U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics

December 2013, NCJ 243936

Bul l etin

Correctional Populations
in the United States, 2012
Lauren E. Glaze and Erinn J. Herberman, Ph.D., BJS Statisticians

A

t yearend 2012, the combined U.S. adult
correctional systems supervised about
6,937,600 offenders, down by about 51,000
offenders during the year (figure 1). The decrease
observed during 2012 marked the fourth consecutive
year of decline in the correctional population.
However, this was the smallest decrease (down 0.7%)
since the correctional population first declined in
2009, reversing a three-year trend of increasing rates
of decline that started in 2009 and continued through
2011. About 1 in every 35 adult residents in the
United States was under some form of correctional
supervision at yearend 2012, the lowest rate observed
since 1997.
This report summarizes data from several Bureau of
Justice Statistics (BJS) correctional data collections to
provide statistics on the total population supervised
by adult correctional systems in the United States.
(See Methodology for sources.) These systems include
offenders living in the community while supervised
by probation or parole agencies and those held in the
custody of state or federal prisons or local jails.

Figure 1
Total population under the supervision of adult
correctional systems and annual percent change,
2000–2012
Population (in millions)
8
Annual percent change
7

Annual percent change
2.5
Population
2.0

6

1.5

5

1.0

4

0.5

3

0.0

2

-0.5

1

-1.0

0

‘00 ‘01 ‘02 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ‘06 ‘07 ‘08 ‘09 ‘10 ‘11 ‘12

-1.5

Note: See Methodology for information on the methods used to
calculate annual change in the correctional population.
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Annual Probation Survey, Annual
Parole Survey, Annual Survey of Jails, Census of Jails, and National
Prisoner Statistics Program, 2000–2012.

HIGHLIGHTS
„„ About 6,937,600 offenders were under the supervision

of adult correctional systems at yearend 2012, declining
by about 51,000 offenders during the year.
„„ The decrease during 2012 was the fourth consecutive

year of decline in the U.S. correctional population.
„„ Although the correctional population declined

by 0.7% during 2012, this was the slowest rate of
decline observed since 2009 when the population
first decreased.
„„ In 2012 about 1 in every 35 adults in the United States,

or 2.9% of adult residents, was on probation or parole
or incarcerated in prison or jail, the same rate observed
in 1997.

„„ An estimated 1 in every 50 adult residents was

supervised in the community on probation or parole
at yearend 2012, compared to 1 in every 108 adults
incarcerated in prison or jail.
„„ The decrease in the probation (down 38,300) and

prison (down 21,100) populations accounted for nearly
all of the decline in the total correctional population
during 2012.
„„ More than half (56%) of the decrease in the U.S.

correctional population during 2012 was attributed
to a drop (28,700 offenders) in California’s correctional
population, a decline driven by the state’s Public Safety
Realignment Act of 2011.

BJS

By yearend 2012, the rate of offenders
under correctional supervision
dropped below the 2000 level
About 2,870 offenders per 100,000
U.S. adult residents (or about 2.9%
of adults) were under some form of
correctional supervision at yearend 2012
(table 1). The correctional supervision
rate dropped below 2,900 per 100,000
adult residents for the first time since
2000, which was similar to the rate last
observed in 1997 (2,860 per 100,000)
when about 1.2 million fewer offenders
were under correctional supervision (5.7
million).

After peaking in 2007 at 3,210 offenders
per 100,000 adult residents, the rate of
correctional supervision declined each
year. Slightly more than half (52%)
of the decrease from 2007 to 2011
was attributed to the decrease in the
number of offenders under correctional
supervision during the period. Less
than half (48%) of the decline was due
to the increase in the number of adult
residents in the United States (not
shown in table).1 In contrast, from
1See

Methodology for information about the
method used to decompose the decline in the
correctional supervision rate since 2007.

2011 to 2012 the increase in the adult
resident population accounted for most
(63%) of the decline in the correctional
supervision rate, while 37% was due to
the decline in the number of offenders
under correctional supervision.
About 1,980 offenders per 100,000
adult residents were supervised in the
community on probation or parole in
2012, a drop from 2,010 per 100,000 in
2011. By yearend 2012, the community
supervision rate fell below 2,000 per
100,000 adult residents for the first time
since 2000, which was similar to the
rate last observed in 1997 (1,990 per

