Printer Friendly

Section VII: appendices.

Appendix I--Methodology

Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program contributors forward crime data to the FBI either directly from local law enforcement agencies or through state UCR Programs in 46 states and the District of Columbia. The FBI provides continuing guidance and support to individual contributing agencies in those states that do not have a state Program.

State UCR Programs are very effective liaisons between local contributors and the FBI. Many of the Programs have mandatory reporting requirements and collect data beyond the national UCR scope to address crime problems germane to their particular locales. In most cases, these state agencies are also able to provide more direct and frequent service to participating law enforcement agencies, to make information more readily available for use at the state level, and to contribute to more streamlined operations at the national level.

With the implementation of state crime reporting Programs, the national UCR Program ceased direct collection of data from individual law enforcement agencies within those states. Currently, the state data collection agency forwards information it receives from local agencies to the national Program.

The criteria established for state Programs ensure consistency and comparability in the data submitted to the national Program, as well as regular and timely reporting. These criteria are: (1) The state Program must conform to national UCR Program standards, definitions, and information requirements. The states are not, of course, prohibited from collecting other statistical data beyond the national requirements. (2) The state criminal justice agency must have a proven, effective, statewide Program and demonstrate acceptable quality control procedures. (3) Coverage within the state by a state agency must be, at least, equal to that attained by the national UCR Program. (4) The state agency must have adequate field staff assigned to conduct audits and to assist contributing agencies in recordkeeping practices and crime-reporting procedures. (5) The state agency must furnish the FBI with all of the detailed data regularly collected by the FBI in the form of duplicate returns, computer printouts, and/or magnetic tapes. (6) The state agency must have the proven capability (tested over a period of time) to supply all the statistical data required in time to meet deadlines established for publication of the national Uniform Crime Reports.

To fulfill its responsibilities in connection with the UCR Program, the FBI continues to edit and review individual agency reports for both completeness and quality. National UCR Program staff have direct contact with individual contributors within the state as necessary in connection with crime reporting matters, coordinating such contact with the state agency. On request, staff members conduct training programs within the state on law enforcement recordkeeping and crime reporting procedures. Should circumstances develop whereby the state agency does not comply with the aforementioned requirements, the national Program may reinstitute a direct collection of Uniform Crime Reports from law enforcement agencies within the state.

Reporting Procedures

Based on records of all reports of crime received from victims, officers who discover infractions, or other sources, law enforcement agencies across the country tabulate the number of Crime Index (Part I) offenses brought to their attention each month. Specifically, the Index crimes reported to the FBI are murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.

Whenever complaints of crime are determined through investigation to be unfounded or false, they are eliminated from an agency's count. Agencies report to the FBI the number of actual offenses known regardless of whether anyone is arrested for the crime, stolen property is recovered, or prosecution is undertaken.

Another integral part of the monthly submission is the total number of actual Crime Index offenses cleared. Crimes are cleared in one of two ways: (1) by arrest of at least one person, who is charged and turned over to the court for prosecution, or (2) by exceptional means when some element beyond law enforcement control precludes the arrest of a known offender. Law enforcement agencies also report the number of Index crime clearances that involve only offenders under the age of 18, the value of property stolen and recovered in connection with the offenses, and detailed information pertaining to criminal homicide and arson.

In addition to its primary collection of Crime Index (Part I) offenses, the UCR Program solicits monthly data on persons arrested for all crimes except traffic violations. The age, sex, and race of arrestees are reported by crime category, both Part I and Part II. Part II offenses include all crimes not classified as Part I.

Monthly data are also collected on law enforcement officers killed or assaulted. The number of full-time sworn and civilian personnel are reported as of October 31 of each year.

At the end of each quarter, summary information is collected on hate crimes, i.e., specific offenses that were motivated by an offender's bias against the race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, or physical or mental disability of the victim. Hate crime data from those agencies participating in the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) are submitted monthly.

Editing Procedures

Each report submitted to the UCR Program is thoroughly examined for arithmetical accuracy and for deviations which may indicate errors. To identify any unusual fluctuations in an agency's crime count, UCR staff compare monthly reports with previous submissions of the agency and with those for similar agencies. Large variations in crime levels may indicate modified records procedures, incomplete reporting, or changes in the jurisdiction's geopolitical structure.

Data reliability is a high priority of the Program, and noted deviations or arithmetical adjustments are brought to the attention of the state UCR Program or the submitting agency. A standard procedure of the FBI is to study the monthly reports and to evaluate periodic trends prepared for individual reporting units. Any significant increase or decrease becomes the subject of a special inquiry. Changes in crime reporting procedures or annexations can influence the level of reported crime. When this occurs, the figures for specific crime categories or totals, if necessary, are excluded from trend tabulations.

To assist contributors in complying with UCR standards, the national Program provides training seminars and instructional materials on crime reporting procedures. Throughout the country, the national UCR Program maintains liaison with state Programs and law enforcement personnel and holds training sessions to explain the purpose of the Program, the rules of uniform classification and scoring, and the methods of assembling the information for reporting. When an individual agency has specific problems in compiling its crime statistics and its remedial efforts are unsuccessful, personnel from the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services Division may visit the contributor to aid in resolving the difficulties.

The Uniform Crime Reporting Handbook, which details procedures for classifying and scoring offenses, is supplied to all contributors as the basic resource document for preparing reports. Because a good records system is essential for accurate crime reporting, the FBI also furnishes the Manual of Law Enforcement Records.

To enhance communication among Program participants, letters to UCR contributors and UCR State Program Bulletins are produced as needed. These provide policy updates and new information, as well as clarification of reporting issues.

The final responsibility for data submissions rests with the individual contributing law enforcement agency. Although the Program makes every effort through its editing procedures, training practices, and correspondence to assure the validity of the data it receives, the accuracy of the statistics depends primarily on the adherence of each contributor to the established standards of reporting. Deviations from these established standards, which cannot be resolved by the national UCR Program, may be brought to the attention of the Criminal Justice Information Systems Committees of the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the National Sheriffs' Association.

Arrest Data

Florida state arrest data are not included in Tables 30-68. Limited arrest data were received from Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Montana, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. No 2001 arrest data were received from the District of Columbia. Complete 12-month arrest figures for New York City were not available for inclusion in this book. Arrest totals for these areas, however, were estimated for inclusion in Table 29, "Estimated Arrests, United States, 2001."

Population

Prior to preparation of 2001 Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program population estimates, 2000 Bureau of the Census (BOC) decennial data were incorporated into the UCR master file and adjustments for over or under estimation of 2000 UCR population estimates were performed. In this edition, the state and national population figures are BOC 2001 state and national provisional estimates. Population figures for individual jurisdictions were updated by applying 2001 state growth rates to 2000 BOC city/county decennial data to obtain 2001 city/county population estimates. The state growth rates were calculated using 2000 resident population counts and 2001 BOC state provisional estimates. The estimate of the U.S. population showed a 1.2-percent increase from 2000 to 2001.

NIBRS Conversion

Several states provide their UCR data in the expanded NIBRS format. For presentation in this book, NIBRS data were converted to the historical summary UCR formats. The NIBRS database was constructed to allow for such conversion so that UCR's long-running time series could continue.

Crime Trends

By showing fluctuations from year to year, trend statistics offer the data user an added perspective from which to study crime. Percent change tabulations in this publication are computed only for reporting units which have provided comparable data for the periods under consideration. Exclusions from trend computations are made when figures from a reporting agency are not received for comparable timeframes or when it is ascertained that unusual fluctuations are due to such variables as improved records procedures, annexations, etc.

Care should be exercised in making any direct comparison between data in this publication and those in prior issues of Crime in the United States. For example, upon receiving 1995 aggravated assault figures for the state of Kentucky, it was determined the 1994 aggravated assault figures previously submitted were not valid; therefore, the Kentucky aggravated assault figures were not included in Tables 12 through 15 of the 1995 edition. The 1994 estimates in certain offense categories were updated for Delaware, Kansas, and Kentucky. In addition, Montana figures for 1995 were updated to show the actual offense data which were received after publication of Crime in the United States, 1995. These updates appear in the national trends.

Offense Estimation

Tables 1 through 5 and 7 of this publication contain statistics for the entire United States. Because not all law enforcement agencies provide data for complete reporting periods, estimated crime counts are included in these presentations. Offense estimation occurs within each of three areas: Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), cities outside MSAs, and rural counties. Using the known crime experiences of similar areas within a state, the estimates are computed by assigning the same proportional crime volumes to nonreporting agencies. The size of agency; type of jurisdiction, e.g., police department versus sheriff's office; and geographic location are considered in the estimation process.

