U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics April 2011, NCJ 233431 Jail Inmates at Midyear 2010 Statistical Tables By Todd D. Minton, BJS Statistician ---------------------------------------------------------- This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.csv) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available from http://www.bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=2375 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.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=38 ----------------------------------------------------------- Between midyear 2009 and midyear 2010, the confined inmate population in county and city jails (748,728) declined by 2.4% (18,706 inmates) (figure 1 and table 1). This is the second decline in the jail population since the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) began the Annual Survey of Jails in 1982. The first occurred between 2008 and 2009. The jail incarceration rate declined in 2010 to 242 jail inmates per 100,000 U.S. residents, the lowest rate since 2003. On June 30, 2010, adults represented 99% of all jail inmates. Males accounted for 87.7%, and females accounted for 12.3% (tables 6 and 7). At midyear whites represented 44.3% of all jail inmates, blacks represented 37.8%, and Hispanics represented 15.8%. These jail inmate distributions have remained nearly stable since midyear 2000. At midyear 2010, about 6 in 10 inmates were unconvicted offenders in jail awaiting court action on a current charge, unchanged since 2005. About 4 in 10 inmates were sentenced offenders or convicted offenders awaiting sentencing. Population decline was mostly concentrated in large jails During the 12-month period ending June 30, 2010, the population in the largest jail jurisdictions with an average daily population of 1,000 or more inmates (based on the average daily population during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2009) declined by 18,187 inmates (table 3). This decline was offset by increases in jail jurisdictions with an average daily population between 100 and 249 inmates (up 2,471) and jail jurisdictions with an average daily population of fewer than 50 inmates (up 760). Population declines were mostly concentrated among large jails. Declines were reported in the inmate population between midyear 2009 and midyear 2010 in two-thirds (111 jails) of the 170 jail jurisdictions with 1,000 or more inmates on an average day during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2010. About a third (57 large jails) reported an increase in their inmate population during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2010. Data were estimated for two large jail jurisdictions that did not respond to the survey in 2010, resulting in no change in their inmate population during this period. (See Methodology for a description of estimation and weighting procedures.) Six jail jurisdictions account for nearly half of the decline in jail population Six jail jurisdictions reported a drop of more than 1,000 inmates (accounting for 46% of the decline nationwide). Los Angeles County, California, with a drop of 3,007 inmates, led the nation in overall decline in their inmate population during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2010. Five other jail jurisdictions reported a decline of more than 1,000 inmates, including Maricopa County, Arizona (1,196 inmates); Orange County, California (1,143); Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (1,111); Fresno County, California (1,105); and Harris County, Texas (1,096). Capacity to hold inmates continues to increase at slower rate The estimated rated capacity for all jail jurisdictions at midyear 2010 reached 866,782 beds (table 2), an increase of 2.0% (16,887 beds) from midyear 2009. This was less than the average annual increase each year since 2000 (2.5% or 22,281 beds). Rated capacity is the maximum number of beds or inmates allocated to each jail facility by a state or local rating official. The percentage of capacity occupied at midyear 2010 (86.4%) was the lowest since 1984. Jail jurisdictions holding 50 or more inmates experienced a decline in the percent of bed space occupied between midyear 2009 (91.5%) and 2010 (87.4%) (not shown in a table). In jail jurisdictions holding fewer than 50 inmates, the jail inmate population grew slightly faster than the rated capacity. As a result, the percent of capacity occupied at midyear 2010 (63.3%) was slightly larger than in 2009 (62.2%) (table 5). The amount of bed space occupied was also measured based on an average daily population in jail jurisdictions (748,553) in the year ending June 30, 2010, and the most crowded day in jails during June 2010. Overall, the nation's jails were operating at about 86% of rated capacity on an average day and about 91% of rated capacity on their most crowded day in June 2010. Local jails admitted almost 13 million persons during the 12 months ending June 30, 2010 The jail population at midyear 2010 represented a comparatively small percentage of all admissions reported over the 12-month period. Local jails admitted an estimated 12.9 million persons during the 12 