these surveillance data through the ICPSR, and Internet publications will help support NCIPC's mission of reducing all types and causes of injuries in the United States, as well as assist other federal agencies with responsibilities for injury prevention and control.
Contributors: United States Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
... These data were collected using the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS), the primary data system of the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). CPSC began operating NEISS in 1972 to monitor product-related injuries treated in United States hospital emergency departments (EDs). In June 1992, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, established an interagency agreement with CPSC to begin collecting data on nonfatal firearm-related injuries in order to monitor the incidents and the characteristics of persons with nonfatal firearm-related injuries treated in United States hospital EDs over time. This dataset represents all nonfatal firearm-related injuries (i.e., injuries associated with powder-charged guns) and all nonfatal BB and pellet gun-related injuries reported through NEISS from 1993 through 2015. The cases consist of initial ED visits for treatment of the injuries. Cases were reported even if the patients subsequently died. Secondary visits and transfers from other hospitals were excluded. Information is available on injury diagnosis, firearm type, use of drugs or alcohol, criminal incident, and locale of the incident. Demographic information includes age, sex, and race of the injured person.
Contributors: Mathematica Policy Research
... The Early Head Start-Child Care Partnerships (EHS-CCP) dataset contains data from two surveys conducted by Mathematica Policy Research as part of a study on Early Head Start-Child Care Partnerships. Mathematica conducted a survey of Early Head Start grantees and their delegate agencies, as well as a survey of selected child care partners of these agencies. The responses to the survey of grantees and their delegate agencies produced three of the datasets included in this collection. The first dataset, Partnership Grantee and Delegate Agency Director Survey, contains data from a survey of Early Head Start grantees and their delegate agencies. This dataset contains questions answered by the grantee or delegate agencies about themselves and contains one observation per grantee. Datasets two and three are also associated with the grantee and delegate agency survey. The second dataset, Grantee and Delegate Agencies Partner Characteristics, contains responses to the initial survey from the grantee or delegate regarding characteristics of all of their child care partners. This dataset was used to create a random sampling of approximately 20 percent of the child care partners for additional questions as well as a separate Child Care Partner survey, which were used to create both datasets three and four. Dataset three, Grantee and Delegate Agencies Randomly Sampled Partner Characteristics, contains responses from grantee and delegate agencies regarding the partners identified by the random sampling created from dataset two. The second survey conducted by Mathematica was of these selected child care partners, and dataset four, Child Care Partner Survey, is comprised of responses to questions asked of the child care partners about themselves. Demographic information contained in these datasets includes education level, degree field, length of occupation, and occupation.
Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS), Wave 1, Restricted Data Version 2.5, 2000-2001
Contributors: Pebley, Anne R., Sastry, Narayan
... This study includes restricted data version 2.5, for Wave 1 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 2.5 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 1 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract and block number for the tract each respondent lives in. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 1 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 2.5 restricted data file. A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 1 at the RAND website. Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from: Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024 The Users' Guides ( Wave 1 and Wave 2) RAND Documentation Reports page
Contributors: Pebley, Anne R., Sastry, Narayan
... This study includes restricted data version 3, for Wave 1 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 3 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 1 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract and block number for the tract each respondent lives in and geographic coordinates data for a number of locations reported by the respondent (including home, grocery store, place of work, place of worship, schools, etc.). It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 1 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 3 restricted data file. A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 1 at the RAND website. Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from: Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024 The Users' Guides ( Wave 1 and Wave 2) RAND Documentation Reports page