Due to the efforts to convert to NIBRS in recent years, it has become necessary to estimate totals for some states. The inability of some state UCR Programs to provide forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines and other problems at the state level have also required unique estimation procedures. A summary of state-specific and offense-specific estimation procedures follows.
Year State(s) Reason for Estimation

1985 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

1986 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

1987 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

1988 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

 Florida, Kentucky Reporting problems at the state
 level resulted in no usable data.

1989 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

1990 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

1991 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

 Iowa NIBRS conversion efforts resulted
 in estimation for Iowa.

1992 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

1993 Michigan, Minnesota The state UCR Programs were unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

 Kansas NIBRS conversion efforts resulted
 in estimation for Kansas.

 Illinois NIBRS conversion efforts resulted
 in estimation for Illinois.

 The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

1994 Illinois NIBRS conversion efforts resulted
 in estimation for Illinois.

 The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

 Kansas NIBRS conversion efforts resulted
 in estimation for Kansas.

 Montana The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1994 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

1995 Kansas The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1995 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1995 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Montana The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1995 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

1996 Florida The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1996 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1996 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Kansas The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1996 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Kentucky, Montana The state UCR Programs were unable
 to provide complete 1996 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

1997 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1997 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Kansas The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1997 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Kentucky, Montana, The state UCR Programs were unable
 New Hampshire, to provide complete 1997 offense
 Vermont figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

1998 Delaware Forcible rape figures supplied by
 the Delaware State Bureau of
 Investigation were not in
 accordance with national UCR
 guidelines.

 Kentucky, Montana, The state UCR Programs were unable
 New Hampshire, to provide complete 1998 offense
 Wisconsin figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Kansas The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1998 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Vermont Due to changes in reporting
 procedures, the 1997 Vermont Crime
 Index offense totals were not
 comparable to those for 1998.

 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1998 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

1999 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1999 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Maine The Maine Department of Public
 Safety was unable to provide
 complete 1999 offense figures in
 accordance with UCR guidelines.

 Kansas, Kentucky, The state UCR Programs were unable
 Montana to provide complete 1999 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 New Hampshire The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 1999 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

2000 Kansas The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 2000 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Kentucky, Montana The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 2000 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 llinois The state UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 2000 offense
 figures or forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

2001 Kentucky The State UCR Program was unable
 to provide complete 2000 offense
 figures in accordance with UCR
 guidelines.

 Illinois The state UCR Program submitted
 complete data for only 7 agencies
 within the state. Additionally,
 the state UCR Program was unable
 to provide forcible rape figures
 in accordance with UCR guidelines.

Year State(s) Estimation Method

1985 Illinois The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to the state.

1986 Illinois The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to the state.

1987 Illinois The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to the state.

1988 Illinois The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to the state.

 Florida, Kentucky State totals were estimated by
 updating previous valid annual
 totals for individual
 jurisdictions, subdivided by
 population group. Percent changes
 for each offense within each
 population group of the geographic
 divisions in which the states
 reside were applied to the
 previous valid annual totals. The
 state totals were compiled from
 the sums of the population group
 estimates.

1989 Illinois The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to the state.

1990 Illinois The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to the state.

1991 Illinois The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to the state.

 Iowa State totals were estimated by
 updating previous valid annual
 totals for individual
 jurisdictions, subdivided by
 population group. Percent changes
 for each offense within each
 population group of the geographic
 divisions in which the states
 reside were applied to the
 previous valid annual totals. The
 state totals were compiled from
 the sums of the population group
 estimates.

1992 Illinois The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to the state.

1993 Michigan, Minnesota The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to each state.

 Kansas Kansas totals were estimated by
 updating previous valid annual
 totals for individual
 jurisdictions, subdivided by
 population group. Percent changes
 for each offense within each
 population group of the West North
 Central Division were applied to
 the previous valid annual totals.
 The state totals were compiled
 from the sums of the population
 group estimates.

 Illinois Since valid annual totals were
 available for approximately 60
 Illinois agencies, those counts
 were maintained. The counts for
 the remaining jurisdictions were
 replaced with the most recent
 valid annual totals or were
 generated using standard
 estimation procedures. The results
 of all sources were then combined
 to arrive at the 1993 state total
 for Illinois.

 The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to the state.

1994 Illinois Illinois state totals were
 generated using only the valid
 crime rates for the East North
 Central Division. Within each
 population group, the state's
 offense totals were estimated
 based on the rate per 100,000
 inhabitants within the remainder
 of the division.

 The rape totals were estimated
 using national rates per 100,000
 inhabitants within the eight
 population groups and assigning
 the forcible rape volumes
 proportionally to the state.

 Kansas Kansas state totals were generated
 using only the valid crime rates
 for the West North Central
 Division. Within each population
 group, the state's offense totals
 were estimated based on the rate
 per 100,000 inhabitants within the
 remainder of the division.

 Montana Montana totals were estimated by
 updating previous valid annual
 totals for individual
 jurisdictions, subdivided by
 population group. Percent changes
 for each offense within each
 population group of the Mountain
 Division were applied to the
 previous valid annual totals. The
 state totals were compiled from
 the sums of the population group
 estimates.

1995 Kansas The Kansas State UCR Program was
 able to provide valid 1994 state
 totals which were then updated
 using 1995 crime trends for the
 West North Central Division.

 Illinois Valid Crime Index counts were
 available for most of the largest
 cities. For other agencies, the
 only available counts were
 generated without application of
 the UCR Hierarchy Rule. (The
 Hierarchy Rule requires that only
 the most serious offense in a
 multiple-offense criminal incident
 is counted.) To arrive at a
 comparable state estimate to be
 included in national compilations,
 the total supplied by the Illinois
 State Program (which was inflated
 because of the nonapplication of
 the Hierarchy Rule) was reduced by
 the proportion of multiple
 offenses reported within single
 incidents in the available NIBRS
 data. Valid totals for the large
 cities were excluded from the
 reduction process.

 Montana Montana state estimates were
 computed by updating the previous
 valid annual totals using the 1994
 versus 1995 percent changes for
 the Mountain States.

1996 Florida The state UCR Program was able to
 provide an aggregated state total;
 data received from 94 individual
 Florida agencies are shown in the
 1996 jurisdictional figures
 presented in Tables 8 through 11.

 Illinois Valid Crime Index counts were
 available for most of the largest
 cities. For other agencies, the
 only available counts were
 generated without application of
 the UCR Hierarchy Rule. (The
 Hierarchy Rule requires that only
 the most serious offense in a
 multiple-offense criminal incident
 is counted.) To arrive at a
 comparable state estimate to be
 included in national compilations,
 the total supplied by the Illinois
 State Program (which was inflated
 because of the nonapplication of
 the Hierarchy Rule) was reduced by
 the proportion of multiple
 offenses reported within single
 incidents in the available NIBRS
 data. Valid totals for the large
 cities were excluded from the
 reduction process.

 Kansas Annual figures were extrapolated
 from 1996 January-June state
 totals provided by the Kansas
 State UCR Program.

 Kentucky, Montana The 1995 and 1996 percent changes
 within each geographic division
 were applied to valid 1995 state
 totals to generate 1996 state
 totals.

1997 Illinois Valid Crime Index counts were
 available for most of the largest
 cities. For other agencies, the
 only available counts were
 generated withoutb application of
 the UCR Hierarchy Rule. (The
 Hierarchy Rule requires that only
 the most serious offense in a
 multiple-offense criminal incident
 is counted.) To arrive at a
 comparable state estimate to be
 included in national compilations,
 the total supplied by the Illinois
 State Program (which was inflated
 because of the nonapplication of
 the Hierarchy Rule) was reduced by
 the proportion of multiple
 offenses reported within single
 incidents in the available NIBRS
 data. Valid totals for the large
 cities were excluded from the
 reduction process.

 Kansas The Kansas state estimate was
 extrapolated from 1996
 January-June state totals provided
 by the Kansas State UCR Program.

 Kentucky, Montana, The 1996 and 1997 percent changes
 New Hampshire, registered for each geographic
 division in which the states of
 Kentucky, Montana, New Hampshire,
 Vermont and Vermont are categorized were
 applied to valid 1996 state totals
 to affect 1997 state totals.