months ending June 30, 2010, or about 17 times the size of the inmate population (748,728) at midyear. (See Methodology on page 15 for methods used to estimate admissions.) Nearly 4 in 10 (39%) admissions during the last week of June 2010 were to the largest jail jurisdictions (table 4). Small jail jurisdictions holding fewer than 50 inmates accounted for 6.3% of all jail admissions, but the number of inmates admitted was about 36 times the size of the inmate population at midyear 2010. They also experienced the highest turnover rate (136.7%), compared to large jail jurisdictions (51.5%). The turnover rate takes into account all admissions into and releases from jails. Higher turnover rates mean relatively larger numbers of admissions and releases relative to the size of the average daily population. ------------------------------------------------------------- Annual Survey of Jails (ASJ) - functions and definition of terms Jails in the ASJ include confinement facilities-usually administered by a local law enforcement agency-that are intended for adults but may hold juveniles before or after adjudication. Facilities include jails and city or county correctional centers; special jail facilities, such as medical or treatment release centers, halfway houses, and work farms; and temporary holding or lockup facilities that are part of the jail's combined function. Inmates sentenced to jail facilities usually are sentenced to serve a year or less. Jail functions Within the ASJ, jail functions are to * receive individuals pending arraignment and hold them awaiting trial, conviction, or sentencing * re-admit probation, parole, and bail bond violators and absconders * temporarily detain juveniles pending transfer to juvenile authorities * hold mentally ill persons pending their movement to appropriate mental health facilities * hold individuals for the military, for protective custody, for contempt, and for the courts as witnesses * release convicted inmates to the community upon completion of sentence * transfer inmates to federal, state, or other authorities * house inmates for federal, state, or other authorities because of crowding of their facilities * sometimes operate community-based programs as alternatives to incarceration. Definition of terms Admissions--persons are officially booked and housed in jails by formal legal document and the authority of the courts or some other official agency. Jail admissions include persons sentenced to weekend programs and who are booked into the facility for the first time. Excluded from jail admissions are inmates re-entering the facility after an escape, work release, medical or treatment facility appointment, and bail and court appearances. BJS collects jail admissions for the last 7 days in June. Average daily population--derived by the sum of inmates in jail each day for a year, divided by the number of days in the year (i.e., between July 1, 2009, and June 30, 2010). Average annual change-denotes the mean average change across a 12-month time period. Calculating annual admissions--the number of jail admissions during the last 7 days in June. Annual jail admissions are calculated by multiplying weekly admissions by the sum of 365 days divided by 7 days. Calculating weekly jail turnover rate--calculated by adding admissions and releases and dividing by the average daily population. See Methodology for additional information. Inmates confined at midyear--the number of inmates held in custody on the last weekday in June. Jail incarceration rate--the number of inmates held in the custody of local jails, per 100,000 U.S. residents. Percent of capacity occupied--calculated by taking the number of inmates at midyear, dividing by the rated capacity, and multiplying by 100. Rated capacity-describes the number of beds or inmates assigned by a rating official to a facility, excluding separate temporary holding areas. Releases -persons released after a period of confinement (e.g., sentence completion, bail/bond releases, other pretrial releases, transfers to other jurisdictions, and deaths). Releases include those persons who have completed their weekend program and who are leaving the facility for the last time. Excluded from jail releases are temporary discharges including work release, medical or treatment center appointment, court appearance, furlough, day reporting, and transfers to other facilities within the jail jurisdiction. Under jail supervision but not confined includes all persons in community--based programs operated by a jail facility. Programs include electronic monitoring, house arrest, community service, day reporting, and work programs. The classification excludes persons on pretrial release and who are not in a community-based program run by the jail, as well as persons under supervision of probation, parole or other agencies, inmates on weekend programs, and inmates who participate in work release programs and return to the jail at night. Weekend programs -offenders in these programs are allowed to serve their sentences of confinement only on weekends (i.e., Friday through Sunday). ------------------------------------------------------- List of Tables Table 1. Inmates