Police Report Crime Statistics

Introduction

There has been a debate on whether the data from reported crime statistics is credible for many years. Researchers feel that data is contaminated by differences in law enforcement reporting practices, advancements in technology per agency, and changes in whether victims report or do not report crimes (Levitt, 1998). But still crime reports are still used when determining if current policing practices are effective.

When capturing crime, Regoli & Hewitt (2008) say that “official crime statistics, which are based on the aggregate records of offenders and offenses processed by police, courts, and correction agencies; and unofficial crime statistics, which are produced by people and agencies outside the criminal justice system” are

the two most notable measures. The two major sources that commonly provide these crime statistics in the United States are the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). There are distinct differences between the two. In the following there will be a comparison of the two primary crime data sources used in the United States. This paper will provide and overall description of the UCR and the NIBRS, to include development, benefits, and major differences.
Overview
Law enforcement and government agencies use data from both the UCR and the NIBRS to make law enforcement policy decisions and on the most efficient and effective practices to combat crime.

Both reports are used because there is not enough data from the NIBRS due to the lack of participation from reporting agencies. However, the FBI still creates annual publications using the UCR. As such, the FBI converts data submitted from NIBRS-compliant law enforcement agencies into UCR summary data (James, N. & Council, L, 2008).

What is the Uniform Crime Reports

Commissioned by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) was prepared to provide local law enforcement agencies a manual on standardized crime reporting (Inciardi, 1978). In 1930, Congress authorized the Federal Bureau of Investigations to collect and document voluntary criminal data from local communities, universities, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies. The FBI has the responsibility of compiling and distributing these criminal statistics in the form of a publication known as the UCR.

Benefits of the Uniform Crime

Reports
The UCR gives us a glimpse of crime across the nation. This view is dependent on submission of data by law enforcement agencies across the nation. In 1976, more that 13,000 law enforcement agencies were contributing to crime data (Inciardi, 1978). In present day, in a given year, more than 18,000 agencies contribute data to the FBI; however, because of computer problems, changes in records management systems, personnel shortages, or a number of other reasons, some agencies cannot provide data for publication (FBI, 2015). Nonetheless, the information that is obtained from these reports serves multiple purposes. Law enforcement administrators use this information when planning police operations and resource allocation. In education and school systems, criminologists use this data in their research on crime over time. Also, news media uses the data to increase the public’s situational awareness of the crime that is going on in their communities.
What is the National Incident-Based Reporting System
By the late 1970’s the evolution of crime came with greater difficulty in criminal activities, a steady increase in volume, and more diversity amongst crimes and criminals. With the UCR remaining unchanged during this time, law enforcement agencies were in need of a more detailed and modernized crime reporting system. In the late 1980’s, an incident based reporting system was established with the purpose to provide a better product that was more detailed, more diverse, and most importantly provided information on each single occurrence. This information is obtained via automated records systems from participating law enforcement agencies.
Benefits of the National Incident-Based Reporting System
The purpose of the NIBRS is to capture nearly every major criminal issue law enforcement agencies encounter and become the standard for the law enforcement community. The intent of the NIBRS is to provide more comprehensive information than traditional reporting systems. The NIBRS achieves this through 1) enhancing the quantity, quality, and timeliness of crime statistical data collected by the law enforcement community; and 2) to improving the methodology used for compiling, analyzing, auditing, and publishing the collected crime data (Criminal Justice Information Services Division, 2000).
Similarities of the Uniform Crime Reports and National Incident-Based Reporting System
The NIBRS some many similarities of the UCR a few are discussed below.

The top similarity among these is that NIBRS data are based on incidents reported to police and recorded by police (Maxfield, 1999).

Voluntary Participation

Participation for both the UCR and the NIBRs are voluntary. This could be problematic in regards to accuracy. Inciardi (1978), states that some agencies “report information to the UCR which is totally unlike that which appears in their own files.” This leaves room for incomplete or contaminated information. For example if a department wanted to make their areas crime rates look better for political reasons, they could “cook the books,” and only report statistics that reflect that. Because these programs are voluntary the volume of these types of incidents is undetermined.