1998 Delaware The 1998 forcible rape total for
 Delaware was estimated by reducing
 the number of reported offenses by
 the proportion of male forcible
 rape victims statewide.

 Kentucky, Montana, State totals were estimated by
 using the 1997 figures for the
 New Hampshire, nonreporting areas and applying
 1997 versus 1998 percentage
 Wisconsin changes for the division in which
 each state is located. The
 estimates for the nonreporting
 areas were then increased by any
 actual 1998 crime counts received.

 Kansas To arrive at 1998 estimates, 1997
 state totals supplied by the
 Kansas State UCR Program were
 updated using 1998 crime trends
 for the West North Central
 Division.

 Vermont The 1998 Vermont Crime Index
 offense totals were excluded from
 Table 4. The 1997 Vermont state
 estimates were, however, retained
 in the aggregate national,
 regional, and divisional volume
 and rate totals.

 Illinois Valid Crime Index counts were
 available for most of the largest
 cities. For other agencies, the
 only available counts were
 generated without application of
 the UCR Hierarchy Rule. (The
 Hierarchy Rule requires that only
 the most serious offense in a
 multiple-offense criminal incident
 is counted.) To arrive at a
 comparable state estimate to be
 included in national compilations,
 the total supplied by the Illinois
 State Program (which was inflated
 because of the nonapplication of
 the Hierarchy Rule) was reduced by
 the proportion of multiple
 offenses reported within single
 incidents in the available NIBRS
 data. Valid totals for the large
 cities were excluded from the
 reduction process.

1999 Illinois Valid Crime Index counts were
 available for most of the largest
 cities. For other agencies, the
 only available counts were
 generated without application of
 the UCR Hierarchy Rule. (The
 Hierarchy Rule requires that only
 the most serious offense in a
 multiple-offense criminal incident
 is counted.) To arrive at a
 comparable state estimate to be
 included in national compilations,
 the total supplied by the Illinois
 State Program (which was inflated
 because of the nonapplication of
 the Hierarchy Rule) was reduced by
 the proportion of multiple
 offenses reported within single
 incidents in the available NIBRS
 data. Valid totals for the large
 cities were excluded from the
 reduction process.

 Maine The Maine Department of Public
 Safety forwarded monthly January
 through October crime counts for
 each law enforcement contributor;
 since 12 months of data were not
 received, the national Program
 estimated for the missing data
 following standard estimation
 procedures to arrive at a 1999
 state total.

 Kansas, Kentucky, To arrive at 1999 estimates for
 Kansas, Kentucky, and Montana,
 Montana 1998 state totals supplied by each
 state Uniform Crime Reporting
 Program were updated using 1999
 crime trends for the divisions in
 which each state is located.

 New Hampshire The state total for New Hampshire
 was estimated by using the 1998
 figures for the 1999 nonreporting
 areas and applying the 2-year
 percent change for the New England
 Division.

2000 Kansas To arrive at 2000 estimates for
 Kansas, 1999 state estimates were
 updated using 2000 crime trends
 for the division in which it is
 located.

 Kentucky, Montana To arrive at 2000 estimates for
 Kentucky and Montana, 1999 state
 totals supplied by each state Uniform
 Crime Reporting Program were
 updated using 2000 crime trends
 for the divisions in which each is
 located.

 llinois Valid Crime Index counts were
 available for most of the largest
 cities. For other agencies, the
 only available counts were
 generated without application of
 the UCR Hierarchy Rule. (The
 Hierarchy Rule requires that only
 the most serious offense in a
 multiple-offense criminal incident
 be counted.) To arrive at a
 comparable state estimate to be
 included in national compilation,
 the total supplied by the Illinois
 State Program (which was inflated
 due to the nonapplication of the
 Hierarchy Rule) was reduced by the
 proportion of multiple offenses
 reported within single incidents
 in the available NIBRS data. Valid
 totals for the large cities were
 excluded from the reduction
 process.

2001 Kentucky To arrive at the 2001 estimate for
 Kentucky, the 2000 state estimates
 were updated using 2001 crime
 trends reported for the East South
 Central Division in which it is
 located.

 Illinois Valid Crime Index counts were
 available for most of the largest
 cities. For other agencies, the
 only available counts were
 generated without application of
 the UCR Hierarchy Rule. (The
 Hierarchy Rule requires that only
 the most serious offense in a
 multiple-offense criminal incident
 is counted.) To arrive at a
 comparable state estimate to be
 included in national compilations,
 the total supplied by the Illinois
 State Program (which was inflated
 because of the nonapplication of
 the Hierarchy Rule) was reduced by
 the proportion of multiple
 offenses reported within single
 incidents in the available NIBRS
 data. Valid totals for the large
 cities were excluded from the
 reduction process.


Table Methodology

Although most law enforcement agencies submit crime reports to the UCR Program, data are sometimes not received for complete annual periods. To be included in this publication's Tables 8 through 11, which show specific jurisdictional statistics, figures for all 12 months of the current year must have been received at the FBI prior to established publication deadlines. Other tabular presentations are aggregated on varied levels of submission. With the exception of the tables which consist of estimates for the total United States population, each table in this publication shows the number of agencies reporting and the extent of population coverage.

Designed to assist the reader, this table explains the construction of many of this book's tabular presentations.
 (1) (2)
 Table Database

 1 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR
 Program. Crime statistics include estimated
 offense totals for agencies submitting less than
 12 months of offense reports for each year.

 2 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR
 Program. Crime statistics include estimated
 offense totals for agencies submitting less than
 12 months of offense reports.

 3 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR
 Program (including those submitting less than
 12 months in 2001).

 4 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR
 Program. Crime statistics include estimated
 offense totals for agencies submitting less than
 12 months of offense reports for 2000 and 2001.

 5 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR
 Program. Crime statistics include estimated
 offense totals for agencies submitting less than
 12 months of offense reports.

 6 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR
 Program. Crime statistics include estimated
 offense totals for agencies submitting less than
 12 months of offense statistics for 2001.

 7 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR
 Program. Crime statistics include estimated
 offense totals for agencies submitting less than
 12 months of offense reports for each year.

 8 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2001.

 9 All university/college law enforcement agencies
 submitting complete reports for 12 months in
 2001.

 10 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2001.

 11 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2001.

 12-15 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for at least 6 common months
 in 2000 and 2001.

 16-19 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2001.

 20 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR) data in
 2001.

21, 22 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2001.

23, 24 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for at least 6 months in 2001.

 25-28 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for at least 6 months in 2001.

 29 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR
 Program (including those submitting less than
 12 months in 2001).

30, 31 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2001.

32, 33 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 1992 and
 2001.

34, 35 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 1997 and
 2001.

36, 37 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2000 and
 2001.

 38-43 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2001.

44, 45 All city law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2000 and
 2001.

 46-49 All city law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2000 and
 2001.

50, 51 All suburban county law enforcement agencies
 submitting complete reports for 12 months in
 2000 and 2001.

 52-55 All suburban county law enforcement agencies
 submitting complete reports for 12 months in
 2001.

56, 57 All rural county law enforcement agencies
 submitting complete reports for 12 months in
 2000 and 2001.

 58-61 All rural county law enforcement agencies
 submitting complete reports for 12 months in
 2001.

62, 63 All suburban area law enforcement agencies
 submitting complete reports for 12 months in
 2000 and 2001.

 64-67 All suburban area law enforcement agencies
 submitting complete reports for 12 months in
 2001.

 68 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2001.

 69 All law enforcement agencies submitting
 complete reports for 12 months in 2001.

 (1) (3)
 Table Table Construction

 1 The 2001 statistics are consistent with Table 2.
 Pre-2001 crime statistics may have been updated
 and, hence, may not be consistent with prior
 publications. Population statistics represent July 1
 provisional estimations for each year except 1990
 and 2000, which are Bureau of the Census
 decennial census data (see the Population section in
 this appendix).

 2 Statistics are aggregated from individual state
 statistics as shown in Table 5. Population statistics
 for 2001 represent estimates based upon the percent
 change in state population from Bureau of the
 Census 2000 decennial census counts and 2001
 provisional estimates (see the Population section in
 this appendix).

 3 Regional offense distributions are computed from
 volume figures as shown in Table 4. Population
 distributions are based on Bureau of the Census
 provisional estimates for 2001.

 4 The 2001 statistics are aggregated from individual
 state statistics as shown in Table 5. Population
 statistics represent Bureau of the Census decennial
 counts for 2000 and provisional estimates for 2001.

