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=5869 This reports 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 ------------------------------------------------- Bulletin Prisoners in 2015 E. Ann Carson, Ph.D., BJS Statistician Elizabeth Anderson, BJS Intern At yearend 2015, the United States had an estimated 1,526,800 prisoners under the jurisdiction of state and federal correctional authorities. This was the smallest U.S. prison population since 2005 (1,525,900 prisoners). The prison population decreased by more than 2% from the number of prisoners held in December 2014 (figure 1). This was the largest decline in the number of persons under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities since 1978 (figure 2). The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) had jurisdiction over 196,500 prisoners at yearend 2015, a decrease of 14,100 prisoners from yearend 2014. This was the third consecutive year that the federal prison population declined and the lowest number of federal prisoners since 2006 (193,000). This decrease in federal prisoners accounted for 40% of the total change in the U.S. prison population. The statistics in this report are based on the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) National Prisoner Statistics (NPS) program, which collects annual data from state departments of corrections (DOCs) and the BOP on prisoner counts, prisoner characteristics, admissions, releases, and prison capacity. The 2015 NPS collection was number 91 in a series that began in 1926. Forty-eight states and the BOP reported NPS data for 2015, while data for Nevada and Oregon were obtained from other sources or were imputed (see Methodology). ************************************************** ************* Highlights ************* * The total number of prisoners under the jurisdiction of state and federal correctional authorities on December 31, 2015 (1,526,800) decreased by 35,500 (down more than 2%) from yearend 2014. * The federal prison population decreased by 14,100 prisoners from 2014 to 2015 (down almost 7%), accounting for 40% of the total change in the U.S. prison population. * After increasing during the previous 2 years, the number of state and federal female prisoners decreased by 1% in 2015. * State and federal prisons had jurisdiction over 1,476,800 persons sentenced to more than 1 year on December 31, 2015. * The imprisonment rate in the United States decreased 3%, from 471 prisoners per 100,000 U.S. residents of all ages in 2014 to 458 prisoners per 100,000 in 2015. * State and federal prisons admitted 17,800 fewer prisoners in 2015 and released 4,700 more than in 2014. * More than half of prisoners in state prisons (53%) at yearend 2014 were serving sentences for violent offenses, the most recent year for which data are available. * Nearly half of federal prisoners incarcerated on September 30, 2015 had been sentenced for drug offenses, the most recent date for which federal offense data were available. ************************************************** ************************************************** *********************** 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. * Capacity, design--The number of prisoners 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 prisoners that can be accommodated based on a facility’s staff, existing programs, and services. * Capacity, rated--The number of beds or prisoners 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--Return 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. * Federal prison system--Includes persons held under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) in secure federal and private prison facilities, and persons held in nonsecure, privately operated community corrections facilities, and juveniles in contract facilities. * 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. * 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. Prisoners 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. 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 state or federal correctional facility. * 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 releases--Expirations of sentences, commutations, and other unspecified unconditional releases. ************************************************** ************************* Total prison population ************************* State and federal prisons had jurisdiction over an estimated 1,526,800 prisoners at yearend 2015, a more than 2% decrease (down 35,500 prisoners) from yearend 2014 (table 1). Federal prisoners made up 13% of the total U.S. prison population at yearend 2015. The decrease in the number of U.S. prisoners from yearend 2014 to 2015 was similar to the decrease that occurred between 2011 and 2012 (down almost 2%). The 2011–2012 decline coincided with California’s Public Safety Realignment Policy, which diverted newly sentenced nonviolent, nonserious, and nonsex offenders from state prisons to serve time in local jails and under community supervision. With the commitment by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2015 to reduce the number of nonviolent drug offenders held in federal prisons, the BOP began releasing more nonviolent drug offenders from prison in 2015. States also enacted laws and policies to reduce prison populations. In California, Proposition 47 retroactively reduced some drug and property offenses from felonies to misdemeanors. In Indiana, prisoners with shorter sentences and good time credit were diverted from state prison to local jail facilities. Other states adopted diversionary techniques, including specialty courts, substance abuse treatment facilities, and reentry programs to decrease prison populations and reduce recidivism. Forty percent of the total decline in the number of prisoners occurred in the federal population (down 14,100 prisoners from yearend 2014). The federal prison population decreased by almost 7% between 2014 and 2015 to 196,500 prisoners, its lowest level since 2006 (193,000 prisoners). This was the third consecutive year of population decline among federal prisoners. States held 21,400 fewer prisoners at yearend 2015 than 2014 (down almost 2%). Twenty-nine states showed decreases in the yearend prison population between 2014 and 2015 (table 2). Six states showed decreases of more than 1,000 prisoners in 2015, including California (down 6,500 or almost 5%), Texas (down 2,100 or 1%), Indiana (down 1,900 or 7%), Louisiana (down 1,700 or 4%), Florida (down 1,400 or 1%), and New Jersey (down 1,100 or 5%). Of the 18 state prison populations that grew between 2014 and 2015, Oklahoma (900 more prisoners at yearend 2015) and Virginia (up 860) had the largest increases in the number of prisoners, while the smaller jurisdiction of North Dakota (up 4%) had the most growth as a percentage of its population. Females made up more than 7% of the total prison population nationally at yearend 2015, which remained largely unchanged from 2005. The female prison population decreased by 1,500 prisoners (or more than 1%) between 2014 and 2015, after increasing almost 4% between 2012 and 2014 (figure 3). Females contributed 7% of the total decline in the federal prison population (down 1,000 prisoners) and 2% of the total decrease in the state prison population (down 500) between 2014 and 2015. Eighteen states and the federal prison population showed decreases in their female prison population at yearend 2015, including California (down 600 female prisoners), Florida (down 400), and Indiana (down 300). Ohio, Oklahoma, and Virginia each had an increase of more than 200 female prisoners between yearend 2014 and 2015, representing growth of more than 5% in their female prison populations. ***************************** Sentenced prison population ***************************** Prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year made up 97% of the total prison population in 2015. The remaining proportion had not been sentenced for an offense or had received a sentence of a year or less. BJS makes the distinction between the total number of persons held under the jurisdiction of state and federal correctional authorities and those sentenced to more than one year in prison. State and federal prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year declined for the second consecutive year ***************************************** From December 31, 2014 to December 31, 2015, the number of state and federal prisoners who were sentenced to more than 1 year declined by 30,900, a 2% decrease (table 3). This was the second consecutive year that prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year in prison declined. The number of prisoners who were unsentenced or sentenced to 1 year or less in prison decreased 8% from 2014 to 2015, from 54,500 to 49,900 prisoners. State prisons held 1,298,200 prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year on December 31, 2015, which was 18,200 fewer sentenced prisoners than at yearend 2014 (down 1%). Federal prisoners had 178,700 sentenced prisoners at yearend 2015, or 12,700 fewer than yearend 2014 (down less than 7%). From 2014 to 2015, 26 states and the federal prison system had a decline in the number of prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year (table 4). The federal system (down 12,700 prisoners), California (down 6,500), and Indiana (down 1,900) experienced the largest decrease in their sentenced prison populations. Virginia (up 860) and