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 BJSwebsite at: http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5479 ****************************************************** Special Report Veterans in Prison and Jail, 2011–12 Jennifer Bronson, Ph.D., E. Ann Carson, Ph.D., and Margaret Noonan, BJS Statisticians, Marcus Berzofsky, Dr.P.H., RTI International In 2011–12, an estimated 181,500 veterans (8% of all inmates in state and federal prison and local jail excluding military- operated facilities) were serving time in correctional facilities. This represented a decrease from the estimated 206,500 incarcerated veterans (9% of the total incarcerated population) in 2004, and was consistent with the decline in the number of veterans in the U.S. general population (figure 1). While the number of veterans in prison and jail increased along with growth in the overall number of persons incarcerated between 1980 and 2008, the proportion of incarcerated veterans has declined, down from an estimated 24% of all persons incarcerated in state prison and jail in 1978 (federal inmates were not surveyed in 1978). In 1978, 19% of U.S. adult residents, 24% of prisoners, and 25% of jail inmates were military veterans. By 2011–12, veterans accounted for 9% of the general population, 8% of state and federal prisoners, and 7% of jail inmates. ************************************************* ************* Highlights ************* * The number of veterans incarcerated in state and federal prison and local jail decreased from 203,000 in 2004 to 181,500 in 2011– 12. * The total incarceration rate in 2011–12 for veterans (855 per 100,000 veterans in the United States) was lower than the rate for nonveterans (968 per 100,000 U.S. residents). * Non-Hispanic black and Hispanic inmates made up a significantly smaller proportion of incarcerated veterans (38% in prison and 44% in jail), compared to incarcerated non-Hispanic black and Hispanic nonveterans (63% in prison and 59% in jail). * A greater percentage of veterans (64%) than nonveterans (48%) were sentenced for violent offenses. * An estimated 43% of veterans and 55% of nonveterans in prison had four or more prior arrests. * More than three-quarters (77%) of incarcerated veterans received military discharges that were honorable or under honorable conditions. * An estimated two-thirds of veterans in prison (67%) and jail (66%) were discharged from military service between 1974 and 2000. * From 2001 to 2012, veterans discharged during Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation New Dawn accounted for 13% of veterans in prison and 25% of veterans in jail. * Nearly half of veterans prison (48%) and jail (44%) served less than 3 years in the military. * A quarter of veterans in prison (25%) and less than a third of veterans in jail (31%) reported that they had been in combat while in the military. * About half of all veterans in prison (48%) and jail (55%) had been told by a mental health professional they had a mental disorder. * Incarcerated veterans who saw combat (60% in prison and 67% in jail) were more likely than noncombat veterans (44% in prison and 49% in jail) to have been told they had a mental disorder. ************************************************* This report uses data from the 2011–12 National Inmate Survey (NIS-3) to describe the demographic characteristics, military service, and disability and mental health status of incarcerated veterans in jails and state and federal prisons. Data from previous BJS surveys of inmates in prison and jail were used to establish historical trends regarding incarcerated veterans. To facilitate comparisons, estimates of nonveteran inmates were standardized to the veteran inmate population’s distribution by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin. See Methodology for further information on computational procedures and data limitations. ************************************* Veterans in prison and jail have decreased since 1998 ************************************* In 2011–12, about 131,500 veterans were incarcerated in prison (8% of the total prison population) and 50,000 were in jail (7% of the total jail population) (table 1). This represents a 6% decrease from the number of veterans incarcerated in prison in 2004 (8,500 fewer inmates) and a 25% decrease from the number of veterans in jail in 2004 (16,500 fewer inmates). While veterans made up a larger proportion of the incarcerated population than the general population in 1978 and 1985, the proportion of veterans in both the general and incarcerated populations was equal in 1998. Veterans were incarcerated at significantly higher rates than nonveterans in 1978 and 1985 and lower rates in 2004 and 2011–12. By 1998, a total of 948 nonveterans per 100,000 adult U.S. nonveteran residents were incarcerated in prison or jail, compared to 882 veterans per 100,000 adult U.S. veteran residents (figure 2). In 2011–12, there were 619 veterans per 100,000 adult residents incarcerated in prison and 236 veterans per 100,000 adult residents in jail (table 2). The incarceration rate for veterans in prison increased 4% from 2004 to 2011–12 (from 598 to 619 per 100,000), while the rate for nonveterans decreased 5% (from 687 to 653). During the same period, the incarceration rate for veterans in jail decreased 17% (from 284 to 236 per 100,000 in 2004), compared to a 4% decrease for nonveterans (from 328 to 315). In 2011–12, males accounted for 93% of nonveterans