Reporting Processes

The general concepts for obtaining, compiling, rating, and reporting criminal data for the UCR are still applicable for the NIBRS. “For example, the jurisdictional rules for collecting data from city, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies and the conditions under which a state UCR Program must operate remain the same” (Criminal Justice Information Services Division,

2000).
Dark Figure of Crime
Not all agencies report crime statistics to the FBI (Inciardi, 1978). Both the UCR and NIBRS only reflect crimes that were reported to law enforcement agencies. There are a number of crimes that go unreported by victims such as rape and sexual assaults. Victims may feel these acts are too embarrassing or too personal. Victims may fear reprisal, fear the police, or lack trust in police. This gap is known as the dark figure of crime. The dark figure of crime is usually referred to the number of crimes that are not reported to law enforcement agencies, but also includes the number of crimes that are unknown to all law enforcement agencies. Because the crime data collected for both the UCR and NIBRS do not include the dark figure of unreported or unknown crimes there is no way of knowing the details of these crimes, resulting room for inaccuracy.
Differences of the Uniform Crime Reports and National Incident-Based Reporting System
The most notable difference between the UCR and the NIBRS is the obvious; the UCR is a summary report which allows disaggregation on to the agencies reporting whereas the NIBRS is an incident-based reporting.
Greater Specificity and Reporting of Offenses
Offenses reported in the UCR are collected on the number of incidents involving eight Part I offenses. The offenses reported in the NIBRS are collected in 46 Group A offenses and 1 Group B offenses. Most of the data that is received and reported from the UCR is through categories. This leaves the UCR with the inability to provide specifics to data. Whereas, the NIBRS breaks down criminal data into detailed subcategories. This gives the NIBRS greater capability when providing specifics in is reports. For example, the NIBRS can breakdown crimes against individuals, businesses, financial institutions, government, religious organizations, society/public, and other entities; crimes committed by and against residents versus nonresidents; and crimes involving various types of weapons and injuries (Criminal Justice Information Services Division, 2004).
Revision of Definitions
The NIBRS added new and revised the offense definitions from the UCR. The eight definitions for the UCR are still applicable and remain the same when using the UCR system, but for reporting purposes many of the definitions in the Crime Index had to be revised. For instance a male being a victim of rape cannot be reported via the UCR system. In the UCR Handbook (2004), forcible rape is defined as “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.” It further states that, “By definition, sexual attacks on males are excluded from the rape category and must be classified as assaults or other sex offenses depending on the nature of the crime and the extent of injury” (Criminal Justice Information Services Division, 2004). However the definition for forcible rape has been revised for the NIBRS allowing for a sexual assault to be reported. The NIBRS defines forcible rape as “[t]he carnal knowledge of a person, forcibly and/or against that person’s will; or not forcibly or against the person’s will where the victim is incapable of giving consent because of his/her temporary or permanent mental or physical incapacity (or because of his/her youth) ” (Criminal Justice Information Services Division, 2000).
The Hierarchy Rule
The UCR is based on the hierarchy rule. The UCR handbook states that “when more than one Part I offense is classified, the law enforcement agency must locate the offense that is highest on the hierarchy list and score that offense involved and not the other offense(s) in the multiple-offense situation” (Criminal Justice Information Services Division, 2004). Therefore if an individual commits a crime of robbery and murder, the murder will be the only crime that is reported. The NIBRS does not use the hierarchy rule. Therefore, if more than one crime was committed by the same person or group of persons and the time and space intervals separating them were insignificant, all of the crimes are reported as offenses within the same incident (Criminal Justice Information Services Division, 2004).
There are more advantages with the NIBRS that the UCR. The NIBRS represent a new source of victimization data and demonstrate the potential for important new information about offenders (Maxfield, 1999). The FBI’s Criminal Justice Division (2000), outlines several additional differences between the NIBRS and the UCR. These are
• The use of incident-based reporting versus summary reporting
• The NIBRS has a new scoring category called “Crimes Against Society”
• There is a means for distinguishing attempted versus completed crimes
• There is more correlation among offenses, property, victims, offenders, and arrestees
• The NIBRS expanded victim to offender relationship data
• Circumstance reporting has increased
• The application of the Hotel Rule has expanded
• The NIBRS requires magnetic media submission for direct participation