U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin National Survey of Prosecutors Prosecutors in State Courts, 2001 May 2002, NCJ 193441 ---------------------------------------------------------------- This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.wk1) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/psc01.htm This report is one in a series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all in the series go to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pubalp2.htm#prosecutors. ---------------------------------------------------------------- By Carol J. DeFrances, Ph.D. BJS Statistician ---------------------------------------------------------------- Highlights * Over the past decade prosecutors' offices nationwide, on average, experienced increases in their staff size, budget for prosecutorial functions, and population served. * In 2001 chief prosecutors were much more likely to serve in a full-time capacity than 10 years ago. * The percentage of prosecutors' offices prosecuting felonies related to domestic violence, child abuse, and bank or thrift fraud increased in 2001 compared to 1994, when similar data were collected. * Over the 12 months preceding the 2001 survey, 42% of prosecutors' offices reported prosecuting either felony or misdemeanor computer-related crimes under their State's computer statutes. * Two-thirds of prosecutors' offices used DNA evidence during plea negotiations or felony trials in 2001 compared to about half of the offices in 1996. * In 2001 about 23% of prosecutors' offices assigned prosecutors to handle community-related activities. ------------------------------------------------------- In 2001, 2,341 prosecutors' offices handled felony cases in State courts of general jurisdiction. These offices employed over 79,000 attorneys, investigators, victim advocates, and support staff, with a median annual budget of $318,000. Over 40% of the offices had experience prosecuting a computer-related crime, and 68% used DNA evidence either during plea negotiations or felony trials. Over three-fourths of chief prosecutors were employed full-time in 2001 compared to half in 1990. These are findings from the 2001 National Survey of Prosecutors (NSP), which was a census of all chief prose- cutors that tried felony cases in State courts of general jurisdiction. *** Footnote 1: The 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996 NSP data collections surveyed a nationally representative sample of chief prosecutors that tried felony cases in State courts of general jurisdiction.*** The census did not include municipal attorneys or county attorneys who primarily operate in courts of limited jurisdiction. This is the second report based on results from the 2001 NSP that describes how the role of the State court prosecutor has changed over the past decade.***Footnote 2: State Court Prose- cutors in Large Districts, 2001, NCJ 191206, available from the BJS website at http:///www.ojp.usdoj.gov.bjs.*** A chief prosecutor is the elected or appointed attorney advocating for the public in felony cases and in a variety of generally less serious offenses. Office titles for chief prosecutors include district attorney, prosecuting attorney, county attorney, commonwealth attorney, and state's attorney (Appendix). State law determines the number of chief prosecutors and whether they are elected or appointed. Texas had the largest number of chief prosecutors (155), followed by Virginia (120) and Missouri (115). Except for Alaska, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, and New Jersey, in 2001 chief prosecutors were elected. In Alaska, Delaware, and Rhode Island criminal prosecution was the primary responsibility of the State's Attorney General. In the District of Columbia the United States Attorney had jurisdiction over adult felony and misdemeanor cases. Most chief prosecutors served prosecutorial districts comprised of one or more counties (not shown in a table). In 2001, 85% of chief prosecutors served a prosecutorial district comprised of one county compared to 80% in 1990. Half of all prosecutors' offices served a district with a population of 36,000 or less. Seventy-five percent of all offices served a district with a population of less than 100,000, and 5% served a district with a population of 500,000 or more. The size of prosecutorial districts varied considerably among the 2,341 offices. This report provides information for all offices and by size of jurisdiction: * A full-time office in a large jurisdiction refers to an office with a full-time chief prosecutor serving a prosecutorial district with a population of 1 million or more. * A full-time office in a medium jurisdiction refers to an office with a full-time chief prosecutor serving a district with a population between 250,000 to 999,999. * A full-time office in a small jurisdiction refers to a full-time chief prosecutor serving a district with a population less than 250,000. * A part-time office has a part-time chief prosecutor serving a prosecutorial district of any size.