and 99% of veterans in prison (table 3). Similarly, males accounted for 87% of nonveterans and 97% of veterans in jail. Unless stated otherwise, analyses in the remainder of this report are limited to data on male inmates. ************************************* On average, veterans in prison and jail were older than nonveterans ************************************* Veterans incarcerated in jail were an average of 43 years of age, 11 years older than nonveterans (age 32) (table 3). More than a quarter (27%) of veterans and nearly two-thirds (64%) of nonveterans in jail were ages 18 to 34. Almost 19% of veterans in jail were age 55 or older, compared to 3% of nonveterans. Veterans in prison averaged 49 years of age, 12 years older than nonveteran prison inmates. Thirteen percent of veterans and 47% of nonveterans were ages 18 to 34, and 33% of veterans and 6% of nonveterans were age 55 or older. The race or Hispanic origin of veterans in prison and jail differed significantly from nonveterans. In prison, 50% of veterans and 27% of nonveterans were white, 27% of veterans and 38% of nonveterans were black, and 11% of veterans and 26% of nonveterans were Hispanic. A higher proportion of non-Hispanic white veterans (44%) than nonveterans (31%) were in jail, while non-Hispanic blacks were equally represented among veterans (32%) and nonveterans (35%). Twenty-four percent of nonveterans and 11% of veterans in jail were Hispanic. In both prison and jail, more veterans had been married at some point in their lives than nonveterans. Significantly more nonveterans (57% in prison and 61% in jail) than veterans (24% in prison and 32% in jail) had never been married. Forty-five percent of veterans in prison and 31% of veterans in jail were divorced, compared to 17% of divorced nonveterans in prison and 12% in jail. Incarcerated veterans had more years of formal education than nonveterans. A higher percentage of veterans in prison (20%) and jail (18%) than nonveterans (5% each in prison and jail) obtained at least a college degree. ************************************* Incarcerated veterans were more likely to be convicted on a violent sexual offense and have fewer priors than nonveterans ************************************* Veterans in prison reported fewer prior arrests and incarcerations than nonveterans (table 4). An estimated 43% of veterans and 55% of nonveterans in prison had four or more prior arrests, while 22% of veterans and 16% of nonveterans had one prior arrest. When standardized to the veteran population, 64% of veterans and 52% of nonveterans in prison were sentenced for violent offenses. An estimated 29% of both veterans and nonveterans in prison reported their most serious offense was a nonsexual violent crime, but a greater percentage of veterans (35%) than nonveterans (23%) was in prison for a violent sexual offense. When standardized to the veteran population, a larger proportion of nonveterans than veterans were in prison for property (17% for nonveterans compared to 12% for veterans), drug (19% compared to 14%), and DUI/DWI (4% compared to 3%) offenses. An estimated 81% of veterans and 77% of nonveterans received sentences of 5 or more years, including sentences of life or death. More veterans (16%) than nonveterans (14%) in prison were serving life sentences, while fewer veterans (17%) than nonveterans (21%) were serving sentences of 1 to 4 years. About a third of veterans (32%) and a quarter of nonveterans (25%) in jail had not been previously incarcerated (table 5). Compared to nonveterans in jail, a larger proportion of veterans had one prior arrest and a smaller proportion had 11 or more prior arrests. Similar proportions of veterans (53%) and nonveterans (52%) in jail were unsentenced. Among jail inmates who were serving sentences, sentence length did not significantly differ based on veteran status. About 22% of both groups were sentenced to less than 1 year, 14% were sentenced to 1 to 4 years, and 10% were sentenced to 5 years or more. In 2011–12, a larger percentage of veterans than nonveterans was incarcerated in jail for a violent sexual offense. Nonveterans were more likely to be held for property offenses (25% for nonveterans compared to 21% for veterans) and drug offenses (23% of nonveterans compared to 18% of veterans). ************************************* The majority of incarcerated veterans did not experience combat during their military service ************************************* The majority of veterans in prison (75%) and jail (69%) reported that they did not experience combat while serving in the U.S. military (table 6)*** Footnote 1 ?Inmates may have served in more than one combat zone and/or more than one branch of the military ***. Of those who saw combat in at least one conflict zone, 42% of veterans in prison and 24% in jail served in Vietnam. Among combat veterans serving prison terms in 2011–12, 27% (8,500 inmates) fought in the Persian Gulf. Thirty-nine percent (12,000 inmates) saw combat in some other action. A higher percentage of veterans in jail saw combat in Afghanistan (23%) or Iraq (42%) than veterans in prison (16% in Afghanistan and 26% in Iraq). Fifty-one percent of veterans in jail reported serving in other conflict zones while in the military. The service branch profile of incarcerated veterans was similar for both jail and prison inmates. The majority (55%) of incarcerated veterans served in the U.S. Army, followed by the Navy (20%), Marine