U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics ------------------------------------------------------- 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://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4880 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.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=40 ------------------------------------------------------- ******************* Bulletin ******************* Prisoners in 2012 Trends in Admissions and Releases, 1991–2012 E. Ann Carson and Daniela Golinelli, BJS Statisticians The prisoner population in the United States in 2012 declined for the third straight year, from 1,599,000 at yearend 2011 to 1,570,400 at yearend 2012. On December 31, 2012, the number of persons sentenced to serve more than 1 year (1,511,500) in state or federal prison facilities decreased by 27,400 prisoners from yearend 2011 and by 42,600 from yearend 2009, when the U.S. prison population was at its peak (figure 1). Between 1978 and 2009, the number of prisoners held in federal and state facilities in the United States increased almost 430%, from 294,400 on December 31, 1978, to 1,555,600 on December 31, 2009. This growth occurred because the number of prison admissions exceeded the number of releases from state prisons each year. However, in 2009, prison releases exceeded admissions for the first time in more than 31 years, beginning the decline in the total yearend prison population. Admissions to state and federal prisons declined by 118,900 offenders (down 16.3%) between 2009 and 2012. In 2012, the number of admissions (609,800) was the lowest since 1999, representing a 9.2% decline (down 61,800 offenders) from 2011. This report describes changes in the types of state prison admissions and releases between 1991 and 2011. Changes over time in the total yearend prison population are influenced by changes in the number of state prisoners who make up 87% of the total prison population. The report also discusses how these changes influence sex, race, Hispanic origin, offense, and sentence length distributions. The statistics in this report are based on the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) National Prisoner Statistics (NPS) Program, National Corrections Reporting Program, and the 1991 and 2004 surveys of state prison inmates. ************************************************* *********** HIGHLIGHTS *********** * In 2012, the number of admissions to state and federal prison in the United States was 609,800 offenders, the lowest number since 1999. * The number of releases from U.S. prisons in 2012 (637,400) exceeded that of admissions for the fourth consecutive year, contributing to the decline in the total U.S. prison population. * In 2011, the majority of state prisoners in 2011 (53%) were serving time for violent offenses. * New court commitments made up 82% of state admissions in 1978, 57% in 2000, and 71% in 2012. * New court commitments to state prisons for drug offenders decreased 22% between 2006 and 2011, while parole violation admissions decreased 31%. * Between 1991 and 2011, new court commitments of females to state prison for violent offenses increased 83%, from 4,800 in 1991 to 8,700 in 2011. * Drug offenses accounted for 24% of new court admissions of black inmates in 2011, a decrease from a range of 35% to 38% from 1991 to 2006. * Since 1991, the proportion of newly admitted violent offenders receiving prison sentences of less than 5 years has increased. * California’s Public Safety Realignment policy drove the decrease in the total number of admissions to California state prisons, as well as a decline in the proportion of admissions to California state prisons for parole violation (from 65% in 2010 to 23% in 2012). * Prisoners age 44 and younger accounted for 80% of prison admissions, 77% of releases, and 72% of the yearend population in 2012. * The number of prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year under state or federal correctional authorities in 2012 was 1,511,500, down from 1,538,800 at yearend 2011. ************************************************* ************************************* The drop in state prison admissions drove the overall decline in U.S. prison admissions in 2012 ************************************* Admissions to U.S. prisons in 2012 declined by 61,800 offenders (9.2%) from 2011, the sixth year in which the number of admissions has decreased. Admissions declined from a high of 747,000 in 2006 to 609,800 in 2012 (table 1). Both state departments of corrections and the Federal Bureau of Prisons admitted fewer inmates in 2012 than in 2011, although the decline in admissions to state prisons (down 57,100) accounted for 92% of the total decrease. The number of admissions to state prisons in 2012 (553,800) is the lowest since 1997. The highest number of admissions to federal prisons occurred in 2011 (60,600 admissions). In 2012, federal prison admissions decreased by 4,700 admissions or 7.7%. Admissions or entries to prison for violating conditional release from prison, typically referred to as parole violation admissions (which also include new crimes committed while serving a term of parole), represented 16% of all state prison admissions and 10% of federal prison admissions in 1978. However, this type of admission increased over the following years. Admissions for new crimes (82% of all state admissions in 1978) reached a low of 57% in 2000 before rebounding to 65% in 2011. New court commitments accounted for 71% of all state and 92% of federal prison entries in 2012. While the overall number of new court commitments to state prisons declined by 1.3% between 2011 and 2012, the proportion of this type of admissions increased due to a 26% decrease in the number of parole violation admissions. About 8% (4,700 prisoners) of federal prison admissions in 2012 were prisoners returned for violating their conditional release. There were 52,400 fewer admissions due to parole violation to state prisons in 2012 than in 2011 (down 26%). Parole violation admissions accounted for 27% of the total state prison entries, down from 33% in 2011. This decrease can be attributed to the large decline in parole violation admissions in California, from 60,300 in 2011 to 8,000 in 2012. Overall, admissions to California prisons declined by 65% between 2011 and 2012, while entries on parole violations decreased by 87% (appendix table 1). ************************************* Releases from state prison in 2012 exceeded admissions for the fourth consecutive year, contributing to the decline in the total prison population ************************************* Although the number of releases or exits from U.S. prisons declined 7.7% between 2011 and 2012, releases exceeded the number of prison admissions (table 2). Total U.S. and state prison releases have outpaced admissions since 2009. The decline in releases from state prison offset the increase in exits from federal prison. State prisons released 54,500 fewer inmates in 2012 than in 2011. However, 27 states had an increase in the number of releases from 2011 to 2012, led by Colorado (up 17%), Hawaii and Massachusetts (up 16% each), Idaho (up 13%), and Nebraska (up 12% ) (appendix table 1). The number of releases from California state prisons declined by 62,000 offenders (down 57%), from 109,500 in 2011 to 47,500 in 2012. Twenty-three other states released fewer inmates from prison in 2012 compared to 2011, including New Hampshire (down 17%), Arkansas (down 13%), Oklahoma (down 10%), Nevada (down 9%), and Georgia and Michigan (down 8% each). Releases from federal prisons increased by more than 1% in 2012, continuing a trend that started in 2009. The BOP released 56,000 inmates in 2012, which exceeded admissions by 100 inmates. This was the first year in more than a decade in which the federal system released more inmates than it admitted. Conditional releases, including supervised mandatory releases, discretionary parole, and shock probation, continued a decline that started in 2009, decreasing 14% between 2011 and 2012. Federal prisons released 