U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Prisoners, 2009 December 2010, NCJ 231675 Heather C. West, Ph.D. and William J. Sabol, Ph.D. BJS Statisticians, and Sarah J. Greenman, BJS Program Assistant ---------------------------------------------------------- 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://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2232 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://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=40 ----------------------------------------------------------- On December 31, 2009, state and federal correctional authorities had jurisdiction over 1,613,740 prisoners, an Prisoners under state and federal jurisdiction at yearend, 2000-2009 increase of 3,981 prisoners from yearend 2008 (figure 1).***Footnote 1 This number is 84 prisoners higher than reported in the BJS Data Brief, Prisoners at Yearend 2009: Advance Counts, NCJ 230189, June 2010. BJS permits respondents to update their data to reflect their most accurate counts ***. This 0.2% increase marked the third consecutive year of slower 1,750,000 3.0% growth in the U.S. prison population and the smallest increase during the decade. Jurisdiction refers to the legal authority over a prisoner, regardless of where the prisoner is held. The slowing in the growth of the total U.S. prison population masked an increase in the federal prison population (3.4%) during 2009, while the number of prisoners under jurisdiction of state correctional authorities declined by 0.2%, the first decline in the state prison population since 1977 (figure 2). The increase in the growth rate of the federal prison population reflected a shift 1,250,000 from the general pattern of declining annual growth rates in that population. The decline in the growth rate of the state prison population during 2009 continued the 3-year trend of declining annual growth rates for state prisoners. ------------------------------------------------------------- Highlights *The U.S. prison population grew at its slowest rate (0.2%) since 2000, reaching 1,613,740 prisoners at yearend 2009. *Prison admissions (down 2.5%) and prison releases (up 2.2%) converged from 2006 through 2009, slowing the 6.0% growth of the nation's prison population. *The imprisonment rate the number of sentenced prison-4.0% ers per 100,000 U.S. residents declined for the second straight year, falling to 502 per 100,000 from 506 per 3.0% 100,000 in 2007. 2.0% *From 2000 to 2008, the state prison population increased by 159,200 prisoners, and violent offenders accounted for 0 60% of this increase. The number of drug offenders in state ---------------------------------------------------------- For a list of all publications in this series go to http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=40 --------------------------------------------------------- The federal prison population reached 208,118 prisoners at yearend 2009, while state authorities had jurisdiction over 1,405,622 prisoners on December 31, 2009 (table 1). The number of male prisoners, accounting for 93% of all prisoners, increased by 0.3% during 2009, while the number of female prisoners declined by 0.1%. Twenty-four state departments of corrections reported decreases in their prison populations during 2009 (appendix table 1). Michigan (down 3,260) and California (down 2,395) reported the largest declines in absolute numbers, followed by New York (down 1,660), Mississippi (down 1,272), and Texas (down 1,257). Rhode Island (down 9.2%) reported the largest percentage decrease the state prison population between yearend 2008 and yearend 2009, followed by Michigan (down 6.7%), Mississippi (down 5.6%), and Maryland and Connecticut (down 4.6% each). Among states that experienced declines in their prison population during 2009, only in New York, New Jersey, and Maryland did the decrease continue a longer-term pattern of decline over the 8-year period from 2000 to 2008. Illinois, Michigan, Delaware, and Texas also experienced a decline in their prison population during 2009, and their growth rates from 2000 through 2008 averaged less than one-half of 1 percent. The remaining 26 state departments of corrections reported increases in their prison populations. Pennsylvania (up 2,214) reported the largest increase in absolute numbers, followed by Florida (up 1,527), Louisiana (up 1,399), and Alabama (up 1,366). Alaska (up 5.4%) reported the largest percentage increase in the state prison population, followed by West Virginia (up 5.1%), Vermont (up 4.9%), and Pennsylvania and Alabama (up 4.5% each). The imprisonment rate declined between yearend 2008 and 2009 The U.S. imprisonment rate the number of sentenced prisoners per 100,000 U.S. residents declined slightly from 504 to 502 prisoners per 100,000 U.S. residents between yearend 2008 and 2009 (appendix table 9). Imprisonment rates decreased in 28 states during this period, and increased in 18 states and the federal system. Four states reported little change to their imprisonment rates during 2009. Alaska (down 73 prisoners per 100,000 U.S. residents) reported the largest decrease in the state imprisonment rate at yearend 2009; Louisiana (up 28 prisoners per 100,000 U.S. residents) reported the largest increase. The decline in the U.S. imprisonment rate stems from a decline in the imprisonment rate for state prisoners. The imprisonment rate for the federal prison population increased during 2009, reaching 61 per 100,000 U.S. residents (figure 3). While the imprisonment rate of sentenced federal prisoners trended upward since 1990, the rate of increase slowed from 2000 to 2009. Compared to the increase in the number of federal prisoners, the imprisonment rate for this population has