Oklahoma (up 850) had an increase of more than 800 sentenced prisoners. Rhode Island, one of six jurisdictions with combined prison-jail systems, had the largest percentage increase in its sentenced prison population, growing 15% (by almost 300 prisoners) between yearend 2014 and 2015. Rhode Island’s total prison population declined in size (down 3% or more than 100 prisoners) in the same period. Vermont, another combined prison-jail system, saw declines in both its total prison population (down 12%) and sentenced population (down 14%). Blacks and Hispanics sentenced to more than 1 year in state or federal prison declined in 2015 ***************************************** At yearend 2015, there were 523,000 non-Hispanic black prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year under state or federal correctional authority. This was a 3% decrease from yearend 2014 and a 9% decline from yearend 2005. The number of non-Hispanic white prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year was virtually unchanged between 2005 (497,600 prisoners) and 2015 (499,400 prisoners). Hispanic prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year declined 2% between 2014 and 2015 and were down by 8% between 2010 and 2015. ****************** Imprisonment rate ****************** At yearend 2015, the imprisonment rate for sentenced prisoners of all ages was the lowest since 1997 ***************************************** At yearend 2015, there were 458 prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year in state or federal prison per 100,000 U.S. residents of all ages (table 5). The imprisonment rate for the U.S. population of all ages was the lowest since 1997 (444 per 100,000 U.S. residents, not shown). Among U.S. residents age 18 or older, there were 593 prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year in state or federal prison per 100,000 U.S. adult residents. Both rates decreased since their peak in 2007. On December 31, 2015, 1% of adult males living in the United States were serving prison sentences of greater than 1 year. However, this imprisonment rate decreased 3% between yearend 2014 (1,168 per 100,000 adult males) and yearend 2015 (1,131 per 100,000). The rates for female imprisonment in 2015 (64 per 100,000 females of all ages and 82 per 100,000 adult females) both decreased by about 2% from yearend 2014. Maine had the lowest imprisonment rate at yearend 2015 (132 per 100,000 residents of all ages), followed by Massachusetts (179) and Minnesota (196) (table 6). Louisiana had the highest imprisonment rate for persons of all ages in 2015 (776 per 100,000 state residents) and adults (1,019 prisoners per 100,000 state residents age 18 or older), followed by Oklahoma (715 per 100,000 state residents of all ages and 948 per 100,000 adult state residents). Seven additional states had imprisonment rates of more than 500 per 100,000 state residents of all ages, including Alabama (611 per 100,000), Mississippi (609), Arizona (596), Arkansas (591), Texas (568), Missouri (530), and Georgia (503). Oklahoma had the highest imprisonment rate for females in the United States at yearend 2014 (151 female prisoners per 100,000 females of all ages). The states with the next highest imprisonment rates for females of all ages were Kentucky (115 per 100,000), Idaho (112), and Arizona and Missouri (105 each). The imprisonment rates decreased for all races from 2014 to 2015 ***************************************** In 2015, imprisonment rates for white, black, and Hispanic adults were at their lowest levels since 2005 (figure 4). Between December 31, 2014, and December 31, 2015, the rate of imprisonment for black adults decreased 4% (from 1,824 per 100,000 in 2014 to 1,745 in 2015). The rate for Hispanic adults decreased 5%, from 860 per 100,000 to 820. The rate for whites also declined, from 317 per 100,000 U.S. residents age 18 or older in 2014 to 312 per 100,000 in 2015. ******************************** Prison admissions and releases ******************************** State and federal correctional authorities admitted 17,800 fewer prisoners in 2015 than in 2014 ******************************************** Federal and state correctional authorities admitted a total of 608,300 prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year in 2015, including 429,100 new court commitments (table 7). This represented a 3% decrease from the number of prison admissions (626,100) in 2014. Both California (down 10%) and the federal prison system (down 8%) admitted 4,000 fewer prisoners in 2015 than in 2014. Illinois (down 2,500 or 8%), Florida (down 1,600 or 5%), and Tennessee (down 1,500 or 10%) also had large declines in admissions from 2014 to 2015. Washington had the largest increase in the number of admissions from 2014 to 2015, up by 5% or more than 1,000 entries to prison. In 2015, new court commitments of prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year accounted for 71% of all U.S. prison admissions, 91% of the federal system’s admissions, and 69% of admissions to state prisons. Admissions of persons who were on community supervision following a previous prison term, which included both new offenses and supervision term violations, made up the majority of the remaining admissions. In 2015, new court commitments made up 66% (49,600) of admissions in Texas, 91% (42,600) in the federal system, 88% (30,700) in California, and 97% (29,700) in Florida. In comparison, violations of post-custody supervision programs made up more than 60% each of admissions in Washington, Vermont, and Idaho. Correctional authorities released 4,700 more prisoners from state and federal prisons in 2015 than in 2014 ***************************************** The total number of prisoners released by state and federal correctional authorities was largely unchanged between 2014 and 2015 (increasing by 4,700 releases or 1%). A total of 60,200 prisoners were released from federal prison (up 10% from 2014), and 580,900 prisoners were released from state prisons (down less than 1% from 2014). States with smaller prison populations experienced the largest percentage increases and declines in releases during 2015, including North Dakota (up 42% or 400 more releases than in 2014), Mississippi (down 35% or 3,300), and Maine (down 34% or 300). Among states that provided disaggregated counts by type of release, 70% of prisoners released in 2015 were discharged with some form of required post-custody community supervision. A total of 405,200 persons were released to state post-custody community supervision programs during 2015. Ten states (Arkansas, Delaware, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oregon, Virginia, and Wisconsin) released more than 90% of prisoners onto post-custody community supervision. Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island placed post-custody supervision conditions on less than half of prisoners released in 2015. ****************************************** Demographic and offense characteristics of state and federal prisoners ****************************************** A tenth (11%) of prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year in state or federal prison at yearend 2015 were age 55 or older ******************************************** Prisoners age 55 or older made up almost 11% of the U.S. prison population sentenced to more than 1 year in 2015 (table 8). More than 11% of all prisoners were ages 18 to 24, but this varied by sex and race or Hispanic origin. At yearend 2015, 8% of non- Hispanic white males in state and federal prison were ages 18 to 24, compared to almost 14% of non-Hispanic black males and 13% of Hispanic males. The percentage of white male prisoners age 60 or older (8%) in state and federal prison in 2015 was greater than among black and Hispanic male prisoners (4% each). A smaller percentage of female prisoners in 2015 were age 55 or older (7%) compared to males (almost 11%). The percentage of white female prisoners age 55 or older was higher for the other race groups of female prisoners. Twice as many white females (52,700 prisoners) than black females (21,700) were in state and federal prison at yearend 2015. However, the imprisonment rate for black females (103 per 100,000 black female residents) was almost double that for white females (52 per 100,000) (appendix table 4). Among any age group, black females were between 1.5 and 4.0 times more likely to be imprisoned than white females and between 1.1 and 2.0 times more likely than Hispanic females. As with males, females ages 30 to 34 had the highest rates of imprisonment of any age group (184 per 100,000 female residents). Fifty-three percent of state prisoners were serving time for violent offenses ******************************************** More than half (53% or 696,900 prisoners) of all state prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year on December 31, 2014 (the most recent year for which state prison offense data are available) were serving sentences for violent offenses on their current term of imprisonment (table 9) (appendix table 5). At yearend 2014, 13% of sentenced prisoners (171,700 prisoners) were serving time in state prison for murder or nonnegligent manslaughter. An additional 162,800 state prisoners (12%) had been sentenced for rape or sexual assault. On December 31, 2015, 249,900 state prisoners (19%) were sentenced to at least 1 year for property offenses. Sixteen percent of state prisoners were