Table 1
U.S. adult residents supervised by adult correctional systems, 2000–2012

Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012

Total population supervised
by adult correctional systemsa
Number supervised
U.S. adult residents
per 100,000 U.S. adult under correctional
residentsc
supervision—
3,060
1 in 33
3,080
1 in 32
3,120
1 in 32
3,150
1 in 32
3,170
1 in 32
3,160
1 in 32
3,190
1 in 31
3,210
1 in 31
3,160
1 in 32
3,090
1 in 32
2,990
1 in 33
2,920
1 in 34
2,870
1 in 35

Community supervision population
Number on probation
or parole per 100,000 U.S. adult residents on
U.S. adult residentsc
probation or parole—
2,160
1 in 46
2,180
1 in 46
2,200
1 in 45
2,220
1 in 45
2,230
1 in 45
2,210
1 in 45
2,230
1 in 45
2,240
1 in 45
2,200
1 in 45
2,150
1 in 47
2,070
1 in 48
2,010
1 in 50
1,980
1 in 50

Incarcerated populationb
Number incarcerated in U.S. adult residents
prison or jail per 100,000 incarcerated in prison
U.S. adult residentsc
or jail—
920
1 in 109
920
1 in 109
940
1 in 106
950
1 in 105
970
1 in 103
980
1 in 102
1,000
1 in 100
1,000
1 in 100
1,000
1 in 100
980
1 in 102
960
1 in 104
940
1 in 107
920
1 in 108

Note: Rates were estimated to the nearest 10. Estimates may not be comparable to previously published BJS reports due to updated information or rounding.
aIncludes offenders in the community under the authority of probation or parole agencies and those held in the custody of state or federal prisons or local jails.
bIncludes inmates held in the custody of state or federal prisons, local jails, or privately operated facilities.
cRates were computed using the U.S. adult resident population estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau for January 1 of the following year.
Sources: Adult correctional population estimates are based on the Bureau of Justice Statistics' Annual Probation Survey, Annual Parole Survey, Annual Survey of Jails, Census
of Jails, and National Prisoner Statistics Program, 2000–2012. The adult resident population estimates are based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s National Intercensal Estimates,
2000–2011, and unpublished adult resident population estimates on January 1, 2012, and January 1, 2013.

Official BJS measure of the U.S. prison population
BJS’s official measure of the prison population is the count of
prisoners under the jurisdiction or legal authority of state or
federal adult correctional officials (1,570,400 in 2012), which
is reported in Prisoners in the United States, 2012: Trends in
Admissions and Releases, 1991-2012, BJS web, NCJ 243920,
December 2013. These prisoners may be held in public and
privately operated prison or jail facilities, outside of the state, or
in the federal prison system. The prison population reported in
table 2 and appendix table 1 is the number held in custody or
physically housed in state (1,267,000 in 2012) or federal (216,900
in 2012) adult correctional facilities, regardless of which entity

has legal authority over the prisoners. The custody population
includes state or federal prisoners held in privately operated
facilities. The difference between the number of prisoners in
custody and the number under jurisdiction is the number of state
or federal prisoners held in the custody of local jails, inmates held
in other states, inmates out to court, and those in transit from one
jurisdiction of legal authority to the custody of a confinement
facility outside that jurisdiction. BJS uses the count of the number
of prisoners held in custody to avoid double counting prisoners
held in local jails.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

2

100,000). The incarceration rate also
decreased between 2011 (940 inmates
per 100,000 adults) and 2012 (920 per
100,000). About 1 in every 108 adults was
incarcerated in prison or jail at yearend
2012, compared to about 1 in every 50
under community supervision.
During 2012, the community
supervision and incarcerated
populations had the smallest
decreases since 2009
About 4,781,300 offenders were
supervised in the community on
probation (3,942,800) or parole
(851,200) at yearend 2012, representing
about 7 in 10 offenders under
correctional supervision (table 2).2 In
comparison, about 3 in 10 offenders
(or 2,228,400) under correctional
supervision were in the custody of state
or federal prisons (1,483,900) or local
jails (744,500).3
2The total community supervision population

excludes parolees who were also on probation to
avoid double counting offenders. See table 7 and
Methodology.

The decline of about 40,500 offenders
under community supervision during
2012 represented the smallest decrease
in this population since it first decline
in 2009 (down 46,300). From 2009
(down 0.9%) to 2011 (down 1.5%),
the rate of decline in the community
supervision population increased.
However, during 2012, the community
supervision population decreased by
about half (down 0.8%) of the rate
of decline compared to the previous
year. Similar changes occurred in the
incarcerated population, as the decrease
of 12,100 inmates during 2012 was the
smallest decline observed since 2009
(down 16,400) when the population
first declined. The rate of decline in
the incarcerated population slowed to
0.5% during 2012, reversing a trend of
increasing rates of decline from 2009
(down 0.7%) to 2011 (down 1.3%).
3See text box on Official BJS measure of the U.S.