 5 Population statistics for 2001 represent estimates
 based upon the percent change in state population
 from Bureau of the Census 2000 decennial census
 counts and 2001 provisional estimates (see the
 Population section in this appendix). Statistics
 under the heading Area Actually Reporting
 represent reported offense totals for agencies
 submitting 12 months of offense reports and
 estimated totals for agencies submitting less than
 12 but more than 2 months of offense reports. The
 statistics under the heading Estimated Totals
 represent the above plus estimated offense totals for
 agencies having less than 3 months of offense
 reports.

 6 Statistics are published for all Metropolitan
 Statistical Areas (MSAs) having at least 75%
 reporting and for which the central city/cities
 submitted 12 months of data in 2001. Population
 statistics for 2001 represent estimates based upon
 the percent change in state population from Bureau
 of the Census 2000 decennial census counts and
 2001 provisional estimates (see the Population
 section in this appendix). The statistics under the
 heading Area Actually Reporting represent reported
 offense totals for agencies submitting all 12 months
 of offense reports plus estimated offense totals for
 agencies submitting less than 12 but more than 2
 months of offense reports. The statistics under the
 heading Estimated Total represent the above plus
 the estimated offense totals for agencies submitting
 less than 3 months of offense reports. The tabular
 breakdowns are according to UCR definitions (see
 App. II).

 7 Offense totals are for all Index offense categories
 other than aggravated assault.

 8 Cities and Towns are defined to be agencies in
 Population Groups I through V (App. III).
 Population statistics for 2001 represent estimates
 based upon the percent change in state population
 from Bureau of the Census 2000 decennial census
 counts and 2001 provisional estimates (see the
 Population section in this appendix).

 9 The 1999 student enrollment figures, which are
 provided by the U.S. Department of Education, are
 the most recent available. They include full- and
 part-time students. No adjustments to equate part-time
 enrollments into full-time equivalents have
 been made.

 10 Suburban Counties are defined as the areas covered
 by noncity agencies within an MSA (App. III).
 Population classifications of suburban counties are
 based on 2001 UCR estimates for individual
 agencies (see the Population section in this
 appendix).

 11 Rural Counties are those outside MSAs and whose
 jurisdictions are not covered by city police agencies
 (App. III). Population classifications of rural
 counties are based on 2001 UCR estimates for
 individual agencies (see the Population section in
 this appendix).

 12-15 The 2001 crime trend statistics are 2-year
 comparisons based on 2001 reported crime activity.
 Only common reported months for individual
 agencies are included in 2001 trend calculations.
 Population statistics for 2001 represent estimates
 based upon the percent change in state population
 from Bureau of the Census 2000 decennial census
 counts and 2001 provisional estimates (see the
 Population section in this appendix). See Appendix
 III for UCR population breakdowns. Note that
 Suburban and Nonsuburban Cities are all municipal
 agencies other than central cities in MSAs.

 16-19 The 2001 crime rates are the ratios of the
 aggregated 2001 crime volumes and the aggregated
 2001 populations of the contributing agencies.
 Population statistics for 2001 represent estimates
 based upon the percent change in state population
 from Bureau of the Census 2000 decennial census
 counts and 2001 provisional estimates (see the
 Population section in this appendix). See Appendix
 III for UCR population breakdowns. Note that
 Suburban and Nonsuburban Cities are all municipal
 agencies other than central cities in MSAs.

 20 The weapon totals are the aggregate for each murder
 victim recorded on the SHRs for calendar year 2001.

21, 22 The weapon totals are aggregated 2001 totals.
 Population statistics represent 2001 UCR estimates.

23, 24 Offense total and value lost total are computed for all
 Index offense categories other than aggravated
 assault. Percent distribution is derived based on
 offense total of each Index offense. Trend statistics
 are derived based on agencies with at least 6 common
 months complete data for 2000 and 2001.

 25-28 The 2001 clearance rates are based on offense and
 clearance volume totals of the contributing agencies
 for 2001. Population statistics for 2001 represent
 estimates based upon the percent change in state
 population from Bureau of the Census 2000 decennial
 census counts and 2001 provisional estimates (see the
 Population section in this appendix). See Appendix
 III for UCR Program population breakdowns.

 29 The arrest totals presented are national estimates
 based on the arrest statistics of all law enforcement
 agencies in the UCR Program (including those
 submitting less than 12 months). The Total Estimated
 Arrests statistic is the sum of estimated arrest volumes
 for each of the 29 offenses. Each individual arrest
 total is the sum of the estimated volumes within each
 of the eight population groups (App. III). Each
 group's estimate is the reported volume (as shown in
 Table 31) divided by the percent of total group
 population reporting (according to 2001 UCR
 estimates for individual agencies, see the Population
 section in this appendix).

30, 31 The 2001 arrest rates are the ratios, per 100,000
 inhabitants, of the aggregated 2001 reported arrest
 statistics and population. The population statistics for
 2001 represent estimates based upon the percent
 change in state population from Bureau of the Census
 2000 decennial census counts and 2001 provisional
 estimates (see the Population section in this
 appendix). See Appendix III for UCR population
 classifications/geographical configuration.

32, 33 The arrest trends are the percentage differences
 between 1992 and 2001 arrest volumes aggregated
 from all common agencies. The population statistics
 for 2001 represent estimates based upon the percent
 change in state population from Bureau of the Census
 2000 decennial census counts and 2001 provisional
 estimates. (See the Population section in this
 appendix). Population statistics for 1992 are based
 upon the percent change in state population from
 Bureau of the Census 1991 and 1992 provisional
 estimates.

34, 35 The arrest trends are the percentage differences
 between 1997 and 2001 arrest volumes aggregated
 from common agencies. The population statistics for
 2001 represent estimates based upon the percent
 change in state population from Bureau of the
 Census 2000 decennial census counts and 2001
 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in
 this appendix). Population statistics for 1997 are
 based upon the percent change in state population
 from the Bureau of the Census 1996 and 1997
 provisional estimates.

36, 37 The arrest trends are 2-year comparisons between
 2000 and 2001 arrest volumes aggregated from
 common agencies. Population statistics represent
 Bureau of the Census 2000 decennial census counts.
 Population statistics for 2001 represent estimates
 based upon the percent change in state population
 from Bureau of the Census 2000 decennial counts
 and 2001 provisional estimates (see the Population
 section in this appendix).

 38-43 Population statistics for 2001 represent estimates
 based upon the percent change in state population
 from Bureau of the Census 2000 decennial census
 counts and 2001 provisional estimates (see the
 Population section in this appendix).

44, 45 The 2001 city arrest trends represent the percentage
 differences between 2000 and 2001 arrest volumes
 aggregated from common city agencies. City
 Agencies are defined to be all agencies within
 Population Groups I-VI (App. III). Population
 statistics for 2001 represent estimates based upon
 the percent change in state population from Bureau
 of the Census 2000 decennial census counts and
 2001 provisional estimates. (See the Population
 section in this appendix.)

 46-49 City Agencies are defined to be all agencies within
 Population Groups I-VI (App. III). Population
 statistics for 2001 represent estimates based upon
 the percent change in state population from Bureau
 of Census 2000 decennial census counts and 2001
 provisional estimates (see Population section in this
 appendix).

50, 51 The 2001 suburban county arrest trends represent
 percentage differences between 2000 and 2001
 volumes aggregated from contributing agencies.
 Suburban Counties are defined as the areas covered
 by noncity agencies within an MSA (App. III).
 Population statistics for 2000 represent Bureau of
 the Census decennial census counts. Population
 statistics for 2001 represent estimates based upon
 the percent change in state population from Bureau
 of the Census 2000 decennial census counts and
 2001 provisional estimates (see the Population
 section in this appendix).

 52-55 Suburban Counties are defined as the areas covered
 by noncity agencies within an MSA (App. III).
 Population statistics for 2001 represent estimates
 based upon the percent change in state population
 from the Bureau of the Census 2000 decennial
 census counts and 2001 provisional estimates (see
 the Population section in this appendix).

56, 57 The 2001 rural county arrest trends represent
 percentage differences between 2000 and 2001
 volumes aggregated from contributing agencies.
 Rural Counties are defined as noncity agencies
 outside MSAs (App. III). Population statistics for
 2000 represent Bureau of the Census decennial
 census counts. Population statistics for 2001
 represent estimates based upon the percent change
 in state population from Bureau of the Census 2000
 decennial census counts and 2001 provisional
 estimates (see the Population section in this
 appendix).