***Footnote 3: The full-and part- time categories used in this report are comparable to the categories used in Prosecutors in State Courts, 1996, NCJ 170092.*** Staffing in prosecutors' offices In 2001 the Nation's prosecutors' offices employed a workforce of over 79,000 full and part-time staff, including assistant prosecutors, supervisory attorneys, investigators, victim advocates, and support staff. This total represented an increase of 39% from 1992 and 13% from 1996. Support staff, including administrative staff and clerical staff, comprised 35% of total staff, and assistant prosecutors, including supervisory attorneys, made up 34%. The number of assistant prosecutors, including supervisory attorneys, grew to nearly 27,000 in 2001, an increase of 35% since 1990 and 12% since 1996 (not shown in a table). Over the past 10 years, the number of assistant prosecutors (including supervisory attorneys) per 100,000 residents kept pace with population growth. The rate per 100,000 residents was 10 in 2001, compared to 9 in 1996. Overall, the ratio of assistant prosecutors (including supervisory attorneys) to investigators was 3.6 attorneys to 1 investigator, to victim advocates 5.9 to 1, and to support staff members 1 to 1. Between 1990 and 2001, the percentage of prosecutors' offices with at least one full-time assistant prosecutor increased from 50% to 65%. In 2001 half the entering assistant prosecutors earned $35,000 or more a year; half the full-time assistant prosecutors with 5 years' experience, $45,000 or more; and half the supervisory attorneys, $60,000 or more. About 8% of the total staff worked part time in 2001. In offices with a part-time chief prosecutor, 40% of staff worked full time. The median total staff size across all offices was nine, including the chief prosecutor. Half of the offices reported two or more assistant prosecutors, one or more victim advocates, and three or more support staff. In 2001 full-time offices in large districts had a median total staff size of 456, with medians of 151 assistant prosecutors, 21 supervisory attorneys, and 145 support staff. Half of part-time offices reported one or more assistant prosecutors and one or more support staff. Term of office, length of service, and salary of chief prosecutor In 2001 the percentage of full-time chief prosecutors was 77% compared to 53% in 1990 (not shown in a table). The 532 part-time chief prosecutors were located in 29 States. Missouri had the largest number of part-time chief prosecutors with 80 of the State's 115 chief prosecutors serving part-time. Fifty percent or more of chief prosecutors in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, North Dakota, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, and South Dakota reported that they worked part time. Eighty-seven percent of chief prosecutors nationwide reported that they were elected or appointed to 4-year terms. The median length of service for chief prosecutors (elected or appointed) was 6.8 years. About 32% of chief prosecutors had served 4 years or less and 20% had served 15 years or more. Half of the chief prosecutors in full-time medium size offices served 8.4 years or more. The longest tenure reported by a survey respondent was 40 years. Half of all offices reported that the chief prosecutor earned $85,000 per year or more. About 29% of chief prosecutors earned $100,000 or more per year. In general, the amount of annual salary varied by the size of the prosecutorial district served and whether the chief prosecutor was full or part-time. The median salary for chief prosecutors in full-time large offices was $136,700; for full-time medium offices, $115,000; for full-time small offices, $90,000; and for chief prosecutors in part-time offices, $39,750. The annual salary for chief prosecutors ranged from $10,500 to $189,000. Attorney recruitment and retention in prosecutors' offices Almost a third of offices had experienced problems with recruiting or retaining staff attorneys (not shown in a table). Fifty-nine percent of full-time medium offices and 46% of full-time large offices reported problems of recruiting new staff attorneys compared to 33% of full-time small offices and 12% of part- time offices. Similarly, over 60% of full-time large and medium offices indicated a problem of retaining staff attorneys, while 31% of full- time small offices and 11% of part-time offices reported such a problem. Low salaries were cited as the primary reason for recruitment (67%) and retention (58%) problems by the offices with these problems. Budget of prosecutors' offices In 2001 prosecutors' offices nationwide had total budgets of over $4.6 billion for prosecutorial functions. Half of the offices reported an annual budget of $318,000 or more. The average budget was $2 million. The reported budgets ranged from $6,000 to $373 million. The median annual budget for full-time large offices was $32 million; for full-time medium offices, $6 million; for full-time small offices, $379,000; and for part-time offices, $95,000. Almost