Most of the decrease in the community
supervision population during 2012 was
attributed to the decline in the number
of probationers. While the probation
population declined by 1.0% (down
38,300 probationers) during 2012, the
parole population remained relatively
stable (down 0.1% or 500 parolees).
During 2012, the decrease in the
incarcerated population resulted from
the drop in the number of inmates held
in the custody of state or federal prisons
(down 1.4% or 21,100 prisoners), as the
number of inmates held in local jails
(up 1.2% or 8,900 inmates) increased.
The state prison population (down 1.8%
or 23,200 prisoners) decreased during
2012, accounting for the entire decline
in the U.S. custody prison population
(appendix table 1). The increase in the
federal prison population (up 1.0% or
2,100) slightly offset the total decline in
the U.S. prison population.

prison population, for the difference between the
jurisdiction and custody prison population counts.
Jurisdiction counts are the official BJS measure
of the prison population as reported in Prisoners
in the United States, 2012: Trends in Admissions
and Releases, 1991-2012, BJS web, NCJ 243920,
December 2013.

Table 2
Estimated number of persons supervised by adult correctional systems, by correctional status, 2000, 2005, 2010–2012
Year
2000
2005
2010
2011
2012
Average annual percent
change, 2000–2011
Percent change,
2011–2012f

Total correctional
populationa
6,461,000
7,050,400
7,079,500
6,978,500
6,937,600

Totala,c
4,565,100
4,946,800
4,887,900
4,814,200
4,781,300

Community supervision
Probation
3,839,500
4,162,500
4,055,500
3,971,300
3,942,800

Parole
725,500
784,400
840,700
853,900
851,200

Total
1,938,500
2,195,000
2,270,100
2,240,600
2,228,400

Incarceratedb
Jaild
621,100
747,500
748,700
735,600
744,500

Prisone
1,317,300
1,447,400
1,521,400
1,505,000
1,483,900

0.7%

0.5%

0.3%

1.5%

1.3%

1.5%

1.2%

-0.7%

-0.8%

-1.0%

-0.1%

-0.5%

1.2%

-1.4%

Note: Estimates were rounded to the nearest 100 and may not be comparable to previously published BJS reports due to updated information or rounding. Totals include
estimates for nonresponding jurisdictions. See Methodology. Total community supervision, probation, parole, and prison custody estimates are for December 31; jail
population estimates are for the last weekday in June.
aEstimates were adjusted to account for some offenders with multiple correctional statuses. See Methodology.
bIncludes local jail inmates and prisoners held in the custody of state or federal prisons or privately operated facilities.
cIncludes some offenders held in a prison or jail but who remained under the jurisdiction of a probation or parole agency.
dTotals are estimates based on the Annual Survey of Jails, except the total for 2005, which is a complete enumeration based on the Census of Jails Inmates. See appendix
table 5 for standard errors and Methodology.
eIncludes prisoners held in the custody of state or federal prisons or privately operated facilities. The custody prison population is not comparable to the jurisdiction prison
population, which is BJS's official measure of the prison population. See text box on page 2 for a discussion of the differences between the two prison populations.
fSee Methodology for information on the methods used to calculate annual change within each correctional population and the total correctional population.
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Annual Probation Survey, Annual Parole Survey, Annual Survey of Jails, Census of Jail Inmates, and National Prisoner Statistics Program,
2000, 2005, and 2010–2012.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

3

Decreases in probation and prison
populations accounted for nearly all
of the decline in the total correctional
population during 2012
At yearend 2012, the probation
population represented more than
half (57%) of all offenders under the
supervision of adult correctional
systems (table 3). The number of
prisoners held in the custody of
state or federal prisons represented
the next largest component of the
correctional population (21%). Parolees
conditionally released to supervision
in the community (12%) and local
jail inmates (11%) represented the
smallest components of the correctional

population. These findings remained
relatively unchanged since 2011.
Combined, the probation, parole,
and prison populations decreased
by 59,900 offenders during 2012.
About 38,300 fewer probationers were
under supervision at yearend 2012,
compared to the beginning of the year,
accounting for 64% of the combined
total decrease in the correctional
population during the year (table 4).
Even though the probation population
was more than two and half times larger
than the custody prison population at
yearend 2012, the decline in the prison
population (down 21,100) accounted for
35% of the total decrease.