9% fewer inmates on conditional status in 2012 than in 2011 due to the decline in federal prison inmates sentenced before the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, which abolished parole for federal prisoners. Conditional releases accounted for 1% of exits from federal prisons in 2012, compared to 70% of state prison releases. Since 1978, conditional releases accounted for 70% to 84% of state prison releases. In comparison, the number of unconditional releases increased in both state and federal prison systems. State prisons had 6.5% (or 9,700) more unconditional releases in 2012 than in 2011, while these exits increased by 1.7% (or 900 inmates) in the federal system. In 2011, California released 13,700 inmates without conditions, which increased to about 29,500 offenders in 2012. Nationally, unconditional prison releases accounted for 33% of all exits, up from 29% in 2011. ************************************* Violent offenders accounted for a larger proportion of the state prison population between 1991 and 2011 ************************************* In 1991, 45% of all state prisoners—or an estimated 327,000 offenders—were sentenced to more than 1 year for violent offenses (table 3). On December 31, 2006 (the year in which admissions to state prisons reached their peak), 50% of all sentenced prisoners in custody of state correctional authorities were violent offenders. In 2011 (the most recent year for which state prison offense data are available), more than 53% (or an estimated 718,000 offenders) of the yearend population was serving a sentence for a violent crime. While robbery was the most common offense across the 20-year period, the proportion of violent offenders convicted for murder or any sexual assault increased over time. Property offenders (250,000 prisoners or 19% of all state prisoners) exceeded the number of drug offenders in custody in 2011 (223,000 inmates, or 17% of the inmate population). An increase in the number of admissions to state prisons for violent offenses contributed to the growth of these sentenced inmates in the yearend prison population. Fewer violent offenders than property and drug offenders were admitted in 1991, 2001, and 2006 (table 4), but by 2011, the estimated proportion of admissions for violent and property offenses was roughly equal. There were 78,600 fewer total admissions in 2011 than in 2006, and 65% of this decline (or an estimated 51,000 persons) was due to fewer admissions for drug crimes. A drop in the number of persons sentenced for drug crimes other than possession accounted for the majority (66%, or an estimated 33,600 persons) of the decrease in admissions for drug crimes between 2006 and 2011. ************************************* Between 1991 and 2011, changes in state prison admission types were associated with changes in the offense distributions ************************************* As the distribution of types of admissions to state prison changed over time, so did the demographic and offense compositions of admitted prisoners. In 1991, new court commitments were almost equally distributed between violent, property, and drug offenses, while parole violation admissions of property offenders were almost twice the number of admissions for violent crimes or drug offenses (table 5). By 2001, the distribution between the three offense categories for parole violation admissions was more balanced, and drug offenders represented the largest proportion of both new court commitments and parole violation admissions. The number of new admissions and readmissions for violent offenses increased between 1991 and 2006, but only due to the overall growth in state prison admissions. The proportion of violent offenders among new court commitment and parole violation admissions was stable until each increased by about 3% in 2011. New court commitments of individuals committing drug offenses other than possession, a category that includes drug trafficking, decreased by 19% (or 16,300 inmates) between 2006 and 2011. The number of persons newly admitted to prison on drug possession sentences experienced a 27% decline during the same period, with an estimated 11,300 fewer new admissions. Parole violation admissions for drug offenders decreased 31% or 23,300 fewer readmissions. ************************************* The number of females admitted on new court commitments for violent offenses in 2011 increased by 2% from 2006 and by 83% from 1991 ************************************* Between 1991 and 2006, the number of new court commitments to state prison for violent offenses increased by 30% for males and 79% for females, although the proportion of violent crime new court commitments remained roughly the same (table 6). In 2011, the proportion of violent offenders among all new court commitments increased for both males and females. However, because of the decrease in overall admissions between 2006 and 2011, about 1,500 fewer males were admitted to state prison for violent crimes, while the number of females increased by 180 violent offenders. Over the 20-year period, the number of females admitted for violent offenses on new court commitments increased 83%, from 4,800 in 1991 to 8,700 in 2011. While the proportion of property crime offenders among new court commitments decreased among males between 1991 and 2006, the number of male offenders sentenced for these crimes increased due to the overall growth in state prison admissions. In 2006, 19,600 females entered prison for property crimes compared to 10,300 in 1991, and 17,100 in 2011. New admissions for public order offenses—including weapons and drunk driving offenses, habitual offender sanctions, and vice crimes—increased by about 39,100 for male inmates between 1991 and 2006, the largest absolute change in the number of admissions. Among the most common public order offenses resulting in a new court commitment to prison, weapons offenses increased 157% between 1991 and 2011, driving while under the influence grew 61%, and court offenses (including perjury, failure to appear, bond jumping, and tampering) increased 751% (detailed breakdown of offense categories not shown). Obstruction of law enforcement grew 226% over the same period, and admissions of habitual offenders increased 311%. In 2001, 34% of male readmissions to state prison and 47% of female readmissions were sentenced drug offenders returning on parole violations (table 7). These proportions declined to 26% of males and 33% of females in 2011. For both males and females, the proportion of readmissions to state prison for drug possession offenders increased in 2006 and then decreased in 2011 to levels comparable to those in 2001. ************************************* Among new court commitments to state prison, more than a third each of black and Hispanic offenders, and a quarter of white offenders were convicted of a violent offense ************************************* In 2011, 34% of non-Hispanic black offenders (54,000 admissions) and 36% of Hispanic offenders (25,000 admissions) entering state prison on new court commitments had committed violent offenses (table 8). For black offenders, this represented an increase over 1991, 2001, and 2006, when less than 30% of new admissions were for violent crimes. New court commitments for non-Hispanic white offenders convicted of violent crimes represented 25% (37,000 offenders) of all new admissions of white offenders in 2011. A third of whites imprisoned for new offenses in 2011 were convicted for property offenses (49,000), compared to 25% of blacks (38,600) and 21% of Hispanics (15,000). In 1991, 38% of all blacks admitted to state prison were serving time for new drug offenses. In 2011, only 24% of all blacks were admitted for drug crimes. Blacks accounted for 47% of new court commitments for violent offenses in 2011, compared to 44% in 2006 and 41% in 2001. Less than a third of inmates newly committed to state prison for violent offenses in 2011 were white (32%), down from 37% in 2001. The racial and Hispanic origin of new admissions for murder and nonnegligent manslaughter between 