all of the prosecutors' offices (98%) indicated that salaries were included in their reported budget amounts for prosecutorial functions. Dollar amounts for expert services were included in 65% of reported budgets, investigators' services in 53%, and DNA testing in 40%. Funding for social services were included by 15% of prosecutors' offices. ----------------------------------------- Staffing and budget in prosecutors' offices, 1992 to 2001 1992 1994 Number of staff Total 57,081 65,402 Median per office 7 8 Mean per office 24 29 Number of assistant prosecutors* Total 21,344 22,278 Median per office 2 2 Mean per office 9 10 Budget for prosecutorial functions Total (in 2001 dollars) -- +$2.9 billion Median per office (in 2001 dollars -- $271,264 Mean per office (in 2001 dollars) -- $1,621,176 1996 2001 Number of staff Total 70,526 79,436 Median per office 9 9 Mean per office 30 34 Number of assistant prosecutors* Total 24,040 26,921 Median per office 3 2 Mean per office 10 10 Budget for prosecutorial functions Total (in 2001 dollars) +$3.5 billion +$4.68 billion Median per office (in 2001 dollars $286,709 $318,000 Mean per office (in 2001 dollars) $1,670,447 $2,000,026 Note: Data for 1992, 1994, and 1996 are from a nationally representative sample of chief prosecutors who tried felony cases in State courts of general jurisdiction. In 1992 data on the number of total staff were available for 2,357 of 2,396 prosecutors' offices and the number of assistant prosecutors for 2,396 offices. In 1994 data on the number of total staff were available for 2,293 of 2,343 prosecutors' offices number of assistant prosecutors for 2,336 offices, and the budget for prosecutorial for 2,336 offices, and the budget for prosecutorial fun for 1,788 offices. In 1996 data on the number of total staff and number of assistant prosecutors were available for 2,341 of 2,343 prosecutor offices, and the budget for prosecutorial functions for 2,121 offices 2001 data on the number of total staff and number of assistant prosecutors' offices and estimated for 130 prosecutors' offices. *Includes supervisory attorneys who litigate cases. --Data were for total budget and were not directly comparable to 1994, 1996, and 2001 data. * Between 1992 and 2001 the number of total staff in prosecutors' offices increased by 39%. * In terms of specific staff members, the number of assistant prosecutors increased by 26% during the period 1992 to 2001. * When 1994 budget amounts are adjusted for inflation, prosecutors' offices had combined total budgets of approximately $2.9 billion for prosecutorial functions. In 2001 these offices had combined total budgets of over $4.6 billion, an increase of 61%. ----------------------------------------- Half of the prosecutors' offices received 85% or more of their funding from the county government (not shown in a table). About a third of the offices relied exclusively on the county government for their budget. About half of the offices reported receiving some funding from the State government. Six percent of the offices reported 100% funding from their State government. Some funding from the city government was reported by 4% of the prosecutors' offices. Over a third of the offices indicated that some portion of their budget came from grant funds. Types of cases handled by prosecutors' offices In addition to felony criminal matters, prosecutors' offices handled a variety of other case types. Nine out of ten offices also had jurisdiction over misdemeanor cases. Juvenile matters were handled by 89% of the offices and traffic violations by 84%. Fifty-four percent of offices represented the government in civil lawsuits. About half of the offices had jurisdiction over child support enforcement cases. Part-time offices were more likely to handle traffic violations (94%) and represent the government in civil lawsuits (75%) than their full-time counterparts. Felony (77%) and misdemeanor (97%) appeals were more likely to be handled in full-time large offices than any of the other office types. ---------------------------------------- Computer-related crime prosecuted by prosecutors' offices Cybercrime has new importance given the increased consumer and business use of the Internet. With cybercrime a priority on several levels, the 2001 NSP asked prosecutors' offices about the kinds of computer-related cases they may have handled. Over the 12 months before the survey, 42% of the prosecutors' offices reported prosecuting computer-related crimes under their State's computer statutes. Computer-related crimes (felony or misdemeanor) were prosecuted by 97% of full-time large offices, 73% of full-time medium offices, 44% of full-time small offices, and 17% of part-time offices. Three in ten offices nationwide reported prosecuting computer-related crimes dealing with the transmittal of child pornography. A quarter of all offices prosecuted credit card fraud (27%) and bank card fraud (22%). Computer sabotage was prosecuted by 5% of the offices and theft of intellectual property by 3%. Percent of