APPENDIX I - Methodology Agencies that contribute to the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program forward crime data through the state UCR Programs in 46 states and the District of Columbia. Local agencies in states that do not have a state Program submit statistics directly to the FBI, which provides continuing guidance and support to individual contributing agencies. The state UCR Programs are very ef- fective liaisons between local contributors and the FBI. Many of the state Programs have mandatory reporting requirements and collect data beyond the national UCR Program's scope to address crime problems germane to their particular locales. In most cases, these state Programs also provide more direct and frequent service to participating law en- forcement agencies, make information more read- ily available for statewide use, and streamline the national Program's operations. 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 required. (2) The state criminal justice agency must have a proven, effective, statewide Program and have instituted acceptable quality control pro- cedures. (3) The state crime reporting must cover a percentage of the population at least equal to that covered by the national UCR Program through direct reporting. (4) The state Program must have adequate field staff assigned to conduct audits and to assist contributing agencies in record-keeping practices and crime-reporting procedures. (5) The state Program must furnish the FBI with all of the detailed data regularly collected by the FBI from individual agencies that report to the State Program in the form of duplicate returns, computer print- outs, and/or appropriate electronic media. (6) The state agency must have the proven capability (test- ed over a period of time) to supply all the statistical data required in time to meet publication deadlines of the national UCR Program. To fulfill its responsibilities in connection with the UCR Program, the FBI continues to edit and review individual agency reports for both com- pleteness and quality. The 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 record-keeping and crime-reporting procedures. Following audit standards established by the federal government, the FBI conducts an au- dit of each state's UCR data collection procedures once every 3 years. 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 Each month the UCR Program tabulates the num- ber of Part I offenses brought to the attention of law enforcement agencies based on all reports of crime received from victims, officers who discover infractions, or other sources. Specifically, the Part I crimes reported to the FBI are murder and nonneg- ligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, aggra- vated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Law enforcement 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. Complaints of crime that are determined through investigation to be unfounded or false are eliminated from an agency's count. Another integral part of the monthly submis- sion is the total number of actual Part I offenses cleared. Crimes are cleared in one of two ways: by arrest of at least one person, who is charged and turned over to the court for prosecution, or by 482 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES exceptional means, when some element beyond law enforcement control precludes the arrest of a known offender. Law enforcement agencies also report the number of clearances that involve only offenders under the age of 18, the value of property stolen and recovered in connection with the offens- es, and detailed information pertaining to criminal homicide and arson. In addition to its primary collection of Part I offenses, the UCR Program solicits monthly data on persons arrested for all crimes except traffic vio- lations. Agencies report the age, sex, and race of arrestees for both Part I and Part II offenses. Part II offenses include all crimes not classified as Part I. The UCR Program also collects monthly data on law enforcement officers killed or assaulted, and, yearly, the number of full-time sworn and civilian law enforcement personnel employed on October 31. At the end of each quarter, the Program col- lects summarized information on hate crimes, i.e., specific offenses that were motivated by an offend- er's bias against the perceived race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, or physical or mental dis- ability of the victim. Those agencies participating in the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) submit hate crime data monthly. Editing Procedures The UCR Program thoroughly examines each re- port it receives for arithmetical accuracy and for deviations that 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 simi- lar agencies. Large variations in crime levels may indicate modified records procedures, incomplete reporting, or changes in the jurisdiction's geopoliti- cal structure. Data reliability is a high priority of the Pro- gram, which brings to the attention of the state UCR Program or the submitting agency any de- viations or arithmetical adjustments noted by the national staff. A standard FBI procedure is to study the monthly reports and to evaluate periodic trends prepared for individual reporting units. Any signifi- cant increase or decrease becomes the subject of a special inquiry. Changes in crime reporting proce- dures or annexations can influence the level of re- ported crime. When this occurs, the UCR Program excludes the figures for specific crime categories or totals, if necessary, from trend tabulations. To assist contributors in complying with UCR standards, the national Program provides train- ing 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 Pro- gram, the rules of uniform classification and scor- ing, 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, person- nel from the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services Division may visit the contributor to aid in resolving the difficulties. The national UCR Program publishes a Uni- form Crime Reporting Handbook, which details procedures for classifying and scoring offenses and serves as the contributing agencies' basic resource for preparing reports. The national staff produce letters to UCR contributors and UCR State Pro- gram Bulletins as needed. These provide policy up- dates and new information, as well as clarification of reporting issues. The final responsibility for data submissions rests with the individual contributing law enforce- ment agency. Although the Program makes every effort through its editing procedures, training prac- tices, and correspondence to assure the validity of the data it receives, the accuracy of the statistics depends primarily on the adherence of each con- tributor 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 In- ternational Association of Chiefs of Police and the National Sheriffs' Association. APPENDIX 483 Arrest Data Crime Trends Due to changes in reporting practices, arrest data for Arkansas and New Hampshire are not compa- rable to previous years' data. Twelve months of complete arrest data were not received for con- tributing Nevada law enforcement agencies by the established publication deadline. Limited arrest data were received from Illinois, Kentucky, and South Carolina. No 2003 arrest data were received from the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department; the two agencies (Zoological Police and Metro Transit Police) for which 1 2 months of arrest data were received have no attributable population. Twelve months of arrest figures for New York City Police Department, New York; law enforcement agencies in Florida; and the newly formed city-county law enforcement agency of Louisville Metro Police Department, Kentucky, were not available for inclusion in this book. How- ever, arrest totals for these areas were estimated by the UCR Program for inclusion in Table 29, "Esti- mated Number of Arrests, United States, 2003." Population For the 2003 edition of Crime in the United States, the UCR Program obtained current population es- timates from the Bureau of the Census to estimate 2003 population counts for all contributing law enforcement agencies. The Bureau of the Census provided revised 2002 state/national population estimates and 2003 state/national population es- timates. Using these provisional census data, the national UCR Program updated the 2002 Bureau of the Census city and county estimates and calculat- ed the 2003 state growth rates. Subsequently, the Program updated population figures for individual jurisdictions by applying the 2003 state growth rates to the updated 2002 Bureau of the Census data. NIBRS Conversion Several states provide their UCR data in the ex- panded 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. By showing fluctuations from year to year, trend statistics offer the data user an added perspective from which to study crime. Percent change tabula- tions in this publication are computed only for re- porting agencies that provided comparable data for the periods under consideration. The Program ex- cludes from the trend calculations all figures except those received for common months from common agencies. Also excluded are unusual fluctuations that the Program determines are due to variables such as improved records procedures, annexations, etc. Data users should exercise care in making any direct comparison between data in this publication and those in prior issues of Crime in the United States. Due to differing levels of participation from year to year and transient reporting problems that require the Program to estimate crime counts for certain contributors, the data are not comparable from year to year. 