2001 and 2011 showed a decrease among whites (from 29% in 2001 to 24% in 2011), and increases among blacks (from 46% in 2001 to 51% in 2011) and Hispanics (from 24% in 2001 to 26% in 2011). Among newly sentenced drug offenders, blacks showed a large decline, from 49% of all new court commitment admissions for drug crimes in 2001 to 42% in 2011. In comparison, whites increased from 29% of newly admitted drug offenders in 2001 to 38% in 2011. The number and proportion of parole violation admissions for drug offenders of all racial groups or Hispanic origin decreased between 2001 and 2011 (table 9), with an estimated 11,400 fewer readmissions of blacks (down 30%), 5,400 fewer whites (down 25%), and 5,200 fewer Hispanics (down 36%) in 2011. The number of parole violations by drug offenders other than possession among blacks decreased 92% (down 10,500). ************************************* Since 1991, the proportion of newly admitted violent offenders receiving prison sentences of less than 5 years has increased ************************************* The proportion of all new court commitments with sentences of less than 20 years was relatively stable across the 20-year period from 1991 to 2011—93% in 1991 and 2001, 92% in 2006, and 94% in 2011 (table 10). In 1991, 10% of all persons admitted on new convictions were sentenced to more than 1 year but less than 2 years in state prison. This increased to 14% in 2001, 2006, and 2011. The percentage of persons newly convicted for violent crimes and sentenced for less than 5 years increased from 37% in 1991 to 42% in 2001 and 44% in 2011. In 1991, 64% of offenders sentenced for drug offenses received less than 5 years, compared to 60% in 2001. In 2011, 69% of newly convicted violent offenders, 85% of drug offenders, and 88% of property offenders were sentenced to less than 10 years in prison. In general, sentences for violent offenses were longer than for other types of crime. From 1991 to 2011, between 14% and 16% of prisoners admitted to state prison on new court commitments for violent offenses were sentenced to 20 years or more (including life or death sentences). A smaller proportion of violent offenders received sentences of life or death in 2011 (4.5%) than in 1991 (5.7%) or 2001 (4.9%), but the increased number of new court commitments for violent crimes in 2011 resulted in a greater number of convicted violent offenders with life or death sentences. Both the number (down 1,030) and percentage (down 84%) of inmates sentenced to life or death for drug offenses decreased between 1991 and 2011. ************************************* Violent offenders’ longer sentences contribute to their increased proportion in the yearend prison population ************************************* The proportion of new court commitment and parole violation admissions for violent offenses is consistently smaller than the proportion of violent offenders in the prison population on December 31 of each year (table 11). This indicates that violent offenders are sentenced to, and are likely serving, relatively longer time in prison than inmates convicted of other types of crime. From 1991 to 2011, violent offenses accounted for 27% to 30% of new court commitments with sentences of more than 1 year (figures 2 to 5). However, within the yearend populations for these years, inmates who were newly admitted for violent offenses represented 47% to 56% of the total state prison population. In contrast, property offenses made up 31% of new court commitments with sentences of more than 1 year in 1991, 27% in 2001 and 2006, and 28% in 2011, compared to between 17% and 24% of inmates originally admitted for property crimes in the prison population on December 31 of each year. Although these property offenders were sentenced to more than 1 year in prison, not all of them were serving a full year. Time served on parole violation admissions tends to be less than time served on new court commitments. This is reflected in the comparison of these admissions to the proportion of parole violators serving time on December 31 of the 4 years examined. The differences in the proportions of admissions and the yearend prison population were smaller than those observed for new court commitments across all offense categories, suggesting that inmates move through their confinement more quickly than offenders serving time on new court commitments for similar crimes. The only exception to this pattern occurred between 1991 and 2001 for admissions of public order and drug offense admissions of parole violators. In both cases, the proportion of parole violation admissions was less than that of parole violators in the yearend state prison population. New admissions for violent offenses showed slight growth between 1991 and 2011, while the total share of violent offenders in the yearend prison population and among inmates readmitted on parole violations increased between 2001 and 2011. ************************************* State prisons released almost 24,900 more inmates than they admitted in 2011 ************************************* State prisons admitted more offenders than they released in 1991, 2001, and 2006 (table 12). In 2011, there were about 24,900 more releases than admissions, and 59% of this difference was due to 14,600 more releases than admissions of drug offenders. Murder was the only offense for which admissions always outnumbered releases, while larceny had higher counts of releases except in 1991. In 2011, conditional releases of violent offenders increased for inmates of all races and Hispanic origin, representing a quarter of whites and a third each of blacks and Hispanics released during 2011 (table 13). Black and Hispanic inmates convicted of violent crimes had the highest proportion of conditional releases across all offenses in 2011, in contrast to 2001 and 2006, when drug offenders were the most commonly released inmates among blacks and Hispanics. White inmates serving prison terms for property crimes had the highest number of conditional releases from 1991 to 2011, although this proportion declined over time concurrent with an increase in the number of releases of white violent and public order offenders. ******************************************************** *************************************** Admissions to California state prisons declined 65% from 2011 to 2012, while releases decreased 57% *************************************** During 2012, the first full year in which the California Public Safety Realignment (PSR) policy was implemented, both admissions to and releases from California state prisons decreased significantly. Between 2011 and 2012, total admissions to prisons in California declined 65%, from 96,700 admissions in 2011 to 34,300 in 2012 (table 14). The number of admissions in 2012 represented a 76% decrease from 2008, the year in which California admitted the most people to prison (140,800 admissions). (See Prisoners in 2011, NCJ 239808, BJS web, December 2012). PSR was written to divert new admissions of nonviolent, nonserious, and nonsex offenders to local jail facilities starting on October 1, 2011. ***Footnote 1 Offenses as specified in the Public Safety Realignment Act.