increased more slowly since 2000. The number of sentenced prisoners increased by an average of 4.6% per year from 125,044 in 2000 to 187,886 in 2009. The federal imprisonment rate increased by an average of 3.4% per year over this period. By comparison, the imprisonment rate for sentenced state prisoners has declined over the past 3 years (figure 4). More generally, since 2000 the trend in the imprisonment rate for state prisoners has diverged from the trend in the number of state prisoners. The number of state prisoners increased by about an average of 1.3% per year from 2000 to 2009, but the imprisonment rate for state prisoners increased only from 432 to 442 per 100,000 U.S. residents. The relative stability in the state imprisonment rate means that the U.S. resident population increased faster than the prison population. Prison admissions and releases converged in recent years During 2009, a total of 730,989 sentenced prisoners were admitted into, and 729,295 sentenced prisoners were released from, the nation's prisons (table 2). Though there were fewer prison admissions (down 13,627) and releases (down 6,159) reported in 2009 than in 2008, prison admissions declined more rapidly (down 1.8%) than releases (down 0.8%). The number of state prison admissions during 2009 was 16,118 fewer than admitted during 2008. As there were 2,491 more admissions into federal prison during 2009 (56,153) than in 2008 (53,662), the decline in state prison admissions accounted for the overall decline in admissions into U.S. prisons between 2008 and 2009. State prison admissions decreased during 2009 (down 2.3%) after remaining relatively stable from 2006 through 2008. From 2006 through 2008, the annual rate of growth in state prison admissions decreased 0.8%. While the number of state prison admissions increased during 2008, the increase in that year was comparatively small (1,697 or 0.2%). In contrast, admissions to federal prison increased in both 2008 (up 0.1%) and 2009 (up 4.6%). From yearend 2006 through 2009, the number of sentenced prisoners admitted into and released from prison converged (figure 5), slowing the growth of the nation's prison population. This convergence occurred as the number of prison admissions declined 2.5% (down 18,809 admissions) and the number of prison releases increased 2.2% (up 15,822 releases) during the 3-year period. From 2006 through 2008, prison population growth slowed because of declines in admissions and increases in releases. During 2009, both admissions and releases declined and prison population growth slowed due to a larger decrease in admissions than releases. Although small, the 0.8% decrease in the number of prisoners released from state (down 0.7%) and federal (down 3.1%) prisons during 2009 was the first decline in the number of prison releases since 2000. The decline in the number of prisoners released in 2009 was the first decrease in state prison releases since 2002 when releases dropped by 0.4%, and the second decrease in federal prison releases since 2000. Decline in state prison admissions was led by a decrease in parole violators admitted in California The overall decrease in state prison admissions during 2009 (down 16,118) was led by the decline in the number of parole violators admitted to state prison. The number of parole violators admitted during 2009 (237,449) was 4.5% fewer than admitted during 2008. Fewer parole violators (down 11,066 from the 2008) entering state prison in 2009 accounted for more than two-thirds (69%) of the total decline in the number of state prison admissions during the year (table 3).***Footnote 2 See Definitions for admission types***. The decline in the number of parole violators admitted to state prison during 2009 was the first such decline since 2003, when 9,150 fewer parole violators were admitted than the 207,855 admitted during 2002 (figure 6). Fewer new court commitments to state prison during 2009 (down 5,681) continued a longer term trend of decline in the number of new court commitments. ***Footnote 3 New court commitments include felony offenders sentenced to state prison and probation violators entering prison for the first time on a violation of a condition of probation. Parole violators include any conditionally released prisoners admitted to prison either for a technical violation of the conditions of supervision or for a new crime***. Since peaking at 441,606 in 2006, the number of new court commitments into state prisons has declined for the past 3 years. The 422,910 new court commitments admitted into state prison during 2009 was 18,696 fewer than admitted during 2006, and represented a decline of 1.3% from the 428,591 admitted during 2008. The decrease in new court commitments could reflect court decisions to divert offenders from prison, a decline in felony convictions, or a combination of both factors. As of the time of this report, data were not available to determine which factors convictions or prison sentences accounted for the decline in new court commitments during 2009. More than half (29) of the state departments of corrections reported decreases in prison admissions between yearend 2008 and yearend 2009 (appendix table 10). California reported a decline of 11,122 admissions in 2009, a decrease that was almost 4 times greater than any other state. California's change in admissions had a large influence on the number of state prison admissions nationwide, particularly the decrease in the number of admissions to California state prisons for parole violations (down 9,668) during 2009. Fewer admissions for parole violations accounted for almost 87% of the decline in the number of California state prison admissions, and about 87% of the decline in the number of