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 com- plete reporting periods, the UCR Program includes estimated crime counts in these presentations. Of- fense estimation occurs within each of three areas: Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), cities out- side MSAs, and nonmetropolitan counties. Using the known crime experiences of similar areas within a state, the national Program computes estimates by assigning the same proportional crime volumes to nonreporting agencies. The population size of agency; type of jurisdiction, e.g., police department versus sheriffs office; and geographic location are considered in the estimation process. Various circumstances require the national Program to estimate certain state offense totals. For example, some states do not provide forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines; report- ing problems at the state level have, at times, result- ed in no usable data. Additionally, the conversion of Summary reporting to NIBRS has contributed to the need for unique estimation procedures. A summary of state-specific and offense-specific estimation pro- cedures follows. 484 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES Year State(s) Reason for Estimation Estimation Method 1985 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable to provide forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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 state UCR Program was unable to provide forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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 state UCR Program was unable to provide forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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 state UCR Program was unable to provide forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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 Reporting problems at the state level resulted in State totals were estimated by updating previous valid annual no usable data. 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 state UCR Program was unable to provide forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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 state UCR Program was unable to provide forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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 state UCR Program was unable to provide forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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 NIBRS conversion efforts resulted in estimation State totals were estimated by updating previous valid annual for Iowa. 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. 1992 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable to provide The rape totals were estimated using national rates per 100,000 forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR inhabitants within the eight population groups and assigning the guidelines. forcible rape volumes proportionally to the state. APPENDIX 485 Year State(s) Reason for Estimation Estimation Method 1993 Michigan, Minnesota The state UCR Programs were unable to provide The rape totals were estimated using national rates per 100,000 forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR inhabitants within the eight population groups and assigning the guidelines. forcible rape volumes proportionally to each state. Kansas N1BRS conversion efforts resulted in estimation State totals were estimated by updating previous valid annual for Kansas. 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 N1BRS conversion efforts resulted in estimation Since valid annual totals were available for approximately 60 for Illinois. 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 state UCR Program was unable to provide The rape totals were estimated using national rates per 100,000 forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR inhabitants within the eight population groups and assigning the guidelines. forcible rape volumes proportionally to the state. 1994 Illinois NIBRS conversion efforts resulted in estimation Illinois totals were generated using only the valid crime rates for for Illinois. 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 state UCR Program was unable to provide The rape totals were estimated using national rates per 100,000 forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR inhabitants within the eight population groups and assigning the guidelines. forcible rape volumes proportionally to the state. Kansas NIBRS conversion efforts resulted in estimation State totals were generated using only the valid crime rates for for Kansas. 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 The state UCR Program was unable to provide State totals were estimated by updating previous valid annual complete 1994 offense figures in accordance totals for individual jurisdictions, subdivided by population with UCR guidelines. 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 state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1995 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. The 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. 486 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES Year State(s) Reason for Estimation Estimation Method Illinois The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1995 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. Valid Crime Index (Part I) 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. The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1995 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. State estimates were computed by updating the previous valid annual totals using the 1994 versus 1995 percent changes for the Mountain Division. 1996 Florida The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1996 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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 1 1 . Illinois The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1996 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. Valid Crime Index (Part I) 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. The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1996 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. The Kansas state estimate was extrapolated from 1996 January- June state totals provided by the Kansas State UCR Program. Kentucky, Montana The state UCR Programs were unable to provide complete 1996 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. The 1995 and 1996 percent changes within each geographic division were applied to valid 1995 state totals to generate 1996 state totals. 1997 Illinois The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1997 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. Valid Crime Index (Part I) 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. The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1997 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. The Kansas state estimate was extrapolated from 1996 January- June state totals provided by the Kansas State UCR Program. APPENDIX 487 Year State(s) Reason for Estimation Estimation Method Kentucky, Montana, New Hampshire, Vermont The state UCR Programs were unable to provide complete 1997 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. The 1996 and 1997 percent changes registered for each geographic division in which the states of Kentucky, Montana, New Hampshire, and Vermont are categorized were applied to valid 1996 state totals to effect 1997 state totals. 1998 Delaware The state UCR Program was unable to provide forcible rape figures in accordance with national UCR guidelines. 