prosecutors' offices Full-time offices (population served) Large Type of computer All (1,000,000 crime prosecuted offices or more) Any computer-related crime 41.5% 97.0% Credit card fraud 27.4 93.5 Bank card fraud/a 22.3 83.3 Computer forgery/b 13.3 63.0 Computer sabotage/c 4.6 53.6 Unauthorized access to computer/d 9.6 60.7 Unauthorized copying or distribution of computer programs/e 2.7 53.8 Cyberstalking/f 16.3 76.7 Theft of intellectual property 3.2 40.7 Transmitting child pornography 30.0 87.1 Identity theft 18.2 80.0 Medium Small Type of computer (250,000 (under crime prosecuted to 999,99 250,000) Part-time Any computer-related crime 72.9% 44.2% 16.8% Credit card fraud 61.2 28.2 7.4 Bank card fraud/a 50.9 22.6 6.9 Computer forgery/b 39.2 12.8 2.7 Computer sabotage/c 14.4 3.8 0.5 Unauthorized access to computer/d 28.8 8.8 2.3 Unauthorized copying or distribution of computer programs/e 9.0 1.8 0.2 Cyberstalking/f 47.8 15.1 4.5 Theft of intellectual property 13.4 2.3 0.5 Transmitting child pornography 67.1 30.4 10.8 Identity theft 51.9 17.2 4.5 Note: Data on prosecution of any computer related crime under their State's computer statutes were available for 2,151 prosecutors' offices. Data were available on credit card fraud for 1,995 prosecutors' offices, bank card fraud 1,956 offices, forgery 1,894 offices, sabotage 1,853 offices, unauthorized access to computer system 1,878 offices, unauthorized copying or distribution of computer programs 1,883 offices, cyberstalking 1,927 offices, theft of intellectual property 1,839 offices, transmitting child pornography 2,029 offices, cyberstalking 1,927 offices, theft of intellectual property 1,839 offices, transmitting child pornography 2,029 offices, and identity theft 1,927 offices. a/ATM or debit. b/Alteration of computerized documents. c/To hinder the normal function of a computer system through the introduction of worms, viruses, or logic bombs. d/Hacking. f/The activity of users sending harassing or threatening e-mail to other users. --------------------------------- Special categories of felony offenses handled by prosecutors' offices During the previous year over 90% of prosecutors' offices prosecuted domestic violence (96%) and child abuse (93%) offenses. Illegal sale or possession of a firearm offenses were prosecuted by 83% of the offices, stalking offenses 61%, bank or thrift fraud 45%, and elder abuse 42%. About 2 in 10 offices reported prosecuting offenses related to health care fraud (23%) or hate crime (20%). In general, full-time large offices were more likely to prosecute special categories of felony offenses than the smaller offices. For example, hate crime offenses were prosecuted in 91% of full-time large offices compared to 57% of full-time medium offices, 18% of full-time small offices, and 6% of part-time offices. Sixty-five percent of full-time large offices prosecuted police use of excessive force offenses compared to 28% of full-time medium offices, 7% of full-time small offices, and 2% of part-time offices. Number of cases and convictions in prosecutors' offices Over 2.3 million felony cases and almost 7 million misdemeanor cases were closed by prosecutors' offices during the 12 months preceding the survey (not shown in a table).***Footnote 4: The caseload data collected in the 2001 NSP are not directly comparable to prior NSP caseload estimates. For the 2001 NSP data collection, the respondent defined a case, whereas in the 1992, 1994, and 1996 collections, BJS provided the definition of a case.*** About 38% of the total number of felony cases closed were prosecuted in full-time small offices, 37% in full-time medium offices, 21% in full-time large offices, and 3% in part-time offices. Approximately 857 felony cases were closed per 100,000 residents. About 87 felony cases per assistant prosecutor were closed.***Footnote 5: This estimate was calculated by dividing the total number of felony cases closed by the number of assistant prosecutors including supervisory attorneys. An assumption made in calculating the estimate if that all assistant prosecutors handled felony cases, which may not always be the case.*** Staff from prosecutors' offices participated in over 67,000 felony jury trials that resulted in a verdict. The median number of felony and misdemeanor criminal cases closed by prosecutors' offices was 976.***Footnote 6: Methods of counting criminal cases vary among prosecutors' offices. About 44% indicated counting criminal cases by each defendant; 21%, by each charge; 17%, by each incident; 4%, by the most serious charge; and 15%, by other methods or did not respond.*** Half of the prosecutors' offices closed 250 or more felony cases. In at least half of the offices, 90% or more of the felony cases closed resulted in a felony or misdemeanor conviction. The median number of felony jury trial verdicts per office was 8. The median annual number of felony cases closed by full-time large offices was 12,079; by full-time medium offices 3,162; by full-time small office 288; and by part-time offices 50. The median conviction rate for felony cases was 90% or more in part-time offices (93%) and in full-time small offices (90%). Half of the full-time large offices were involved in at least 354 felony jury trials that resulted in a verdict during the preceding year. Half of the offices serving a medium size jurisdiction participated in 91 or more such trials; half the small offices, 10 or more trials; and half the part-time offices, 2 or more felony jury trials. Juveniles proceeded against in criminal courts by prosecutors' offices Measuring the number of juvenile cases proceeded against is difficult due to the various mechanisms (judicial waiver, direct file by prosecutor, and statutory exclusion of certain offenses from juvenile court jurisdiction) by which a juvenile case can reach criminal court, the variation in the definition of juvenile across States, and the different terminology used by States in referring to this type of case. Approximately 69% of prosecutors' offices indicated that they had handled juvenile cases in criminal court. During the previous year, prosecutors' offices reported proceeding against over 32,000 juvenile cases in criminal court, an increase of 23% from 1996.***Footnote 7: Other sources of statistics for juvenile cases handled in criminal court: Delinquency Cases Waived to Criminal Court, 1988-1997, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Fact Sheet, February 200; State Court Sentencing of Convicted Felons, 1994, BJS NCJ 164614; and Juvenile Felony Defendants in Criminal Court, BJS NCJ 165815.*** A median of five juvenile cases per office were proceeded against in criminal court. About 7% of the offices reported having a specialized unit that handled juvenile cases in criminal court. These specialized units were more likely to be found in full-time medium offices (39%)and full-time large offices (35%) than either full-time small offices (5%) or part-time offices (1%). Over a third of prosecutors' offices indicated that a designated attorney handled juvenile cases proceeded against in criminal court. Forty-one percent of full-time small offices indicated designating attorneys to handle juvenile cases in criminal court, 35% of full-time large offices, 32% of full-time medium offices, and 17% of part-time offices. Written guidelines for handling juvenile cases in criminal court were reported by 19% of all offices. Full-time large offices (59%) were more likely to have written guidelines than their full-time and part-time office counterparts. Work-related threats or assaults against staff in prosecutors' offices In 2001, 41% of prosecutors' offices reported a work-related threat or assault against a staff member (not shown in table). This was a decrease from 1996 when 49% of offices indicated that a staff member experienced a work-related threat or assault. In 2001, 81% of full-time large offices reported a work-related threat or assault against a staff member, 56% of full-time medium offices, 41% of full-time small offices, and 32% of part-time offices. About 2% reported having only assaults against staff members. In terms of specific staff members, about a third of chief prosecutors and a quarter of assistant prosecutors nationwide experienced a work-related threat or assault. Security measures used in prosecutors' offices A variety of security measures were used by prosecutors' offices to protect their staff and building. Electronic security systems (22%), building guards (21%), and metal detectors (21%) were used by over 20% of all prosecutors' offices nationwide. About 1 out of 10 offices had electronic surveillance (12%) or police protection (11%). The percentage of prosecutors' offices using building guards and metal detectors in 2001 more than doubled since 1994, when 10% of offices reported using building guards and 10% metal detectors. The chief prosecutor carried a firearm for personal security in 21% of the offices. Twenty-three percent of full-time small offices indicated that their chief prosecutor carried a firearm for personal security, 22% of full-time medium offices, 15% of part-time offices, and 12% of full-time large offices. About a third of all offices reported that a staff investigator carried a firearm. DNA evidence used by prosecutors' offices In 2001 two-thirds of prosecutors' offices reported the use of DNA evidence during plea negotiations or felony trials. This is an increase from 1996 when about half of all offices indicated using DNA evidence during plea negotiations or felony trials. All the full-time large offices reported using DNA evidence during plea negotiations or felony trials, 98% of full-time medium offices, 73% of full-time small offices, and 38% of part-time offices. A State-operated forensic laboratory performed the DNA testing for 61% of all offices, a privately operated laboratory for 22%, the FBI for 8%, and a local agency for 5%. Full-time medium offices (82%) were more likely to use a State-operated forensic laboratory than full-time small offices (67%), full-time large offices (66%), and part-time offices (34%). A local agency was used for DNA testing by 81% of full-time large offices, 22% of full-time medium offices, and 2% of full-time small offices.***Footnote 8: For more information on DNA laboratories, see BJS report, Survey of DNA Crime Laboratories, 2001, NCJ 179104.*** When asked about problems in the use of DNA evidence, a third of all offices indicated at least one instance of excessive delay in getting laboratory results. Excessive delays in getting DNA results were reported by 72% of full-time large offices, 65% of full-time medium offices, 34% of full-time small offices, and 15% of part-time offices. Inconclusive DNA results were reported by 15% of all offices, improper collection of evidence by the police 7%, and difficulty at least once in getting DNA results admitted in court as evidence 1%. Community prosecution in prosecutors' offices Community prosecution has been defined by prosecutors as a way to involve the community to solve crime and coordinate their office, law enforcement, local residents, and organizations to improve public safety and quality of life. ***Footnote 9: For more information on community prosecution see Nugent, Elaine and Gerard A. Rainville, "The State of Community Prosecution: Results from a National Survey", The Prosecutor, March/ April 2001, pp. 26-33 and the Office of Justice Programs website http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ prosecution/commlinks.htm>.*** During the previous year 68% of all prosecutors' offices used tools other than traditional criminal prosecution to address community problems, 55% involved the community to identify crime or problem areas, and 18% assigned prosecutors to specific geographic areas. Assigning prosecutors to specific geographic areas was done most often by full-time large offices (66%) compared to their full and part-time counterparts. Virtually all the offices (99%) indicated a formal or informal relationship with law enforcement agencies. Eighty-seven percent of the offices reported a formal or informal relationship with other governmental agencies, 69% community associations, and 61% private organizations. About three-quarters of all offices met regularly with school groups. Half of the offices reported meeting regularly with youth service organizations and business groups. About a third met regularly with neighborhood associations. Nine percent of all offices indicated meeting regularly with tenant associations. Twenty-three percent of all offices assigned prosecutors to handle community-related activities. Of the offices assigning prosecutors to handle community-related activities, 30% reported that these prosecutors were located outside of the central prosecutors' offices in places such as the police department or a community-based office (not shown in a table). The types of offenses handled most often by prosecutors assigned to community-related activities were drug crime (80%), violent crime (65%), juvenile crime (63%), property crime (62%), and public-order crime (46%). Over three-fourths of the offices that assigned prosecutors to community-related activities indicated that these prosecutors carried a full caseload. Methodology Respondent selection The 2001 National Survey of Prosecutors (NSP) was a census of the 2,341 chief prosecutors in the United States that handled felony cases in State courts of general jurisdiction. In 2001, there were 2,341 prosecutorial districts in the Nation, each with one chief prosecutor. Data collection The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) conducted the data collection for the 2001 NSP through a mailed questionnaire. The 2001 NSP questionnaire is available at the BJS website < http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ pub/pdf/nsp01.pdf>. In May 2001, the 2001 NSP questionnaire was mailed to the 114 prosecutors' offices that served districts with a population of 500,000 or more. The remaining 2,228 prosecutors' offices were sent questionnaires in June 2001. After the initial mailings, an extensive follow-up was required to obtain a returned survey from each of the prosecutors' offices. The follow-up process involved phone calls, e-mail and fax communication, re-mailing questionnaires, and sending follow-up letters. Staff of the National District Attorneys Associations as well as the Prosecutor Coordinator Office in each State also assisted NORC in providing follow-up. NORC conducted additional telephone, fax, and e-mail follow-up on completed surveys to obtain responses to unanswered items and to clarify some responses. Survey response Overall, 2,243 or 96% of the 2,341 prosecutors' offices nationwide responded to the 2001 NSP. Data were not collected for the 98 prosecutors' offices listed below: Alabama (judicial circuits) 6th, 12th, 20th, 28th; Arizona (judicial district) 9th West; California (counties) Plumas; Georgia (judicial circuits) Dublin, Piedmont, Bell-Forsyth; Idaho (counties) Clark; Indiana (judicial circuits) 20th; Iowa (counties) Howard; Kansas (counties) Harper, Kingman, Neosho, Osage, Phillips; Kentucky (judicial circuits) 1st, 26th, 28th, 31st, 33rd, 35th, 39th, 41st, 44th; Louisiana (judicial districts) 8th, 12th, 16th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 26th, 34th, 40th; Minnesota (counties) Pipestone, Ramsey, Roseau; Missouri (counties) Carter, Crawford, Dade, Douglas, Howell, Lewis, Lincoln, Madison, Pike, St. Francois, Ste. Genevieve, Stoddard, Taney; Nebraska (counties) Dodge, Gage, Garden, Harlan, Holt, Howard, Nemaha, Stanton, Washington, Wheeler; North Carolina (prosecutorial districts) 23, 25; North Dakota (counties) Mountrail, Dunn; Oklahoma (judicial districts) 13th; Oregon (counties) Clackamas, Klamath, Lincoln, Linn, Tillamook, Umatilla, Union; South Carolina (judicial circuits) 10th; South Dakota (counties) McCook, Miner, Perkins, Shannon; Texas (counties) Coleman, Floyd, Jim Wells, Matagorda, Val Verde, Wilbarger, Winkler; Virginia (counties) Buckingham, Nottoway, Rappahannock; Washington (counties) Asotin, Kitsap, Lewis, Mason, Pacific, Spokane; West Virginia (counties) Lewis, Pleasants; Wisconsin (counties) Bayfield, Richland. Data imputations Data on the total budget for prosecutorial functions for 10 of the 98 nonrespondents were retrieved from a secondary source and (such as, office web page, telephoning the county budget or treasurer's office) entered into the data set. Similarly, data on the number of full-time assistant prosecutors and the total number of full-time staff for 11 of the 98 nonrespondents were collected from a secondary source and entered into the data set. Since these data were retrieved from proxy sources other than the prosecutors' offices, they are treated as imputed data. The simple hot deck method -- copying a value from a donor case having similar values or related variables -- was used to impute various variables for the 2001 NSP. Initially, the number of full-time chief prosecutors, the number of part-time chief prosecutors, the number of part-time assistant prosecutors, the total number of part-time staff, and the number of various full-time and part-time staff members (that is, investigators, victim advocate, support staff) were imputed for 98 prosecutors' offices; the number of full-time assistant prosecutors and the number of full-time staff for 87 offices; the total budget for prosecutorial function for 120 offices; and the number of felony cases closed for 288 offices. The number of juvenile cases proceeded against in criminal court was imputed for 4 offices that served a district with a population over 500,000. To impute any variable by the hot deck method, the prosecutorial district size was used to sort the completed cases (that is, prosecutor office surveys) in descending order. A missing value for each variable was imputed as the value of the variable on the case immediately preceding the case with missing data. For example, a missing value for felony cases closed was imputed as the value of felony cases closed on the case that immediately proceeded the case with missing data. For the 98 prosecutors' offices where the full-time or part-time status of the chief prosecutor was imputed, BJS staff verified this information with the Prosecutor Coordinator's office in each of the 24 States where the 98 offices were located. ------------------------------------------ The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Lawrence A. Greenfeld is acting director. Carol J. DeFrances wrote this report under the supervision of Steven K. Smith. At BJS, Keonna Feaster provided statistical review; David Carlis, Dorothea Proctor, and Keonna Feaster assisted in compiling the list of 2,341 chief prosecutors; Keonna Feaster also assisted in data collection. Marika F.X. Litras constructed the map. Data collection and processing were performed by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC); Natalie Suter was the project director, and Annemarie Rosenlund, the assistant project director. At NORC, other project staff included Haider Baig, Pauletta Baxter, Angeline Bregianes, Nakia Brown, Lashanda Carter, Valarie Cook, Angela Herrmann, Irv Horowitz, Robert Johnson, Ellen Kaplowitz, Adam Levine, Patricia Mikkelson, Gloria Rauens, Lyanette Scott, Joanna Small, Victoria Sudler, Lakecia Whimper, and Michael Yang. Paula Wulff of the National District Attorneys Association, as well as the Prosecutor Coordinator Office in each State assisted with data collection. Elaine Nugent from the American Prosecutors Research Institute, James Polley, IV from the National District Attorneys Association, and Paula Wulff reviewed the report. Tina Dorsey and Tom Hester produced and edited the report. Jayne Robinson prepared the report for printing. May 2002, NCJ 193441 ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- This report in portable document format and in ASCII, its tables, survey questionnaire, and related statistical data are available at the BJS World Wide Web Internet site: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ -------------------------------------------- End of file 05/15/02 ih