serving sentences for drug-related offenses (206,300 prisoners). Violent offenders represented more than half (54%) of the sentenced male state prisoners. More than a third (36%) of female prisoners were violent offenders. Eighteen percent (223,700) of male state prisoners and 28% (26,000) of females were sentenced for property offenses. Twenty-five percent of female state prisoners (23,500 females) and 15% of male state prisoners (182,700 males) were sentenced for drug offenses. A smaller percentage of whites were serving sentences of more than 1 year in state prison for violent offenses (47% or 210,400 prisoners) than blacks (58% or 263,800) or Hispanics (59% or 152,900). This pattern was consistent across racial and ethnic groups for murder or nonnegligent manslaughter, robbery, and assault. Whites had a higher percentage of sentenced prisoners serving time in state facilities for rape or sexual assault (16%) than blacks (8%) or Hispanics (13%). Whites also had a higher percentage offenders serving a sentence of more than 1 year in state prison for property crimes (25%) than blacks (16%) and Hispanics (14%) at yearend 2014. The proportion of prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year in state prison for drug offenses was roughly equal between whites, blacks, and Hispanics (15.0% or 67,800 white prisoners, 14.9% or 68,000 black prisoners, and 14.6% or 28,800 Hispanic prisoners). Nearly half of federal prisoners in 2015 were serving sentences for drug offenses ******************************************** Almost 50% (92,000 prisoners) of sentenced federal prisoners on September 30, 2015 (the most recent date for which federal offense data are available) were serving time for drug offenses (table 10) (appendix table 6). An additional 36% of federal offenders (67,500 prisoners) were imprisoned for public order offenses, including 30,200 (16% of all federal prisoners) for weapons offenses and 14,900 (8%) for adjudicated immigration crimes. While 53% of sentenced state prisoners were serving time for violent offenses, 7% of federal prisoners (13,700 prisoners) were serving sentences for violent crimes. Among female federal prisoners, 59% were serving sentences for drug offenses, compared to 49% of males. A larger proportion of white prisoners in federal prison (42%) were serving time for public order offenses on September 30, 2015 than blacks (32%) or Hispanics (37%). More than half of black (51%) and Hispanic (58%) federal prisoners in 2015 were convicted of drug offenses. ************************** Other selected findings ************************** Prison capacity ***************** * At yearend 2015, 18 states and the BOP met or exceeded the maximum measure of their prison facilities’ capacity, and 26 states and the BOP had a number of prisoners in their custody that met or exceeded their minimum number of beds (appendix table 1). * Prison facilities in Illinois held 46,200 prisoners at yearend 2015, 145% of the rated capacity of 31,900 (their maximum capacity), and 165% of the design capacity of 28,000 (their minimum capacity). * Jurisdictions with more prisoners in custody than the maximum number of beds for which their facilities were designed, rated, or operationally intended included Illinois (145%), Nebraska (125%), Massachusetts (123%), the BOP (120%), Delaware (117%), and Hawaii (115%). Private prisons **************** * In 2015, 8% of the total number of state and federal prisoners were held in privately operated facilities that were under the jurisdiction of 29 states and the BOP. The number of prisoners held in private facilities in 2015 (126,300) decreased 4% (5,500 prisoners) from yearend 2014 (appendix table 2). * Federal prisoners held in private prison decreased by 5,100 prisoners, which accounted for 93% of the total decrease in the number of prisoners held in private prisons at yearend 2015. * Private prison facilities, including nonsecure community corrections centers and home confinement, housed almost 18% of the federal prison population on December 31, 2015. * Six states (Hawaii, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Oklahoma) housed at least 20% of their prison population in privately operated facilities. * Vermont, Connecticut, Alabama, and Idaho experienced large percentage decreases in prisoners held in private facilities, while South Dakota, North Dakota, and Ohio observed large percentage increases. Prisoners held in local jails ******************************** * At yearend 2015, almost 81,200 prisoners were held in the custody of local jails in 37 states and the BOP, an almost 1% decline (down 580 prisoners) from the 81,800 prisoners held in jail facilities in 2014. * Nineteen states increased the number of prisoners held in local jails during 2015, while 17 states and the BOP reduced the number of prisoners held in local jails between 2014 and 2015. * Four states (Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, and Mississippi) held at least 600 fewer prisoners in local jails in 2015 than in 2014. * Louisiana saw a 7% decrease (1,400 prisoners) in the number of prisoners held in local jails in 2015. Louisiana held nearly half (49%) of the total state prisoners in local jails--the highest of any jurisdiction at yearend 2015. U.S. military and territories ******************************** * At yearend 2015, the U.S. military held 1,100 persons sentenced to at least 1 year and 1,400 persons of all sentence lengths under their correctional authority (appendix table 7). * About half (48%) of offenders under military correctional authority had served in the U.S. Army before imprisonment. * The Army had custody of two-thirds (67%) of all military personnel sentenced to 1 year or more on December 31, 2015, and the U.S. Navy held nearly a third. * Of military personnel with known offense data sentenced to any term of imprisonment under military jurisdiction, 45% had committed violent offenses, including 29% incarcerated for violent sexual offenses, 7% for murder, and 8% for assault (appendix table 8). * Thirty-seven percent of the total military prison population committed some nonviolent sex offense, including sexual misconduct. * The five U.S. territories held a total of 12,900 persons in custody of correctional authorities at yearend 2015 (appendix table 10). ************************************ National Prisoner Statistics (NPS) program jurisdiction notes ************************************ Alabama--Prisons were not recently rated for official capacity. The majority of Alabama prisons were overcrowded. As of 2015, 25,763 beds were in operation, which represented the physical capacity for prisoners but was not based on staffing, programs, and services. The operating capacity differs from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) definition. Alaska--Alaska did not submit NPS data in 2014. In their 2015 submission, the state updated custody and jurisdiction numbers that BJS estimated for the Prisoners in 2014 report. Alaska did not report admissions or releases of offenders with a sentence of more than 1 year in 2015 because it could not disaggregate these offenders from those with no sentence or sentences of 1 year or less. BJS based its estimate for admissions of offenders with sentences of more than 1 year on the total number of admissions (regardless of sentence length) from the Alaska Department of Corrections’ 2015 Offender Profile (http://www.correct.state.ak.us/admin/docs/2015profile.pdf). The percentage of all admissions for offenders with sentences of more than 1 year were based on Alaska’s reported admission records from the 2014 National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP) data collection. The number of released offenders with sentences of more than 1 year was estimated as the difference between the yearend 2015 and 2014 populations plus 2015 admissions. BJS assumed the distribution of releases by type was identical to the distribution of release type for offenders sentenced to more than 1 year reported by Alaska in the 2014 NCRP release file. Alaska did not report capacity measures for its prison system to the 2015 NPS-1B and has not reported capacity data since 2012. While data from prior years were used in earlier Prisoners reports, BJS could no longer assume that these reflected current capacity levels in Alaska correctional facilities. BJS assumed that the percentage of Alaska offenders age 17 or younger and those who were not U.S. citizens were the same in 2015 as in 2013, the last time Alaska reported these distributions. Arizona--Jurisdiction counts were based on custody data and prisoners in contracted beds, but did not include prisoners held in other jurisdictions because Arizona receives an equal number of prisoners to house from other jurisdictions. Arizona abolished parole in 1994, and only prisoners released prior to 1994 were on parole. However, community supervision prisoners were supervised as parolees, so both parolees and community supervision violators were included in admissions as parole violators. In 2015, Arizona classified persons returned to prison from deportation as transfer admissions. In prior submissions, these persons had been included in the “other admissions” category. Other unconditional releases included prisoners released by the court. Other conditional releases included releases onto other community supervision programs. Other releases included persons released to deportation. Arkansas--Other conditional