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, New Hampshire, Wisconsin The state UCR Programs were unable to provide complete 1998 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. State totals were estimated by using the 1997 figures for the nonreporting areas and applying 1997 versus 1998 percentage 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. The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1998 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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. Illinois The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1998 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. Valid Crime Index (Part I) 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 The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1999 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. Valid Crime Index (Part I) 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 state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1999 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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, The state UCR Programs were unable to provide Montana complete 1999 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. To arrive at 1999 estimates for Kansas, Kentucky, and Montana, 1998 state totals supplied by each state's UCR Program were updated using 1999 crime trends for the divisions in which each state is located. New Hampshire The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 1999 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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. 488 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES Year State(s) Reason for Estimation Estimation Method 2000 The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 2000 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. To arrive at 2000 estimates for Kansas, 1999 state estimates were updated using 2000 crime trends for the West North Central Division. Kentucky, Montana The state UCR Programs were unable to provide complete 2000 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. To arrive at 2000 estimates for Kentucky and Montana, 1999 state totals supplied by each state's UCR Program were updated using 2000 crime trends for the divisions in which each state is located. Illinois The state UCR Programs were unable to provide complete 2000 offense figures or forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. Valid Crime Index (Part I) 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 compilations, 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 The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 2000 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. 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. Illinois The state UCR Program submitted complete data for only seven agencies within the state. Additionally, the state UCR Program was unable to provide forcible rape figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. Valid Crime Index (Part I) 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. 2002 Kentucky The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 2002 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. To obtain the 2002 state crime count, the FBI contacted the state UCR Program, and the state agency was able to provide their latest state total, 2000. Therefore, the 2001 state estimate was updated for inclusion in the 2002 edition of Crime in the United States by using the 2001 crime trends for the division in which the state is located. To derive the 2002 state estimate, the 2002 crime trends for the division were applied to the adjusted 2001 state estimate. Illinois The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 2002 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. Valid Crime Index (Part I) counts were only 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. APPENDIX 489 Year State(s) Reason for Estimation Estimation Method 2003 Kentucky The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 2003 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. To obtain the 2003 state estimate, the 2003 crime trend for the East South Central Division was applied to an adjusted 2002 state estimate. The 2002 state count was reestimated by applying the 2002 crime trend for the East South Central Division using a more current figure, 2001 state totals, provided by the state UCR Program. The adjusted 2002 estimate differs from the figure published in the 2002 edition of Crime in the United States which was originally estimated using 2000 state totals. Illinois The state UCR Program was unable to provide complete 2003 offense figures in accordance with UCR guidelines. Valid Part I counts were available only for most of the largest cities. For other agencies, the only available counts were generated by the Illinois State Program 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 NIBRS total (which was inflated because the Hierarchy Rule was not applied) supplied by the Illinois State Program was reduced by the proportion of multiple offenses reported within single incidents in NIBRS data nationwide. 490 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES Table Methodology Although most law enforcement agencies submit crime reports to the UCR Program, not all agen- cies send 12 months of complete data for the re- porting year. For example, to be included in this publication's Tables 8 through 11, which show spe- cific jurisdictional statistics, the FBI must receive figures for all 12 months of the reporting year prior to established publication deadlines. Other tabular presentations are based on varied levels of submis- sion. With the exception of the tables that 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, the follow- ing table explains the construction of many of this book's tabular presentations. in Table (2) Database (3) Table Construction (4) General Comments All law enforcement agencies in the UCR Pro- gram. Crime statistics include estimated offense totals (except arson) for agencies submitting less than 1 2 months of offense reports for each year. The 2003 statistics are consistent with Table 2. Pre- 2003 crime statistics may have been updated and, therefore, may not be consistent with those published in prior publications. Population statistics represent July 1 provisional estimations for each year except 1990 and 2000, which are the Census Bureau's de- cennial census data. (See the Population section in this appendix.) Represents an estimation of reported crime for the Nation from 1984 to 2003. Sufficient data are not available to provide arson estimates. All law enforcement agencies in the UCR Pro- gram. Crime statistics include estimated offense totals (except arson) for agencies submitting less than 12 months of offense reports for 2003. Statistics are aggregated from individual state sta- tistics as shown in Table 5. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 re- vised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) • Represents an estimation of reported crime in 2003 for the: 1. Nation 2. MSAs 3. Cities outside metropolitan areas 4. Nonmetropolitan counties » Sufficient data are not available to provide arson estimates. All law enforcement agencies in the UCR Pro- gram (including those submitting less than 12 months of offense reports for 2003). Arson is not included. Regional offense distributions are computed from volume figures as shown in Table 4. Population distributions are based on the Census Bureau's provi- sional estimates for 2003. Represents the 2003 geographical distribution of estimated offenses and population. Sufficient data are not available to provide arson estimates. All law enforcement agencies in the UCR Pro- gram. Crime statistics include estimated offense totals (except arson) for agencies submitting less than 12 months of offense reports for 2002 and 2003. The 2003 statistics are aggregated from individual state statistics as shown in Table 5. Population sta- tistics represent the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. Represents an estimation of reported crime for the: 1. Nation 2. Regions 3. Divisions 4. States Sufficient data are not available to provide arson estimates. Any comparison of UCR statistics should take into consideration factors in addition to reported crime. More details concerning the proper use of UCR statistics are provided in Crime Factors in this report. All law enforcement agencies in the UCR Pro- gram. Crime statistics include estimated offense totals (except arson) for agencies submitting less than 12 months of offense reports for 2003. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) Statistics under the heading Area Ac- tually 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 sta- tistics under the heading Estimated Totals represent the above plus estimated offense totals for agencies submitting 2 months or less of offense reports. Represents an estimation of reported crime for states. Sufficient data are not available to provide arson estimates. Any comparison of UCR statistics should take into consideration factors in addition to reported crime. More details concerning the proper use of UCR statistics are provided in Crime Factors in this report. APPENDIX 491 (1) Table (2) Database (3) Table Construction (4) General Comments 6 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR Pro- gram. Crime statistics include estimated offense totals (except arson) for agencies submitting less than 12 months of offense reports for 2003. Statistics are published for all currently designated Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) having at least 75% of the area's agencies reporting and for which the principal city/cities submitted 12 months of complete data for 2003. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) The statistics under the heading Area Actually Report- ing represent offense totals for agencies submitting 12 months of complete data and estimated totals for agencies submitting less than 12 but more than 2 months of data. The statistics under the heading Esti- mated Total represent the above plus estimated totals for agencies submitting 2 months or less of data. The tabular breakdowns are according to UCR definitions. (See Appendix II.) Represents an estimation of reported crime for MSAs. Sufficient data are not available to provide arson estimates. Any comparison of UCR statistics should take into consideration factors in addition to reported crime. More details concerning the proper use of UCR statistics are provided in Crime Factors in this report. 7 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR Program. Crime statistics include estimated of- fense totals for agencies submitting less than 12 months of offense reports for 1999 through 2003. Offense totals are for all Part I offenses other than aggravated assault and arson. (Appendix II of this report defines the UCR Program's Part I offenses.) Represents an estimation of reported crime for the Nation from 1999 to 2003. Aggravated assault and arson are not included in the data source from which this table is derived. 8 All city and town law enforcement agencies (10,000 and over in population) submitting 12 months of complete data for 2003. Cities and towns are agencies in Population Groups I through V. Population statistics for 2003 repre- sent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) • Represents reported crime of individual agencies in cities and towns 10,000 and over in population. • Any comparison of UCR statistics should take into consideration factors in addition to reported crime. More details concerning the proper use of UCR statistics are provided in Crime Factors in this report. 9 All university/college law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete data for 2003. The 2001 student enrollment figures, which are pro- vided 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 en- rollments into full-time equivalents have been made. Represents reported crime from those individual university/college law enforcement agencies (listed alphabetically by state) contributing data to the UCR Program. Any comparison of these UCR statistics should take into consideration size of enrollment, number of on-campus residents, and other demographic factors. 10 All county law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete data for 2003. Metropolitan counties are the areas covered by non- city agencies within a currently designated MSA. Nonmetropolitan counties are those outside currently designated MSAs whose jurisdictions are not covered by city police agencies. (See Appendix III.) Popula- tion classifications for counties are based on 2003 UCR estimates for individual agencies. (See the Population section in this appendix.) Represents reported crime from individual law enforcement agencies in metropolitan counties and nonmetropolitan counties covering populations of 25,000 and over (i.e., the individual sheriffs office and/or county police department). These figures do not represent the county totals because they exclude city crime counts. Any comparison of UCR statistics should take into consideration factors in addition to reported crime. More details concerning the proper use of UCR statistics are provided in Crime Factors in this report. 492 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES (1) (2) (3) (4) Table Database Table Construction General Comments All state law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete data for 2003. State and federal agencies are those agencies, regard- less of jurisdiction, that are managed by their respec- tive state and federal governments. • Represents reported crime from individual state law enforcement agencies (i.e., state police, highway patrol and/or other law enforcement agencies managed by the state) and any federally-managed law enforcement agency participating in the UCR Program. • Any comparison of UCR statistics should take into consideration factors in addition to reported crime. More details concerning the proper use of UCR statistics are provided in Crime Factors in this report. 12-15 All law enforcement agencies submitting at least 6 common months of complete offense reports for 2002 and 2003. The 2003 crime trend statistics are 2-year compari- sons based on 2003 reported crime. Only common reported months for individual agencies are included in 2003 trend calculations. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) UCR population breakdowns are furnished in Appendix III. Note that suburban and nonsuburban cities are all mu- nicipal agencies other than central cities in MSAs. Due to changes in reporting practices, agencies in Arkansas (which otherwise would meet the crite- ria for this table) were excluded. 16-19 All law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete data (except arson) for 2003. The 2003 crime rates are the ratios, per 100,000 in- habitants, of the aggregated 2003 crime volumes and the aggregated 2003 populations of the contributing agencies. Population statistics for 2003 represent es- timates based on the percent change in state popula- tion from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) UCR population break- downs are furnished in Appendix III. Note that suburban and nonsuburban cities are all municipal agencies other than central cities in MSAs. • The forcible rape figures furnished by the Delaware and Illinois state 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 complete data. • Sufficient data are not available to provide arson estimates. • There is a slight decrease in national coverage for Table 19 due to FBI editing procedures and fewer submissions from reporting agencies. • Due to changes in reporting practices, agencies in Arkansas (which otherwise would meet the criteria for this table) were excluded. 20 All law enforcement agencies submitting Supple- mentary Homicide Report (SHR) data for 2003. The weapon totals are the aggregate for each murder victim recorded on the SHRs for calendar year 2003. The SHR is the monthly report form concerning homicides. It details victim and offender charac- teristics, circumstances, weapons used, etc. 21,22 All law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete offense reports for 2003. The weapon totals are aggregated 2003 totals. Popu- lation statistics represent 2003 UCR estimates. 23, 24 All law enforcement agencies submitting at least 6 months of complete offense reports for 2003. Offense total and value lost total are computed for all Part I offenses other than aggravated assault and arson. Percent distribution is derived based on the offense total of each Part I offense. Trend statistics are derived based on agencies with at least 6 common months of complete data for 2002 and 2003. (Ap- pendix II of this report defines the UCR Program's Part I offenses.) • Aggravated assault and arson are excluded from Table 23. • For UCR Program purposes, the taking of money or property in connection with an assault is reported as robbery. • Arson is not included in the data source from which this table is derived. 25-28 All law enforcement agencies submitting at least 6 months of complete offense reports for 2003. The 2003 clearance rates are based on offense and clearance volume totals of the contributing agencies for 2003. Population statistics for 2003 represent es- timates based on the percent change in state popula- tion from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) UCR population break- downs are furnished in Appendix III. Due to changes in reporting practices, agencies in Arkansas (which otherwise would meet the crite- ria for this table) were excluded. APPENDIX 493 (1) (2) (3) (4) Table Database Table Construction General Comments 29 All law enforcement agencies in the UCR Pro- gram (including those submitting less than 12 months of complete arrest data for 2003). 