 58-61 Rural Counties are defined as noncity agencies
 outside MSAs (App. III). Population statistics for
 2001 represent estimates based upon the percent
 change in state population from the Bureau of the
 Census 2000 decennial census counts and 2001
 provisional estimates (see the Population section in
 this appendix).

62, 63 The 2001 suburban area arrest trends represent
 percentage differences between 2000 and 2001
 arrest volumes aggregated from contributing
 agencies. Suburban Area is defined as agencies
 that are within a metropolitan area excluding those
 that cover central cities as defined by the Office of
 Management and Budget (App. III). Population
 statistics for 2000 represent Bureau of the Census
 decennial census counts. Population statistics for
 2001 represent estimates based upon the percent
 change in state population from Bureau of the
 Census 2000 decennial census counts and 2001
 provisional estimates (see the Population section in
 this appendix).

 64-67 Suburban Area is defined as agencies that are
 within a metropolitan area excluding those that
 cover central cities as defined by the Office of
 Management and Budget (App. III). Population
 statistics for 2001 represent estimates based upon
 the percent change in state population from Bureau
 of the Census 2000 decennial census counts and
 2001 provisional estimates (see the Population
 section in this appendix).

 68 Population statistics for 2001 represent estimates
 based upon the percent change in state population
 from Bureau of the Census 2000 decennial census
 counts and 2001 provisional estimates (see the
 Population section in this appendix).

 69 Arrest totals are aggregated for individual agencies
 within each state. Population statistics represent
 Bureau of the Census provisional estimates for
 2001 (see Population section in this appendix).

 (1) (4)
 Table General Comments

 1 Represents an estimation of national reported crime
 activity from 1982 to 2001.

 2 Represents an estimation of national reported crime
 activity in 2001.

 3 Represents the 2001 geographical distribution of
 estimated Crime Index offenses and population.

 4 Represents an estimation of reported crime activity
 for Index offenses at the:
 1. national level
 2. regional level
 3. division level
 4. state level
 Any comparison of UCR statistics should take into
 consideration demographic factors.

 5 Represents an estimation of reported crime activity
 for Index offenses at the state level. Any comparison
 of UCR statistics should take into consideration
 demographic factors.

 6 Represents an estimation of the reported crime
 activity for Index offenses at individual MSA level.
 Any comparison of UCR statistics should take into
 consideration demographic factors.

 7 Represents an estimation of national reported crime
 activity from 1997 to 2001. Aggravated assault is
 excluded from Table 7, because if money or
 property is taken in connection with an assault, the
 offense is robbery.

 8 Represents reported crime activity of individual
 agencies in cities and towns 10,000 and over in
 population. Any comparison of UCR statistics
 should take into consideration demographic factors.

 9 Represents reported crime from those individual
 university/college law enforcement agencies
 contributing to the UCR Program. These agencies
 are listed alphabetically by state. Any comparison
 of these UCR statistics should take into
 consideration size of enrollment, number of on-campus
 residents, and other demographic factors.

 10 Represents crime reported to individual law
 enforcement agencies in suburban counties, i.e., the
 individual sheriff's office, county police department,
 highway patrol, and/or state police. These figures
 do not represent the county totals since they exclude
 city crime counts. Any comparison of UCR
 statistics should take into consideration demographic
 factors.

 11 Represents crime reported to individual rural county
 law enforcement agencies covering populations
 25,000 and over, i.e., the individual sheriff's office,
 county police department, highway patrol, and/or
 state police. These figures do not represent the
 county totals since they exclude city crime counts.
 Any comparison of UCR statistics should take into
 consideration demographic factors.

 12-15

 16-19 The forcible rape figures furnished by the Delaware
 and Illinois state-level UCR Programs were not in
 accordance with national guidelines. For inclusion
 in these tables, the Delaware and Illinois forcible
 rape figures were estimated by using the national
 rates for each population group applied to the
 population by group for Delaware and Illinois
 agencies supplying all 12 months of data. Slight
 decrease in national coverage for Table 19 due to
 editing procedure and lower submission rate.

 20 The SHR is the monthly report form concerning
 homicides. It details victim and offender
 characteristics, circumstances, weapons used, etc.

21, 22

23, 24 Aggravated assault is excluded from Table 23. For
 UCR Program purposes, the taking of money or
 property in connection with an assault is reported
 as robbery.

 25-28

 29

30, 31

32, 33

34, 35

36, 37

 38-43

44, 45

 46-49

50, 51

 52-55

56, 57

 58-61

62, 63

 64-67

 68 Data furnished are based upon individual state age
 definitions for juveniles.

 69 Any comparison of statistics should take into
 consideration variances in arrest practices,
 particularly for Part II crimes.


Appendix II--Offenses in Uniform Crime Reporting

The Uniform Crime Reporting Program classifies offenses into two groups, Part I and Part II. Each month contributing agencies submit information on the number of Part I (Crime Index) offenses known to law enforcement; those cleared by arrest or exceptional means; and the age, sex, and race of persons arrested. Contributors provide only arrest data for Part II offenses.

The Part I offenses are defined below:

Criminal homicide--a.) Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter: the willful (nonnegligent) killing of one human being by another. Deaths caused by negligence, attempts to kill, assaults to kill, suicides, and accidental deaths are excluded. The Program classifies justifiable homicides separately and limits the definition to: (1) the killing of a felon by a law enforcement officer in the line of duty; or (2) the killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen. b.) Manslaughter by negligence: the killing of another person through gross negligence. Traffic fatalities are excluded. While manslaughter by negligence is a Part I crime, it is not included in the Crime Index.

Forcible rape--The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. Rapes by force and attempts or assaults to rape regardless of the age of the victim are included. Statutory offenses (no force used--victim under age of consent) are excluded.

Robbery--The taking or attempting to take anything of value from the care, custody, or control of a person or persons by force or threat of force or violence and/or by putting the victim in fear.

Aggravated assault--An unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. This type of assault usually is accompanied by the use of a weapon or by means likely to produce death or great bodily harm. Simple assaults are excluded.

Burglary (breaking or entering)--The unlawful entry of a structure to commit a felony or a theft. Attempted forcible entry is included.

Larceny-theft (except motor vehicle theft)--The unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or riding away of property from the possession or constructive possession of another. Examples are thefts of bicycles or automobile accessories, shoplifting, pocket-picking, or the stealing of any property or article which is not taken by force and violence or by fraud. Attempted larcenies are included. Embezzlement, confidence games, forgery, worthless checks, etc., are excluded.

Motor vehicle theft--The theft or attempted theft of a motor vehicle. A motor vehicle is self-propelled and runs on the surface and not on rails. Motorboats, construction equipment, airplanes, and farming equipment are specifically excluded from this category.

Arson--Any willful or malicious burning or attempt to burn, with or without intent to defraud, a dwelling house, public building, motor vehicle or aircraft, personal property of another, etc.

The Part II offenses are defined below:

Other assaults (simple)--Assaults and attempted assaults where no weapons are used and which do not result in serious or aggravated injury to the victim.

Forgery and counterfeiting--Making, altering, uttering, or possessing, with intent to defraud, anything false in the semblance of that which is true. Attempts are included.

Fraud--Fraudulent conversion and obtaining money or property by false pretenses. Confidence games and bad checks, except forgeries and counterfeiting, are included.

Embezzlement--Misappropriation or misapplication of money or property entrusted to one's care, custody, or control.

Stolen property; buying, receiving, possessing--Buying, receiving, and possessing stolen property, including attempts.

Vandalism--Willful or malicious destruction, injury, disfigurement, or defacement of any public or private property, real or personal, without consent of the owner or persons having custody or control. Attempts are included.

Weapons; carrying, possessing, etc.--All violations of regulations or statutes controlling the carrying, using, possessing, furnishing, and manufacturing of deadly weapons or silencers. Attempts are included.

Prostitution and commercialized vice--Sex offenses of a commercialized nature, such as prostitution, keeping a bawdy house, procuring, or transporting women for immoral purposes. Attempts are included.

Sex offenses (except forcible rape, prostitution, and commercialized vice)--Statutory rape and offenses against chastity, common decency, morals, and the like. Attempts are included.

Drug abuse violations--State and/or local offenses relating to the unlawful possession, sale, use, growing, and manufacturing of narcotic drugs. The following drug categories are specified: opium or cocaine and their derivatives (morphine, heroin, codeine); marijuana; synthetic narcotics--manufactured narcotics that can cause true addiction (demerol, methadone); and dangerous nonnarcotic drugs (barbiturates, benzedrine).