releases included those released to boot camps. California--Due to a high-level data conversion project by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), the movement data used to report detailed counts of admissions and releases were not available for this report. CDCR was able to differentiate between new court commitment and parole violation admissions but was not able to provide any other detailed breakdown of other admission types or any release types. Custody counts included California out-of-state correctional facility contracted beds, community correctional facility private contract beds, and private work furlough prisoners. Jurisdiction counts for prisoners with maximum sentences of more than 1 year included felons who were temporarily absent, such as in court, jail, or a hospital. The majority of temporarily absent prisoners were absent for fewer than 30 days. California experienced an increase in releases during 2015 due to the enactment of Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act. This proposition, passed in November 2014, allowed offenders convicted of specific drug- or property-related felonies to petition the court to resentence specified felonies to misdemeanors for expedited release from CDCR institutions during 2015. California was unable to differentiate between its prisoners held in federal or other state facilities. A total of 492 male and 301 female California prisoners were held in federal and other state facilities. Changes in design capacity were based on information from an annual facilities planning and management report. Colorado--Jurisdiction and custody counts included a small, undetermined number of prisoners with a maximum sentence of 1 year or less and 224 males and 8 females who were part of the Youthful Offender System. Prisoners reported as housed in privately operated correctional facilities were offenders under Federal Transfer and Interstate Compact programs and were not reported in the department’s population and capacity counts. Jurisdictional population included a small number of prisoners from other states admitted under the interstate compact agreement. Prisoners who were absent without leave (AWOL) or who had escaped were not included in releases. Other conditional releases included discharges from youthful offender systems. Design and operational capacities did not include the privately run facilities in Colorado. Connecticut--Prisons and jails formed one integrated system. All NPS data included jail and prison populations. New court commitment admissions included prisoners who were admitted on accused status but received a sentence later in 2015. Counts of other types of admissions and releases included persons with legitimate types of prison entries and exits that did not match BJS categories. Legislation in July 1995 abolished the capacity law, making a facility’s capacity a fluid number based on the needs of the department. The needs were dictated by security issues, populations, court decrees, legal mandates, staffing, and physical plant areas of facilities that served other purposes or had been decommissioned. The actual capacity of a facility was subject to change. Delaware--Prisons and jails formed one integrated system. All NPS data included jail and prison populations. Capacity counts included the halfway houses under the Department of Corrections (DOC). Releases included offenders who received a combined sentence (prison and parole) of more than 1 year. Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)--Data reflect prisoners under BOP jurisdiction on December 26, 2015. Jurisdiction counts included prisoners housed in secure private facilities where the BOP had a direct contract with a private operator and prisoners housed in secure facilities where there was a subcontract with a private provider at a local government facility. Jurisdiction counts also included prisoners housed in jail or short-term detention and others held in state-operated or other non-federal secure facilities. Counts included 9,153 prisoners (7,971 males and 1,182 females) held in nonsecure, privately operated community corrections centers or halfway houses and 3,122 offenders on home confinement (2,723 males and 399 females). A total of 64 juveniles (58 males and 6 females) were held in contract facilities. These juvenile prisoners were included in the jurisdiction totals but excluded from the counts of private, locally, or federally operated facilities. Some of these juveniles were under the jurisdiction of U.S. probation but were being housed in the custody of the BOP in contract facilities. Due to information system configuration, Asians and Native Hawaiians or Other Pacific Islanders were combined, and prisoners of Hispanic origin were included in the racial categories. On December 31, 2015, the BOP held 62,324 male and 4,062 female prisoners of Hispanic origin. Parole violation counts included those with and without a new sentence. Other admissions include hospitalization and treatment. Expiration of sentence included good conduct releases that usually had a separate and distinct term of supervision, and releases from the residential drug abuse treatment program. In the category of unconditional releases, good conduct releases were included with expiration of sentence cases. Other releases included court- ordered terminations, compassionate release, hospital treatment completions, and releases based on the amount of time served. The BOP population on December 31, 2015 was 160,946 prisoners (excluding contracted and private facilities), and the rated capacity on that date was 134,461. The crowding rate was 20%. Florida--Other admissions included program supervision violations. In 2015, five prisoners received other unconditional releases through vacated sentences. Other conditional releases included provisional release supervision, conditional medical release, program supervision, mandatory conditional, and parole reinstatement. Prior to 2013, Florida identified noncitizen prisoners based on country of birth. In 2013, Florida changed their method for identifying noncitizen prisoners, basing it on citizenship status. Estimates of noncitizens from 2015 are only comparable to those submitted to BJS by Florida in 2013 and 2014. Georgia--Custody populations included both state prisons and county correctional institutions. Subtotals of race, sex, sentence length for jurisdiction, and custody counts were adjusted by the Georgia DOC, using interpolation to match the overall totals. Counts of admissions and releases were adjusted using interpolation to balance the jurisdictional populations on January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015. Females were not housed in privately operated correctional facilities in Georgia. The Georgia DOC was not able to distinguish between parole violators who returned with a new sentence from violators who returned without a new sentence. In 2015, the Georgia overall population was slightly lower because the Georgia Criminal Justice Reform Initiatives (GA CJRI) affected both the commitments and admissions of offenders into the prison system. Hawaii--Prisons and jails formed one integrated system. All NPS data included jail and prison populations. In custody and jurisdiction counts, sentenced felon probationers and probation violators were included with the counts of prisoners with a total maximum sentence of 1 year or less. Jurisdiction counts included dual-jurisdiction (State of Hawaii or federal) prisoners currently housed in federal facilities and in contracted federal detention center beds. Other releases included prisoners released due to status change. Hawaii did not have a rated capacity for its integrated prison and jail system. Information on foreign nationals held in correctional facilities was based on self- reports by prisoners. Idaho--Counts were estimates based on live data with some changing variability over time due to the movement and processing of offenders. Other unconditional releases included non-Idaho civil commitments. Illinois--In December 2015, the Illinois DOC initiated a major information technology (IT) transition, moving to a web-based offender tracking system. During the transition, some traditional population counts and other measures were not collected. Therefore, the data the DOC provided to BJS reflected November 30, 2015 populations. Entries (admissions) and discharges (exits) provided to BJS included 11 months of data (January through November 2015). BJS imputed 12-month admission and release data using Illinois NCRP data to estimate the number of admissions and releases in December 2015. The NCRP data showed that from 2010 to 2014, an average of 7.5% of annual admissions and 8.6% of annual releases occurred in December. BJS assumed these percentages for December 2015 admissions and releases. All population counts were based on jurisdiction. Jurisdiction, custody population, admission, and release counts for prisoners with maximum sentences of more than 1 year included an undetermined number of prisoners with a 1-year sentence. Counts included escape admissions and releases that occurred at adult transition centers. Other admission and release types included an undetermined number of transfers to other jurisdictions and the net difference between long-term admissions and release movements not reported in other categories but required to balance yearend populations. Other unconditional releases included