National Civil Rights Research and Records Institute
Data Portal/National Trends
NCRRRI Data Portal

National Trends & State Scores

Longitudinal civil rights index data from 2019 to present — tracking shifts in voting rights, housing equity, criminal justice, and education across all 50 states. Designed for researchers, students, journalists, and policy analysts.

Peer-reviewed methodologyPrimary federal sourcesCitable datasetAnnual updates
Voting Rights-6
72
since 2019
Housing-7
58
since 2019
Crim. Justice-8
44
since 2019
Education-7
61
since 2019

Methodology note: Index scores are composite measures (0–100) derived from federal datasets, court records, and field research. Higher scores indicate greater equity. Scores are updated annually; 2025 figures are preliminary pending full data reconciliation. See the Documentation page and the full methodology section below for variable definitions, weighting rationale, and known limitations.

Historical index

Six-Year National Trend Lines

2019–2025 · Click a category below to show or hide its line

40506070802019202020212022202320242025
Voting Rights
72vs 71 prior year
+1 year over year
Housing
58vs 58 prior year
0 year over year
Crim. Justice
44vs 44 prior year
0 year over year
Education
61vs 61 prior year
0 year over year
For researchers & students

Index Construction & Methodology

Each dimension index is constructed from primary federal datasets using a weighted composite methodology. The following describes the construction process, weighting rationale, and validation approach used for peer-review purposes.

01

Primary source collection

All underlying data is obtained directly from federal agency portals, FOIA responses, court record systems, and congressional archives. No secondary or aggregated datasets are used as primary inputs. Source documents are retained and available upon request for replication purposes.

02

Disparity ratio calculation

For each sub-indicator, a disparity ratio is calculated as the rate for the reference group divided by the rate for the comparison group. Ratios are then normalized to a 0–100 equity scale using a min-max transformation anchored to the observed national range for that indicator over the full 2019–present period.

03

Weighted composite aggregation

Sub-indicator scores are aggregated into dimension indices using pre-specified weights (see variable definitions below). Weights were established prior to data collection based on a literature review of existing civil rights measurement frameworks and have not been adjusted post-hoc.

04

Independent verification & cross-validation

Every factual claim is cross-referenced against at least two independent primary sources. Index scores are cross-validated against published composite measures from the Brennan Center, Vera Institute, and National Fair Housing Alliance. Divergences greater than 8 points trigger a data audit.

05

Expert review

Draft index scores are reviewed annually by at least one external subject-matter expert — typically a civil rights attorney, academic researcher, or former federal agency official — before publication. Reviewer names and affiliations are disclosed in the annual methodology report.

06

Community testimony integration

Quantitative index scores are contextualized with qualitative testimony gathered at NCRRRI public hearings. Testimony does not alter index scores but is published alongside them as a parallel evidentiary record. Researchers are encouraged to use both data streams together.

Category breakdown

Current National Index by Category

Most recent annual scores across all six tracked dimensions. Expand any category for key findings, primary data sources, peer context, and variable definitions suitable for citation in academic and policy work.

Reference

Data Dictionary

Precise definitions of all terms and variables used in the NCRRRI Civil Rights Index — for use in academic citations, policy briefs, and peer-review submissions.

Composite Index Score

A weighted average of sub-indicators scaled to 0–100, where 100 represents full equity (no measurable racial disparity) and 0 represents maximum documented disparity. Scores are not absolute measures of conditions — they measure relative equity between racial groups within a jurisdiction.

Disparity Ratio

The rate of an outcome for a reference group (typically Black or Latino Americans) divided by the rate for the comparison group (typically white Americans). A ratio of 1.0 indicates parity; ratios above 1.0 indicate over-representation of the reference group in adverse outcomes.

Year-over-Year Delta

The arithmetic difference between the current year's index score and the prior year's score. A positive delta indicates improving equity; a negative delta indicates worsening disparity. Deltas below ±2 points should be interpreted cautiously given data collection variance.

All-Time Delta (2019 baseline)

The difference between the most recent annual score and the 2019 baseline. 2019 was selected as the baseline year because it represents the last full pre-pandemic data year with complete federal dataset coverage across all six dimensions.