parole violators entering state prison nationwide during the year. Excluding California, parole violators admitted to state prison would have decreased by 1,398 instead of 11,066. Comparatively, fewer new court commitments to California state prison made up about a quarter (26%) of the decline in new court commitments to state prison nationwide. Excluding California, the number of new court commitments would have decreased by 4,227 instead of 5,681 in 2009. Decrease in state prison releases led by the decline in the number of prisoners released unconditionally A total of 678,575 prisoners were released from state prison during 2009, down 4,531 prisoners from yearend 2008. States reported declines in both conditional (down 0.2%) and unconditional (down 2.4%) releases during the year, with the change in unconditional releases accounting for most (87.4%) of the decrease in the number of state prison releases (table 4).***Footnote 4 See Definitions for release types***. Unconditional releases from state prison declined by 3,962, from 165,568 during 2008 to 161,606 during 2009. The number of conditional releases decreased from 505,168 to 504,057 during this period, a difference of 1,111 releases from state prison. Much like admissions, California (down 8,056) was the largest contributor to the total decrease in releases, as it reported a decrease in the number of conditional releases that was at least 4 times that of any other state. However, California experienced little change in unconditional releases (up 37) between 2008 and 2009. Georgia (down 3,209)reported the largest decline in unconditional releases, and accounted for 80.1% of the total change in unconditional releases from all state prisons during 2009. Release rates increased The release rate is the ratio of the number of sentenced prisoners released from prison during a year, divided by the sum of the start of the year population of sentenced prisoners plus the number of sentenced prisoners admitted during the year, and is expressed per 1,000 prisoners who could be released. The measure used in this report includes all types of releases, including releases from new court commitments (so-called first releases), releases of parole violators, and releases by other means, including death and other exceptional types of release. The release rate gives an indication of turnover in the prison population and consequently of length of stay in prison. As the release rate increases, the length of stay in prison decreases. From 2002 through 2005, the total release rate increased (321 to 337 per 1,000 prisoners), and after dipping slightly in 2006 (332 per 1,000), it has remained relatively stable through 2009 (table 5). The overall relative stability in the release rate masks differences by type of release. From 2006 through 2009, the release rate for conditional releases (prisoners released to some form of post-prison supervision) was comparatively stable (around 246 per 1,000 prisoners), while the release rate for unconditional releases and those whose sentences expired increased slightly. For unconditional releases, the release rate increased from 74 per 1,000 prisoners (in 2006) to 79 per 1,000 (in 2009), and for prisoners whose sentences expired, the release rate also increased slightly from 67 (in 2006) to 73 per 1,000 prisoners (in 2009). Accompanying the increase in the release rate of state prisoners was a slight change in the distribution of time served until release from prison. During 2000, about half of all sentenced offenders released from state prison served 1 year or less in prison, and 71% served 2 years or less (table 6).***Footnote 5 This calculation of time served in prison does not include time served in jail on a sentence***. By 2008 (the year of the most recent detailed BJS data available at the time of this report), 56% of sentenced offenders released from state prison had served 1 year or less, and 76% had served 2 years or less. As the share of released prisoners with shorter lengths of stay increased, the share of those serving longer time declined. In 2000, about 10% of sentenced prisoners released from state prison had served more than 5 years. This percentage declined to about 8% in 2008. Violent offenders accounted for 60% of the growth in the size of the state prison population from 2000 through 2008 From 2000 through 2008, the number of sentenced offenders in state prison increased by 159,200 (table 7).***Footnote 6 Offense data for 2008 were the most recent data available at the time of this report***. At yearend 2008, the number of offenders sentenced to state prison for a violent offense reached 715,400, up 95,400 violent offenders from 2000. This increase accounted for most (59.9%) of the growth in the number of sentenced state prisoners during this period, followed by public order offenders (33.6%), primarily those sentenced for a weapons offense. Prisoners sentenced for other offenses habitual offender laws not classified in a substantive offense category accounted for 8.6% of the growth of the size of the state prison population. Among the major offense categories, the number of sentenced drug offenders declined during this period. There were about 12,400 fewer drug offenders in state prison in 2008 than in 2000. While the number of sentenced violent offenders in state prison increased from 2000 through 2008, the expected length of stays for these offenders declined slightly during this period. The mean time served for all violent offenders in 2000 was just under 46 months (table 8). By 2008, expected length of stay for violent offenders had declined by 2 months, to just under 44 months. The expected lengths of stay in state prison for property and drug offenses also declined