Corps (18%), Air Force (9%), and Coast Guard (2%). Almost half of veterans in prison (48%) and jail (44%) served in the U.S. military for less than 3 years, while about a quarter of prisoners (24%) and jail inmates (27%) had 5 years or more of military service. More than three-quarters (77% each) of veterans in prison and jail received discharges from the military that were honorable or general under honorable conditions. Less than 10% of prisoners (5%) and jail inmates (6%) received dishonorable or bad conduct discharges. Two-thirds of veterans incarcerated in prison (67%) and jail (66%) separated from the military between 1974 and 2000. A quarter of veterans (25% or 10,800) in jail left the military between 2001 and 2012, the Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation New Dawn (OEF/OIF/OND) era. A higher percentage of veterans in prison served in Vietnam (16%) than OEF/OIF/OND (13%). ************************************* Veterans in prison and jail were likely to report having been told they had post-traumatic stress disorder ************************************* Past 30-day serious psychological distress (SPD) is measured by the K6 scale of nonspecific psychological distress ***Footnote 2 The K6 scale is a six-question, self-reported mental health screener widely used in national surveys. It is not the same as a clinical diagnosis of a mental disorder(s) and is used here as an indicator that an inmate might have a current mental health problem. See Methodology***. When standardized to the veteran population, no significant difference was observed in the percentage of veterans (14%) and nonveterans (15%) in prison who had scores consistent with SPD (table 7). An estimated 48% of veterans and 36% of nonveterans in prison were ever told they had a mental disorder. Veterans in prison (23%) were twice as likely as nonveterans (11%) to report that a mental health professional ever told them they had post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). An estimated 29% of jail inmates had K6 scores consistent with SPD, and there was no significant difference between veterans and nonveterans. A higher percentage of veterans (26%) than nonveterans (19%) in jail reported they were currently being treated for a mental health problem. A higher percentage of veterans (55%) than nonveterans (43%) in jail reported that, at some point in their lives, a mental health professional told them they had a mental disorder. The most common disorder for veterans (34%) and nonveterans (30%) was major depressive disorder. The proportion of veterans in jail who were ever told that they had PTSD (31%) was twice as high as nonveterans (15%). *************************************************** ************************************* Incarcerated veterans with combat experience remained in the military longer than those without combat experience ************************************* About 31,800 veterans in state and federal prisons and 14,700 veterans in local jails reported that they experienced combat in a line or combat unit during their military service (table 8). Veterans with combat experience who were serving time in prison or jail were significantly more likely than those who did not see combat to have remained in the military longer and to have received an honorable discharge. Thirty-five percent of veterans in jail who left the military between 2001 and 2012 saw combat, compared to 21% of veterans in prison. Significantly more incarcerated veterans who had seen combat reported they were told that they had a mental disorder at some point in their lives. This could be influenced by increased access to mental health services provided by the military. Sixty-seven percent of veterans in jail who experienced combat reported they were told that they had a mental disorder, compared to 49% of veterans who were not in combat. The differences were smaller for current serious psychological distress (SPD), although more veterans in jail who had combat experience reported SPD. Thirty-one percent of veterans in jail who had combat experience and 27% who were not in combat reported current SPD, compared to 16% of veterans in prison with combat experience and 13% who were not in combat. d be influenced by increased access to mental health services provided by the military. Sixty percent of veterans in prison who experienced combat and 44% of those who were not in combat were told they had a mental disorder at some point in their lives. Sixty-seven percent of veterans in jail who experienced combat reported they were told that they had a mental disorder, compared to 49% of veterans who were not in combat. The differences were smaller for current serious psychological distress (SPD), although more veterans in jail who had combat experience reported SPD. Thirty-one percent of veterans in jail who had combat experience and 27% who were not in combat reported current SPD, compared to 16% of veterans in prison with combat experience and 13% who were not in combat. **************************************************** ************************************* Veterans in prison and jail were more likely than nonveterans to report a hearing or vision disability ************************************* Inmates were asked if they had one or more of six disability types: hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, or independent living (see Methodology). An ambulatory disability was the most common disability among veterans