court orders. Indiana--Other types of admissions included prisoners on active supervision or who were admitted for prior charges. Iowa--In 2009, the Iowa DOC began including offenders on work release, in the operating-while-intoxicated population. Also, Iowa prisoners housed in out-of-state prisons were included in its jurisdiction counts. Iowa data included in BJS reports prior to 2009 were custody counts only. The admission and release data and methodology were updated in 2013. Therefore, changes from counts in prior years may reflect these updates. The number of sentenced prisoners under Iowa jurisdiction that were transferred from other jurisdictions between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015 includes offenders transferring from other jurisdictions with an Iowa sentence. Counts of AWOL admissions and releases were of the work release and operating-while-intoxicated populations. Escape admissions and releases were of the prison population only. Other admissions and releases included some unknown types. Other conditional releases included special sentences for sex offenders. Kansas--Prior to 2014, actual time of incarceration rather than sentence length was used to differentiate persons sentenced to 1 year or less from those sentenced to more than 1 year. The jurisdictional numbers for 2014 have been corrected, but Kansas custody and jurisdiction counts reported for 2014 and 2015 were not comparable to counts from prior years. Admissions data from 2014 were updated because 399 male and 149 female admissions were incorrectly categorized as “sanctions from probation,” which had a maximum term of less than 1 year in 2014. These 548 prisoners were reclassified in the “other admissions” section. Other admissions included sanctions from probation for 30 to 180 days. Other unconditional releases included court appearance releases. Other conditional releases included people reparoled in Kansas, reparoled to another state, and supervised on conditional release. Kentucky--Due to a misinterpretation of the counting rules in 2014, the 2015 population counts were not comparable to 2014. Other types of admissions included special admissions and return from active release. Other types of conditional prison releases included exits to home incarceration, and other types of unconditional release included pardons. Other releases included release from jail and active release. Louisiana--Jurisdiction and capacity counts are correct as of December 29, 2015. Other types of unconditional releases include court orders and releases for good time with no supervision. Other types of conditional release included reinstatement to probation. Other types of release included compassionate releases. Maine--Other conditional releases included supervised community confinement program placement. Maryland--The number of prisoners with a maximum sentence of more than 1 year for the jurisdiction, custody, admission, and release measures was estimated by taking the percentage of prisoners with a maximum sentence of more than 1 year from the automated data and applying these percentages to the manual headcounts for the measure of interest (December 31 jurisdiction population, December 31 custody population, annual admissions, and annual releases). Any sentenced prisoners housed at the Baltimore City Detention Center or the Baltimore Central Booking and Intake Center were included in the jurisdiction and custody counts; pretrial prisoners at these facilities were not included. The unsentenced prisoners in Maryland’s custody on December 31, 2015, were all federal prisoners housed contractually at the Chesapeake Correctional Facility. The reported prisoners under Maryland’s jurisdiction that were housed in facilities operated by a county or local authority were prisoners that were sentenced to state prison by local jurisdictions and were waiting to be transferred to DOC custody. No sentence or demographic information were known for these prisoners, and they were not included in the total jurisdictional number. Note that the three additional male prisoners in the number of prisoners housed in local facilities operated by a county or local authority were part of a special program to serve the end of their prison sentence in a local facility, and they were included in the total jurisdiction. Hispanic or Latino origin was captured in the information system but may have been underreported because records for existing prisoners were still being updated. Due to implementation issues with a new information system, admissions and releases for 2015 were estimates. The total number of new court commitments may have included a small, undetermined number of returns from appeal or bond. Mandatory release violators were included with parole violators. Maryland did not distinguish between AWOLs and escapees. Other unconditional releases included court order releases and a small, undetermined number of released to appeal or bond. Other releases were coded as “other, permanent exit.” Operational capacities included beds used for some Maryland pre- trial prisoners that were not counted in the yearend counts. 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 was excluded from the state count but was included in published population counts and rates for local jails and correctional institutions. Jurisdiction counts exclude approximately 2,652 prisoners (2,539 males and 113 females) in the county system (local jails and houses of correction) who were serving a sentence of more than 1 year, but these prisoners were included in imprisonment rate calculations at the request of the Massachusetts DOC. Jurisdiction and custody counts may have included a small but undetermined number of prisoners who were remanded to court; transferred to the custody of another state, federal, or locally operated system; or subsequently released. There was a continued increase in prisoners transferred to local jails prior to their release from prison as part of a step-down initiative for reentry. Two juveniles under the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts DOC and housed in a Massachusetts Department of Youth Services facility were included in the count of prisoners housed on other arrangements. Michigan--During the reporting year for 2015, the Michigan DOC’s major data system was under transition to a new data platform. As a result, statistical techniques had to be modified to obtain much of the data reported in this survey. However, the numbers reported were solidly in line with previous trends, which have remained stable. For example, the racial breakdown percentages stayed constant for several years. Similarly, the percentage of admissions from new court commitments has also stayed constant for several years. Therefore, BJS calculated the racial breakdowns and admissions from new court commitments based on previous trends. The data recorded for Hispanics were treated as an ethnicity rather than as a race, and reporting was optional. Therefore, the numbers for Hispanics were significantly under-reported. Rather than reporting an incorrect number, BJS has included the relatively small number of cases recorded as Hispanic under the “white” category. Releases to appeal or bond and admissions of prisoners returning from appeal or bond were not disaggregated by length of time out to court. These counts represented the net difference between all movements to and from court. Operational capacity was institutional net capacity. Minnesota--Jurisdiction counts for parole violators increased from 2014 to 2015 due to database updates. Because of data issues, the jurisdictional total with admissions and releases did not match yearend numbers. Jurisdiction included prisoners temporarily housed in local jails, on work release, or on community work crew programs. Admissions and releases due to AWOL or escape, returns from or releases to appeal or bond, and releases because of transfer were excluded from Minnesota’s database file. Minnesota measured only operational capacity. Mississippi--Jurisdiction counts of local facilities included both local county jails and county regional facilities. Violators of parole and conditional release were not distinguished by their sentence status in the Mississippi file. Other types of admission and release data included corrections to data because of a lag in processing. Other conditional releases included earned release, house arrest, and medical release. Total operational capacity on December 31, 2015 was 23,516. This capacity included private prisons, county jails, and county regional facilities. Missouri--Offenders reported to have a total maximum sentence of 1 year or less had a sentence of exactly 1 year. Other types of unconditional releases included resentenced completions, court- ordered discharges, and compensation. Other types of conditional releases included parole board holdover returns. Other releases included releases to the field. The Missouri DOC did not have the design capacity of its older prisons, nor did it update design capacity for prison extensions or improvements. Missouri did not use a rated capacity. The state defined operational capacity as the number of beds available, including those temporarily offline. Noncitizen data were based on self-reported place of birth. Montana--DOC did not record Hispanic origin. Therefore, the number of Hispanics was not recorded. Nebraska--Other admissions reflected movements in the population of the reentry furlough program. Other unconditional releases included amended sentences. Nebraska defined operational capacity as its stress capacity, which was 125% of design capacity for designated facilities. The total design and operational capacities for institutions that house females included one female multicustody facility. The department operates two coed facilities that represented a design capacity of 290 and were counted in the male design and operational capacities. Nevada--Nevada did not submit the 2015 NPS data. BJS imputed all 2015 responses from either Nevada DOC reports or the 2014 NPS-1B, as indicated below. For custody and jurisdiction counts, BJS compared the male and female populations in the Nevada DOC’s January 20, 2016 Fact Sheet (http://doc.