*** Individuals convicted of serious, violent, or sex offenses continued to be admitted to state prison. In 2012, 48% of all admissions were for violent offenses (an increase from 31% in 2010 and 32% in 2011), and 14% of all admissions in 2012 were for drug offenses (a decrease from 25% in 2010). The proportion of admissions for property crimes declined by 10% over the period from 2010 to 2012, although admissions for public order offenses, which include weapons and habitual offender violations, increased in 2012. Between 2011 and 2012, the proportions of all admissions that were parole violations and new court commitments were reversed. In 2011, 62% of all admissions to California state prisons were parole violations, compared to 23% in 2012. New court commitments increased from 38% of all admissions in 2011 to 77% in 2012. In 2012, 33% of parole violation admissions to prisons and 53% of prisoners newly committed were violent offenders. The number of inmates released from California prisons also declined in 2012, but at a slower rate than the decrease in admissions. In 2012, there were 47,500 releases from California prisons, 57% fewer than in 2011 when there were 109,500 releases (table 15). In 2012, 37% of all releases were of violent offenders, compared to 29% in 2010. Prisoners convicted of aggravated assault and robbery accounted for the majority of the increase in released prisoners. While violent offenders accounted for 29% of conditional releases in 2010, this proportion had increased to 67% in 2012. Similar to the pattern of admission types, unconditional releases accounted for less than 2% of total releases in 2010 and 12% in 2011, compared to 62% in 2012. In 2012, 37% of prisoners were released with post custody conditions, down from 98% in 2010. Drug and property offenses accounted for 33% each of all unconditional releases in 2012. While the percentage of violent offenders unconditionally released from California state prisons decreased from 40% in 2010 to 18% in 2012, the increase in the total number of unconditional releases in 2012 resulted in a net increase of violent offenders with this type of prison release, from 670 offenders in 2010 to 5,400 offenders in 2012. Released prisoners in California are returned to the county in which they were originally sentenced. While this does not guarantee that a former prisoner will continue to live in the same county, it provides a proxy measure to identify the counties most immediately influenced by state prison releases. In 2012, 30% of all inmates released from California state prisons (14,800 persons) were returned to Los Angeles County, followed by San Bernardino (4,400 inmates or 9.1% of all releases) and San Diego counties (3,500 or 7.3% of all releases) (table 16). Almost two-thirds of inmates released from prison to these three counties had no conditions placed on their release. Only four counties (Alameda, Colusa, Inyo, and Trinity) received more conditional releases from state prison than inmates released unconditionally. While Los Angeles County received the largest number of inmates released from state prisons in 2012, when compared to the general population of each county, Los Angeles had a prison release rate of 14.9 per 10,000 county residents. Eighteen counties with smaller general populations had higher rates of prison release in their communities. Kings County (population 150,800) received 507 prison releases, but had a rate of 33.6 releases per 10,000 residents. After Kings County, Yuba (29.0 releases per 10,000 residents), Tehama (28.8 releases per 10,000 residents), and Shasta (24.4 releases per 10,000 residents) counties had the highest rates of released prisoners. *************************************** The 2012 yearend U.S. sentenced prison population declined 1.8%, driven by a decrease in the number of state prisoners *************************************** A total of 27,400 fewer prisoners were sentenced to more than 1 year in state and federal prisons at yearend 2012, than at yearend 2011, a decrease of almost 2% (table 17). The federal prison system had the largest sentenced prison population (196,600 prisoners) of any jurisdiction in 2012, followed by Texas (157,900 inmates), California (134,200 inmates), Florida (101,900 inmates), and New York (54,100 inmates). With the federal population, these five jurisdictions accounted for 43% of the sentenced U.S. prison population in 2012. Texas, California, and Florida accounted for 30% of the sentenced state prison population in 2012. California (down 10%) had the largest percentage decrease in prison population, followed by Arkansas (down 9%), Wisconsin and Colorado (down 7% each). The prison populations in New Hampshire (up 7%) and North Dakota (up 6%) led the 24 jurisdictions with sentenced population increases in 2012. Females comprised almost 7% of the state prison population and 6% of the federal system in 2012. *************************************** Imprisonment rates continued to decline for most race, ethnicity, sex, and age groups *************************************** Compared to age-, sex-, and race-specific imprisonment rates in 2011, rates in 2012 remained the same or decreased for all but Hispanic males ages 60 to 64, which increased from 685 per 100,000 U.S. residents to 687 per 100,000 residents (table 18) (see Prisoners in 2011, NCJ 239808, BJS web, December 2012). Male and female white prisoners of all age groups had lower imprisonment rates than male and female black and Hispanic prisoners. Overall, black males were 6 times and Hispanic males 2.5 times more likely to be imprisoned than white males in 2012. Hispanic males ages 18 to 19 were more than 3 times as likely as white males of the same age to be imprisoned, while all other age groups were at least twice as likely as white males to be serving a prison sentence. Black males had imprisonment rates at least 4 times those of white males in all age groups. The rates for black males age 39 or younger were more than 6 times greater than white males of the same age. Male inmates ages 18 to 19 had the largest imprisonment rate disparity between whites and blacks. Black males in this age group were almost 9.5 times more likely than white males to be in prison. Almost 1% of all male residents in the United States were imprisoned at yearend 2012. A total of 2.8% of black, 0.5% of white, and 1.2% of Hispanic males were in state or federal prison on December 31, 2012. Among black males, this represents a decline from the rate in 2011 (3%). Between 4% and 7% of black males ages 20 to 49 were prison inmates. Black males ages 30 to 34 had the highest incarceration rate (6,932 prisoners per 100,000 black male U.S. residents ages 30 to 34). This age group also had the highest imprisonment rates among white and Hispanic males in 2012. Among female prisoners in 2012, black females ages 18 to 19 were 3 times more likely to be imprisoned than white females. Hispanic females in this age group had imprisonment rates nearly twice those of white females. White and Hispanic females approached parity imprisonment rates among prisoners ages 35 to 44. Hispanic females age 65 or older were more than twice as likely as white females of this age to be serving time in prison, the age group of greatest disparity. Black and white female imprisonment rates were closest among prisoners ages 25 to 39, when black females were less than twice as likely as white females to be imprisoned. ********************** Other select findings ********************** * In 2012, the number of prisoners released increased in 27 states (appendix table 1). * Blacks accounted for 40% of all unconditional releases from state prison in 2001, 2006, and 2011 (appendix table 2). * Inmates under age 45 accounted for 80% of federal and state prison admissions in 2012, compared to 72% of the yearend prison population in 2012, and 77% of released prisoners (appendix tables 3–5). * The total U.S. prison population declined for the third consecutive year in 2012, to 1,570,400 prisoners on December 31, 2012 (appendix table 6). * The proportion of the U.S. prison population housed in private prisons increased from 8.2% in 2011 to 8.7% in 2012 (appendix table 7). * A total of 137,200 inmates were in the custody of private prisons at yearend 2012, a 5% increase over the 131,000 inmates in 2011. * The number of prison inmates housed in local jail facilities on December 31, 2012 (83,600 inmates) was 2% higher than at yearend 2011. * In 2012, the number of inmates held in local jails increased in 16 states. * Four states housed more than 25% of their prison populations in local jails on December 31, 2012: Louisiana (52%), Kentucky (38%), Tennessee (30%), and Mississippi (29%). * U.S. prisons held 9,900 fewer persons identified as noncitizens in 2012, compared to 102,800 noncitizen inmates in 2011 (appendix table 8). Because state and federal departments of corrections have varying definitions of noncitizen, readers should exercise caution when