and nonveterans in prison (30% each of veterans and nonveterans) and jail (18% of veterans and 20% of nonveterans) (table 9). There were few significant differences between prisoners according to veteran status and disability. About 18% of veterans in prison reported a cognitive disability, 14% reported an independent living disability, and 11% reported a hearing disability. After adjusting for age and race, nonveterans in jail (8%) were less likely than veterans (14%) to report having a hearing disability. Rates for vision, cognitive, self care, and independent living were comparable between nonveterans and veterans. ************** Methodology ************** The National Inmate Survey ************************************* The findings in this report come from the 2011–12 fielding of the National Inmate Survey (NIS-3). The NIS-3 was conducted in 233 state and federal prisons, 358 local jails, and 15 special facilities (military, Indian country, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)) between February 2011 and May 2012. RTI International collected the data under a cooperative agreement with the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The surveys were administered to 41,822 adult inmates in state and federal prison and 58,745 inmates in jail, for a total of 100,567 adult inmates who participated. Additional information on the methodology for sample selection of facilities and inmates can be found in Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2011–12 (NCJ 241399, BJS web, May 2013). Measurement of veteran status ************************************* In this report, the analysis of veteran status was restricted to adult inmates in prison or jail excluding military prisons. This report contains measures of veterans incarcerated in state and federal prison and local jail. It does not include estimates of all incarcerated service members because it excludes inmates age 17 or younger or in military, Indian country, or ICE facilities. The veteran status module was administered to all inmates participating in the NIS-3. Survey respondents received the module before they were randomized to either the sexual victimization survey (90% of inmates) or the alternative survey (10% of inmates), and all inmates responded to the veteran module. The module on veteran status relied on inmates reporting their direct experience. It asked those who indicated they were a veteran about the branch of the military in which they served, whether they saw combat, the campaign(s) they fought in, their discharge type, and how long they served in the military. Due to the small number of female respondents, it is not possible to make significant inferences about female veterans in prisons or jails. Therefore, except for the sex variable in table 3, this report excludes females from all analyses. The audio computer-assisted self-interview questionnaire (listed as National Inmate Survey) is available on the BJS website. Nonresponse bias analysis ************************************* Bias occurs when the estimated prevalence of an outcome is different from the actual prevalence of the outcome for a given inmate. One potential source of bias is nonresponse. For each survey in the NIS-3, a nonresponse bias analysis was conducted to determine whether inmates who did not receive modules (due to the time constraints built into the survey) that may be associated with veteran status were different from inmates who did receive those modules. For both the sexual victimization survey respondents and the alternative survey respondents, the analysis consisted of assessing the level of missing data for key items. Key findings from the nonresponse bias analysis for respondents to the sexual victimization survey include the following for both prisons and jails: * All inmates completed the demographic and criminal history modules. * All inmates received the facility climate module, which includes items on contact with family and friends. * All inmates received the disciplinary experiences module. * More than 99% of inmates received the mental health screener module. When “don’t know” and “refuse” responses were taken into account, more than 95% of inmates provided useable responses to the mental health screener items. * Of the inmates who reported a mental health condition, more than 15% did not receive the full mental health module due to survey time constraints. * More than 15% of inmates did not receive the disability module. Key findings from the nonresponse bias analysis for respondents to the alternative survey include the following for both prisons and jails: * All inmates received the demographic and criminal history modules. * More than 99% of inmates received the mental health screener items and full mental health module. When “don’t know” and “refuse” responses were taken into account, more than 95% of inmates provided useable responses. * More than 99% of inmates received the disability module. Based on this analysis, the following was determined: * A combined file consisting of respondents from the sexual victimization survey and alternative survey can be used to analyze veteran status and demographics, criminal history, contact with family and friends, and mental health screener items. Weighting and nonresponse adjustments ************************************* Responses from interviewed inmates were weighted to produce national-level estimates. Each interviewed inmate was assigned an initial weight