U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics -------------------------------------------------- This report is one in series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all reports in the series go to http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=40 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 on BJS website at:http://bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4559 -------------------------------------------------- Prisoners in 2011 E. Ann Carson, Ph.D., and William J. Sabol, Ph.D., BJS Statisticians December 2012, NCJ 239808 During 2011, the number of prisoners under the jurisdiction of state and federal correctional authorities declined by 0.9%, from 1,613,803 to 1,598,780 (figure 1). This decline represented the second consecutive year the prison population in the United States decreased. At yearend 2011, 492 sentenced prisoners per 100,000 U.S. residents were incarcerated, a decrease of 1.7% from the rate in 2010 (500 per 100,000). Both admissions into and releases from prison declined during 2011. Admissions of prisoners sentenced to more than one year in state or federal prison declined by 5.0% from 2010 to 2011, or nearly twice the rate of the decrease (down 2.9%) in releases of sentenced prisoners. The statistics in this report are drawn from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) National Prisoner Statistics (NPS) program, which collects annual data from all 50 states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons on prisoner counts, characteristics, admissions, releases, and prison capacity. The 2011 NPS collection is number 87 in a series that began in 1925. ************************************** ************ HIGHLIGHTS ************ * Declining for the second consecutive year, state and federal prison populations totaled 1,598,780 at yearend 2011, a decrease of 0.9% (15,023 prisoners) from yearend 2010. * State correctional authorities had jurisdiction over 21,663 fewer sentenced inmates in 2011 than in 2010. Seventy percent of this decrease was due to California’s Public Safety Realignment program. * The number of state and federal prisoners sentenced to more than one year declined by 15,254 individuals, from 1,552,669 in 2010 to 1,537,415 in 2011. * The number of sentenced prisoners under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Prisons in 2011 increased by 6,409 inmates (up 3.4%) from 2010. * At yearend 2011, 492 out of every 100,000 U.S. residents were sentenced to more than one year in prison. * During 2011, the number of releases from state and federal prisons (688,384) exceeded the number of admissions (668,800). * In 2010, 53% of prisoners incarcerated under state jurisdiction (725,000) were serving time for violent offenses. * Nearly half (48%) of inmates in federal prison were serving time for drug offenses in 2011, while slightly more than a third (35%) were incarcerated for public-order crimes. * At yearend 2011, 39% of sentenced state and federal prisoners were age 40 or older. ************************************** ************************************** The decline of prisoners in California contributed to the overall prison population decline ************************************** For the second year in a row, the number of prisoners under the jurisdiction of state and federal correctional authorities at yearend declined, as the U.S. prison population decreased by 0.9% in 2011 (table 1). The rate of decline during 2011 was larger than in 2010, when the prison population declined by 0.1%. From its peak in 2009 of 1,615,487 prisoners, the U.S. prison population declined by 16,707 prisoners to reach 1,598,780 at yearend 2011. The number of state prisoners decreased by 21,614 (down 1.5%), while the federal prison population increased by 6,591 (up 3.1%). This marked the second straight year in which the state prison population declined while the federal prison population increased. During 2011, the divergence in growth between state and federal prison populations was larger than in 2010, when the state prison population declined by 0.2% and the federal prison population increased by 0.8%. Twenty-four states had increases in their prison population during 2011 (table 2). Among the 24 states and federal prison system with increases in their prison populations, the total increase amounted to 13,559 prisoners. Tennessee and Kentucky each observed increases of more than 1,000 prisoners. In Illinois and Minnesota, the increase in 2011 was minimal (i.e., less than 10 prisoners). In 2011, 26 states had decreases in their prison population totaling 28,582 prisoners. California’s decline of 15,493 prisoners accounted for more than half of the total decrease (see text box on page 4). New Jersey, New York, Michigan, Florida, and Texas had decreases of more than 1,000 prisoners, and Connecticut and North Carolina had declines of more than 900. California’s prison population declined by 9.4% in 2011, which was the largest percent change among the 51 jurisdictions. New Hampshire (5.3%), Connecticut (5.2%), and New Jersey (4.7%) experienced declines of about 5%. In several states, prison populations declined during 2011 after increasing during 2010. The prison population in Iowa declined by 3.6% in 2011 after increasing by 7.3% in 2010. In Arkansas, the prison population declined by 0.6% in 2011 after increasing by 6.5% in 2010. In comparison, the prison population in Kentucky increased 4.9% in 2011, which offset the 5.1% decline in 2010. ***************************************************** ************************************* California Public Safety Realignment ************************************* On May 23, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ruling by a lower three-judge court that the State of California must reduce its prison population to 137.5% of design capacity (approximately 110,000 prisoners) within two years to alleviate overcrowding. In response, the California State Legislature and governor enacted two laws—AB 109 and AB 117—to reduce the number of inmates housed in state prisons starting October 1, 2011. The Public Safety Realignment (PSR) policy is designed to reduce the prison population through normal attrition of the existing population while placing new nonviolent, nonserious, nonsexual offenders under county jurisdiction for incarceration in local jail facilities. Inmates released from local jails will be placed under a county-directed post- release community supervision program (PRCS) instead of the state’s parole system. The