Research, Analysis & Evaluation

The Connecticut Department of Public Safety (DPS), Division of State Police, Crimes Analysis Unit and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) coordinate the collection of the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR).
Criminal Justice
Criminal Justice Policy and Planning Division Calendar
Crime in the U.S.

The National Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program was initiated in 1929, when the International Association of Chiefs of Police standardized procedures for crime data collection, then, on June 11, 1930, Congress enacted legislation authorizing the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to collect nationwide crime counts and to serve as the clearinghouse for such data.  In July 1977 under CGS 29-1c Connecticut began its own UCR Program.
The UCR Program periodically measures crime in the United States by counting those offenses brought to the attention of law enforcement agencies.  According to the Connecticut Department of Public Safety’s (DPS) publication entitled [PDF] UCR Program Description, 2004, the objective is to produce reliable crime statistics for law enforcement administration, operation and management.”  After the data undergoes a quality control process, it is forwarded to the FBI National UCR Program by DPS.
Who Reports?
Every month law enforcement agencies, as well as some colleges and universities throughout Connecticut submit UCR data to DPS.  According to the Connecticut Department of Public Safety (DPS), Division of State Police, Crimes Analysis Unit, there is 100% participation in the UCR Program.  The data submitted consists of the number of offenses brought to the attention of law enforcement agencies by a variety of sources such as police or victim reports.  Of course, not all crimes are reported, and hence not all crimes are counted.  UCR data is collected for all crimes reported, except traffic violations, and includes the age, race and gender of arrestees.
In Connecticut, some police departments report summary data and others use incident based reporting.
The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program gathers offense data for violent and property crimes. Offenses that make up the Crime Index are Part I crimes—violent crimes of murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault; property crimes of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.
Law enforcement agencies that participate, forward crime data through their State UCR Programs in 46 States and the District of Columbia. Local agencies without State UCR Programs submit crime statistics directly to the FBI. Many states have mandatory reporting requirements, and many State UCR Programs collect data beyond those typically called for by the national UCR Program to address crime problems specific to their particular jurisdictions.

Law enforcement agencies tabulate the number of Part I crimes brought to their attention based on records of all reports of crime received from victims, officers who discover infractions, or other sources, and submit them each month to the FBI either directly or through their State UCR Programs.
In addition to reporting Part I offenses, law enforcement agencies provide monthly data to the UCR Program on persons arrested for all other crimes except traffic violations, law enforcement officers killed or assaulted (LEOKA) and hate crimes (reported Quarterly).

In 2007, more than 17,700 city, county, college and university, state, tribal, and federal agencies voluntarily participated in the UCR Program.
For more information, see UCR Frequently Asked Questions.
On July 23 and July 24, 2008, the Department of Public Safety, Statistical Analysis and Reporting Section, held a FREE two day FBI training session on the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program’s - Summary Reporting System. The training was held at the Department of Public Safety, 1111 Country Club Road, Middletown CT and all materials were provided at no charge, including copies of the UCR Handbook below.
FBI expert, Agent Darrin Moor, from the Criminal Justice Information Services, (CJIS) conducted this training. The training had not been offered in Connecticut in recent years, and due to the reduction in government travel is not anticipated to be offered again in the foreseeable future.

The purpose of the training was to ensure that agency records personnel and staff are properly collecting UCR summary data that define a jurisdiction’s level of crime. The FBI found through informal reviews that some agencies do not classify their crime correctly, affecting the total picture of crime in the community. The training was designed for civilian and sworn personnel, both those who enter incidents and those responsible for signing off on them and provided a clear understanding of classifying crimes in the Uniform Crime Reporting System.
Below are copies of FBI Agent, Darrin Moor’s FOUR PART presentation, a uniquely valuable reference.
FBI Training materials are provided below in Adobe PDF format.  
  1. PDF to HTML ConverterHistorical Background on UCR Summary Program
  2. PDF to HTML ConverterPreparing Return A and Hierarchy Rule
  3. PDF to HTML ConverterClassifying & Scoring Procedures 
  4. PDF to HTML ConverterDefinition of Offenses

The UCR Summary training provided useful information on form accuracy, the supplement to Return A, establishing property values, scenarios that captured specific details, and understanding the analytical value of comprehensive summary reporting.
In addition, there was a brief review of Family Violence, Bias and LEOKA Offense Reports.
Crime Statistics
Every month law enforcement agencies, and some colleges and universities throughout Connecticut submit UCR data to the DPS Crimes Analysis Unit. According to the Unit, there is 100% participation in the UCR Program over time.

The National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) is a second generation UCR system that went into effect in Connecticut in 1993. NIBRS collects and reports data on each incident, and allows reporting of one or more offenses for any one incident. Information in UCR is summary based, meaning that only the highest level offense in any one incident is reported. Consequently, NIBRS data provides considerable more detail about an incident, and yields richer and more meaningful information than those produced by the summary UCR system.

A total of 182 entities reported within Connecticut in 2007. This includes the Connecticut State Police reporting as a separate entity.  With 169 municipalities in Connecticut, there are 92 separate local Police Departments (PD) which cover 85% of the State’s population.  Among the 92 local PD, 67 utilize NIBRS and 25 utilize UCR.  The Connecticut State Police use the NIBRS system and provide police services for another 81 Connecticut towns and places (or 15% of the State’s population).  In addition, there are 7 campus police departments also reporting, 5 of which use NIBRS and 2 that use the summary UCR system.  The State Capitol Police utilize the NIBRS system.

See PDF to HTML ConverterBJS Effects of NIBRS on Crime Statistics

The FBI cautions data users of Crime in the United States against comparing statistical data of cities, counties, metropolitan areas, states, colleges or universities solely on the basis on their population coverage or student enrollment. In addition, the FBI cautions data users to exercise care in making any direct comparison between data in this publication and those in prior issues, because of differing levels of participation from year to year and reporting problems that require the FBI to estimate crime counts for certain contributors, the data may not be comparable from year to year.

Some factors that are known to affect the volume and type of crime occurring from place to place are:

  • Population density and degree of urbanization.
  • Variations in composition of the population, particularly youth concentration.
  • Stability of the population with respect to residents' mobility, commuting patterns, and transient factors.
  • Modes of transportation and highway system.
  • Economic conditions, including median income, poverty level, and job availability.
  • Cultural factors and educational, recreational, and religious characteristics.
  • Family conditions with respect to divorce and family cohesiveness.
  • Climate.
  • Effective strength of law enforcement agencies.
  • Administrative and investigative emphases of law enforcement.
  • Policies of other components of the criminal justice system (e.g. prosecutorial, judicial, correctional, and probation).
  • Citizens' attitudes toward crime.
  • Crime reporting practices of the citizenry.