during this period (about 2 months each), from about 17 months to about 15 months. The expected length of stay for offenders sentenced to more than 1 year for public-order offenses (up less than 1 month) and other/unspecified offenses (up 15.2 months) increased from yearend 2000 through yearend 2008. The expected time that prisoners could expect to serve for other/ unspecified offenses increased 78% during this period. This increase was due primarily to an increase in offenders sentenced under habitual offender laws and whose substantive offense was not recorded in the database used to generate the estimates for time served. (See Methodology for a description of National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP) data.) The decline in the expected time served for a violent, property, or a drug offense from 2000 through 2008 was due to a slight increase in the release rate (exit rate) of state prisoners with sentences of 1 year or more in these offense categories. The release rate of state prisoners sentenced for a violent offense was 234 per 1,000 violent offenders in state prison in 2000. By 2008, the release rate of violent offenders from state prison had increased to 246 per 1,000. If expected length of stay had remained constant at its 2000 level, there would have been an estimated 40,300 more violent offenders than the 715,400 actually reported in 2008, as implied by the decline of 2.1 months in expected length of stay for violent offenders (table 9). Similarly, there were more property (45,000) and drug (32,200) offenders in state prison in 2008 than there would have been if the expected time served had not decreased from its 2000 level. From 2000 through 2008, the increase in the number of sentenced prison admissions offset the decrease in the expected length of stay in state prison. State prison admissions (up 98,300)increased in each major offense category during this period (table 10). Offenders admitted to state prison for a public order offense increased by 33,600, followed closely by those sentenced to more than 1 year for a property offense (up 32,500) and a violent offense (up 27,600). Offenders admitted to state prison for a drug offense increased by 3,400. Decline in admissions during 2009 led to the decline in state prison population size During 2009, as admissions decreased, the size of the state prison population declined. The extent to which specific offenses contributed to this decline cannot yet be determined, because length of stay did not contribute to the decline in state prisoners. As indicated by the constant release rate in 2008 and 2009 (332 per 1,000) expected length of stay did not increase during these two years.Consequently, the decline in admissions was due to the decline in state prisoners. Selected characteristics of prisoners under state or federal jurisdiction From December 31, 2008 through December 31, 2009-- *The size of the male prison population increased slightly (0.3% or 5,168 prisoners) (appendix table 2). *Fewer females were imprisoned (down 1.0% or 1,187 prisoners) at yearend 2009 than at yearend 2008 (appendix table 3). *Males had an imprisonment rate (949 per 100,000 U.S. residents) that was 14 times higher than the rate for females (67 per 100,000) (appendix table 9). *Black non-Hispanic males had an imprisonment rate (3,119 per 100,000 U.S. residents) that was more than 6 times higher than white non-Hispanic males (487 per 100,000), and almost 3 times higher than Hispanic males (1,193 per 100,000) (appendix tables 15 and 16). *One in 703 black females was imprisoned, compared to about 1 in 1,987 white females and 1 in 1,356 Hispanic females. *Private facilities housed an estimated 8.0% (129,336 prisoners) of the prison population at yearend 2009 (appendix tables 20). Methodology National Prisoner Statistics Begun in 1926 under a mandate from Congress, the National Prisoner Statistics (NPS) program collects statistics on prisoners at midyear and yearend. The U.S. Census Bureau serves as the data collection agent for the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). BJS depends entirely upon the voluntary participation by state departments of corrections and the Federal Bureau of Prisons for NPS data. The NPS distinguishes between prisoners in custody and prisoners under jurisdiction. To have custody of a prisoner, a state or federal prison must hold that prisoner in one of its facilities. To have jurisdiction over a prisoner, a state or federal prison must have legal authority over that prisoner. Some states are unable to provide counts that distinguish between custody and jurisdiction. The NPS jurisdiction counts include prisoners serving a sentence within a jurisdiction's facilities. These facilities include prisons, penitentiaries, correctional facilities, halfway houses, boot camps, farms, training or treatment centers, and hospitals. The NPS includes prisoners who are-- *temporarily absent (less than 30 days), out to court, or on work release *housed in privately operated facilities, local jails, other state or federal facilities *serving concurrent sentences for more than one correctional authority. The NPS custody counts include all inmates held within a respondent's facilities, including inmates housed for other correctional facilities. The custody counts exclude inmates held in local jails and in other jurisdictions. The NPS custody counts include inmates held in privately operated facilities. Additionally, NPS data include counts of inmates in combined jail-prison systems in Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The District of Columbia has operated only a jail system since yearend 2001. Prisoners sentenced under the District of Columbia criminal code are housed