state is giving additional funding to the 58 counties in California to deal with the increased correctional population and responsibility, but each county must develop a plan for custody and post- custody that best serves the needs of the county. Since California incarcerates more individuals than any other state except Texas (10.8% of the U.S. state prison population), changes California’s prison population will have national implications. In 2011, the sentenced U.S. state prison population decreased by 21,663 inmates. California contributed 15,188 inmates (70%) to the total decrease. On December 31, 2010, California reported a total jurisdictional population of 165,062. On the same day in 2011, the population was 149,569. Between 2010 and 2011, the number of sentenced female inmates in the California state prison population decreased at a faster rate (down 17.5%) than did males (down 8.7%). A total of 96,669 inmates were admitted to California state prisons during 2011. Admissions during the first three quarters of 2011 accounted for 89% (about 86,000) of all state prison admissions, compared to 11% (about 10,600)during the fourth quarter (figure 2). Fourth quarter releases also declined from 25% in 2010 to 21% in 2011, and the types of release changed significantly. During the first three quarters of 2011, 98% of releases were conditional mandatory releases to parole, compared to 1.5% for unconditional releases due to expiration of prison sentences (not shown). In quarter 4, only 46% of releases were conditional, while 52% were unconditional without post-release stipulations. Overall, unconditional releases increased by 691% from 2010 to 2011, while conditional releases decreased 20% (table 3). All types of admissions to California state prisons decreased in 2011, with readmissions of parole violators down 22%. The offense distribution of admissions to California state prisons changed after October 1, 2011 (table 4). The percentage of inmates admitted for violent offenses increased from 30% on September 30, 2011, to 41% on December 31, 2011. Decreases in property and drug offenders contributed to the change. BJS will continue to monitor the change in the California state prison population, including the demographic and criminal characteristics, as low-level offenders are diverted from state prison to incarceration in local facilities. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation publishes weekly updates on the progress of PSR on their website: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Reports_Research/Offender_Information_Services_Bra nch/Population_Reports.html. ************************************* Imprisonment rates declined to levels last seen in 2005 ************************************* Prison systems are combined prison-jail systems in six states: Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Vermont. In these states, the prison population includes jail inmates, who are typically unsentenced and awaiting trial. In other states, prisons may hold a small number of unsentenced prisoners. To enable better comparisons between imprisonment rates and compositional changes across jurisdictions, BJS reports the number of sentenced prisoners (i.e., the number of prisoners with sentences of more than one year). At yearend 2011, there were 1,537,415 prisoners serving sentences of more than one year, about 15,000 fewer than at yearend 2010 (table 5). Since sentenced prisoners made up 96% of the prison population in 2011, it was expected that the changes in the sentenced prison population in 2011 mirrored those in the total prison population. The total number of sentenced prisoners declined by 1.0%, and the sentenced prison population in the federal system increased by 3.4%. The sentenced state prison population declined by 1.6%. Between 2010 and 2011, the imprisonment rate--the number of sentenced prisoners divided by the U.S. resident population times 100,000—declined from 500 to 492 per 100,000 U.S. residents (table 6). The imprisonment rate has declined consistently since 2007 when there were 506 persons imprisoned per 100,000 U.S. residents. The rate in 2011 was comparable to the rate observed in 2005 (492 per 100,000). Males (932 per 100,000) were imprisoned at 14 times the rate of females (65 per 100,000) in 2011. Imprisonment rates for males (down 1.7%) and females (down 1.8%) showed similar rates of decline from 2010 to 2011. Imprisonment rates among the states ranged from 147 to 865 per 100,000 residents (appendix table 3). Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island each had imprisonment rates below 200 per 100,000 residents of the individual states. Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama had rates at or above 650 per 100,000 residents. Rhode Island, New York, Maryland, Massachusetts, Delaware, New Jersey, and Michigan imprisoned males at more than 20 times the rate of females. Females comprised 6.7% of the 2011 state and federal prisoner population (appendix table 5). In eight states, at least 10% of the sentenced state prison population was female, including South Dakota, Idaho, Kentucky, Montana, West Virginia, Wyoming, Alaska, and North Dakota. Rhode Island, North Dakota, California, and New Hampshire had the greatest decreases in female prisoners between 2010 and 2011, declining between 15% and 24%. The female prison population increased by at least 14% in Alaska, Kentucky, and Tennessee. ************************************* Black and Hispanic prisoners were generally younger and imprisoned at higher rates than white prisoners ************************************* About 61% of the sentenced prison population in 2011 was age 39 or younger (table 7). The age distribution varied among racial groups. Among males--who accounted for 93% of the sentenced prison population--black non-Hispanic and Hispanic prisoners were generally younger than white non-Hispanic prisoners. More than half (52%) of white male prisoners were age 39 or younger, compared to 63% of black and 68% of Hispanic male prisoners. About 60% of both white and black female prisoners were age 39 or younger, compared to 67% of Hispanic female prisoners. In 2011, imprisonment rates among age and racial groups tended to increase through age 34 before declining (table 8). The imprisonment rates indicate that about 0.5% of all white males, more than 3.0% of all black males, and 1.2% of all Hispanic males were imprisoned in 2011. Between 6.6% and 7.5% of all black males ages 25 to 39 were imprisoned in 2011, which were the highest