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/docnvgov/content/About/Statistics /WFS/20160120%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf) to the male and female population in the DOC’s January 2, 2015 Fact Sheet (http://doc.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/docnvgov/content/About/Statistics /WFS/FactSheetsWeekly01022015.pdf). These two reports showed that the male (up 3.96%) and female (up 7.44%) populations had increased from yearend 2014 to yearend 2015. BJS increased the population figures in Nevada’s 2014 NPS data by these percentages to derive the 2015 figures. For the distribution of the Nevada prison population by race, BJS used the racial distribution provided in the January 20, 2016 fact sheet. Because the Nevada prison population increased from yearend 2014 to yearend 2015, BJS assumed that the number of releases in 2015 was the same as in 2014, and that the population increase was due to increased admissions. BJS assumed the number of releases in 2015 was the same as in 2014. BJS assumed the distributions of admission and release types were the same in 2015 as in 2014. The number of noncitizen prisoners and those age 17 or younger were assumed to be the same as in 2014. New Hampshire--Other conditional releases included end of 7-day or 90-day detention for parole violation releases to home confinement. New Jersey--Population counts for prisoners with a maximum sentence of more than 1 year included prisoners with sentences of a year. The New Jersey DOC had no jurisdiction over prisoners with sentences of less than 1 year or over unsentenced prisoners. Reporting of other conditional releases included those to an intensive supervision program. Other types of unconditional releases included vacated and amended sentences and court ordered releases. New Jersey data for escapes did not differentiate between prisoners who disappeared from confined walls and those who disappeared while out of institutions. Other releases included prisoners transferred early from county jails into the state prison system then released back to county jails, and other transfers. New Mexico--Totals for admissions and releases included all entries and exits to New Mexico prisons, regardless of sentence length. New Mexico did not include its prisoners housed in other states under the interstate compact agreement in its total jurisdiction count. According to BJS definitions, these prisoners should be included in the total state jurisdiction and were in this report. The count of noncitizens included prisoners in both state-run and private facilities. New York--Other admissions included the return to prison of persons erroneously discharged and those admitted for parole supervision. Other releases include errors, release to parole supervision, and other discharges. North Carolina--As of December 1, 2011, North Carolina prisons no longer housed misdemeanor offenders with sentences of fewer than 180 days. Captured escapees were not considered a prison admission type in North Carolina, and escape was not considered a type of prison release. Supervised mandatory releases were post-release offenders. Post-release supervision was defined as a reintegration program for serious offenders who served extensive prison terms. This form of supervision was created by the Structured Sentencing Act of 1993. Other unconditional releases included court-ordered interstate compact releases. Rated capacity was not available. North Dakota--Other releases included court-ordered release. Ohio—Population counts for prisoners with a maximum sentence of more than 1 year included an undetermined number of prisoners with a sentence of 1 year or less. Returns and conditional releases involving transitional control prisoners were reported only after movement from confinement to a terminal release status occurs. Admissions of parole violators without a new sentence included only formally revoked violators. Escapes included nonconfinement escapes. Other unconditional releases included vacated sentences. Rated capacity figures excluded two privately operated prison facilities. The count of noncitizens and prisoners age 17 or younger excluded prisoners housed in privately operated facilities. Oklahoma--Most prisoners with sentences of less than 1 year were part of the Oklahoma Delayed Sentencing Program for Young Adults. On December 31, 2015, the number of prisoners under their jurisdiction with a maximum sentence of more than 1 year included 285 males and 39 females who were waiting in county jails to be moved to state prisons. Prisoners held by Oklahoma for other states were excluded from all jurisdiction counts. Waiting in county consisted of offenders who had been sentenced to DOC but not yet taken into custody. Jurisdiction counts included offenders in a DOC jail program, those in court, escapees in the custody of local jails, and those sentenced to the DOC but not yet in custody. Offenders in the custody of other states were mostly escapees. Numbers reported in “escapes from confinement” represented escapes from state-run prisons. Only DOC facilities were included in the capacity counts. Noncitizen status was determined by country of birth. Oregon--This state did not submit 2015 NPS data. BJS imputed all 2015 responses from the Oregon DOC report (http://www.oregon.gov/doc/OC/docs/pdf/IB-53-Quick%20Facts.pdf) and the 2014 NPS-1B. For jurisdiction and custody counts, BJS assumed that the sentence length distributions were the same in 2015 as in 2014, and that the ratio of the size of the custody to jurisdiction populations was also the same. In addition, BJS assumed that the percentage of persons held in private facilities, local jails, and in other states was the same in 2015 as in 2014. BJS used race data on the custody population from the DOC report and applied this distribution to the total jurisdiction population count. For counts of admissions and releases, BJS used the total number of admissions and releases reported by the Oregon DOC and assumed the distributions of admission and release types remained the same as in 2014. BJS assumed Oregon had the same prison capacity in 2015 as in 2014, and that the percentage of noncitizen prisoners and those age 17 or younger did not change in 2015. Pennsylvania--Release counts included 59 offenders whose sentences are less than 1 year. Other admissions included admissions from the state hospital and unspecified reasons. Other types of unconditional releases included vacated sentences and convictions. Other releases included temporary absences. Rhode Island--Prisons and jails formed one integrated system. All NPS data included jail and prison populations. Jurisdiction counts included prisoners who had dual jurisdiction or those serving Rhode Island sentences out of state while also serving that state’s sentence. The Rhode Island data system recorded Hispanic origin as a race rather than an ethnicity and did not capture Native Hawaiians, Other Pacific Islanders, or persons identifying as two or more races, including those who may identify themselves as Hispanic second to another race. Prison admissions classified as escape returns included admissions under home confinement, serving out of state, and minimum-security facilities. Rhode Island DOC’s data system could not differentiate between parole violation admissions with and without new sentences. Other types of unconditional releases consisted of court-ordered discharges. Other types of conditional releases included discharge to the Institute for Mental Health. Other releases included those prisoners discharged out of state. South Carolina--The December 31, 2015 count of unsentenced prisoners included 13 unsentenced males: 9 safekeeper and 4 Interstate Compact Commission prisoners. As of July 1, 2003, the South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC) began releasing prisoners due for release and housed in SCDC institutions on the first day of each month. Because January 1, 2016 was a holiday, prisoners eligible for release on January 1 were released on December 31, 2015. Therefore, the prisoner count was at its lowest point for the month on December 31, 2015. All prisoners in private facilities in South Carolina were housed in private medical facilities. The local facilities holding prisoners on December 31, 2015 included designated facilities and persons AWOL to county or local facilities. South Carolina did not have a specific race code to designate persons identifying as two or more races. These individuals were included in other specific race groups or labeled as other race. Other types of admissions included resentenced Youthful Offender Act (YOA) conversion admissions and prisoners who were resentenced. Other types of unconditional releases consisted of remands and releases by court order. Conditional release counts included prisoners released under community supervision after serving 85% of their sentence under truth in sentencing and supervised reentry. Other release types included persons who were resentenced. There were two paroling authorities within the adult correctional system in South Carolina. The Intensive Supervision Administrative Release Authority of SCDC (ISARA) assumed YOA Parole Board duties on February 1, 2013. Prior to that, the Youthful Offender Branch of SCDC handled YOA paroles. ISARA paroled 804 offenders sentenced under the YOA, and the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services paroled 747 non-YOA sentenced offenders. South Carolina used the operational capacity concept in its management reports and other requested surveys. South Dakota--Custody and jurisdiction counts of prisoners 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 reporting system for the South Dakota DOC did not have a category for prisoners of two or more races. These prisoners were included in the counts of other race prisoners. South Dakota did not separate discretionary and presumptive parole releases. Parole detainees were included in the counts of other admissions and other release types. Prior to 2014, these persons had not been included. The operational capacity reported was planned capacity. South Dakota did not have rated or design capacities. South Dakota did not record the number of prisoners with a sentence of greater than 1 year who were admitted in 2015. Instead, in its place they used the total number of prisoners under their jurisdiction with a total sentence of 1 year or greater as of December 31, 2014. Other admissions included parole or supervised release detainees. Tennessee--Other admissions included those admitted for unknown reasons. Other conditional releases included those who were released to community corrections. The total rated capacity included the rated capacity of three private prisons. The total operational capacity included the operational capacity of three private prisons. 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 included offenders in custody and those held in privately operated prisons, intermediate-sanction facilities, substance abuse felony punishment facilities, and halfway houses; offenders temporarily released to a county for fewer than 30 days; and offenders awaiting paperwork for transfer to state-funded custody. Capacities excluded county jail beds because they do not have a minimum or maximum number of beds available for paper-ready and bench-warrant prisoners. Admissions and releases included offenders received into an intermediate-sanction facility, which was a sanction in lieu of revocation. These offenders were counted in the parole violator category, although these were not revocations. Other conditional releases included discretionary mandatory releases. Other admissions and other release types included transfers between divisions. Executions are included in other releases. Utah--Other types of unconditional release included discharges of cases or prisoners holds. Vermont--Prisons and jails formed one integrated system. Vermont did not complete the 2015 NPS-1B form. The Vermont DOC provided the total jurisdiction population by sex, the number unsentenced by sex, and the number housed out of state by sex. Based on the 2014 NPS, BJS assumed that the only difference between the custody and jurisdiction populations was the 241 male offenders housed in an out-of-state private prison. BJS assumed that the distribution of sentenced offenders in custody or under jurisdiction receiving a sentence of more than 1 year was the same in 2015 as 2014. BJS assumed the race distribution was the same in 2015 as 2014. BJS assumed the number of admissions in 2015 was equal to the number in 2014 and that the decrease in the jurisdiction population was due solely to an increase in releases in 2015. Admission and release type distributions were assumed to be the same in 2015 as 2014. BJS used the same prison capacity reported in 2014 for 2015 and assumed the number of noncitizen offenders and those age 17 or younger were the same in 2015 as 2014. Virginia--Jurisdiction counts were for December 31, 2014. As of September 1, 1998, the state was responsible for prisoners with a sentence of 1 year or more or a sentence of 12 months plus 1 day. Prior to September 1, 1998, the state had been responsible for a 1-year sentence, while local authorities were responsible for sentences of 12 months or fewer. Prior to 2013, the count of prisoners housed in local facilities was taken from Compensation Board reports. Starting in 2013, these counts were obtained from DOC data. Virginia DOC revised its method of reporting prison capacity in 2014 to match BJS definitions. As a result, comparisons should not be made to estimates before 2014. The counts do not include beds assigned to institutional hospitals that cannot be designated as only male or only female and do not include detention and diversion centers. Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders are included in the Asian racial category. Admissions and releases are preliminary fiscal year 2015 figures. Other unconditional releases included court ordered releases. Washington--Offenders sentenced to 1 year or less and unsentenced offenders generally resided in county jails, but revisions to law allowed certain prisoners with sentences of less than 1 year to be housed in prison. Admission and release counts included offenders who did not receive sentences of greater than 1 year. They included offenders who served time in county jails who were released to community supervision, and then returned to a county jail for a term of less than 30 days because they violated the terms of their community supervision. Also included in admissions and releases of conditional release violators were offenders who received probation sentences and were sent to county jails for a term of less than 30 days for violating the conditions of their probation. Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders were included in the Asian racial category. Other unconditional releases included vacated sentences. West Virginia--Other types of admissions and releases included those to and from the Anthony Center for Young Adults and Diagnostics. Other types of unconditional releases included court- ordered releases. Wisconsin--Consistent with the method used to generate population estimates in 2014, the Wisconsin DOC used the time between a prisoner’s admission date and their maximum discharge date to determine sentence length for yearend counts. If a maximum discharge date was not recorded, the mandatory release date was used. If this date was not recorded, the prisoner’s release date was used. Therefore, this may not accurately reflect whether the prisoner was initially sentenced to 1 year or less or more than 1 year. Custody measures include prisoners without Wisconsin sentences who were physically housed in a Wisconsin prison. Jurisdiction measures include prisoners with Wisconsin sentences, regardless of where they were physically located. Unsentenced prisoners were those who had not yet had data entered reflecting their mandatory release date and maximum discharge date and some offenders temporarily held in the Milwaukee facility. An offender on a temporary hold who was on probation did not have a mandatory release date or maximum discharge date. To determine sentence length for admissions totals, the time between a prisoner’s admission date and their maximum discharge date was used. If a maximum discharge date was not recorded, the mandatory release date was used. If this date was not recorded, the prisoner’s release date was used. Therefore, this may not accurately reflect whether the prisoner was initially sentenced to 1 year or less or more than 1 year. Other admissions included temporary holds, alternatives to revocation, persons admitted under the corrections compact, and erroneous releases. To determine sentence length for the releases total, the time between a prisoner’s admission date and release date was used. This may not accurately reflect whether a prisoner was initially sentenced to 1 year or less or more than 1 year. Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander prisoners are included in the Asian category. Wyoming--No notes were submitted. ************** Methodology ************** The National Prisoner Statistics (NPS) program started in 1926 under a mandate from Congress to 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 (DOC) and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) for NPS data. The NPS distinguishes between prisoners in custody and prisoners under jurisdiction. To have custody of a prisoner, a state or the BOP must hold the prisoner 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 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 (fewer 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 prisoners held within a respondent’s facility, including prisoners housed for other correctional facilities. The custody counts exclude prisoners held in local jails and other jurisdictions. With a few exceptions, the NPS custody counts exclude prisoners 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 and probation violator returns, 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 prisoners in the combined jail and 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 prisoners 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. Data on prisoners under the jurisdiction of U.S. territorial correctional authorities are collected separately from state and federal NPS data, and U.S. totals in this report do not include territorial counts. Three territories (American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands) did not provide 2015 data for NPS. Data from prior years are shown in appendix table 10. Nonreporting states ******************** The Nevada and Oregon state DOCs did not respond to the 2015 NPS survey. For Nevada jurisdiction and custody counts, BJS compared the male and female populations in the DOC’s January 20, 2016 Fact Sheet (http://doc.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/docnvgov/content/About/Statistics /WFS/20160120%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf) to the male and female population in the DOC’s January 2, 2015 Fact Sheet (http://doc.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/docnvgov/content/About/Statistics /WFS/FactSheetsWeekly01022015.pdf). These two reports showed that the male (up 4.0%) and female (up 7.4%) populations had increased from yearend 2014 to yearend 2015. BJS increased the population figures in Nevada’s 2014 NPS-1B by these percentages to derive the 2015 counts. BJS assumed that the increase in the 2015 jurisdiction counts was due to an increase in admissions, and that there was no change in the number of releases from 2014 to 2015. BJS assumed that the race and Hispanic origin distribution of the jurisdiction population and estimates for capacity, noncitizens, and prisoners age 17 or younger had not changed from 2014. For Oregon, BJS used custody figures from the DOC report (http://www.oregon.gov/doc/OC/docs/pdf/IB-53-Quick%20Facts.pdf) and assumed that the distribution of sentence length for offenders was the same in 2015 as in 2014. In addition, BJS assumed that the ratio of custody to jurisdiction population had not changed in 2015 from that reported on the 2014 NPS-1B. The DOC report provided the race and Hispanic origin distribution in addition to the total number of admissions and releases for Oregon during 2015. BJS assumed that the estimates for prison facility capacity, the percentage of noncitizens and prisoners age 17 or younger, or the distributions of admission and release types did not change from 2014. Vermont only reported sex-specific jurisdiction counts in 2015, including the number of unsentenced prisoners and those held out of state. BJS made estimates for admissions, releases, capacity, and special populations based on 2014 data. See Jurisdiction notes for estimation details. Military correctional data **************************** BJS obtains an annual aggregate count of service personnel under military jurisdiction and limited demographic and offense data from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. The Department of Defense disaggregates these data by the branch in which prisoners served, the branch having physical custody of the prisoner, and whether the prisoner was an officer or enlisted. Estimating yearend counts of prison population by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin **************************************** National-level estimates of the number of persons by race under the jurisdiction of state prisons on December 31, 2015 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. Racial categories are defined exclusive of Hispanic origin. OMB adopted guidelines for collecting 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 point in the analysis, only a few states were able to report information on Hispanic origin separately from race. BJS adjusted 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 prisoner surveys that use OMB categories for race to the relative distribution of prisoners by race and Hispanic origin in the NPS data. For this report, the 2004 Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities was used to calculate the ratio used for statistics on racial distributions in 2015. 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 by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin on December 31, 2014 were generated by creating separate totals for federal and state prisons. For the federal estimates, each sex and race count that BOP reported to the NPS was multiplied by the ratio of the age category count within the sex and race combination in the Federal Justice Statistics Program (FJSP) to the FJSP total count within the sex and 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 and 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 and race ratio adjustment based on individual-level data from the National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP). State and federal estimates were added together to obtain national estimates for yearend prison populations. In the current report, BJS publishes the unadjusted jurisdiction- level counts of prisoners by race and Hispanic origin (appendix table 3). Historical counts of prisoners by race are archived through the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/studies/36281). These data are administrative or operational in nature and do not necessarily reflect how individual prisoners might choose to report their race or Hispanic origin. National level estimates (table 8) have been adjusted to more accurately reflect the distributions among race and Hispanic origin as reported by prisoners in BJS prisoner surveys. Estimating imprisonment rates by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin **************************************** BJS calculated age-specific imprisonment rates for each age, sex, and racial group by dividing the estimated number of sentenced prisoners within each age group under jurisdiction on December 31, 2015 by the estimated number of U.S. residents in each age group on January 1, 2016. BJS multiplied the result 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 and federal prison populations by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin **************************************** 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, which yielded a national offense distribution for state prisoners. Prisoners 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, state offense distribution estimates are published for the previous calendar year. Data presented in table 10 and appendix table 6 are drawn from FJSP and encompass all prisoners in federal custody, regardless of sentence length. Data are limited to prisoners sentenced on U.S. district court commitments, District of Columbia superior court commitments, and those returned to federal custody following violations of probation (both federal and District of Columbia), parole, supervised release, or mandatory release. Due to these methodological differences, the estimates in table 10 and appendix table 6 will differ from previously published federal offense distributions presented in the FJSP web tool (http://www.bjs.gov/fjsrc/) or Federal Justice Statistics bulletins and statistical tables on the BJS website. Because FJSP is a custody collection, the total count of prisoners in table 10 and appendix table 6 will differ from the jurisdiction count of prisoners reported to NPS. 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 prisoners 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 prisoners held in the states’ private facilities. Noncitizen prisoners ************************ BJS asks state DOCs and the BOP to report the number of persons in their custody who were not citizens of the United States on December 31, 2015. While the intention is for jurisdictions to report based on prisoners’ current citizenship status, a number of jurisdictions cannot provide that information and instead report country of birth to NPS. These states are noted in appendix table 9. As this is a custody count, noncitizens held in private prison facilities or local jails under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities are not included. ********************************************************** The Bureau of Justice Statistics of the U.S. Department of Justice is the principal federal agency responsible for measuring crime, criminal victimization, criminal offenders, victims of crime, correlates of crime, and the operation of criminal and civil justice systems at the federal, state, tribal, and local levels. BJS collects, analyzes, and disseminates reliable and valid statistics on crime and justice systems in the United States, supports improvements to state and local criminal justice information systems, and participates with national and international organizations to develop and recommend national standards for justice statistics. Jeri M. Mulrow is acting director. This report was written by E. Ann Carson. Joshua Markman, Danielle Kaeble, Laura Maruschak, and Mariel Alper verified the report. Monika Potemra, Jill Thomas, and Morgan Young edited the report. Tina Dorsey produced the report. December 2016, NCJ 250229 ********************************************************** ************************************************** Office of Justice Programs Building Solutions • Supporting Communities • Advancing Justice www.ojp.usdoj.gov ************************************************** ************************** 12/12/2016 JER 11:25am *************************