interpreting these results. * State prisons held 1,300 inmates under age 18 in custody on December 31, 2012. * Based on their reported custody counts, 18 states and the BOP were operating prison systems above 100% of their maximum reported facility capacity (appendix table 9). * The number of prisoners serving a sentence for violent offenses in federal prison in 2012 (11,700 inmates) decreased 4% from 2011 (21,200 inmates) (appendix table 10). * Drug offenders accounted for 50% of the male federal prison population and 58% of the female federal prison population in 2012 (appendix table 11). * On December 31, 2012, 12% of prisoners in the federal prison system were serving time for immigration offenses and 15% had been convicted of weapons offenses. *************************************** National Prisoner Statistics Program jurisdiction notes *************************************** Alabama--Prisons have not recently been rated for official capacity, but the majority of Alabama prisons are operating in a state of overcrowding. Currently, there are 26,339 beds in operation; this represents the physical capacity for inmates but is not based on staffing, programs, and services. Operational capacity differs from the BJS definition. Alaska--Prisons and jails form one integrated system. All NPS data include 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. All capacity measures are the same as in 2011. The count of Asian inmates includes Pacific Islanders. Alaska does not report type of admission or release. Total admissions and releases include Alaskan reported values, but state and national totals by type of admission and release do not. Arizona--Jurisdiction counts are based on custody data and inmates in contracted beds. The “other admissions” category includes four males and one female who were mistakenly released and readmitted during 2012. Arkansas--Jurisdiction counts of prisoners held in local jails include county jail back-up and inmates participating in the Act 309 Program, which provides additional space for the care and custody of state inmates on a temporary basis in state-certified adult detention facilities operated by counties and cities. California--Population counts for inmates with maximum sentences of more than 1 year include felons who are temporarily absent, such as in court, in jail, or in a hospital. The majority of temporarily absent inmates are absent for fewer than 30 days. Population counts for unsentenced inmates include civil addicts who are enrolled for treatment and are not serving a criminal conviction sentence, but are under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. In addition, the counts of unsentenced inmates include persons housed in out-of-state contract facilities. California is unable to differentiate between inmates held in federal facilities and those held in other states’ facilities. Changes in design capacity are based on information from an annual facilities planning and management report. Colorado--Population counts include a small, undetermined number of inmates with a maximum sentence of 1 year or less. Admission and release data for inmates who are absent without leave (AWOL) or who have escaped are estimated. Design and operational capacities do not include the privately run facilities in Colorado. Connecticut--Prisons and jails form one integrated system. All NPS data include jail and prison populations. New court commitment admissions include inmates admitted in 2012 on accused status, but who received a sentence later in 2012. Legislation in July 1995 abolished the capacity law. A facility’s capacity is a fluid number based on 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. All NPS data include jail and prison populations. Capacity counts include the halfway houses under the Department of Corrections. Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)--Data reflect inmates under BOP jurisdiction on December 30, 2012. Jurisdiction counts include inmates housed in secure private facilities where the BOP had a direct contract with a private operator, as well as inmates housed in secure facilities where there was a subcontract with a private provider at a local government facility. Jurisdiction counts also include inmates housed in jail or short-term detention and others held in state- operated or other nonfederal secure facilities. Counts include 8,932 inmates (7,798 males and 1,134 females) held in nonsecure, privately operated community corrections centers/halfway houses and 2,659 offenders on home confinement (2,278 males and 381 females). A total of 99 male and 6 female juveniles were held in contract facilities; these inmates were included in the jurisdiction totals but excluded from the counts of private, locally operated, or federally operated facilities. Due to information system configuration, Asians and Native Hawaiians or other Pacific Islanders are combined, and inmates of Hispanic origin are included in the race categories. On December 30, 2012, BOP held 71,714 male and 4,378 female inmates of Hispanic origin. Other admissions include hospitalization and treatment. Parole violation counts combine those with and without a new sentence. Expirations of sentence include good-conduct releases that usually have a separate and distinct term of supervision, as well as releases from the residential drug abuse treatment program. Other releases include vacated sentences, completion of hospitalization or treatment, and court-ordered terminations. The BOP population on December 30, 2012, was 176,658 inmates (excluding contracted and private facilities), and the rated capacity on that date was 128,615. The crowding rate was 37%. Florida--Other conditional releases include provisional release supervision, conditional medical release, program supervision, and parole reinstatement. Georgia--Females are not housed in privately operated correctional facilities in 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. All NPS data include jail and prison populations. In custody and jurisdiction counts, sentenced felon probationers and probation violators are included with the counts of prisoners with a total maximum sentence of 1 year or less. Jurisdiction counts include dual-jurisdiction (state of Hawaii or 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 was based on self-reports by inmates. Idaho--Idaho defines rated capacity as 100% of maximum capacity and operational capacity as 95% of maximum capacity. Design capacity is based on original facility-designed occupancy. Illinois--Illinois did not submit NPS data in 2012. See Methodology for a description of the data imputation procedure. Iowa--In 2009, the Iowa Department of Corrections began including offenders on work release, the Operating While Intoxicated population, and Iowa inmates housed in out-of- state prisons and in jurisdiction counts. Iowa data included in BJS reports prior to 2009 were custody counts only. Jurisdiction counts include Iowa offenders housed in prisons in other jurisdictions who are under Iowa’s jurisdiction. The data quality and collection methodology were updated in 2012; therefore, changes from previous years’ counts may reflect these updates. Absent without leave (AWOL) admissions and releases are for the work release and the Operating While Intoxicated population. Escape admissions and releases are for the prison population only; this differs from the 2011 counts, which included escapes from work release. Kansas--Jurisdiction counts of inmates with sentences of less than 1 year are available for 2012, but not for 2011. Admissions and releases reflect movements of the custody population with the exception of transfers, which include all Kansas prisoners regardless of custody status. Kentucky--The decrease in the number of unconditional releases between 2011 and 2012 is due to the implementation of a mandatory reentry supervision law, which became effective on January 1, 2012. Louisiana--Jurisdiction and capacity counts are correct as of December 27, 2012. Maine--Fewer male state prisoners are housed in county facilities due to overcrowding at the local level. The state has been adding capacity and double-bunking at prisons. Maryland--The number of inmates with maximum sentences of more than 1 year is estimated by taking the percentages for these prisoners from the automated totals and applying them to the manual totals submitted for NPS. The number of male inmates included in the jurisdiction count of prisoners held in other state facilities may include a small number of female inmates. Maryland’s system does not capture Hispanic origin. An undetermined number of Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders may be included in the count of American Indian/Alaska Natives. Maryland’s system does not distinguish between AWOL and escape 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 counted twice. 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) who are serving a sentence of more than 1 year, but these inmates are included in imprisonment rate calculations at the request of the Massachusetts Department of Corrections. 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; or subsequently released. Due to the opening of a new correctional facility for females, the admissions, releases, and custody population of county- sentenced females serving under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections has decreased. After legislative changes to reduce discretionary parole releases in 2011 that caused fluctuations in the number and rate of persons released on parole, these measures remained stable during 2012. This has resulted in an apparently higher parole rate in 2012 than in 2011 for both males and females. In 2012, 261 inmates received unconditional court releases due to falsification of drug tests by one of the chemists in the state drug lab. Michigan--Operational capacity includes institution and camp net operating capacities, as well as the population of community programs on December 31, 2012. Michigan’s new database system treats Hispanic as an ethnicity rather than a race. Because this is currently an optional field, the numbers for Hispanics are significantly underreported, and the state included them in the white race category. Escape releases and admissions consist predominantly of zero- tolerance escapes from community residential programs. Minnesota--Jurisdiction counts include inmates temporarily housed in local jails, on work release, or on community work crew programs. Minnesota only measures operational capacity. Admissions and releases due to AWOL or escape, returns from or releases to appeal or bond, 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 distinguished by their sentence status in the Mississippi file. 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. The state 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 to ease prison crowding. Nebraska defines operational capacity as its stress capacity, which is 125% of design capacity for designated facilities. The total design and operational capacity for institutions that house females includes only one multicustody facility. The department operates two co-ed facilities that represent a design capacity of 290, and that are counted in the male design and operational capacities. Nevada--Nevada did not submit NPS data in 2012. See Methodology for a description of the data imputation procedure. New Hampshire--The new offender database management system reports the number of inmates who are under New Hampshire’s jurisdiction but housed in other state facilities in a different manner from NPS submissions prior to 2010. New Hampshire’s operating capacity is defined as the inmate population on any given day. New Jersey--Population counts for inmates with a maximum sentence of more than 1 year include inmates with sentences of 1 year. The New Jersey Department of Corrections has no jurisdiction over inmates with sentences of less than 1 year or over unsentenced inmates. Reporting of other conditional release admissions has changed from 2011 to better reflect the sentence status of inmates. Other releases include inmates brought too soon from the county jails into the state prison system, then released back to the county jails. New Jersey has recently undertaken a review of its prison system capacity, resulting in updated counts in 2012. New Mexico--New Mexico does not include its inmates housed in other states under the interstate compact agreement in its total jurisdiction count. According to BJS definitions, these inmates should be included in the total state jurisdiction, and were in this report. North Carolina--As of December 1, 2011, North Carolina prisons no longer house misdemeanor offenders with sentences of less than 180 days. 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 postrelease offenders. Postrelease supervision is defined as a reintegration 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 a maximum sentence of more than 1 year include an undetermined number of inmates with a sentence of 1 year or less. Counts of inmates who are under Ohio’s jurisdiction but housed in federal or other state facilities are estimates. Counts of admission and release types reflect revised reporting methods. Admissions of parole violators without a new sentence include only formally revoked violators. Returns and conditional releases involving transitional control inmates are reported only after movement from confinement to a terminal release status occurs. Oklahoma--Jurisdiction counts exclude inmates from other states who were serving time in Oklahoma prisons under the interstate compact and inmates sentenced to the Department of Corrections but not yet in custody. Jurisdiction counts include offenders in a Department of Corrections jail program, those in court, and escapees in the custody of local jails. Most inmates with sentences of less than 1 year were part of the Oklahoma Delayed Sentencing Program for Young Adults. Offenders in the custody of other states and the BOP are mostly escapees. Capacity counts have changed in Oklahoma, as only Department of Corrections facilities have an approved capacity determined by the Board of Corrections according to the standards of the American Correctional Association. Noncitizen status is determined by country of birth. Oregon--Most offenders with a maximum sentence of less than 1 year remain under the custody of local counties rather than the Oregon Department of Corrections. Oregon does not recognize rated capacity. Pennsylvania--All Pennsylvania inmates housed in Virginia were brought back to serve time in Pennsylvania in March 2012. Rhode Island--Prisons and jails form one integrated system. All NPS data include jail and prison populations. Jurisdiction counts include inmates who have dual jurisdiction, or those serving Rhode Island sentences out of state while serving that state’s sentence as well. The Rhode Island data system records Hispanic as a race rather than an ethnicity and does not capture Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islanders or persons identifying as two or more 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, 2012, custody count of unsentenced individuals includes Interstate Compact Commission 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, 2013, was a holiday, inmates eligible for release on January 1 were released on December 31, 2012. Therefore, the inmate count was at its lowest point for the month on December 31, 2012. All inmates in private facilities in South Carolina were housed in private medical facilities. Conditional release counts include inmates released under community supervision after serving 85% of their sentence under truth in sentencing. The SCDC has implemented new intensive supervision services, which are designed to promote community safety and ensure the successful reentry of young offenders back into the community. South Carolina uses 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 included 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 included all holds for the U.S. Marshals Service (sentenced and unsentenced). Commutations are not tracked separately in the South Dakota reporting