imprisonment rates among the measured sex, race, Hispanic origin, and age groups. Slightly fewer than 3% of Hispanic males were imprisoned in each of the age cohorts between ages 25 and 39. In 2011, blacks and Hispanics were imprisoned at higher rates than whites in all age groups for both male and female inmates. Among prisoners ages 18 to 19, black males were imprisoned at more than 9 times the rate of white males. In 2011, Hispanic and black male prisoners age 65 or older were imprisoned at rates between 3 and 5 times those of white males. Excluding the youngest and oldest age groups, black males were imprisoned at rates that ranged between 5 and 7 times the rates of white males. Among persons ages 20 to 24, black males were imprisoned at about 7 times that of white males. Among persons ages 60 to 64, the black male imprisonment rate was 5 times that of the white male imprisonment rate. In comparison, Hispanic males were imprisoned at 2 to 3 times the rate of white males in 2011. Black females were imprisoned at between 2 and 3 times the rate of white females, while Hispanic females were imprisoned at between 1 and 3 times the rate of white females. ************************************* Violent offenders accounted for the majority of sentenced prisoners in state prison ************************************* Of the nearly 1.4 million sentenced state prisoners, an estimated 725,000 (53%) were sentenced for violent offenses in 2010, the year for which the most recent data on offense are available (table 9). Eighteen percent (249,500) of state prisoners were serving sentences for property offenses, and 17% (237,000) were serving sentences for drug crimes. An estimated 188,200 sentenced prisoners (14%) were serving time for murder or manslaughter (negligent and nonnegligent), while 160,800 prisoners (12%) were held for sexual assault crimes, including rape. At yearend 2010, male and female state prison inmates differed in the types of offenses for which they were sentenced. At yearend 2010, 25% of female inmates in state prisons were incarcerated for drug crimes, compared to 17% of male inmates. Property crimes comprised 29% of the overall sentenced female population in state prison and 18% of the overall male population. An estimated 37% (34,100) of females in state prison were held for violent crimes, compared to 54% (689,000) of males. The percentage of females serving time for murder (10% of all sentenced females) was similar to that of males (12%). Robbery was the most common violent crime for males (14%), followed by murder (12%), and assault (11%). A larger percentage of whites (24%) were sentenced for property crimes than Hispanics (14%) or blacks (15%). The percentage of Hispanics (57%) and blacks (55%) in state prison held on violent offenses exceeded that for whites (49%). A higher percentage of whites (16%) were imprisoned for both rape and other sexual assaults than blacks (8%) and Hispanics (12%) ************************************* Violent offenders increased in state prison over the past decade, while drug offenders decreased ************************************* From 2000 to 2010, the number of sentenced prisoners in state prisons increased by about 13% (152,898) (table 10). Over the same period, the share of violent offenders among sentenced prisoners in state prisons increased, while the shares of drug offenders decreased. Violent offenders increased both in numbers and proportion of the total state prison population. Between 2000 and 2010, the number of violent offenders increased by 99,400 (16%) as their share of the state sentenced prison population grew from 52% to 53%. The number of drug offenders declined by 8% (down 21,100), and the number of property offenders remained relatively constant. The largest percent increase was among public order offenders (104% or 72,600 inmates). The majority of this increase was due to offenses categorized under habitual offender laws, in which the underlying offense or criminal history was not available. ************************************* Drug and public-order offenses increased in federal prison ************************************* The offense distribution for federal prisoners in 2011 differed from that of state prisoners in 2010, the most recent year for which data are available. Almost half of sentenced federal prisoners (48%) were held for drug crimes, while only 8% were held for violent offenses (table 11). Fewer inmates served time in federal prison for violent and drug crimes in 2011 than in 2010, while 35% of sentenced prisoners were imprisoned for public-order offenses. An estimated 11% (22,100) of inmates in federal prison were sentenced for immigration offenses, which represented one of the fastest growing segments of the federal prison population. Between 2010 and 2011, the number of inmates sentenced to more than a year in federal prison for immigration crimes increased 9.4%. ************************************* Admissions and releases continued to decline in 2011 ************************************* Releases of sentenced federal or state prisoners exceeded admissions of sentenced prisoners during 2011, as both declined for the third year in a row. The 668,800 admissions into state or federal prison in 2011 was the lowest number of admissions since 2002 (table 12). During 2011, sentenced prisoner admissions into and releases from state prisons decreased, while both admissions and releases increased in the federal prison system. The number of admissions into state prison (608,166) fell to its lowest level since 2001. New court commitments comprised 66% of state prison admissions in 2011, increasing from 63% in 2010. Inmates entering state prison on parole violations declined 12% between 2010 and 2011. As was the case with the total state sentenced prison population, California was responsible for the majority of the reduction in parole violation admissions. California admitted 17,129 fewer inmates on parole violations in 2011 than in 2010, which accounted for 65% of the total state prison population decline in these admissions (appendix table 13). In the federal prison system, new court commitments made up 92% of sentenced prison admissions, and increased 13% from 2010. In comparison, parole violation admissions increased 4.6% between 2010 and 2011. There were 20,293 fewer releases from state and federal prison in 2011 than in 2010. The majority (94%) of the reduction in releases was the result of fewer conditional releases (table 13). In state prison systems, 75% of the 633,145 inmates