Citation guidance

Citing This Data

NCRRRI data is freely available for academic, journalistic, and policy use. When citing index scores in peer-reviewed work, please include the data vintage (year of publication), the specific dimension and geographic unit, and a reference to the primary federal source used for that dimension.

APA

National Civil Rights Research, Records & Reform Institute. (2025). Civil Rights Disparity Index [Data set]. NCRRRI Data Portal. https://ncrrri.org/data-portal/trends

Chicago

National Civil Rights Research, Records & Reform Institute. "Civil Rights Disparity Index." NCRRRI Data Portal, 2025. https://ncrrri.org/data-portal/trends.

MLA

National Civil Rights Research, Records & Reform Institute. "Civil Rights Disparity Index." NCRRRI Data Portal, 2025, ncrrri.org/data-portal/trends.

Data requests: Researchers requiring underlying microdata, replication files, or custom geographic aggregations may submit a formal data request to [email protected]. NCRRRI supports open science and will provide replication materials for published academic work.

Peer review notice

Known Limitations

NCRRRI is committed to transparent disclosure of methodological limitations. Researchers and reviewers should consider the following constraints when interpreting or citing index scores.

Reporting gaps in use-of-force data

Federal use-of-force reporting is voluntary and incomplete. Approximately 40% of law enforcement agencies do not submit data to the FBI's National Use-of-Force Data Collection. Criminal justice index scores should be treated as lower bounds on actual disparity.

Ecological fallacy risk

State and city-level index scores are aggregate measures. They do not capture within-state variation, which can be substantial. A state with a moderate overall score may contain counties with critical-level disparities. Researchers should supplement state scores with city-level profiles.

Data lag

Federal datasets used in index construction are typically published 12–24 months after the reference year. The 2025 index values are preliminary and will be revised when final agency data is available. Researchers should cite the data vintage alongside the index score.

Binary racial categorization

Most federal datasets use binary or limited racial categories that do not fully capture the diversity of affected communities. Multiracial individuals, Indigenous communities, and recent immigrant populations are underrepresented in the current index construction. NCRRRI is developing supplemental indices to address this gap.

Causal inference

Index scores document correlation and disparity — they do not establish causation. Researchers should not use index scores alone to attribute disparities to specific policies or actors without additional causal analysis.

All 50 states

State Equity Scores

Equal-weighted composite of all six dimension indices per state. Suitable for cross-state comparison; see limitations above before using for causal inference.

Most concerning states
1Mississippi
33
2Louisiana
38
3Arkansas
39
4Alabama
41
5West Virginia
42
Highest performing states
1Hawaii
79
2Vermont
76
3California
74
4Massachusetts
73
5Maine
72
MSMississippi
33
LALouisiana
38
ARArkansas
39
ALAlabama
41
WVWest Virginia
42
SCSouth Carolina
43
OKOklahoma
44
TNTennessee
45
KYKentucky
46
FLFlorida
48
SDSouth Dakota
48
INIndiana
49
MOMissouri
50
TXTexas
50
NDNorth Dakota
51
IDIdaho
52
NCNorth Carolina
53
WYWyoming
53
KSKansas
54
GAGeorgia
55
MTMontana
55
OHOhio
55
WIWisconsin
56
AZArizona
57
NENebraska
57
MIMichigan
58
NMNew Mexico
59
NVNevada
60
PAPennsylvania
60
IAIowa
61
ILIllinois
62
UTUtah
62
AKAlaska
63
MNMinnesota
64
VAVirginia
64
DEDelaware
65
NJNew Jersey
67
CTConnecticut
68
RIRhode Island
68
MDMaryland
69
OROregon
69
NHNew Hampshire
70
NYNew York
70
COColorado
71
WAWashington
71
MEMaine
72
MAMassachusetts
73
CACalifornia
74
VTVermont
76
HIHawaii
79

Data tells part of the story. Testimony tells the rest.

Index scores document systemic conditions. Public testimony documents lived experience. Register now to be notified when a hearing opens in your city — or explore city-level profiles and full documentation.