in federal facilities. Selected previously published prisoner counts and the percent population change statistics include DCjail inmates for 2001, the last year of collection. Additional information is provided in the notes to the tables, where applicable. BJS allows respondents state departments of corrections and the Federal Bureau of Prisons--to update the data previously submitted. This report includes the most recent data reported. Additional information about the NPS data collection instrument is available on the BJS website at http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov. Other inmate counts Federal prisoner data used to calculate race and offense distributions are obtained from BJS'Federal Justice Statistics Program (FJSP). The FJSP obtains its data from the Federal Bureau of Prisons. These data include individual-level records of prisoners in federal facilities as of September 30. Specifically, the FJSP provides counts of sentenced federal inmates by sex, race, Hispanic origin, and offense. Estimating age-specific imprisonment rates Estimates are provided for the number of sentenced prisoners under state or federal jurisdiction by sex. Furthermore, prisoners are characterized within sexes by age group, race (non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black), and Hispanic origin. The detailed race and Hispanic origin categories exclude estimates of persons identifying two or more races. Estimates produced separately for prisoners under state or federal jurisdiction were combined to obtain a total estimated population for 2000 and 2009. State estimates were prepared by combining information about the sex of prisoners from the NPS with information reported during inmate interviews on race and Hispanic origin in the 2004 Survey of Inmates of State Correctional Facilities. For the estimates of federal prisoners, the distributions of FJSP counts of sentenced federal prisoners by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin on September 30, 2009, were applied to the NPS counts of sentenced federal prisoners by sex at yearend 2009. Estimates of the U.S. resident population for January 1, 2010, by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin were generated by applying the December 31, 2009, age distributions within sex, race, and Hispanic origin groups to the January 1, 2010 population estimates by sex. The U.S. Census Bureau provided the population estimates. Age-specific rates of imprisonment for each demographic group were calculated by dividing the estimated number of sentenced prisoners within each age group by the estimated number of U.S. residents in each age group. The result was multiplied by 100,000 and rounded to the nearest whole number. Totals by sex include all prisoners and U.S. residents regardless of racial or Hispanic origin. Detailed race and Hispanic origin imprisonment rates exclude persons identifying two or more races. Calculating admission and release rates All admission and release rates were calculated by dividing the number of admitted or released prisoners for a particular year by the sentenced population at yearend of the previous year. The result was was multiplied by 1,000, and then rounded to the nearest whole number. Estimating expected length of stay Admissions and release data from the NPS and individual-level time served data from the National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP) were used to estimate length of stay. The NCRP data are administrative data on prisoners entering and exiting custody or supervision. These data are gathered annually from all state departments of corrections and parole agencies in about 41 states. Four separate datasets from NCRP were constructed for the analysis: 2000 and 2008 prison release and 2000 and 2008 sentenced prison population (prison stock or stock population). The prison release datasets consisted of data from 36 states. Due to lower participation rates, the prison stock datasets consisted of data from 24 states. Most of the selected states submitted data during both 2000 and 2008. Data from adjacent years (1 to 2 years after 2000, or 1 to 3 years before 2008) were used to supplement the missing values for those states that did not submit data during both years. Two states, Illinois and Mississippi, did not participate in NCRP between 2004 and 2008. Data from 2003 were drawn to supplement the missing values in the 2008 prison release and prison stock datasets for these two states. BJS used a post-stratification weight computed from NPS and NCRP to adjust the individual-level NCRP counts to the national totals. The weight is a ratio of the proportion of sentenced prisoners in the sample (NCRP) to the proportion of sentenced prisoners in the population (NPS). For each state in the NCRP, a post-stratification weight was calculated using the following formula: In this formula, h represents the state stratum, wh is the post-stratification weight, nh is the number of cases in the stratum in the NCRP, and Nh is the number of cases in the stratum in the NPS. The total number of states for the stratum (h) equals 50 in NPS, 36 in the prison release datasets, and 24 in the prison stock datasets. The method used to estimate the mean length of stay in prison was based on the exit rate and adjusts for the growth rate of the prison population (Patterson and Preston 2008). ***Footnote 7 Evelyn J. Patterson and Samuel H. Preston, 2008. "Estimating Mean Length of Stay in Prison: Methods and Applications," Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Volume 24, pages 33-49***. This measure is represented by the following equation, where is the estimator, d is the exit rate of the stable population, r is the growth rate of the prison