released during 2011 had conditional releases, representing a 3.8% decrease from 493,287 conditional releases in 2010. The overall number of releases from federal prison increased in 2011. However, conditional releases--including supervised mandatory releases, discretionary parole, and shock probation releases--declined 33% between 2010 and 2011 in the federal prison system. This decline was due to the declining number of federal prison inmates sentenced before the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. Unconditional releases accounted for 98% of federal prison releases in 2011, an increase of 6.0% from 2010. ************************** Other selected findings ************************** * Eight jurisdictions had 2011 custody populations that exceeded by more than 137% their lowest reported prison capacity: Alabama, California, Illinois, Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, North Dakota, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (appendix table 14). * Mississippi and New Mexico had custody populations occupying the least capacity. In 2011, Mississippi’s population was at only 45% of its operational capacity, while New Mexico was at 62% of its capacity. * The percentage of all prisoners housed in private prison facilities increased slightly in 2011 from 7.9% to 8.2% (appendix table 15). * The number of prisoners in private facilities under the jurisdiction of state Departments of Corrections decreased by 1.8% between 2010 and 2011. * The Federal Bureau of Prisons increased the number of inmates held in private prisons by 14% from 2010 to 2011. * On December 31, 2011, 6.7% of the state and 18% of the federal prison populations were incarcerated in private facilities. * Texas (18,603 inmates) and Florida (11,827 inmates) had the highest number of inmates in private prisons. * North Carolina, Wisconsin, California, and Alabama each decreased the size of their private prison population by at least 45% from 2010 to 2011. * Arizona, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and South Dakota incarcerated at least 17% more inmates in private facilities in 2011 than in 2010. * In 2011, Louisiana incarcerated more than half (20,866) of its prison population in local jails, which represented 25% of all state and federal prisoners held in jails. * More than 50% of all prisoners housed in local jails in 2011 were serving time in Louisiana, Texas, or Tennessee. * Kentucky (33%), Tennessee (30%), Mississippi (28%), West Virginia (25%), and Utah (22%) also had large proportions of their prison populations incarcerated in local jails. * The total number of prison inmates housed in local jails decreased for both state and federal prison systems in 2011. * Thirty-eight states reported holding a total of 1,790 inmates age 17 or younger on December 31, 2011. Of these, 96% were male (appendix table 16). * Florida, New York, and Louisiana held the most inmates age 17 or younger in 2011. These states imprisoned almost a third of the total number of inmates age 17 or younger. * A total of 102,809 inmates identified as non-U.S. citizens were incarcerated at yearend 2011, an increase of 7.1% from 95,977 in 2010. * In 2011, federal prisons had custody of 30% of all non-U.S. citizen inmates (30,544 prisoners), while California, Florida, and Texas incarcerated 35% (35,529 inmates) of non-U.S. citizens. * Non-U.S. citizens represented 17% of the total custody population of the Federal Bureau of Prisons in 2011. ************************************** *********************** NPS jurisdiction notes *********************** Alabama--Alabama prisons have not currently been rated as to the official capacity. The operational capacity represents physical capacity for inmates, but is not based upon staffing, programs, and services. Alaska--Prisons and jails form one integrated system, and NPS data include both jail and prison populations housed in state and out of state. Jurisdictional totals include individuals in electronic and special monitoring programs who are under the jurisdiction of the state of Alaska. Arizona--Jurisdiction counts are based on custody counts and inmates in contracted beds. California--Population counts for inmates with over 1 year maximum sentence(s) include felons who are temporarily absent, such as in court, jail, hospital, etc. Except for a small number, temporarily absent inmates are absent for less than 30 days. Population counts for unsentenced inmates include civil addicts who are temporarily absent for treatment but are typically returned to prison within 30 days. California is unable to differentiate between inmates held in federal facilities and in other states` facilities. Custody counts include California out-of- state correctional facilities, community correctional facilities, private and private work furlough inmates, and inmates housed in out-of-state contract facilities. Changes in design capacity are based upon information from a report from facilities planning and management on an annual basis. Colorado--Counts include a small undetermined number of inmates with a maximum sentence of 1 year or less. Data on admissions and releases by AWOL and escape are estimated. Population counts include 268 inmates in the Youthful Offender System, which is a program established primarily for violent juvenile offenders. Connecticut--Prisons and jails form one integrated system, and NPS data include both jail and prison populations. New court commitment admissions include inmates admitted in 2011 on accused status, but who received a sentence later in 2011. 