confined in local jails at midyear, average daily population, and incarceration rates, 2000-2010 Table 2. Rated capacity of local jails and percent of capacity occupied, 2000-2010 Table 3. Inmates confined in local jails at midyear, by size of jurisdiction, 2009 and 2010 Table 4. Average daily jail population, admissions, and turnover rate, by size of jurisdiction, week ending June 30, 2009 and 2010 Table 5. Percent of jail capacity occupied at midyear, by size of jurisdiction, 2009, and 2010 Table 6. Number of inmates in local jails, by characteristic, midyear 2000 and 2005-2010 Table 7. Percent of inmates in local jails, by characteristic, midyear 2000 and 2005-2010 Table 8. Inmate population in jail jurisdictions reporting on confined persons being held for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, midyear 2002-2010 Table 9. The 50 largest local jail jurisdictions, by number of inmates held, average daily population, and rated capacity, midyear 2008-2010 Table 10. Persons under jail supervision, by confinement status and type of program, midyear 2000 and 2006-2010 Table 11. Estimated standard errors, by confinement status, Annual Survey of Jails, 2010 Table 12. Estimated standard errors, by selected characteristics, Annual Survey of Jails, 2010 Table 13. Estimated percentages of local jail inmates, by selected characteristics and ratio estimates, 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- Methodology Annual Survey of Jails In years between the complete census of local jails, BJS conducts the Annual Survey of Jails (ASJ). ASJ is a sample survey of local jails used to estimate the number and characteristics of local inmates nationwide. For the 2010 ASJ, the U.S. Census Bureau, as the collection agent, drew a sample of 873 jail jurisdictions represented by 936 jail facilities (also referred to as reporting units). This sample represents approximately 2,830 jail jurisdictions nationwide. Local jail jurisdictions include counties (parishes in Louisiana) or municipal governments that administer one or more local jails. The 2010 ASJ sample included all jails with certainty (67) that were operated jointly by two or more jurisdictions, or multi-jurisdictional jails. Other jail jurisdictions included with certainty (268) were those that - * held juvenile inmates at the time of the 2005 Census of Jail Inmates and had an average daily population of 500 or more inmates during the 12 months ending June 30, 2005. * held only adult inmates and had an average daily population of 750 or more. The remaining jurisdictions were stratified into two groups: jurisdictions with jails holding at least one juvenile on June 30, 2005, and jails holding only adults on that date. Using stratified random sampling, 538 jurisdictions were selected from eight strata based on the two conditions enumerated above and four strata based on the average daily jail inmate population during 2005. The average daily jail inmate population was derived from the 2005 Census of Jail Inmates. Data were obtained from sampled jurisdictions by mail-out and web-based survey questionnaires. After follow-up phone calls and facsimiles to respondents, the response rate for the survey was 100% for critical items, such as the number of inmates confined, average daily population, and rated capacity. (See tables 12, 13 and 14 for standard errors associated with reported estimates from the ASJ 2010 at http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2195.) Response rate, nonresponse adjustment, and out-of-scope jail facilities There were 930 active respondents in the 2010 ASJ universe file.* [FOOTNOTE: Of the 936 respondents in the 2010 ASJ universe file, two jail facilities were determined to be out-of-scope for the 2009 ASJ and remained out-of-scope for 2010. Four were out-of-scope for the 2010 data collection because they closed permanently, leaving 930 active respondents.] Eight jail facilities were nonrespondents. For this collection year, BJS implemented nonresponse weight* adjustment procedures to account for missing data. However, prior to implementing the plan, data were estimated for 3 of the 8 survey nonrespondents. For the confined population and average daily population (ADP), the estimation method included applying the average annual change from 2007-2009 to estimate the 2010 data. The rated capacity for 2010 is the same as in 2009 because of the stability of these numbers. After October, 21, 2010, BJS implemented the nonresponse weight adjustment procedure to account for five respondents that did not participate. Nonresponse weight adjustment The nonresponse weighting adjustment for the ASJ is handled in two steps. The first step is to calculate a multi-jail factor for the jail jurisdictions with more than one nonregional jail reporting unit. The second step is to calculate the nonresponse weighting adjustment factor within sample stratum. Step 1: Multi-jail factor When all the nonregional jail reporting units within the jail jurisdiction respond, the multi-jail factor is 1. When none of the nonregional jail reporting units within the jurisdiction respond, the multi-jail factor is 0. When at least one nonregional jail reporting