population, AD is the mean duration at exit, and AP is the mean duration of the stock population: Estimating the mean length of stay included several steps. First, a post-stratification weight was calculated and applied to the NCRP data reported by each state. The analysis was limited to inmates with a sentence of more than 12 months to exclude jail inmates who typically have shorter sentences. Exit rates (d) for both years (2000 and 2008) were calculated by dividing the number of prisoners released during the year by the size of the sentenced prison population reported in the NPS at yearend. NPS data were also used to estimate growth in the prison population (r) from yearend 1999 through yearend 2000 and from yearend 2007 to yearend 2008. Weighted data from the 36 states in the prison release datasets were selected to estimate the mean durations at exit (AD) in 2000 and 2008. Similarly, weighted data from the 24 states in the prison stock Prison capacities datasets were aggregated to estimate the mean durations of the stock population (AP) in 2000 and 2008. Lastly, the estimates obtained from the previous steps were entered into the estimator to compute the mean length of stay for the overall prison population in 2000 and 2008. With the exceptions of the steps taken to calculate the exit and growth rates, BJS used the above procedures to estimate the mean lengths of stay for subgroups defined by the 5 main offense and admission types. For the calculation of the exit rates and growth rates for these subgroups, the percentage of cases in the main offense and admission categories was obtained from the weighted NCRP data. The percentage was applied to the state population counts in NPS to generate group totals for prison releases and prison stock in those categories. The adjusted group totals for prison releases were divided by the corresponding adjusted totals for the sentenced prison population to calculate the exit rates. The growth rates for 2000 and 2008 were derived from the changes in the adjusted sentenced prison populations in those categories from 1999 to 2000 and from 2007 to 2008, respectively. The analysis also provided estimates of mean length of stay and percentage change in length of stay for individual states providing valid prison release and prison stock data to the NCRP either for 2000 and 2008 or for adjacent years. The weighted NCRP data was used to calculate the average lengths of time served in 2000 and 2008. State-level prison population data from the NPS were used to calculate exit rates and growth rates. To assess states' contributions to change in length of stay, the overall length of stay in all state prisons was reestimated by setting the states' 2008 values in mean time served on current admission, number of prison releases, yearend sentenced prison population, and prison growth at their 2000 levels. The difference between the new estimate and the previous estimate was divided by the total amount of changes in estimated length of stay from 2000 to 2008 in the overall state prison population. The result, when presented in the form of percent change, indicates the extent to which the overall estimated length of stay in prison would have risen or fallen had the changes in the state from 2000 to 2008 not occurred. Prison capacities State and federal correctional authorities provide three measures of their facilities' capacity: design capacity, operational capacity, and rated capacity. Estimates of the prison populations as a percentage of capacity are based on a state or Federal Bureau of Prison's custody population. In general, a state's capacity and custody counts exclude inmates held in private facilities. Some states include prisoners held in private facilities as part of the capacity of their prison systems. Where this occurs, prison population as a percent of capacity includes private facilities. Definitions Average annual change--arithmetic average (mean) annual change across a specific period. Conditional releases --Includes releases to probation, supervised mandatory releases, and other unspecified conditional releases. Conditional release violators--admissions that include prisoners released by discretionary parole release, mandatory parole release, release to probation, or expiration of sentence with post-custody supervision. Custody--the number of inmates held in state or federal prisons or local jails, regardless of sentence length or authority having jurisdiction. Design capacity--the number of inmates that planners or architects intended for a facility. Expected length of stay or mean expected time to be served an estimate of the amount of time that offenders admitted into prison can expect to serve prior to release. It differs from other measures of time served that are based solely on data of offenders released from prison. The estimate of mean time to be served takes into account the dynamics of growth in the prison population. See Methodology. Highest capacity--the sum of the maximum number of beds reported across the three capacity measures: design capacity, operational capacity, and rated capacity. Imprisonment rate--the number of prisoners under state or federal jurisdiction sentenced to more than 1 year per 100,000 U.S. residents. Incarceration rate--see total incarceration rate. Inmates--individuals held in custody in state or federal prisons or in local jails. Jail--confinement facilities usually administered by a local law enforcement agency, intended for adults, but sometimes holding juveniles, before and after adjudication. Facilities include jails and city/county correctional centers, special jail facilities such as medical treatment or release centers, halfway houses, work farms, and temporary holding