Gambling--Promoting, permitting, or engaging in illegal gambling.

Offenses against the family and children--Nonsupport, neglect, desertion, or abuse of family and children. Attempts are included.

Driving under the influence--Driving or operating any vehicle or common carrier while drunk or under the influence of liquor or narcotics.

Liquor laws--State and/or local liquor law violations except drunkenness and driving under the influence. Federal violations are excluded.

Drunkenness--Offenses relating to drunkenness or intoxication. Driving under the influence is excluded.

Disorderly conduct--Breach of the peace.

Vagrancy--Begging, loitering, etc. Includes prosecutions under the charge of suspicious person.

All other offenses--All violations of state and/or local laws except those listed above and traffic offenses.

Suspicion--No specific offense; suspect released without formal charges being placed.

Curfew and loitering laws (persons under age 18)--Offenses relating to violations of local curfew or loitering ordinances where such laws exist.

Runaways (persons under age 18)--Limited to juveniles taken into protective custody under provisions of local statutes.

Appendix III--Uniform Crime Reporting Area Definitions

The presentation of statistics by reporting area facilitates analyzing local crime counts in conjunction with those for areas of similar geographical location or population size. Geographically, the United States is divisible by regions, divisions, and states. Further breakdowns rely on population figures and proximity to metropolitan areas. As a general rule, sheriffs, county police, and state police report crimes committed within the limits of counties but outside cities, and local police report crimes committed within the city limits.

Community Types

Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) data are often presented in aggregations representing three types of communities:

1. Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs)--Each MSA includes a central city of at least 50,000 people or an urbanized area of at least 50,000. The county containing the central city and other contiguous counties having strong economic and social ties to the central city and county are also included. Counties in an MSA are designated suburban for UCR purposes. An MSA may cross state lines. The MSA concept facilitates the analysis and presentation of uniform statistical data on metropolitan areas by establishing reporting units which represent major population centers. Due to changes in the geographic composition of MSAs, no year-to-year comparisons of data for those areas should be attempted.

New England MSAs are composed of cities and towns instead of counties. In this publication's tabular presentations, New England cities and towns are assigned to the proper MSAs. Some counties, however, have both suburban and rural portions. Data for state police and sheriffs in those jurisdictions are included in statistics for the rural areas.

MSAs made up approximately 79.9 percent of the total United States population in 2001. Some presentations in this book refer to suburban areas. A suburban area includes cities with less than 50,000 inhabitants in addition to counties (unincorporated areas) within the MSA. The central cities are, of course, excluded. The concept of suburban area is especially important because of the particular crime conditions which exist in the communities surrounding the Nation's largest cities.

2. Cities Outside MSAs--Cities outside MSAs are mostly incorporated. They comprised 8.0 percent of the 2001 population of the United States.

3. Rural Counties Outside MSAs--Rural counties are composed of mostly unincorporated areas. Law enforcement agencies in rural counties cover areas that are not under the jurisdiction of city police departments. Rural county law enforcement agencies served 12.1 percent of the national population in 2001.

The following is an illustration of the community types:
 MSA NON-MSA

 CENTRAL
 CITIES 50,000 CITIES
 CITIES AND OVER OUTSIDE
 METROPLITAN
 SUBURBAN AREAS
 CITIES

 COUNTIES
 (including SUBURBAN RURAL
 unincorporated COUNTIES COUNTIES
 areas)


Population Groups

The population group classifications used by the UCR Program are:
Population Political Population
 Group Label Range

I City 250,000 and over
II City 100,000 to 249,999
III City 50,000 to 99,999
IV City 25,000 to 49,999
V City 10,000 to 24,999
VI City (1) Less than 10,000
VIII (Rural County) County (2) N/A
IX (Suburban County) County (2) N/A

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

(2) Includes state police to which no population is attributed.


The major source of UCR data is the individual law enforcement agency. The number of agencies included in each population group will vary slightly from year to year because of population growth, geopolitical consolidation, municipal incorporation, etc. Population figures for individual jurisdictions are estimated by the UCR Program in noncensus years. (See Appendix I for a more comprehensive explanation of population estimations.)

The following table shows the number of UCR contributing agencies within each population group for 2001.
Population Number of Population
 Group Agencies Covered

I 70 52,194,574
II 170 25,241,834
III 415 28,433,360
IV 794 27,588,722
V 1,856 29,412,579
VI (1) 8,463 25,860,112
VIII (Rural County) (2) 3,413 34,454,583
IX (Suburban County) (2) 1,790 61,611,123
Total 16,971 284,796,887

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

(2) Includes state police to which no population is attributed.


Regions and Divisions

As shown in the accompanying map, the United States is composed of four regions: the Northeastern States, the Midwestern States, the Southern States, and the Western States. These regions are further separated into nine divisions. The following table delineates the regional, divisional, and state configuration of the country.
NORTHEASTERN STATES

New England Middle Atlantic
 Connecticut New Jersey
 Maine New York
 Massachusetts Pennsylvania
 New Hampshire
 Rhode Island
 Vermont

MIDWESTERN STATES

East North Central West North Central
 Illinois Iowa
 Indiana Kansas
 Michigan Minnesota
 Ohio Missouri
 Wisconsin Nebraska
 North Dakota
 South Dakota

SOUTHERN STATES

South Atlantic East South Central
 Delaware Alabama
 District of Columbia Kentucky
 Florida Mississippi
 Georgia Tennessee
 Maryland West South Central
 North Carolina Arkansas
 South Carolina Louisiana
 Virginia Oklahoma
 West Virginia Texas

WESTERN STATES

Mountain Pacific
 Arizona Alaska
 Colorado California
 Idaho Hawaii
 Montana Oregon
 Nevada Washington
 New Mexico
 Utah
 Wyoming


[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Appendix IV--The Nation's Two Crime Measures

The U.S. Department of Justice administers two statistical programs to measure the magnitude, nature, and impact of crime in the Nation: the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). Each of these programs produces valuable information about aspects of the Nation's crime problem. Because the UCR and NCVS programs are conducted for different purposes, use different methods, and focus on somewhat different aspects of crime, the information they produce together provides a more comprehensive panorama of the Nation's crime problem than either could produce alone.

Uniform Crime Reports

The FBI's UCR Program, which began in 1929, collects information on the following crimes reported to law enforcement authorities: homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Arrests are reported for 21 additional crime categories.

The UCR data are compiled from monthly law enforcement reports or individual crime incident records transmitted directly to the FBI or to centralized state agencies that then report to the FBI. Each report submitted to the UCR Program is examined thoroughly for reasonableness, accuracy, and deviations that may indicate errors. Large variations in crime levels may indicate modified records procedures, incomplete reporting, or changes in a jurisdiction's boundaries. To identify any unusual fluctuations in an agency's crime counts, monthly reports are compared with previous submissions of the agency and with those for similar agencies.

In 2001, law enforcement agencies active in the UCR Program represented approximately 255 million United States inhabitants--89.6 percent of the total population.

The UCR Program provides crime counts for the Nation as a whole, as well as for regions, states, counties, cities, and towns. This permits studies among neighboring jurisdictions and among those with similar populations and other common characteristics.

UCR findings for each calendar year are published in a preliminary release in the spring of the following calendar year, then succeeded by a detailed annual report, Crime in the United States, issued in the fall. In addition to crime counts and trends, this report includes data on crimes cleared, persons arrested (age, sex, and race), law enforcement personnel (including the number of sworn officers killed or assaulted), and the characteristics of homicides (including age, sex, and race of victims and offenders; victim-offender relationships; weapons used; and circumstances surrounding the homicides). Other periodic reports are also available from the UCR Program.

The UCR Program is continually converting to the more comprehensive and detailed National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). NIBRS can provide detailed information about each criminal incident in 22 broad categories of offenses.

National Crime Victimization Survey

The Bureau of Justice Statistics' NCVS, which began in 1973, provides a detailed picture of crime incidents, victims, and trends. After a substantial period of research, the survey completed an intensive methodological redesign in 1993. The redesign was undertaken to improve the questions used to uncover crime, update the survey methods, and broaden the scope of crimes measured. The redesigned survey collects detailed information on the frequency and nature of the crimes of rape, sexual assault, personal robbery, aggravated and simple assault, household burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. It does not measure homicide or commercial crimes (such as burglaries of stores).