unit within the jail jurisdiction has responded and at least one nonregional jail reporting unit has not responded, the multi-jail factor weights up the data for the responding nonregional jail reporting unit to account for the nonresponding nonregional jail reporting units within the jail jurisdiction. The nonregional jail reporting units were match back to the 2005 Census of Jail Inmates, and the 2005 ADP was used in the multi-jail factor. For 2010, the 5 nonrespondents were self representative and not considered for a multi-jail factor. The multi-jail factor F1hi is calculated as-- where Ji = Number of jail reporting units in jurisdiction i, JRi= Number of responding jail reporting units in jurisdiction i, Xhij = Value of 2005 ADP for jail reporting unit j in jurisdiction i in stratum h. Step 2: Nonresponse weighting adjustment factor The nonresponse weighting adjustment factor is calculated within each stratum. The sample weights in the nonresponse adjustment factor are used. The nonresponse weighting adjustment factor F2h is calculated as-- where nh = number of jurisdictions in stratum h, whij = sample weight for jail j in jurisidiction i in stratum h. Final weight The final weight FWhij for each individual jail reporting unit on the 2010 ASJ data file is calculated as-- Weekly admission and release estimation procedures Based on the 2010 ASJ, 821 of the 925 jail facilities (89%) provided valid data on weekly admissions or releases (including estimates for five nonrespondents). To calculate an overall weekly estimate, data on offender flows through local jails were estimated for the 104 jail facilities that did not report data on admissions and releases. Estimates were calculated based on the following criteria: * Data for 64 jail facilities included admission and release data based on estimates from the 2009 Annual Survey of Jails. * Data for 13 jail facilities included admission and release data based on estimates from the 2008 Annual Survey of Jails. *Release data for 13 jail facilities was based on admission data reported in 2009. * Data for 11 jail facilities included admission and release data based on estimates from the 2007 Annual Survey of Jails. * Admission data for 2 jail facilities was based on release data reported in 2009. * Admission data for 1 jail facility was based on admission data reported in 2009. Calculating annual admissions BJS determined that the June admission data on the 2004 Survey of Large Jails (SLJ) were a reliable source to calculate a nationwide annual admission estimate. Although the number of admissions to jails fluctuated throughout the year, the SLJ tracked monthly movements from January 2003 to January 2004 and showed that the June 2003 count (339,500) closely matched the annual average number of admissions (342,956). The number of annual admissions was calculated by multiplying the weekly admissions by 365 days and dividing by 7 days. Calculating weekly turnover rates Weekly jail turnover rates were modeled after the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey. Additional information on turnover rates is available at http://www.bls.gov/jlt/. Jail turnover rates were calculated by adding admissions and releases and dividing by the average daily population. The turnover rate takes into account admissions into and releases from jails and gives an indication of the fluctuation of the jail population. Higher turnover rates mean larger numbers of admissions and releases relative to the size of the average daily population. Revised 2008 and 2009 data The number of inmates held at midyear 2008 and 2009 and the average daily population in 2009 for Bexar County, TX, are based on revised data. The rated capacity data for Bexar County, TX, and the District of Columbia have been revised for 2008 and 2009. Revised rated capacity data for Kern County, CA, have been revised for 2009. ------------------------------------------------------------ Office of Justice Programs * Innovation * Partnerships * Safer Neighborhoolds * http://www.ojp.gov ------------------------------------------------------------ The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. James P. Lynch is director. These Statistical Tables were prepared and data were analyzed by Todd D. Minton. Margaret Noonan verified the report. Lisa A. McNelis and Jennifer Deppe carried out the data collection and processing with assistance provided by Joshua Giunta, Alonzo Johnson, and Andrea Arroyo, under the supervision of Stephen Simoncini and Heather C. West, Ph.D., Governments Division, Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. Suzanne Dorinski and Andrew Post provided statistical and technical assistance, respectively. Catherine Bird and Jill Thomas edited the report, Tina Dorsey produced the report, and Jayne Robinson prepared the report for final printing under the supervision of Doris J. James. April 2011, NCJ 233431 This report in portable document format and in ASCII and its related statistical data and tables are available at the BJS website: http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2375 ------------------------------------------------------------- Revised 7/11/2011/TLD/12:00