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 estimated total number of arrests is the sum of estimated ar- rest volumes for each of 28 offenses, not including suspicion. Each individual arrest total is the sum of the estimated volumes within each of the eight population groups. (See Appendix III.) Each group's estimate is the reported volume (as shown in Table 3 1 ) divided by the percent of the total group popula- tion reporting, according to 2003 UCR estimates for individual agencies. (See the Population section in this appendix.) 30, 31 All law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2003. The 2003 arrest rates are the ratios, per 100,000 inhabitants, of the aggregated 2003 reported arrest statistics and population. The population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) UCR population classifications and geographical configura- tion are provided in Appendix III. 32, 33 All law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 1994 and 2003. The arrest trends are the percentage differences be- tween 1994 and 2003 arrest volumes aggregated from all common agencies. The population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 re- vised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) Population statistics for 1994 are based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 1993 and 1994 provisional estimates. 34, 35 All law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 1999 and 2003. The arrest trends are the percentage differences be- tween 1999 and 2003 arrest volumes aggregated from common agencies. The population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 re- vised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) Population statistics for 1999 are based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 1998 and 1999 provisional estimates. 36, 37 All law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2002 and 2003. The arrest trends are 2-year comparisons between 2002 and 2003 arrest volumes aggregated from com- mon agencies. Population statistics for 2002 repre- sent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2001 revised estimates and 2002 provisional estimates. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state populations from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this ap- pendix.) 38-43 All law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2003. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) 494 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES (1) Table (2) Database (3) Table Construction (4) General Comments 44, 45 All city law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2002 and 2003. The 2003 city arrest trends represent the percentage differences between 2002 and 2003 arrest volumes aggregated from common city agencies. City agen- cies are all agencies within Population Groups I-VI. (See Appendix 111.) Population statistics for 2002 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2001 revised estimates and 2002 provisional estimates. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) 46-49 All city law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2003. City agencies are all agencies within Population Groups I- VI. (See Appendix III.) Population statis- tics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional esti- mates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) There is a slight decrease in coverage for Table 49 due to FBI editing procedures and fewer submis- sions of race data from reporting agencies. 50, 51 All metropolitan county law enforcement agen- cies submitting 1 2 months of complete arrest data for 2002 and 2003. The 2003 metropolitan county arrest trends represent percentage differences between 2002 and 2003 vol- umes aggregated from contributing agencies. Met- ropolitan counties are the areas covered by noncity agencies within a currently designated MSA. (See Appendix III.) Population statistics for 2002 repre- sent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2001 revised estimates and 2002 provisional estimates. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state populations from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this ap- pendix.) 52-55 All metropolitan county law enforcement agen- cies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2003. Metropolitan counties are the areas covered by nonc- ity agencies within a currently designated MSA. (See Appendix III.) Population statistics for 2003 repre- sent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) There is a slight decrease in coverage for Table 55 due to FBI editing procedures and fewer submis- sions of race data from reporting agencies. 56, 57 All nonmetropolitan county law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2002 and 2003. The 2003 nonmetropolitan county arrest trends represent percentage differences between 2002 and 2003 volumes aggregated from contributing agencies. Nonmetropolitan counties are noncity agencies out- side currently designated MS As. (See Appendix III.) Population statistics for 2002 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2001 revised estimates and 2002 provisional estimates. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state populations from the Census Bureau's 2002 re- vised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) 58-61 All nonmetropolitan county law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2003. Nonmetropolitan counties are noncity agencies out- side currently designated MS As. (See Appendix III.) Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) APPENDIX 495 (1) Table (2) Database (3) Table Construction (4) General Comments 62, 63 All suburban area law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2002 and 2003. The 2003 suburban area arrest trends represent percentage differences between 2002 and 2003 ar- rest volumes aggregated from contributing agencies. Suburban area includes agencies within a currently designated metropolitan area excluding those that cover principal cities as defined by the Office of Man- agement and Budget. (See Appendix III.) Population statistics for 2002 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2001 revised estimates and 2002 provisional estimates. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state populations from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) 64-67 All suburban area law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2003. Suburban area includes agencies within a currently designated metropolitan area excluding those that cover principal cities as defined by the Office of Management and Budget. (See Appendix III.) Popu- lation statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) 68 All law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2003. Population statistics for 2003 represent estimates based on the percent change in state population from the Census Bureau's 2002 revised estimates and 2003 provisional estimates. (See the Population section in this appendix.) Data furnished are based on individual states' age definitions for juveniles. 69 All law enforcement agencies submitting 12 months of complete arrest data for 2003. Arrest totals are aggregated for individual agencies within each state. Population statistics represent the Census Bureau's provisional estimates for 2003. (See the Population section in this appendix.) Any comparison of statistics should take into con- sideration variances in arrest practices, particular- ly for Part II crimes. ( Appendix II of this report defines the UCR Program's Part II offenses.) 496 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES APPENDIX II - Offenses in Uniform Crime Reporting The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program divides offenses into two groups, Part I and Part II crimes. Each month, contributing agencies submit information on the number of Part I offenses known to law enforcement; those offenses cleared by arrest or exceptional means; and the age, sex, and race of persons arrested for each of the offenses. Contribu- tors provide only arrest data for Part II offenses. The UCR Program collects the Part I of- fenses in order to measure the level and scope of crime occurring throughout the Nation. The Pro- gram's founders chose these offenses, in particular, because they are serious crimes, they occur with regularity in all areas of the country, and they are likely to be reported to police. The Part I offenses are defined below: Criminal homicide — a.) Murder and non- negligent 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 sepa- rately 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. 