Two times a year, U.S. Bureau of the Census personnel interview all household members at least 12 years old in a nationally representative sample of approximately 49,000 households (about 80,000 people). Approximately 160,000 interviews are conducted annually. Households stay in the sample for 3 years. New households rotate into the sample on an ongoing basis.

The NCVS collects information on crimes suffered by individuals and households, whether or not those crimes were reported to law enforcement. It estimates the proportion of each crime type reported to law enforcement, and it summarizes the reasons that victims give for reporting or not reporting.

The survey provides information about victims (age, sex, race, ethnicity, marital status, income, and educational level), offenders (sex, race, approximate age, and victim-offender relationship), and the crimes (time and place of occurrence, use of weapons, nature of injury, and economic consequences). Questions also cover the experiences of victims with the criminal justice system, self-protective measures used by victims, and possible substance abuse by offenders. Supplements are added periodically to the survey to obtain detailed information on topics like school crime.

The first data from the redesigned NCVS were published in a BJS bulletin in June 1995. BJS publication of NCVS data includes Criminal Victimization in the United States, an annual report that covers the broad range of detailed information collected by the NCVS. BJS publishes detailed reports on topics such as crime against women, urban crime, and gun use in crime. The NCVS data files are archived at the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data at the University of Michigan to enable researchers to perform independent analyses.

Comparing UCR and NCVS

Because the NCVS was designed to complement the UCR Program, the two programs share many similarities. As much as their different collection methods permit, the two measure the same subset of serious crimes, defined alike. Both programs cover rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Rape, robbery, theft, and motor vehicle theft are defined virtually identically by both the UCR and NCVS. (While rape is defined analogously, the UCR Crime Index measures the crime against women only, and the NCVS measures it against both sexes.)

There are also significant differences between the two programs. First, the two programs were created to serve different purposes. The UCR Program's primary objective is to provide a reliable set of criminal justice statistics for law enforcement administration, operation, and management. The NCVS was established to provide previously unavailable information about crime (including crime not reported to police), victims, and offenders.

Second, the two programs measure an overlapping but nonidentical set of crimes. The NCVS includes crimes both reported and not reported to law enforcement. The NCVS excludes, but the UCR includes, homicide, arson, commercial crimes, and crimes against children under age 12. The UCR captures crimes reported to law enforcement, but it excludes simple assaults and sexual assaults other than forcible rape from the Crime Index.

Third, because of methodology, the NCVS and UCR definitions of some crimes differ. For example, the UCR defines burglary as the unlawful entry or attempted entry of a structure to commit a felony or theft. The NCVS, not wanting to ask victims to ascertain offender motives, defines burglary as the entry or attempted entry of a residence by a person who had no right to be there.

Fourth, for property crimes (burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft), the two programs calculate crime rates using different bases. The UCR rates for these crimes are per capita (number of crimes per 100,000 persons), whereas the NCVS rates for these crimes are per household (number of crimes per 1,000 households). Because the number of households may not grow at the same rate each year as the total population, trend data for rates of property crimes measured by the two programs may not be comparable.

In addition, some differences in the data from the two programs may result from sampling variation in the NCVS and from estimating for nonresponse in the UCR. The NCVS estimates are derived from interviewing a sample and are, therefore, subject to a margin of error. Rigorous statistical methods are used to calculate confidence intervals around all survey estimates. Trend data in NCVS reports are described as genuine only if there is at least a 90-percent certainty that the measured changes are not the result of sampling variation. The UCR data are based on the actual counts of offenses reported by law enforcement jurisdictions. In some circumstances, UCR data are estimated for nonparticipating jurisdictions or those reporting partial data.

Apparent discrepancies between statistics from the two programs can usually be accounted for by their definitional and procedural differences or resolved by comparing NCVS sampling variations (confidence intervals) of those crimes said to have been reported to police with UCR statistics.

For most types of crimes measured by both the UCR and NCVS, analysts familiar with the programs can exclude from analysis those aspects of crime not common to both. Resulting long-term trend lines can be brought into close concordance. The impact of such adjustments is most striking for robbery, burglary, and motor vehicle theft, whose definitions most closely coincide.

With robbery, annual victimization rates are based only on NCVS robberies reported to the police. It is also possible to remove UCR robberies of commercial establishments such as gas stations, convenience stores, and banks from analysis. When the resulting NCVS police-reported robbery rates are compared to UCR noncommercial robbery rates, the results reveal closely corresponding long-term trends.

Each program has unique strengths. The UCR provides a measure of the number of crimes reported to law enforcement agencies throughout the country. The UCR's Supplementary Homicide Reports provide the most reliable, timely data on the extent and nature of homicides in the Nation. The NCVS is the primary source of information on the characteristics of criminal victimization and on the number and types of crimes not reported to law enforcement authorities.

By understanding the strengths and limitations of each program, it is possible to use the UCR and NCVS to achieve a greater understanding of crime trends and the nature of crime in the United States. For example, changes in police procedures, shifting attitudes towards crime and police, and other societal changes can affect the extent to which people report and law enforcement agencies record crime. NCVS and UCR data can be used in concert to explore why trends in reported and police-recorded crime may differ.
Appendix V--Directory of State Uniform Crime Reporting Programs

Alabama Alabama Criminal Justice
 Information Center
 Suite 350
 770 Washington Avenue
 Montgomery, Alabama 36104
 334-242-4900

Alaska Uniform Crime Reporting Section
 Department of Public Safety
 Information System
 5700 East Tudor Road
 Anchorage, Alaska 99507
 907-451-5166

American Samoa Department of Public Safety
 Post Office Box 1086
 Pago Pago
 American Samoa 96799
 684-633-1111

Arizona Uniform Crime Reporting Program
 Access Integrity Unit
 Arizona Department of Public Safety
 Post Office Box 6638
 Phoenix, Arizona 85005-6638
 602-223-2263

Arkansas Arkansas Crime Information Center
 One Capitol Mall, 4D-200
 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
 501-682-2222

California Criminal Justice Statistics Center
 Department of Justice
 Post Office Box 903427
 Sacramento, California 94203-4270
 916-227-3282

Colorado Uniform Crime Reporting
 Colorado Bureau of Investigation
 Suite 3000
 690 Kipling Street
 Denver, Colorado 80215
 303-239-4300

Connecticut Uniform Crime Reporting Program
 Post Office Box 2794
 Middletown, Connecticut 06457-9294
 860-685-8030

Delaware Delaware State Bureau of Identification
 Post Office Box 430
 Dover, Delaw are 19903
 302-739-5875

District of Columbia Research and Development
 Metropolitan Police Department
 Post Office Box 1606
 Washington, D.C. 20001
 202-727-4289

Florida Florida Crime Information Bureau
 Florida Department of Law Enforcement
 Post Office Box 1489
 Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1489
 850-410-7121

Georgia Georgia Crime Information Center
 Georgia Bureau of Investigation
 Post Office Box 370748
 Decatur, Georgia 30037-0748
 404-244-2840

Guam Guam Police Department
 Planning, Research and Development
 Building #3
 Central Avenue
 Tiyan, Guam 96913
 671-472-8911 X 418

Hawaii Crime Prevention and Justice
 Assistance Division
 Department of the Attorney General
 Suite 401
 235 South Beretania Street
 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
 808-586-1416

Idaho Criminal Identification Bureau
 Idaho Department of Law Enforcement
 Post Office Box 700
 Meridian, Idaho 83680
 208-884-7156

Illinois Uniform Crime Reporting
 Division of Administration; Crime
 Statistics
 Illinois State Police
 Post Office Box 3677
 Springfield, Illinois 62708
 217-782-5794

Iowa Iowa Department of Public Safety
 Wallace State Office Building
 East Ninth and Grand
 Des Moines, Iowa 50319
 515-281-8494

Kansas Criminal Justice System
 Kansas Bureau of Investigation
 Crime Data Information Center
 1620 Southwest Tyler Street
 Topeka, Kansas 66612
 785-296-8200

Kentucky Records Section
 Kentucky State Police
 1250 Louisville Road
 Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
 502-227-8790

Louisiana Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement
 Office of the Governor
 Room 708
 1885 Wooddale Boulevard
 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70806
 225-925-4420

Maine Records Management Services
 Uniform Crime Reporting Division
 Maine Department of Public Safety
 Maine State Police
 36 Hospital Street, Station 42
 Augusta, Maine 04333
 207-624-7003