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 of 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, and NPS data include both jail and prison populations. Total jurisdiction counts include only those inmates housed in Delaware facilities. Capacity counts include the halfway houses under the Department of Corrections. Federal Bureau of Prisons--Jurisdiction counts are as of December 25, 2011, and include inmates housed in secure private facilities through private contracts and subcontracts, as well as inmates housed in jail/short-term detention and others held in state-operated secure facilities. They also include 8,770 inmates held in nonsecure privately operated residential reentry centers, as well as 2,427 offenders on home confinement. Due to information system configuration, Asian and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islanders are combined, and inmates of Hispanic origin are included in the racial categories. Expirations of sentence include good conduct releases that usually have a separate and distinct term of supervision, as well as vacated sentences and court ordered terminations. The Federal Bureau of Prisons does not house inmates age 17 or younger in federal facilities; 149 such inmates were housed in contract facilities. Georgia--Subtotals of race, sex, and sentence length for jurisdiction and custody counts were adjusted by the Georgia Department of Corrections using interpolation to match the overall totals. Hawaii—Prisons and jails form one integrated system, and NPS data include both jail and prison populations. In custody and jurisdiction counts, sentenced felon probationers, and probation violators are included with the counts of a total maximum sentence of 1 year or less. Jurisdiction counts include dual jurisdiction (Hawaii/federal) inmates currently housed in federal facilities and in contracted beds. Hawaii does not have a rated capacity for the integrated prisons and jail system. Information on foreign nationals held in correctional facilities were based on self- reports by inmates. Idaho--Idaho defines rated capacity as 100% and operational capacity as 95% of maxium capacity. Design capacity is based on original facility- designed occupancy. Illinois--All population counts are based on jurisdiction. Population counts for inmates with over 1 year maximum sentence include an undetermined number of inmates with a 1-year maximum sentence. Other release types include an undetermined number of transfers to other jurisdictions. Iowa--Iowa began including offenders on work release, operating while intoxicated continuum status, and Iowa inmates housed in prisons out of state in jurisdiction counts in 2009. Prior Iowa data were custody counts only. Jurisdiction counts include Iowa offenders housed in prisons in other jurisdictions who are under Iowa’s jurisdiction. In 2011, Iowa began reporting escapee returns from residential facilities. Kansas--The Asian category contains an undetermined number of Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders. Kentucky--Capacity counts in Kentucky dropped significantly due to the closing of a minimum custody prison in 2011. The parole board in Kentucky is discretionary, and the parole rate can fluctuate on a year to year basis. The higher number of admissions of other conditional release violators without a new sentence is due to such a fluctuation. In 2011, the discretionary parole release program was expanded from 6 months to 9 months. Louisiana--Jurisdiction and capacity counts are as of December 28, 2011. Maryland--Counts of inmates with sentences greater than 1 year on December 31, 2011, are calculated using the percentage of these inmates from the automated data on the manual totals. Maryland’s system does not distinguish between AWOL and escapee releases, nor does it record the sex of inmates housed in out-of-state private prisons. The count of admissions by new court commitments may include a small but undetermined number of returns from appeal or bond. The count of unconditional releases includes court-ordered releases and a small but undetermined number of releases to appeal or bond. Other release types include interstate compact releases and releases of new admissions that were double-counted on the admission side during 2011. Maryland’s system does not capture Hispanic ethnicity. Massachusetts--By law, offenders in Massachusetts may be sentenced to terms of up to 2.5 years in locally operated jails and correctional institutions. This population is excluded from the state count, but is included in published population counts and rates for local jails and correctional institutions. Jurisdiction counts exclude approximately 3,271 inmates in the county system (local jails and houses of correction) serving a sentence of over 1 year. Jurisdiction and custody counts may include a small but undetermined number of inmates who were remanded to court; transferred to the custody of another state, federal, or locally operated system; and subsequently released. Michigan--Operational capacity includes institution and camp net operating capacities. Michigan’s new database system treats Hispanic as an ethnicity rather than a race. Since this is an optional field, the numbers for Hispanic race are significantly under reported. Minnesota--Minnesota only measures operational capacity. Jurisdiction counts include inmates temporarily housed in local jails, on work release, or on community work crew programs. Admissions and releases due to AWOL or escape and releases due to transfer are not included in Minnesota’s database file. Mississippi--Custody counts exclude county regional facilities, while jurisdiction counts include these facilities. Local jails and county regional facilities are included in the jurisdiction count of inmates housed at local facilities. Parole and conditional release violators are not distinguised in the Mississippi file by their sentence status. Missouri--The Missouri Department of Corrections does not have the design capacity of its older prisons, nor does it update design capacity for prison extension or improvements. Missouri does not use a rated capacity. Missouri defines operational capacity as the number of available beds, including those temporarily offline. Noncitizen data are based on self- reported place of birth. Nebraska--By statute, inmates are housed where they are sentenced by the judge and are never housed in local jails or by another state in order to ease prison crowding. Nebraska defines operational capacity as its stress capacity, which is 125% of design capacity for designated facilities. This capacity is ordered by the governor, but set by the Department of Corrections. The total for design and operational capacity for female institutions includes only the department’s single female multicustody facility. The department operates two co-ed facilities, which are represented in male design and operational capacity counts. Nevada--The Nevada Department of Corrections provided BJS with estimates for 2011 data. All data should be viewed as preliminary. New Hampshire--New offender database management system reports the number of inmates under New Hampshire’s jurisdiction but housed in other states’ facilities in a different manner from previous NPS submissions. New Jersey--Population counts for inmates with over 1 year maximum sentence include inmates with sentences of 1 year. The Department of Corrections has no jurisdiction over inmates with sentences of less than 1 year or over unsentenced inmates. Rated capacity figures are not maintained. Operational and design capacity numbers do not include halfway houses and county jails. The numbers are only for the main institutions in New Jersey. North Carolina--Rated capacity is not available. Captured escapees are not considered a prison admission type in North Carolina, and escape is not considered a type of prison release. Supervised mandatory releases are post-release offenders. Post-release supervision is defined as a reintegrative program for serious offenders who have served extensive prison terms. This form of supervision was created by the Structured Sentencing Act of 1993. North Dakota--Capacities include a new facility that opened in 1998 and account for double bunking in the state penitentiary. Ohio--Population counts for inmates with over 1 year maximum sentence include an undetermined number of inmates with a sentence of 1 year or less. Counts of inmates under Ohio’s jurisdiction but housed in federal or other states’ facilities are estimates. Counts of admission and release types reflect revised reporting methods. Returns and conditional releases involving transitional control inmates are reported only after movement from confinement to a terminal release status occurs. Oklahoma--Inmates from other states serving time in Oklahoma prisons under the interstate compact are excluded from jurisdiction questions. Most of the inmates with sentences of less than 1 year are part of the Oklahoma Delayed Sentencing Program for Young Adults. Counts of prison release by escape reflect inmates escaping state-run prisons only. Capacity counts have changed in Oklahoma, as only Department of Corrections (DOC) facilities have an approved capacity determined by the Board of Corrections. Decreased capacity from last year’s report is due to the exclusion of county jails, private prisons, and halfway houses from 2011 data submission since they are not assigned capacities by the Oklahoma DOC. Noncitizen status determined by country of birth. Oregon--Most offenders with less than 1 year maximum sentence remain under the control of local counties, rather than the Oregon Department of Corrections, and are not reported in this report. Oregon does not recognize rated capacity. Pennsylvania--In 2011, a number of Pennsylvania inmates housed out of state were brought back to serve time in Pennsylvania. As of September 1, 2011, the Department of Corrections changed operational bed capacity to bed capacity, which is defined as the number of inmates a facility can accommodate by filling all beds based on a number of factors: cell size; security level; and the number of inmates the facility can accommodate based on its staffing, support services, facility infrastructure, and full inmate employment or programming involvement. Bed capacity may include existing space conversions for permanent, new construction, and modular units if the above requirements are met. This is a change in how the department assesses capacity with respect to quality of life and safety for both staff and inmates as opposed to an operational change. Rhode Island--Prisons and jails form one integrated system, and NPS data include both jail and prison populations. Rhode Island has opened two new women’s facilities over the past 2 years and closed one male medium security facility over the past 2 years, significantly changing the reported capacities. Counts for inmates under the jurisdiction of Rhode Island but housed in federal or other states’ facilities include inmates who have dual jurisdiction, or those serving Rhode Island sentences out of state while serving that state’s sentence as well. This is a change from previous reporting practices. The Rhode Island data system records Hispanic as a race rather than an ethnicity and does not capture Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islanders or multiple races. Prison admissions classified as escape returns include admissions under home confinement, serving out of state, and minimum security facilities. South Carolina--The December 31, 2011, custody count of unsentenced individuals includes Interstate Compact Commission (ICC) inmates. As of July 1, 2003, the South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC) began releasing inmates due for release and housed in SCDC institutions on the first day of each month. Since January 1, 2012, was a holiday, inmates eligible for release on January 1 were released on December 31, 2011. Therefore, the inmate count was at its lowest point for the month on December 31, 2011. Conditional release counts include inmates released under community supervision after serving 85% of sentence under truth in sentencing. South Carolina utilizes the operational capacity concept in its management reports and other requested surveys. South Dakota--Custody and jurisdiction counts of inmates serving a maximum sentence of 1 year or less include those under the sentence of probation who, as a condition of probation, must serve up to 180 days in state prison. The custody count of unsentenced inmates includes all holds for the U.S. Marshal Service (sentenced and unsentenced). Commutations are not tracked separately in the South Dakota reporting system. They are included in expiration of sentence, supervised mandatory release, or other conditional releases. The operational capacity reported is planned capacity. South Dakota does not have rated or design capacities. Texas--Offenders in custody are all offenders currently serving time in a facility owned and operated by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ).Offenders under jurisdiction includes offenders in custody as well as offenders held in privately operated prisons, intermediate sanction facilities, substance abuse felony punishment facilities, pre-parole transfer facilities, and halfway houses; offenders temporarily released to a county less than 30 days; and offenders awaiting paperwork for transfer to state-funded custody. Capacities exclude county jail beds, because they do not have a minimum or maximum number of beds available for paper ready and bench warrant inmates. Admissions and releases include offenders received into an intermediate sanction facility, which is a sanction in lieu of revocation. These were counted in the parole violator category. Vermont--Prisons and jails form one integrated system, and NPS data include both jail and prison populations. Ethnicity and multiracial composition are not collected/recorded in Vermont. Virginia--The reported jurisdiction counts are actual counts for December 31, 2011. On September 1, 1998, the law changed, making state responsible inmates have a sentence of one year or more or a sentence of 12 months and one day. Inmates with a sentence of 12 months or less are not the responsibility of the state. The state is responsible for a 1-year sentence, while local authorities are responsible for a 12-month sentence. Virginia Department of Corrections maintains a count of beds-- called authorized capacity--that is provided as the measure of rated capacity in this survey. The number of beds assigned by rating officials (DOC) to institutions takes into account the number of inmates that can be accommodated based on staff, programs, services, and design. Washington--Offenders sentenced to 1 year or less and unsentenced offenders generally reside in county jails, but revisions to law allows certain inmates with sentences of less than 1 year to be housed in prison. These inmates are included in the total jurisdiction counts. Wisconsin--Custody and jurisdiction counts include 722 temporary probation and parole placements. Wisconsin does not code escapes as releases and returns from the escape as admissions. The reported design capacity include a Department of Corrections juvenile facility, a non- Department of Corrections facility, and 97 beds in 20 Wisconsin county jails contracted to temporarily house Corrections inmates. Excluded from the total are design capacities for local jails, federal, other state and private facilities. From the end of 2010 to the end of 2011, the custody population increased, while the jurisdiction remained largely unchanged. This was possibly due to a decision to end a practice of early release to community supervision for some inmates begun in 2010, as well as a further reduction of inmates being held in out-of-state facilities. During 2011, a minimum male facility was converted to medium to handle increased custody population. ************************************** ************************************** ********************** Definition of terms ********************** Average annual change--average (mean) annual change across a specific period. Capacity, design--the number of inmates that planners or architects intended for a facility. Capacity, highest--the maximum number of beds reported across the three capacity measures: design capacity, operational capacity, and rated capacity. Capacity, lowest--the minimum number of beds across three capacity measures: design capacity, operational capacity, and rated capacity. Capacity, operational--the number of inmates that can be accommodated based on a facility’s staff, existing programs, and services. Capacity, rated--the number of beds or inmates assigned by a rating official to institutions within a jurisdiction. Conditional releases--includes discretionary parole, mandatory parole, post-custody probation, and other unspecified conditional releases. Conditional release violators--readmission to prison of persons released to discretionary parole, mandatory parole, post-custody probation, and other unspecified conditional releases. Custody--prisoners held in the physical custody of state or federal prisons or local jails, regardless of sentence length or authority having jurisdiction. Imprisonment rate--the number of prisoners under state or federal jurisdiction sentenced to more than 1 year per 100,000 U.S. residents. Inmate--person incarcerated in a local jail, state or federal prison, or private facility under contract to federal, state, or local authorities. Jail--confinement facility usually administered by a local law enforcement agency that is intended for adults, but sometimes holding juveniles, for confinement before and after adjudication. Such facilities include jails and city or 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. Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont, Delaware, Alaska, and Hawaii operate integrated systems, which combine prisons and jails. Jurisdiction--the legal authority of state or federal correctional officials over a prisoner, regardless of where the prisoner is held. New court commitments--admissions into prison of offenders convicted and sentenced by a court, usually to a term of more than 1 year, including probation violators and persons with a split sentence to incarceration followed by court-ordered probation or parole. Parole violators--all conditional release violators returned to prison for either violating conditions of release or for new crimes. Prison--a long-term confinement facility run by a state or the federal government that typically holds felons and offenders 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. Prisoner--a individual confined in a correctional facility under the legal authority (jurisdiction) of state and federal correctional officials. Sentenced prisoner--a prisoner sentenced to more than 1 year. Supervised mandatory releases--conditional release with post-custody supervision generally occurring in jurisdictions using determinate sentencing statutes. Unconditional release--expirations of sentences, commutations, and other unspecified unconditional releases. ************************************** ************** Methodology ************** Begun in 1926 under a mandate from Congress, the National Prisoner Statistics (NPS) program collects annual statistics on prisoners at yearend. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) sponsors the survey, and the U.S. Census Bureau serves as the data collection agent. BJS depends entirely on the voluntary participation of 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 inmate in one of its facilities. Jurisdiction over a prisoner means state or federal officials have legal authority over that prisoner, regardless of where the prisoner is incarcerated or supervised. Some states are unable to provide counts that distinguish between custody and jurisdiction. (See NPS jurisdiction notes to determine which states did not distinguish between custody and jurisdiction counts.) The NPS jurisdiction counts include persons held in prisons, penitentiaries, correctional facilities, halfway houses, boot camps, farms, training or treatment centers, and hospitals. Counts also include prisoners who are-- * temporarily absent (less than 30 days), out to court, or on work release * housed in privately operated facilities, local jails, or other state or federal facilities, or those serving concurrent sentences for more than one correctional authority. The NPS custody counts include all inmates held within a state’s facilities, including