corresponding to the inverse of the probability of selection within each sampled facility. A series of adjustment factors was applied to the initial weight to minimize potential bias due to nonresponse and to provide national estimates. Methods to adjust for survey nonresponse are described in Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2011–12 (NCJ 241399, BJS web, May 2013). Once adjusted, weights were developed to account for survey nonresponse. An additional weighting adjustment was conducted to account for the potential bias introduced by nonresponse due to time constraints. Bias could result if the module nonrespondents were different from the module respondents. The adjustment for module nonresponse included a calibration of the weights so that the weight from a nonresponding inmate was assigned to a responding inmate with similar characteristics. Weight adjustments were conducted separately for the sexual victimization survey and the alternative survey so that each had weight totals representing the prison and jail populations by sex. For analyses that consisted of a combination of respondents to the sexual victimization and alternative surveys, an additional weight adjustment was made to ensure that weight totals were correct. In this adjustment, an inmate’s survey weight was adjusted by the probability of receiving the survey to which they were randomly assigned. As all inmates in the survey received the veteran module, this report includes additional responses that were properly weighted for inference to either the prison or jail population. The nonresponse bias analysis found that all inmates completed the demographic, criminal history, and veteran modules, so no response was necessary. Standard errors and tests of significance ************************************* As with any sample survey, the NIS-3 estimates are subject to error arising from their basis on a sample rather than a complete enumeration of the population of adult inmates in prison and jail. Differences in the estimates for subgroups in the tables have been tested and noted for significance at the 95% level of confidence. Standardization of nonveteran estimates ************************************* When comparing two populations, differences found for some characteristics or conditions may be statistically different as a result of a true difference in the populations or due to differences in basic demographics that are associated with the outcome of interest. Standardizing the estimates is one method that can be used to determine if these demographic differences are the only reason for differences found in other characteristics or conditions. Standardizing survey estimates consists of calibrating the survey weights for one population so that the distributions are identical for key demographic characteristics known for each population. This process was done using SUDAAN’s PROC DESCRIPT procedure. The resulting estimates are not a representation of the standardized population by themselves (i.e., generalizations about the population cannot be made from standardized estimates), but are appropriate estimates for comparison with other populations of interest. In this report, the nonveteran prison and jail populations were standardized to the distributions of race or Hispanic origin and age for veterans in jail and prison. The analyses in this report were limited to the male inmate population, so standardization by sex was not necessary. Measuring serious psychological distress ************************************* To determine whether inmates had an indicator of a current mental health problem, the NIS-3 included the K6 screening scale. The K6 scale is a measure of past 30-day, nonspecific serious psychological distress (SPD) and is not a diagnostic tool. It was developed by Kessler and colleagues to estimate the prevalence of serious mental illness in noninstitutional settings and as a tool to identify possible cases of psychiatric disorder ***Footnote 3 Kessler, R. C., Barker, P. R., Colpe, L. J., Epstein, J. F., Gfroerer, J. C., Hiripi, E., . . . Zaslavsky, A. M. (2003). Screening for serious mental illness in the general population. Archives of General Psychiatry, 60, 184-189. Kessler, R. C., Green, J. G., Gruber, M. J., Sampson, N. A., Bromet, E., Cuitan, M., . . . Zaslavsky, A. M. (2010). Screening for serious mental illness in the general population with the K6 screening scale: results from the WHO World Mental Health (WMH) survey initiative. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 19(Supp. 1), 4-22***. It has been used widely in epidemiological surveys in the United States and other countries including with prison populations. The K6 scale consists of six questions that ask inmates to report how often during the past 30 days they had felt-- * nervous * hopeless * restless or fidgety * so depressed that nothing could cheer them up * everything was an effort * worthless. The response options were (1) all of the time, (2) most of the time, (3) some of the time, (4) a little of the time, and (5) none of the time. Following Kessler, the responses were recoded from 4 to 0, with 4 assigned to “all of the time” and 0 assigned to “none of the time.” A summary scale combining the responses from all six items, with a range of 0 to 24, was then produced. The summary score was then reduced to three categories: 0 to 7 indicated no mental illness, 8 to 12 indicated an anxiety-mood disorder, and 13 or higher indicated