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 con- sent) are excluded. Robbery — The taking or attempted taking of 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 inflict- ing 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 un- lawful 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 that is not taken by force and violence or by fraud. Attempted larcenies are in- cluded. 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 land 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, for which only arrest data are collected, are defined below: Other assaults (simple) — Assaults and at- tempted assaults which are not of an aggravated na- ture and do not result in serious injury to the victim. Forgery and counterfeiting — The altering, copying, or imitating of something without author- ity or right, with the intent to deceive or defraud by passing the copy or thing altered or imitated as that which is original or genuine; or the selling, buy- ing, or possession of an altered, copied, or imitated thing with the intent to deceive or defraud. At- tempts are included. Fraud — The intentional perversion of the truth for the purpose of inducing another person or other entity in reliance upon it to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right. Fraudulent conversion and obtaining of money or property by false pretenses. Confidence games and bad checks, except forgeries and counterfeiting, are included. Embezzlement — The unlawful misappro- priation or misapplication by an offender to his/her APPENDIX 497 own use or purpose of money, property, or some other thing of value entrusted to his/her care, cus- tody, or control. Stolen property; buying, receiving, pos- sessing — Buying, receiving, possessing, selling, concealing, or transporting any property with the knowledge that it has been unlawfully taken, as by burglary, embezzlement, fraud, larceny, robbery, etc. Attempts are included. Vandalism — To willfully or maliciously de- stroy, injure, disfigure, or deface any public or pri- vate property, real or personal, without the consent of the owner or person having custody or control by cutting, tearing, breaking, marking, painting, drawing, covering with filth, or any other such means as may be specified by local law. Attempts are included. Weapons; carrying, possessing, etc. — The violation of laws or ordinances prohibiting the manufacture, sale, purchase, transportation, posses- sion, concealment, or use of firearms, cutting in- struments, explosives, incendiary devices, or other deadly weapons. Attempts are included. Prostitution and commercialized vice — The unlawful promotion of or participation in sexual activities for profit, including attempts. Sex offenses (except forcible rape, prostitution, and commercialized vice) — Statutory rape, offenses against chastity, common decency, morals, and the like. Attempts are included. Drug abuse violations — The violation of laws prohibiting the production, distribution, and/or use of certain controlled substances and the equipment or devices utilized in their preparation and/or use. The unlawful cultivation, manufacture, distribution, sale, purchase, use, possession, trans- portation, or importation of any controlled drug or narcotic substance. Arrests for violations of state and local laws, specifically those relating to the un- lawful possession, sale, use, growing, manufactur- ing, and making 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 — To unlawfully bet or wager money or something else of value; assist, promote, or operate a game of chance for money or some other stake; possess or transmit wagering informa- tion; manufacture, sell, purchase, possess, or trans- port gambling equipment, devices or goods; or tam- per with the outcome of a sporting event or contest to gain a gambling advantage. Offenses against the family and children — Unlawful nonviolent acts by a family member (or legal guardian) which threaten the physical, mental, or economic well-being or morals of another family member and which are not classifiable as other of- fenses, such as Assault or Sex Offenses. Attempts are included. Driving under the influence — Driving or operating a motor vehicle or common carrier while mentally or physically impaired as the result of consuming an alcoholic beverage or using a drug or narcotic. Liquor laws — The violation of state or lo- cal laws or ordinances prohibiting the manufacture, sale, purchase, transportation, possession, or use of alcoholic beverages, not including driving under the influence and drunkenness. Federal violations are excluded. Drunkenness — To drink alcoholic beverages to the extent that one's mental faculties and physical coordination are substantially impaired. Exclude driving under the influence. Disorderly conduct — Any behavior that tends to disturb the public peace or decorum, scan- dalize the community, or shock the public sense of morality. Vagrancy — The violation of a court order, regulation, ordinance, or law requiring the with- drawal of persons from the streets or other specified areas; prohibiting persons from remaining in an area or place in an idle or aimless manner; or prohibiting persons from going from place to place without vis- ible means of support. All other offenses — All violations of state or local laws not specifically identified as Part I or Part II offenses, except traffic violations. Suspicion — Arrested for no specific offense and released without formal charges being placed. Curfew and loitering laws (persons under age 18) — Violations by juveniles of local curfew or loitering ordinances. Runaways (persons under age 18) — Limited to juveniles taken into protective custody under the provisions of local statutes. 498 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES APPENDIX III - Uniform Crime Reporting Area Definitions By presenting crime data by area, the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program provides its data users with the opportunity to analyze local crime statistics in relation to crime statistics reported in other areas of a like community type, population size, or geographic location. In determining com- munity type, the UCR Program considers proxim- ity to metropolitan areas, using U.S. Bureau of the Census designations. (Generally, sheriffs, county police, and state police report crimes within coun- ties but outside cities; local police report crime within city limits.) A locale's population figures will determine the population group into which the Program places it. In its geographic breakdowns, the UCR Program divides the United States into regions, divisions, and states. Community Types Establishing reporting units representing major population centers assists data users in analyzing and presenting uniform statistical data on metro- politan areas. The UCR Program displays data ag- gregated by three types of communities: 1. Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) — Each MSA has a principal city or ur- banized area with a population of at least 50,000 inhabitants. MSAs include the county that contains the principal city and other adjacent counties that have, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, a high degree of economic and social integration with the principal city and county as measured through com- muting. In the UCR Program, counties in an MSA are considered metropolitan. Additionally, MSAs may cross state boundaries. About 83 percent of the Nation's population inhabited MSAs in 2003. Integrated within MSAs and referenced in this publication are suburban areas. These include cities with less than 50,000 population as well as unincorporated areas within the MSA but exclude the principal cities. The suburban area concept is important because of the distinctive crime conditions in the communities around the Nation's largest cities. The Program discourages data users from making year-to-year comparisons of MSA data because of changes in the geographic composition of MSAs. 2. Cities Outside MSAs — Cities outside MSAs are mostly incorporated areas and made up nearly 7 percent (6.7) of the Nation's population in 2003. 