or lockup facilities that are part of the jail's combined function. Inmates sentenced to jail facilities usually have a sentence of 1 year or less. Jurisdiction--the number of prisoners under the legal authority of state or federal correctional officials, regardless of where the prisoner is held. Lowest capacity--the sum of the minimum number of beds across three capacity measures: design capacity, operational capacity, and rated capacity. Mandatory releases -conditional release with post-custody supervision generally occurring in jurisdictions using determinate sentencing statutes. Operational capacity--the number of inmates that can be accommodated based on a facility's staff, existing programs, and services. Parole violators--admissions that include all conditional release violators returned to prison for either violation of conditions of release or new crimes. Some states include prisoners on post-custody supervision. See Jurisdiction notes. Prisons--compared to jail facilities, prisons are longer-term facilities run by a state or the federal government, and typically hold felons and prisoners with sentences of more than 1 year. However, sentence length may vary by state. Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont, Delaware, Alaska, and Hawaii operate integrated systems, which combine prisons and jails. Prisoners -idividuals confined in correctional facilities under the legal authority (jurisdiction) of state and federal correctional officials. Rated capacity the number of beds or inmates assigned by a rating official to institutions within the jurisdiction. Release rate the number of sentenced prisoners released from prison during the year divided by the sum of the start of the year sentence prisoner population plus the number of sentenced prisoners admitted during the year. Sentenced prisoner-- a prisoner sentenced to more than 1 year. Total incarceration rate--the number of inmates held in custody of state or federal prisons or in local jails, per 100,000 U.S. residents. Unconditional release Includes expirations of sentence, commutations, and other unconditional releases. ---------------------------------------------------------- NPS jurisdiction notes Alabama --Operational capacity represents physical capacity for inmates but is not based on staffing, programs, and services. Alaska--Prisons and jails form one integrated system. All NPS data include jail and prison populations housed both in and out of state. Jurisdiction totals include individuals in electronic and special monitoring programs. Arizona--Population counts are based on custody data and inmates in contracted beds. California --Jurisdiction counts include felons and unsentenced inmates who are temporarily absent ( i.e. housed in local jails, hospitals). Population counts for "unsentence dinmates" include civil addicts who are temporarily absent because they are under the California Department of Corrections' jurisdiction and are typically returned to prison within 30 days. Colorado--Counts include 222 male and 10 female inmates in the Youthful Offender System, which was established primarily for violent juvenile offenders. Connecticut--Prisons and jails form one integrated system. All NPS data include jail and prison populations. Legislation in July 1995 abolished the capacity law. The capacity of a facility is a fluid number based upon the needs of the department. The needs are dictated by security issues, populations, court decrees, legal mandates, staffing, and physical plant areas or facilities that are serving other purposes or have been decommissioned. The actual capacity of a facility is subject to change. Delaware--Prisons and jails form one integrated system. All NPS data include jail and prison populations. Federal Bureau of Prisons Expirations of sentence include good conduct releases that usually have a separate and distinct term of supervision. Georgia--Counts are based on custody data. Population counts exclude an undetermined number of inmates housed in local jails awaiting transfer to prison. Number may not compare to previous years due to a system conversion. Hawaii--Prisons and jails form one integrated systems. All NPS data include jail and prison populations. Illinois--Population counts for prisoners with a sentence of more than 1 year include an undetermined number of prisoners with sentences of 1 year. Iowa--The jurisdiction count for December 31, 2009 is not comparable to previous years due to a change in measurement. As of 2009, the Iowa Department of Corrections began including the Operating While Intoxicated population, prisoners on work release, and prisoners housed in out of state prisons. Numbers reported in prior years were custody numbers. Kansas--Admission and release data for the years 2006 through 2009 are not comparable to previous years due to change in reporting. Maine--Parole is not valid in the state of Maine. Parole numbers reflect post sentence probation. Massachusetts--Jurisdiction count excludes approximately 4,012, male inmates in local jails and houses of corrections serving a sentence of more than 1 year. Montana--Counts may not be comparable to previous years due to a change in reporting. New Jersey--Jurisdiction counts for prisoners with sentences of more than 1 year include prisoners with sentences of 1 year. North Carolina -Standard operational capacity is equal to one inmate per cell or 50 square feet per inmate in a dormitory setting. Ohio--Population counts for prisoners with a sentence of more than 1 year include an undetermined number of prisoners with sentences of 1 year or less. Oklahoma--Population counts for inmates with sentences of less than a year consist mainly of offenders ordered by the court to the Delayed