SPD. Measuring disability ************************************* The disability module was administered to participating inmates in the NIS-3 for one of two reasons: 1. to ensure the sexual victimization survey length was similar for all participating inmates 2. as part of the alternative survey on mental and physical health, past drug and alcohol use, and treatment for substance abuse. Inmates were randomly assigned to a core survey--90% received the sexual victimization survey and 10% received the alternative survey. Respondents in the 90% sample who completed the core sexual victimization survey in 45 minutes or less received the quasi-core 2, which contained the mental health and disability modules. Based on the time criteria, 31,048 prisoners and 47,427 jail inmates randomly assigned to the sexual victimization survey completed the disability module. Of the inmates who received the alternative survey on mental and physical health, past drug and alcohol use, and treatment for substance abuse (10% of inmates surveyed), 4,237 prisoners and 5,958 jail inmates completed the disability module. Together, 35,285 prisoners, 88% of whom were in the sexual victimization survey sample (90% of inmates surveyed), answered the disability questions. Approximately 53,385 jail inmates, 89% of whom were in the sexual victimization sample, answered the disability questions. Disability data come from the 10% alternative sample only. This sample was a randomized set from the original sample of inmates in each facility, which allows all inmates in the United States to be independently represented. Nonresponse and poststratification adjustments were conducted on the 10% sample only using the frame information (sex, age, race or Hispanic origin, time since admission, and sentence length). National weights were benchmarked to the adult inmate population (age 18 or older) by facility jurisdiction (prison or jail) and sex. The disability data from the 90% sample were not used due to bias. Respondents in the 90% sample who completed the disability module were less likely to report sexual victimization while incarcerated, less likely to report mental health problems, and less likely to speak English than inmates who did not receive or complete the disability module. These factors, particularly victimization and mental health status, are likely highly correlated with an inmate’s disability status and would introduce bias into the results. This report uses six questions to measure disability. The questions were modeled after the 2012 American Community Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. Inmates could report more than one disability. 1. Hearing disability--Are you deaf or do you have serious difficulty hearing? 2. Vision disability--Are you blind or do you have serious difficulty seeing even when wearing glasses? 3. Cognitive disability--Because of a physical, mental, or emotional problem, do you have serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions? 4. Ambulatory disability--Do you have serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs? 5. Self-care disability--Do you have difficulty dressing or bathing? 6. Independent living disability--Because of a physical, mental, or emotional problem, do you have difficulty doing activities on your own such as going to meal time, going outside, working in or outside of this facility, going to classes, or attending programs? Limitations of these data and assumptions that cannot be made about incarcerated adults who self-report a disability include the following: * The etiology of an inmate’s disability is unknown. It might be congenital, genetic or biological, related to an illness or disease, or caused by something in the environment (i.e., a gunshot wound). The temporal relationship between the onset of the disability and the offense is also unknown. Therefore, it is inappropriate to make assumptions about whether or not a disability “caused” an inmate to commit an offense. * The way in which the disability limits or impairs an inmate’s ability to function is unknown (e.g., daily struggles with many activities or occasional flare-ups only). * Disability data were not verified against medical records or diagnostic information. * Prevalence rates may be underestimated because some inmates with serious functional disabilities may have been unable to participate in the NIS-3 due to cognitive limitations that prevented them from fully understanding the informed consent procedures or the survey questions. In addition, some inmates with a particular disability (e.g., a hearing disability) may have had a harder time completing the survey than inmates who did not have a disability. *************************************************** 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. William J. Sabol is director. This report was written by Jennifer Bronson, E. Ann Carson, and Margaret Noonan, BJS Statisticians, and Marcus Berzofsky, RTI International. Zhen Zeng, BJS statistician, and Glynis Ewing, RTI International, verified the report. Irene Cooperman and Jill Thomas edited the report. Barbara Quinn produced the report. December 2015, NCJ 249144 *************************************************** ************************************************* Office of Justice Programs Innovation * Partnerships * Safer Neighborhoods www.ojp.usdoj.gov ************************************************* *********************** 11/19/2015 9:30am JER ***********************