3. Nonmetropolitan Counties Outside MSAs — Most nonmetropolitan counties are com- posed of unincorporated areas. In 2003, over 10 percent (10.4) of the population resided in nonmet- ropolitan counties. Community types are illustrated below: Metropolitan Nonmetropolitan Principal Cities (50,000+) Cities outside Metro- politan Areas Suburban Cities Metropolitan Counties Nonmetropolitan Counties Population Groups The UCR Program uses the following population group designations: Population Group Political Label Population 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 (Nonmetropolitan County) County 2 N/A IX (Metropolitan 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. APPENDIX 499 Individual law enforcement agencies are the major source of UCR data. Annually, the number of agencies included in each population group varies because of population growth, geopoliti- cal consolidation, municipal incorporation, etc. In noncensus years, the UCR Program estimates population figures for individual jurisdictions. A more comprehensive explanation of population estimations can be found in Appendix I of this pub- lication. The table below displays the number of agencies contributing to the UCR Program within each population group for 2003. Number of Population Population Group Agencies Covered 1 71 53,436,860 11 176 26,238,733 III 431 29,641,812 IV 823 28,480,363 v 1,873 29,615,324 VI' 8.776 26,149,056 VIII (Nonmetropolitan County) 2 3,070 30,282,628 IX (Metropolitan County) 2 2,161 66,965,001 Total 17,381 290,809,777 1 Includes universities and colleges to which no population is attributed. 2 Includes state police to which no population is attributed. Regions and Divisions The accompanying map illustrates the four regions of the United States along with their nine subdivi- sions as established by the U.S. Census Bureau. The UCR Program uses this widely recognized geographic organization when compiling the Na- tion's crime data. The following table lists the 50 states arranged according to the regions and divi- sions of the United States. MIDWESTERN STATES East North Central Illinois Indiana Michigan Ohio Wisconsin SOUTHERN STATES South Atlantic Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Maryland North Carolina South Carolina Virginia West Virginia WESTERN STATES Mountain Arizona Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Utah Wyoming West North Central Iowa Kansas Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota South Dakota East South Central Alabama Kentucky Mississippi Tennessee West South Central Arkansas Louisiana Oklahoma Texas Pacific Alaska California Hawaii Oregon Washington NORTHEASTERN STATES Middle Atlantic New Jersey New York Pennsylvania New England Connecticut Maine Massachusetts New Hampshire Rhode Island Vermont 500 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES APPENDIX 501 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 informa- tion about aspects of the Nation's crime problem. Because the UCR and NCVS programs are con- ducted for different purposes, use different meth- ods, and focus on somewhat different aspects of crime, the information they produce together pro- vides 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 re- ported to law enforcement authorities: homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Law enforcement agencies report arrest data for 21 ad- ditional crime categories. The UCR Program compiles data 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. The Program thoroughly examines each report it receives for reasonableness, accuracy, and deviations that may indicate errors. Large varia- tions 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, the Pro- gram compares monthly reports to previous sub- missions of the agency and with those for similar agencies. In 2003, law enforcement agencies active in the UCR Program represented nearly 291 million United States inhabitants — 93.0 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 charac- teristics. The UCR Program annually publishes its findings in a preliminary release in the spring of the following calendar year, followed 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 ar- rested (age, sex, and race), law enforcement person- nel (including the number of sworn officers killed or assaulted), and the characteristics of homicides (including age, sex, and race of victims and offend- ers; 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' (BJS) NCVS, which began in 1973, provides a detailed picture of crime incidents, victims, and trends. After a sub- stantial period of research, the BJS completed an intensive methodological redesign of the survey in 1993. The BJS conducted the redesign 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 Cen- sus personnel interview household members in a nationally representative sample of approximately 43,000 households (about 76,000 people). Ap- proximately 150,000 interviews of persons age 12 or older are conducted annually. Households stay 502 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES 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 vic- tims (age, sex, race, ethnicity, marital status, in- come, 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 con- sequences). 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 BJS published the first data from the redesigned NCVS 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 informa- tion collected by the NCVS. The BJS publishes detailed reports on topics such as crime against women, urban crime, and gun use in crime. The National Archive of Criminal Justice Data at the University of Michigan archives the NCVS data files to enable researchers to perform independent analyses. Comparing UCR and NCVS Because the BJS designed the NCVS to comple- ment 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 Pro- gram 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 Pro- gram's primary objective is to provide a reliable set of criminal justice statistics for law enforcement ad- ministration, operation, and management. The BJS established the NCVS to provide previously un- available information about crime (including crime not reported to police), victims, and offenders. Second, the two programs measure an over- lapping 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 collects only arrest data for simple assaults and sexual assaults other than forcible rape. 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 vic- tims 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 prop- erty 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 varia- tion in the NCVS and from estimating for nonre- sponse in the UCR. The BJS derives the NCVS estimates from interviewing a sample and are, there- fore, subject to a margin of error. The BJS uses rigorous statistical methods to calculate confidence intervals around all survey estimates. The BJS de- scribes trend data in the NCVS reports as genuine only if there is at least a 90-percent certainty that the measured changes are not the result of sampling APPENDIX 503 variation. The UCR Program bases its data on the actual counts of offenses reported by law enforce- ment agencies. In some circumstances, the UCR Program estimates its data for nonparticipating agencies 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 varia- tions (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, the BJS bases the NCVS vic- timization rates only on 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 users compare the resulting NCVS police-reported robbery rates and the 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 limita- tions 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 oth- er 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-re- corded crime may differ. 504 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES 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 www.acjic.state.al.us Alaska Alaska Department of Public Safety Criminal Records and Identification Bureau 5700 East Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99507 (907) 269-5765 American Samoa Department of Public Safety Post Office Box 1086 Pago Pago American Samoa 96799 (684) 633-1111 Arizona Arkansas Access Integrity Unit Uniform Crime Reporting Program Arizona Department of Public Safety Mail Drop 1190 Post Office Box 6638 Phoenix, Arizona 85005-6638 (602) 223-2263 www.dps.state.az.us Arkansas Crime Information Center One Capitol Mall, 4D-200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2222 www.acic.org California Criminal Justice Statistics Center Department of Justice Post Office Box 903427 Sacramento, California 94203-4270 (916) 227-3515 APPENDIX 505 Colorado Uniform Crime Reporting Colorado Bureau of Investigation Suite 3000 690 Kipling Street Denver, Colorado 80215 (303) 239-4222 www.cbi.state.co.us Connecticut Uniform Crime Reporting Program Post Office Box 2794 Middletown, Connecticut 06457-9294 (860) 685-8030 www.state.ct.us/dps/crime_analysis/crime_analysis.asp Delaware Delaware State Bureau of Identification Post Office Box 430 Dover, Delaware 19903-0430 (302) 739-5901 District of Columbia Research and Resource Development Metropolitan Police Department 300 