Automated Author ProfileLugo, Kristina
Lugo, Kristina
Current S-Index
Sum of Dataset Indices for all datasets
Average Dataset Index per Dataset
Average Dataset Index per dataset
Total Datasets
Total datasets for this author
Average FAIR Score
Average FAIR Score per dataset
Total Citations
Total citations to the author's datasets
Total Mentions
Total mentions of the author's datasets
S-Index Interpretation
The S-Index (Sharing Index) is a comprehensive metric that represents the cumulative impact of all your datasets. It is calculated as the sum of Dataset Index scores across all your claimed datasets.
What it means:
- A higher S-index indicates greater overall impact of your datasets relative to typical datasets in their fields of research
- The S-Index grows as you add more datasets or as existing datasets gain more citations and mentions
- It provides a single number to track your research data impact over time
Current S-Index: 1.6 (sum of 4 datasets Dataset Index scores)
More information here.
S-Index Over Time
Cumulative Citations Over Time
Cumulative Mentions Over Time
Datasets
Despite reductions in U.S. crime rates in recent decades, crime victimization continues to be a pressing problem with enormous societal costs. This project, conducted by the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) in partnership with the Urban Institute (Urban) and the National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC), is an assessment of the field of cost of victimization research. The product is a menu of recommendations for future research studies and practitioner tools to advance the field. One objective of the project was to keep the focus squarely on the victims, and consider what information is most needed by those who serve them. Relatedly, another objective was to recognize that even if the proximate victim is a business, the government, or non-profit organization, individuals still suffer. Given the victim-centered focus, the project team conducted several primary data collections designed to obtain input from practitioners and victims about their experiences and needs. Focus groups were conducted with three practitioner groups: Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) compensation and assistance administrators, State Administering Agency (SAA) and state Statistical Analysis Center (SAC) directors, and civil attorneys who pursue tort claims for damages for crime victims. As well, the project team conducted a nationwide survey of victim service providers and a smaller survey of victimization survivors. The project team also re-framed the taxonomy of victimization costs pioneered and revised by Cohen over the years (Cohen, 2005, e.g.) from the perspective of various practitioner users - based on who covers different costs - and adds factors that may increase or decrease costs they may be estimating. The project team also conducted a literature review that consists of two major sections: one focused on how costs of victimization are estimated and the other on estimation methods and data sources concerning the incidence, prevalence, and concentration of victimization. The data collection activities and literature reviews, combined with extensive input from an advisory board of experts throughout the project, inform the menu of recommendations proposed in Volume III. These focus on topical areas where more information is needed; methodological recommendations to improve estimates; and practitioner resources and tools to help disseminate research developments, assist in calculating local estimates, and better equip practitioners to communicate and use victimization cost estimates effectively in the field.
Authors
- Lugo, Kristina ;
- Przybylski, Roger
Despite reductions in U.S. crime rates in recent decades, crime victimization continues to be a pressing problem with enormous societal costs. This project, conducted by the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) in partnership with the Urban Institute (Urban) and the National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC), is an assessment of the field of cost of victimization research. The product is a menu of recommendations for future research studies and practitioner tools to advance the field. One objective of the project was to keep the focus squarely on the victims, and consider what information is most needed by those who serve them. Relatedly, another objective was to recognize that even if the proximate victim is a business, the government, or non-profit organization, individuals still suffer. Given the victim-centered focus, the project team conducted several primary data collections designed to obtain input from practitioners and victims about their experiences and needs. Focus groups were conducted with three practitioner groups: Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) compensation and assistance administrators, State Administering Agency (SAA) and state Statistical Analysis Center (SAC) directors, and civil attorneys who pursue tort claims for damages for crime victims. As well, the project team conducted a nationwide survey of victim service providers and a smaller survey of victimization survivors. The project team also re-framed the taxonomy of victimization costs pioneered and revised by Cohen over the years (Cohen, 2005, e.g.) from the perspective of various practitioner users - based on who covers different costs - and adds factors that may increase or decrease costs they may be estimating. The project team also conducted a literature review that consists of two major sections: one focused on how costs of victimization are estimated and the other on estimation methods and data sources concerning the incidence, prevalence, and concentration of victimization. The data collection activities and literature reviews, combined with extensive input from an advisory board of experts throughout the project, inform the menu of recommendations proposed in Volume III. These focus on topical areas where more information is needed; methodological recommendations to improve estimates; and practitioner resources and tools to help disseminate research developments, assist in calculating local estimates, and better equip practitioners to communicate and use victimization cost estimates effectively in the field.
Authors
- Lugo, Kristina ;
- Przybylski, Roger
This project examined practices and initiatives undertaken by prosecutors across the United States to address trafficking in persons (TIP) in order to learn about TIP case identification and case building; when jurisdictions prosecute utilizing their state's TIP statute or alternative charges; and how prosecutors approach victim identification, serving victims, and increasing convictions and penalties for traffickers and buyers. It also sought to draw lessons learned that other jurisdictions can use to begin this work or increase their capacity and effectiveness, regardless of size or location. This project was a partnership between the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) and the National District Attorney's Association (NDAA) and consisted of two phases. Phase I was a national survey of prosecutors and Phase II was a series of four case studies in jurisdictions undertaking anti-TIP initiatives. The results of the survey are intended to provide a national snapshot of trends in local TIP prosecutions and the use of state-level TIP statutes by local prosecutors. It serves as a ten-year update to, and expansion of, previous research on local prosecutorial approaches to trafficking that had used data on cases prosecuted through 2008.
Authors
- Lugo, Kristina
This project examined practices and initiatives undertaken by prosecutors across the United States to address trafficking in persons (TIP) in order to learn about TIP case identification and case building; when jurisdictions prosecute utilizing their state's TIP statute or alternative charges; and how prosecutors approach victim identification, serving victims, and increasing convictions and penalties for traffickers and buyers. It also sought to draw lessons learned that other jurisdictions can use to begin this work or increase their capacity and effectiveness, regardless of size or location. This project was a partnership between the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) and the National District Attorney's Association (NDAA) and consisted of two phases. Phase I was a national survey of prosecutors and Phase II was a series of four case studies in jurisdictions undertaking anti-TIP initiatives. The results of the survey are intended to provide a national snapshot of trends in local TIP prosecutions and the use of state-level TIP statutes by local prosecutors. It serves as a ten-year update to, and expansion of, previous research on local prosecutorial approaches to trafficking that had used data on cases prosecuted through 2008.
Authors
- Lugo, Kristina