Maryland Central Records Division
 Maryland State Police
 1711 Belmont Avenue
 Baltimore, Maryland 21244
 410-298-3883

Massachusetts Crime Reporting Unit
 Uniform Crime Reports
 Massachusetts State Police
 470 Worcester Road
 Framingham, Massachusetts 01702
 508-820-2111

Michigan Uniform Crime Reporting Section
 Criminal Justice Information Center
 Michigan State Police
 7150 Harris Drive
 Lansing, Michigan 48913
 517-322-1424

Minnesota Criminal Justice Information Systems
 Bureau of Criminal Apprehension
 Minnesota Department of Public Safety
 1246 University Avenue
 St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
 651-642-0670

Missouri Uniform Crime Reporting Program Office
 Criminal Records and Identification
 Division
 Missouri State Highway Patrol
 Post Office Box 568
 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102-0568
 573-526-6278

Montana Montana Board of Crime Control
 Post Office Box 201408
 Helena, Montana 59620-1408
 406-444-4298

Nebraska Uniform Crime Reporting Section
 The Nebraska Commission on Law
 Enforcement and Criminal Justice
 Post Office Box 94946
 Lincoln, Nebraska 68508
 402-471-3982

Nevada Criminal Information Services
 Nevada Highway Patrol
 808 West Nye Lane
 Carson City, Nevada 89703
 775-687-1600

New Hampshire Uniform Crime Reporting Unit
 New Hampshire State Police
 New Hampshire Department
 of Public Safety
 10 Hazen Drive
 Concord, New Hampshire 03305
 603-271-2509

New Jersey Uniform Crime Reporting
 New Jersey State Police
 Post Office Box 7068
 West Trenton, New Jersey 08628-0068
 609-882-2000 X 2392

New York Statistical Services
 New York State Division of Criminal
 Justice Services
 8th Floor, Mail Room
 4 Tower Place
 Albany, New York 12203
 518-457-8381

North Carolina Records and Criminal Statistics
 State Bureau of Investigation
 Post Office Box 29500
 Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0500
 919-662-4509

North Dakota Information Services Section
 Bureau of Criminal Investigation
 Attorney General's Office
 Post Office Box 1054
 Bismarck, North Dakota 58502
 701-328-5500

Ohio * Office of Criminal Justice Services
 Suite 300
 400 East Town Street
 Columbus, Ohio 43215
 614-644-6797

Oklahoma Uniform Crime Reporting Section
 Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation
 Suite 300
 6600 North Harvey
 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73116
 405-879-2533

Oregon Law Enforcement Data System Division
 Oregon State Police
 955 Center Street, Northeast
 Salem, Oregon 97310-2559
 503-378-3057

Pennsylvania Bureau of Research and Development
 Pennsylvania State Police
 1800 Elmerton Avenue
 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110
 717-783-5536

Puerto Rico Statistics Division
 Puerto Rico Police
 Post Office Box 70166
 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00936-8166
 787-793-1234 X 3113

Rhode Island Rhode Island State Police
 311 Danielson Pike
 North Scituate, Rhode Island 02857
 401-444-1121

South Carolina South Carolina Law Enforcement Division
 Post Office Box 21398
 Columbia, South Carolina 29221-1398
 803-896-7016

South Dakota South Dakota Statistical Analysis Center
 500 East Capitol Avenue
 Pierre, South Dakota 57501-5070
 605-773-6310

Tennessee * Tennessee Bureau of Investigation
 901 R.S. Gass Boulevard
 Nashville, Tennessee 37216-2639
 615-744-4014

Texas Uniform Crime Reporting
 Crime Information Bureau
 Texas Department of Public Safety
 Post Office Box 4143
 Austin, Texas 78765-9968
 512-424-2734

Utah Data Collection and Analysis
 Uniform Crime Reporting
 Bureau of Criminal Identification
 Utah Department of Public Safety
 Post Office Box 148280
 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-8280
 801-965-4566

Vermont Vermont Crime Information Center
 103 South Main Street
 Waterbury, Vermont 05671-2101
 802-241-5220

Virginia Criminal Justice Information Services
 Division
 Virginia State Police
 Post Office Box 27472
 Richmond, Virginia 23261-7472
 804-674-2023

Virgin Islands Virgin Islands Police Department
 Criminal Justice Complex
 Saint Thomas, Virgin Islands 00802
 809-774-2211

Washington Uniform Crime Reporting Program
 Washington Association of Sheriffs and
 Police Chiefs
 Post Office Box 826
 Olympia, Washington 98507
 360-586-3221

West Virginia Uniform Crime Reporting Program
 West Virginia State Police
 725 Jefferson Road
 South Charleston, West Virginia 25309
 304-746-2159

Wisconsin Office of Justice Assistance
 Suite 202
 131 West Wilson Street
 Madison, Wisconsin 53702-0001
 608-266-3323

Wyoming Uniform Crime Reporting
 Criminal Records Section
 Division of Criminal Investigation
 316 West 22nd Street
 Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002
 307-777-7625

* National Incident-Based Reporting System Only

APPENDIX VI--National Uniform Crime Reporting Directory

Administration 304-625-3691
 Program administration; management; policy

Crime Analysis, Research and Development 304-625-3600
 Statistical models; special studies and
 analyses; crime forecasting

Information Dissemination 304-625-4995
 Requests for published and unpublished
 data; printouts, magnetic tapes, and books

National Incident-Based Reporting System 1-888-UCR-NIBR
 (NIBRS) (1-888-827-6427)

 Information for law enforcement agencies
 regarding the NIBRS certification process;
 federal funding for NIBRS-compliant
 records management systems; and data
 submission specifications

Quality Assurance 304-625-2941
 Assistance in confirming statistical
 validity and ensuring agency reporting
 integrity

Statistical Processing 304-625-4830
 Processing of summary and incident-based
 reports from data contributors; reporting
 problems; requests for reporting forms;
 data processing; data quality

Training/Education 304-625-2821
 Requests for training of law enforcement
 personnel; information on police reporting
 systems; technical assistance

 Send correspondence to: Federal Bureau of Investigation
 Criminal Justice Information Services
 Division
 Attention: Uniform Crime Reports
 1000 Custer Hollow Road
 Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306


Appendix VII--Uniform Crime Reporting Publications List

Crime in the United States (annual) *

Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted (annual) *

Hate Crime Statistics (annual) *

Killed in the Line of Duty: A Study of Selected Felonious Killings of Law Enforcement Officers (special report)

In the Line of Fire: Violence Against Law Enforcement--A Study of Felonious Assaults on Law Enforcement Officers (special report)

Uniform Crime Reports: Their Proper Use (brochure)

National Incident-Based Reporting System (brochure)

Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report, January-June *

Preliminary Annual Uniform Crime Report *

Uniform Crime Reporting Handbook:

National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS)

Summary System

NIBRS:

Volume 1--Data Collection Guidelines *

Volume 2--Data Submission Specifications *

Volume 3--Approaches to Implementing an Incident-Based Reporting (IBR) System **

Volume 4--Error Message Manual *

Addendum to the NIBRS Volumes *

Conversion of NIBRS Data to Summary Data *

Supplemental Guidelines for Federal Participation

Manual of Law Enforcement Records

Hate Crime:

Hate Crime Data Collection Guidelines *

Hate Crime Magnetic Media Specifications for Tapes & Diskettes

Hate Crime Statistics, 1990: A Resource Book

Training Guide for Hate Crime Data Collection *

Age-Specific Arrest Rates and Race-Specific Arrest Rates for Selected Offenses

Periodic Press Releases:

Special Topics *

Hate Crime *

Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted *

* These publications are available on the FBI's Internet site at

www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm.

** This publication is no longer in print.
COPYRIGHT 2001 Federal Bureau of Investigation
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2001, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Publication:Uniform Crime Reports: Crime in the United States
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Jan 1, 2001
Words:12378
Previous Article:Section VI: law enforcement personnel.
Next Article:Foreword.
Topics:


Related Articles
Section VII: appendix I: methodology.
Appendix VII: Uniform Crime Reporting publications list.
Section VII: appendices.
Section VII: appendices.
Appendix I--methodology.
Appendix II--offenses in uniform crime reporting.
Appendix III--uniform crime reporting area definitions.
Appendix V--directory of state uniform crime reporting programs.
Appendix VI--national uniform crime reporting directory.
Appendix VII--publications provided by the UCR program.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2014 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters