The difference between rates and total volume reported isn't clear to the casual user

[cde-feedback-bot]

What brought you to the site and how can we improve your experience here?

Part of FBI CJIS beta test (week of May 8-12)

General feedback about the site?

1. Many of the downloads get stuck downloading the first thing you request. (e.g., if you download the Hate Crime .csv it gives you that if you ask for a different data set.)
2. The site does not provide much context for the casual user as to the differences between crime rate and total number of crimes (volume)--particularly the headers in the small chart above the line graph. This may be confusing without at least cursory explanation or clearer headings in the chart.
3. When discussing crime rates the site says rate per xx incidents. This may be misleading since the word incident is really specifically a NIBRS term in UCR. Normally, one says crime rate per 100,000 offenses. Again, this might be confusing to the casual or new user. 4.On the About page the available datasets links do not go to datasets or really anywhere.
4. On the home page, it says that the CDE is part of an ongoing effort to improve the accuracy and timeliness of the crime statistics. Perhaps accuracy here is a bad word choice. It implies inaccuracy previously and this publication/dissemination tool will not change accuracy of data, in any case. Timeliness is true, but instead of accuracy perhaps data quality or completeness? 6.In general, links don't seem to be going consistently to correct places. Also, some things are links on one page (violent crime for example) but are not links on another page (property crime) when they are being presented in the same way. Also note that the offense of rape does not link to the glossary when every other crime does. 7.The word "hierarchy" used in narrative portions links to the Effects of NIBRS on Crime Statistics piece instead of the glossary.
5. Perhaps the term Bulk Download and Dataset implies more data than a .csv that represents a table from a publication. This may just be a placeholder at this juncture and if so, that is okay, but just wanted to note this.
6. Do the little "book" icons mean a link will go to the glossary? If so they are not consistently applied.
7. Noticing several grammatical errors in narrative portions (e.g. "from 1991-2014" should be "from 1991 to 2014" or "available here 1991-2014.") Also, passive voice and some awkward constructions. Maybe grammar will be tackled later and not at this juncture. Again, just noting it.

Using this data for something cool? Tell us about it!

Everything I do is cool. ;-)