Sentencing Program for Young Adults pursuant to 22 O.S. 996 through 996.3. Oregon--Counts include an undetermined number of inmates with sentences of a year or less. County authorities retain jurisdiction over the majority of these types of inmates. Rhode Island--Prisons and jails form one integrated system. All NPS data include jail and prison populations. Vermont--Prisons and jails form one integrated system. All NPS data include jail and prison populations. Wisconsin--The population decline from yearend 2008 through yearend 2009 may reflect the initiation of earned release policies. The decline in admissions reflects the impact of the truth-in-sentencing. -------------------------------------------------------- Appendix table contents Appendix table 1. Prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities, by jurisdiction, December 31, 2000, 2008, and 2009 Appendix table 2. Male prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities, by jurisdiction, December 31, 2000, 2008, and 2009 Appendix table 3. Female prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities, by jurisdiction, December 31, 2000, 2008, and 2009 Appendix table 4. Sentenced prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities, by jurisdiction, December 31, 2000, 2008, and 2009 Appendix table 5. Number of sentenced male prisoners under the jurisdiction of state and federal correctional authorities, December 31, 2000-2009 Appendix table 6. Sentenced male prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities, by jurisdiction, December 31, 2000, 2008, and 2009 Appendix table 7. Number of sentenced female prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities, December 31, 2000-2009 Appendix table 8. Sentenced female prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities, by jurisdiction, December 31, 2000, 2008, and 2009 Appendix table 9. Imprisonment rates of sentenced prisoners under jurisdiction of state and federal correctional authorities, by sex and jurisdiction, December 31, 2008 and 2009 Appendix table 10. Number of sentenced prisoners admitted and released from state or federal jurisdiction, by jurisdiction, December 31, 2000, 2008, and 2009 Appendix table 11. Number of sentenced prisoners admitted and released from state or federal jurisdiction, by type, December 31, 2009 Appendix table 12. Estimated number of sentenced prisoners under state or federal jurisdiction, by gender, race, and Hispanic origin, December 31, 2000-2009 Appendix table 13. Estimated number of sentenced prisoners under state or federal jurisdiction, by gender, race, Hispanic origin, and age, December 31, 2009 Appendix table 14. Estimated rate of sentenced prisoners under state or federal jurisdiction, per 100,000 U.S. residents, by gender, race, and Hispanic origin, December 31, 2000-2009 Appendix table 15. Estimated number of sentenced prisoners under state or federal jurisdiction per 100,000 U.S. residents, by gender, race, Hispanic origin, and age, December 31, 2009 Appendix table 16a. Estimated number of sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction, by offense, gender, race, and Hispanic origin, yearend 2006 Appendix table 16b. Estimated number of sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction, by offense, gender, race, and Hispanic origin, yearend 2007 Appendix table 16c. Estimated number of sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction, by offense, gender, race, and Hispanic origin, yearend 2008 Appendix table 17a. Estimated percent of sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction, by offense, gender, race, and Hispanic origin, yearend 2006 Appendix table 17b. Estimated percent of sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction, by offense, gender, race, and Hispanic origin, yearend 2007 Appendix table 17c. Estimated percent of sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction, by offense, gender, race, and Hispanic origin, yearend 2008 Appendix table 18. Number of sentenced prisoners in federal prison, by most serious offense, 2000, 2008, and 2009 Appendix table 19. Number of state or federal prisoners in private facilities, December 31, 2000-2009 Appendix table 20. Number of state and federal prisoners in private facilities, by jurisdiction, December 31, 2000, 2008, and 2009 Appendix table 21. Number of state or federal prisoners in local facilities, December 31, 2000-2009 Appendix table 22. Number of state and federal prisoners in local facilities, by jurisdiction, December 31, 2000, 2008, and 2009 Appendix table 23. Reported state and federal prison capacities, December 31, 2009 Office of Justic Programs * Innovation * Partnerships * Safer Neighborhoods * http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S.Department of Justice. James P. Lynch is Director. This Bulletin was written by Heather C. West, Ph.D, William J. Sabol,Ph.D., and Sarah J. Greenman, BJS Program Assistant. Spencer Li, BJS Statistician, contributed analyses to this report. Todd Minton and Lauren Glaze provided statistical review and verification on the report. Joshua Giunta carried out the data collection and processing under the supervision of Steve Simoncini, Governments Division, Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. Georgette Walsh and Jill Duncan edited the report, Barbara Quinn produced the report, and Jayne E. Robinson prepared the report for final printing under the supervision of Doris J. James. December 2010, NCJ 231675 This report in portable document format and in ASCII and its related statistical data and tables are available at the BJS website: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index. cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2232. 8/1/2011/TLD/4:00pm