inmates housed for other states. The custody counts exclude inmates held in local jails and in other jurisdictions. With a few exceptions, the final custody counts reported by BJS include inmates held in privately operated facilities. In the fielding of a current year’s NPS survey, respondents are permitted to update the prior counts of prisoners held in custody and under jurisdiction. Statistics on the jurisdiction and sentenced prison populations for the prior year are updated in this report. All tables showing data based on jurisdiction counts--including tables of imprisonment rates—are based on the updated and most recently available data provided by respondents. The NPS has historically included counts of inmates in the combined jail- prison systems of Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The District of Columbia (D.C.) has not operated a prison system since yearend 2001. Felons sentenced under the D.C. criminal code are housed in federal facilities. Jail inmates in D.C. are included in the Annual Survey of Jails. Some previously published prisoner counts and the percentage change in population include D.C. jail inmates for 2001, the last year of collection. Admissions include new court commitments, parole violator returns, and other conditional release violator returns; transfers from other jurisdictions; returns of prisoners absent without leave (AWOL), with or without a new sentence; escape returns, with or without a new sentence; returns from appeal or bond, and other admissions. For reporting purposes, BJS admission counts exclude transfers from other jurisdictions, AWOL returns, and escape returns. Releases include unconditional releases (e.g., expirations of sentence or commutations), conditional releases (e.g., probations, supervised mandatory releases, or discretionary paroles), deaths, AWOLs, escapes from confinement, transfers to other jurisdictions, releases to appeal or bond, and other releases. For reporting purposes, BJS release counts exclude AWOLs, escapes, and transfers to other jurisdictions. BJS allows respondents to update data they previously submitted. This report includes the most recently reported data for 2010 and 2011. Additional information about the NPS, including the data collection instrument, is available on the BJS website. ************************************* Estimating imprisonment rates by age, sex, and race or Hispanic origin ************************************* Estimates of the total number of sentenced prisoners on December 31, 2011, by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin were generated by creating separate totals for federal and state prisons. Each sex-race count was then multiplied by the ratio of the age category count within the sex- race combination in the Federal Justice Statistics Program (FJSP) to the FJSP total count within the sex-race combination (e.g., FJSP 18 to 19 year-old white males divided by FJSP white males). The resulting product yielded the FJSP-adjusted NPS counts for each sex-race combination by age group (e.g., 18 to 19 year-old white male prisoners in the federal prison system). State prison age distributions for NPS use a similar race-sex ratio adjustment, based on individual-level data from the National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP). National--level estimates of the number of state prisoners by race were based on adjusting NPS counts to comport with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) definitions of race and ethnicity. OMB defines persons of Hispanic or Latino origin as a separate category. Race categories are defined exclusive of Hispanic origin. Not all NPS providers’ information systems categorize race and ethnicity in this way. BJS’ adjusts the NPS data on race and Hispanic origin by the ratio of the relative distribution of prisoners by race and Hispanic origin in self-report inmate surveys that use OMB categories for race to the relative distribution of prisoners by race and Hispanic origin in the NPS data. This ratio is calculated for the year(s) in which BJS has an inmate survey and NPS data. For this report, the 2004 Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities was used to calculate this ratio. The ratio obtained by comparing the within-year relative distributions by race and Hispanic origin was then multiplied by the NPS distribution in a year to generate the estimate of persons by race and Hispanic origin. Age--specific imprisonment rates for each age-sex-race 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 on January 1, 2012. 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 race or Hispanic origin. Detailed race and Hispanic origin imprisonment rates exclude person. ************************************* Estimating offense distribution in the state prison population ************************************* BJS employs a ratio adjustment method to weight the individual-level race or sex-specific offense data from NCRP to the control totals obtained in the NPS data collection, thereby yielding a national offense distribution for state prisoners. Updated NPS control totals of sentenced state prisoners and racial distributions necessitated the reanalysis of state prison offense data from 2008 and 2009. The updated results for 2008 and 2009 appear in appendix tables 7 through 10. ****************** 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 custody population. In general, state capacity and custody counts exclude inmates held in private facilities, although six states include prisoners held in private facilities as part of the capacity of their prison systems: Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Wisconsin. For these states, prison population as a percent of capacity includes private facilities. ***************************************************** The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. James P. Lynch is director. This report was written by E. Ann Carson, Ph.D., and William J. Sabol, Ph.D. Alexia Cooper, Margaret Noonan, and Sheri Simmons verified the report. Jill Thomas edited the report, and Barbara Quinn produced the report under the supervision of Doris J. James. December 2012, NCJ 239808 ***************************************************** ****************************************************** Office of Justice Programs * Innovation * Partnerships * Safer Neighborhoods * http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov ****************************************************** ______________________ 12/4/12/JER/11:36am