system; however, they are included in expiration of sentence, supervised mandatory release, or other conditional releases. South Dakota does not separate discretionary and presumptive parole releases. The operational capacity reported is planned capacity. South Dakota does not have rated or design capacities. Tennessee--The sex of six inmates could not be identified and were counted as males in the jurisdiction counts. Eleven inmates could not be assigned to a race category, including five females and the six assigned male inmates. Texas--Offenders in custody were all offenders serving time in a facility owned and operated by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice at the time of data collection. Jurisdiction counts include offenders in custody and those 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 for 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 offenders were counted in the parole violator category. Vermont--Prisons and jails form one integrated system. All NPS data include jail and prison populations. Hispanic origin and persons identifying as two or more races are not collected or recorded in Vermont. Virginia--Jurisdiction counts were for December 31, 2012. As of September 1, 1998, the state is responsible for inmates with a sentence of 1 year or more, or a sentence of 12 months plus 1 day. The state was responsible for a 1-year sentence, while local authorities were responsible for a 12-month sentence. Inmates with a sentence of 12 months or less were not the responsibility of the state. New court commitments are based on fiscal year 2012, while parole violation admissions and all releases are based on calendar year 2012. The 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 (Virginia Department of Corrections) to institutions takes into account the number of inmates who can be accommodated based on staff, programs, services, and design. Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders are included in the Asian race category. Washington--Offenders sentenced to 1 year or less and unsentenced offenders generally reside in county jails, but revisions to law allow certain inmates with sentences of less than 1 year to be housed in prison. These inmates are included in the total jurisdiction counts. Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders are included in the Asian race category. Wisconsin--Custody and jurisdiction counts include 722 temporary probation and parole placements. The jurisdiction count excludes 27 male and 2 female prisoners because they were not serving a Wisconsin sentence. In 2012, both the female custody and jurisdiction populations increased, probably due to more new court commitments and parole violation admissions. Wisconsin does not code escapes as releases and returns from the escape as admissions. In 2012, 19 males and 1 female were on escape status. Design capacities for local jails and for federal, other state, and private facilities are excluded from the total design capacity measure. The reported design capacity includes the following facilities currently housing Wisconsin adult inmates: a state juvenile facility with a design capacity of 400, a non-Department of Corrections facility with a design capacity of 362, and 29 beds contracted in 20 Wisconsin county jails to temporarily house Department of Corrections inmates. The number of contracted beds has declined substantially from the 97 beds reported in 2011. ********************** Terms and definitions ********************** Adult imprisonment rate--The number of prisoners under state or federal jurisdiction sentenced to more than 1 year per 100,000 U.S. residents age 18 or older. 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 the 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, postcustody probation, and other unspecified conditional releases. Conditional release violators--Readmission to prison of persons released to discretionary parole, mandatory parole, postcustody 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 of all ages. Inmate--A person incarcerated in a local jail, state prison, federal prison, or a private facility under contract to federal, state, or local authorities. Jail--A confinement facility usually administered by a local law enforcement agency that is intended for adults, but sometimes holds 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. Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Vermont 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. Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Vermont operate integrated systems, which combine prisons and jails. Prisoner--An individual confined in a correctional facility under the legal authority (jurisdiction) of state or federal correctional officials. Sentenced prisoner--A prisoner sentenced to more than 1 year. Supervised mandatory releases--Conditional release with postcustody supervision generally occurring in jurisdictions using determinate sentencing statutes. Unconditional releases--Expirations of sentences, commutations, and other unspecified unconditional releases. ************* Methodology ************* Started in 1926 under a mandate from Congress, the National Prisoner Statistics (NPS) Program collects annual data 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 voluntary participation by state departments of corrections and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) for NPS data. The NPS distinguishes between inmates in custody and prisoners under jurisdiction. To have custody of a prisoner, a state or the BOP must hold that inmate in one of its facilities. To have jurisdiction over a prisoner, the state or BOP must have legal authority over that prisoner, regardless of where the prisoner is incarcerated or supervised. Some states were unable to provide counts that distinguish between custody and jurisdiction. (See National Prisoner Statistics Program 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 were temporarily absent (less than 30 days), in court, or on work release; housed in privately operated facilities, local jails, or other state or federal facilities; and 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. With a few exceptions, the NPS custody counts include inmates held in privately operated facilities. Respondents to NPS surveys are permitted to update prior counts of prisoners held in custody and under jurisdiction. Some statistics on jurisdiction and sentenced prison populations for prior years have been updated in this report. All tables showing data based on jurisdiction counts, including tables of imprisonment rates, were based on the updated and most recently available data that respondents provided. Admissions include new court commitments, parole violator returns, and other conditional release violator returns; transfers from other jurisdictions; returns of prisoners who were 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. The NPS has historically included counts of inmates in the combined jail/prison systems in Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The District of Columbia has not operated a prison system since yearend 2001. Felons sentenced under the District of Columbia criminal code are housed in federal facilities. Jail inmates in the District of Columbia are included in the Annual Survey of Jails. Some previously published prisoner counts and the percentage change in population include jail inmates in the District of Columbia for 2001, the last year of collection. Additional information about the NPS, including the data collection instrument, is available on the BJS website at www.bjs.gov. Nonreporting states ******************** As of September 13, 2013, Illinois and Nevada had not reported any 2012 custody, jurisdiction, admission, release, or capacity data to the NPS. For both states, BJS compared past NPS submissions with analogous counts reported on their departments of corrections websites. If the ratio of past NPS data to the website data from the same year was stable over 6 years, BJS assumed that the website data could be used in this report. To generate estimates