Indiana Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 727-4174 www.mpdc.dc.gov Florida Criminal Justice Information Services Uniform Crime Reports 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 www.ganet.org/gbi/ Guam Guam Police Department Planning, Research and Development Building #233 Central Avenue Tiyan, Guam 96913 (671) 475-8434 506 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES Crime Prevention and Justice Assistance Division Department of the Attorney General Suite 401 235 South Beretania Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 (808) 586-1420 www.cpja.ag.state.hi.us/rs/ Bureau of Criminal Identification Idaho State Police Post Office Box 700 Meridian, Idaho 83680-0700 (208) 884-7155 www.isp.state.id.us/identification/ucr/ Uniform Crime Reporting Program Division of Administration; Crime Statistics Illinois State Police 3 rd Floor 400 lies Park Place Springfield, Illinois 62703-2978 (217) 782-5794 www.isp.state.il.us Iowa Department of Public Safety Wallace State Office Building East Ninth and Grand Des Moines, Iowa 50319 (515) 281-8494 www.state.ia.us/government/dps/asd/stats.htm Kansas Bureau of Investigation Information Services Division Incident Based Reporting Section 1620 Southwest Tyler Street Topeka, Kansas 66612 (785) 296-8279 www.accesskansas.org/kbi/ Criminal Identification and Records Branch Kentucky State Police 1250 Louisville Road Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 (502) 227-8790 www.kentuckystatepolice.org APPENDIX Louisiana Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement Uniform Crime Reporting 12 th Floor 1885 Wooddale Boulevard Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70806 (225) 925-7465 www.cole.state.la.us/lucr.htm 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 www.maine.gov/dps/ 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 www.michigan.gov/msp Minnesota Criminal Justice Information Systems Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Minnesota Department of Public Safety 1430 Maryland Avenue East St. Paul, Minnesota 55106 (651)793-2400 www.dps. state. mn.us/bca/bca.html CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES Missouri Missouri State Highway Patrol Criminal Records & Identification Division CJIS Section - UCR Program Office 1510 East Elm Street Post Office Box 9500 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102-9500 (573) 526-6278 Montana Montana Board of Crime Control Post Office Box 201408 Helena, Montana 59620-1408 (406) 444-4298 www.mbcc.state.mt.us Nebraska Uniform Crime Reporting Section The Nebraska Commission on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Post Office Box 94946 Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-4946 (402) 471-3982 www.nol.org/home/crimecom/ Nevada Uniform Crime Reporting Program Records and Identification Bureau 808 West Nye Lane Carson City, Nevada 89703 (775) 687-1600 x235 www.nvrepository.state.nv.us New Hampshire Uniform Crime Reporting Unit New Hampshire State Police New Hampshire Department of Public Safety 33 Hazen Drive Concord, New Hampshire 03305 (603) 271-2509 New Jersey Uniform Crime Reporting Unit New Jersey State Police Post Office Box 7068 West Trenton, New Jersey 08628-0068 (609) 882-2000 x2392 www.njsp.org APPENDIX 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 Crime Reporting and Criminal Statistics State Bureau of Investigation Post Office Box 29500 Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0500 (919) 662-4509 sbi2.jus. state. nc.us/crp/public/Default. htm North Dakota Information Services Section Bureau of Criminal Investigation Attorney General's Office Post Office Box 1054 Bismarck, North Dakota 58502 (701)328-5500 www.ag.state.nd.us Ohio* Office of Criminal Justice Services 14* Floor 140 East Town Street Columbus, Ohio 43215 (614) 644-6797 Oklahoma Uniform Crime Reporting Section Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation 6600 North Harvey Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73116 (405) 879-2533 www.osbi.state.ok.us Oregon Law Enforcement Data System Division Oregon State Police Post Office Box 14360 Salem, Oregon 97309 (503) 378-3055 x55002 510 ^National Incident-Based Reporting System Only CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES Pennsylvania Bureau of Research and Development Pennsylvania State Police 1 800 Elmerton Avenue Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110 (717) 783-5536 ucr.psp.state.pa.us Puerto Rico Statistics Division Puerto Rico Police Post Office Box 70166 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00936-8166 (787) 793-1234 x3113 w w w.policia. gobierno .pr Rhode Island Rhode Island State Police 311 Danielson Pike North Scituate, Rhode Island 02857 (401)444-1156 www.risp.ri.gov/ South Carolina South Carolina Law Enforcement Division Post Office Box 21398 Columbia, South Carolina 29221-1398 (803) 896-7016 www.sled.state.sc.us South Dakota South Dakota Statistical Analysis Center 3444 East Highway 34 Pierre, South Dakota 57501-5070 (605) 773-6312 www.sddci.com Tennessee* Tennessee Bureau of Investigation 901 R.S. Gass Boulevard Nashville, Tennessee 37216-2639 (615) 744-4014 www.tbi.state.tn.us Texas Uniform Crime Reporting Crime Information Bureau Texas Department of Public Safety Post Office Box 4143 Austin, Texas 78765-9968 (512) 424-2091 www. txdps . state . tx .us/crimereports/citindex.htm ^National Incident-Based Reporting System Only APPENDIX 511 Utah Vermont Virginia Virgin Islands Washington 512 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES 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) 965-4812 www.bci.utah.gov Vermont Crime Information Center 103 South Main Street Waterbury, Vermont 05671 (802) 244-8727 www.dps.state.vt. us/cjs/vcic.htm Criminal Justice Information Services Division Virginia State Police Post Office Box 27472 Richmond, Virginia 23261-7472 (804) 674-2143 www.vsp.state.va.us/crimestatistics.htm Virgin Islands Police Department Criminal Justice Complex Saint Thomas, Virgin Islands 00802 (340)774-2211 Uniform Crime Reporting Program Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs Suite 200 3060 Willamette Drive, Northeast Lacey, Washington 98516 (360) 486-2380 www.waspc.org Uniform Crime Reporting Program West Virginia State Police 725 Jefferson Road South Charleston, West Virginia 25309 (304) 746-2159 www.wvstatepolice.com Wisconsin Office of Justice Assistance Suite 202 131 West Wilson Street Madison, Wisconsin 53702-0001 (608) 266-7644 oja.state.wi.us Uniform Crime Reporting Criminal Records Section Division of Criminal Investigation 316 West 22nd Street Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002 (307) 777-7625 attorneygeneral. state. wy.us/dci/ APPENDIX APPENDIX VI - National Uniform Crime Reporting Directory Administration Program administration; management; policy Crime Analysis, Research and Development Statistical models; special studies and analyses; crime forecasting Information Dissemination Requests for published and unpublished data; printouts, electronic media, and books National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) Information for law enforcement agencies regarding the NIBRS certification process; federal funding for NIBRS-compliant records management systems; and data sub- mission specifications Telephone: (304) 625-3691 Telephone: (304) 625-3600 Facsimile: (304) 625-2868 E-mail: Telephone: (304) 625-4995 Facsimile: (304) 625-5394 E-mail: Telephone: (304) 625-2998 Facsimile: (304) 625-3458 E-mail: Quality Assurance Assistance in confirming statistical validity and ensuring agency reporting integrity Telephone: (304) 625-2941 Facsimile: (304) 625-3457 E-mail: Statistical Processing Processing of summary and incident-based reports from data contributors; reporting problems; requests for reporting forms; data processing; data quality Telephone: (304) 625-4830 Facsimile: (304) 625-3455 E-mail: Training/Education Telephone: 1 (888) UCR-NIBR Requests for training of law enforcement personnel; information on police reporting [827-6427] 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 514 CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES 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: Data Collection Guidelines* Data Submission Specifications (Web exclusive)* Error Message Manual- Addendum to the NIBRS Volumes* Conversion of NIBRS Data to Summary Data* NIBRS Addendum for Submitting LEOKA Data* Supplemental Guidelines for Federal Participation Developments in the NIBRS (Web exclusive)* 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, 1965-1992 Age-Specific Arrest Rates and Race-Specific Arrest Rates for Selected Offenses, 1993-2001 * * These publications are available on the FBI's Internet site at . APPENDIX 515