for Nevada, BJS used statistical data published on the Nevada Department of Corrections website (http://www.doc.nv.gov/sites/doc/files/pdf/stats/2012/12/Stat Facts122012.pdf) for total and sex-specific custody, jurisdiction, admission and release counts, and a race and Hispanic origin distribution of the custody population as of December 31, 2012. BJS applied the 2011 proportion of unsentenced prisoners and prisoners with sentences of 1 year or less or more than 1 year to the 2012 custody and jurisdiction totals, which assumes that the distribution of sentence length did not change between 2011 and 2012. BJS also assumed that the proportion of the Nevada prison jurisdiction population housed in local jails in 2012 was the same as that reported in 2011. Similarly, BJS used the 2011 distribution of admission and release types to generate estimates from the 2012 admission and release totals. BJS used an estimate of operating capacity from June 30, 2012 (http://www.doc.nv.gov/sites/doc/files/pdf/stats/2012/12/SS_Q RII_FY13.pdf). Estimates of the custody counts for Nevada were compared with the state’s submission of National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP) data. November 30, 2012, is the date closest to December 31, 2012, for which data were available on the Illinois Department of Corrections website (http://www2.illinois.gov/idoc/reportsandstatistics/Documents /IDOC_Quarterly%20Report_Jan_%202013.pdf). Illinois has reported identical custody and jurisdiction data to the NPS for the past 10 years; therefore, BJS made the assumption that the 2012 custody and jurisdiction counts would again be the same. BJS applied the 2011 distribution of sentence length (unsentenced, sentenced to 1 year or less, sentenced to more than 1 year) to the 2012 counts. The 2011 race and Hispanic origin distribution from Illinois was applied to the custody and jurisdiction total count from November 30, 2012. The 2011 distribution of admission and release types was used to estimate the types of admissions and releases in 2012. BJS obtained monthly counts of admissions and releases from two quarterly reports (http://www2.illinois.gov/idoc/reportsandstatistics/Documents /IDOC_Quarterly%20Report_Apr_%202013.pdf and http://www2.illinois.gov/idoc/reportsandstatistics/Documents/ IDOC_Quarterly%20Report_Jul%202012.pdf). Since these were not sex-specific counts, after summing to obtain 2012 totals, BJS applied the 2011 sex ratios for admissions and releases to the 2012 data, assuming that the proportion of males and females entering or exiting prison had not changed during 2012. Finally, BJS applied the 2011 sex-specific admission and release type distributions on the 2012 totals. Capacity counts were obtained from the April 2013 Illinois Department of Corrections quarterly report, and reflect state prison capacity as of February 28, 2013. The imputed counts were used to calculate overall state and national totals of prisoners, and are footnoted in state- specific tables. *************************************** Estimating yearend counts of prison population, admissions, and releases by age, sex, and race or Hispanic origin *************************************** National-level estimates of the number of persons by race admitted to, released from, or under the jurisdiction of state prisons on December 31, 2012, were based on an adjustment of NPS counts to comply with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) definitions of race and Hispanic origin. OMB defines persons of Hispanic or Latino origin as a separate category. Race categories are defined exclusive of Hispanic origin. OMB adopted guidelines for the collection of these data in 1997, requiring the collection of data on Hispanic origin in addition to data on race. Not all NPS providers’ information systems categorize race and Hispanic origin in this way; in 1991, the earliest time point in the analysis, only a few states were able to report information on Hispanics separately from race. 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 was calculated for the year(s) in which BJS had an inmate survey and NPS data. For this report, the 1991 Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities was used to calculate the ratio used for statistics on racial distributions in 1991; however, because so few states reported Hispanic origin in the 1991 NPS, BJS did not estimate statistics for Hispanics in 1991. The 2004 Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities was used for the 2001, 2006, 2011, and 2012 time points. 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. Estimates of the total number of sentenced prisoners, admissions, and releases by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin on December 31, 2012, were generated by creating separate totals for federal and state prisons. For the federal estimates, each sex-race count that BOP reported to the NPS was 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 white males ages 18 to 19 divided by FJSP white males). The resulting product yielded the FJSP-adjusted NPS counts for each sex-race combination by age group (e.g., white male prisoners ages 18 to 19 in the federal prison system). State prison age distributions for the NPS use a similar sex-race ratio adjustment based on individual-level data from the NCRP. State and federal estimates were added together to obtain national estimates for prison admissions, prison releases, and yearend prison populations. *************************************** Estimating imprisonment rates by age, sex, and race or 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 under jurisdiction on December 31, 2012, by the estimated number of U.S. residents in each age group on January 1, 2013. 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. *************************************** Estimating offense distribution in the state prison population, admissions, and releases by age, sex, and race or Hispanic origin *************************************** Total counts of admissions and releases excluded transfers, escapees, and those absent without leave (AWOL). Parole violation admissions included all conditional release violators returned to prison for either violations of conditions or for new crimes. BJS employed a ratio adjustment method to weight the individual-level race and Hispanic origin or sex-specific offense data from the NCRP to the state prison control totals for sex and the estimated race or Hispanic origin from the NPS, thereby yielding a national offense distribution for state prisoners. Inmates missing offense data were excluded from the analysis prior to the weighting. Because data submission for the NCRP typically lags behind that of the NPS, offense distribution estimates are published for the previous calendar year. 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 five states include prisoners held in private facilities as part of the capacity of their prison systems: Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, and Mississippi. For these states, prison population as a percentage of capacity includes private facilities. ******************************************************** The Bureau of Justice Statistics, located in the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, collects, analyses, and disseminates statistical information on crime, criminal offenders, victims of crime, and the operation of justice systems at all levels of government. William J. Sabol is acting director. This report was written by E. Ann Carson and Daniela Golinelli. Erinn Herberman, Sheri Simmons, and Josephine Palma verified the report. Jill Thomas and Lynne McConnell (Lockheed Martin) edited the report, and Barbara Quinn, Tina Dorsey, and Morgan Young produced the report. December 2013, NCJ 243920 ******************************************************** ************************************************** Office of Justice Programs Innovation * Partnerships * Safer Neighborhoods www.ojp.usdoj.gov ************************************************** ********************** 12/5/2013/JER/2:55pm **********************