The drop of 500 parolees (down 1.0%)
between the beginning and end of 2012
had minimal impact on the total decline
in the correctional population. After
three consecutive years of decline, the
jail population increased (up 8,900)
during 2012. It was the only correctional
population to increase during the year,
partially offsetting the overall decline in
the correctional population. Most of the
increase in the jail population during
2012 occurred in California jails.4
4See California’s Public Safety Realignment Act

of 2011 and the U.S. correctional populations in
this report, for the size and change in the state’s
correctional populations and its impact on the U.S.
correctional populations.

Table 3
Estimated number of persons supervised by adult correctional systems, by correctional status, 2011-2012
Correctional populations
Totala
Probationb
Paroleb
Prisonc
Local jaild
Offenders with multiple correctional statusese

Population
6,978,500
3,971,300
853,900
1,505,000
735,600
87,200

2011
Percent of total population
100%
56.9
12.2
21.6
10.5
:

Population
6,937,600
3,942,800
851,200
1,483,900
744,500
84,700

2012
Percent of total population
100%
56.8
12.3
21.4
10.7
:

Note: Estimates were rounded to the nearest 100. Details may not sum to total due to rounding and because offenders with multiple correctional statuses were excluded from
the total correctional population. Includes estimates for nonresponding jurisdictions. See Methodology.
:Not calculated.
aEquals the sum of each correctional population and excludes the number of offenders with multiple correctional statuses.
bPopulation as of December 31.
cCustody prison population as of December 31. See the text box on page 2 for a discussion of the differences between the custody and jurisdiction prison populations.
dPopulation as of the last weekday in June.
eSome probationers and parolees on December 31 were held in a prison or jail but still remained under the jurisdiction of a probation or parole agency and some parolees
were also on probation. They were excluded from the total correctional population to avoid double counting. See table 7 and Methodology.
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Annual Probation Survey, Annual Parole Survey, Annual Survey of Jails, and National Prisoner Statistics Program, 2011-2012.

Table 4
Change in the number of persons supervised by adult correctional systems, 2012
Total changea
Total increase
Local jailb
Total decrease
Probationc
Parolec
Prisond

Change in number
-51,000
8,900
8,900
-59,900
-38,300
-500
-21,100

Percent of total
100%
100%
100
100%
63.9
0.8
35.2

Note: Estimates were rounded to the nearest 100. See Methodology for methods used to calculate change.
aChange equals the sum of the change for each correctional population.
bChange equals the difference between the populations on the last weekday in June for the prior year and
reporting year (e.g., last weekday of June of 2011 and 2012).
cChange equals the difference between the January 1 and December 31 populations within the year.
dChange equals the difference between the December 31 custody prison populations for the prior year and
reporting year (e.g., December 31 of 2011 and 2012).
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Annual Probation Survey, Annual Parole Survey, Annual Survey of Jails, and
National Prisoner Statistics Program, 2011-2012.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

4

California’s Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011 and the U.S. correctional
populations
In October 2011, the state of California and its counties
implemented the Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011,
redirecting nonserious, nonviolent, and nonsex offenders from
the state prison and parole systems to sentences in local jails
or county-directed post-release community supervision. The
legislation was designed to reduce the number of inmates in
California’s prison system to alleviate crowding and to stop
low-level offenders from cycling in and out of prison.

About 598,600 offenders were under the supervision of
California’s adult correctional systems at yearend 2012. Offenders
supervised in the community on probation (297,700) represented
the largest component of California’s correctional population
(table 5). An additional 132,900 offenders were held in the
custody of state prisons; 89,300 were on parole or post-release
community supervision; and 78,700 were incarcerated in
local jails.

Although all 58 counties in California designated probation
agencies as the correctional entities responsible for post-release
community supervision, BJS included that population in
California’s parole population rather than the probation
population for counting purposes. This method was used
because the post-release community supervision population
was conditionally released to the community after a sentence to
incarceration, regardless of the ent­ity that had authority over the
population while in the community.

Fewer offenders (down 28,700) were under correctional
supervision in California at yearend 2012 than in 2011. Although
California’s correctional population represented about 9% of the
U.S. correctional population at yearend 2012, more than half of
the year’s decrease in the U.S. correctional population (down
51,000 offenders) was attributed to the decrease in the state’s
correctional population. All other states, the federal system, and
the District of Columbia accounted for 91% of all offenders under
correctional supervision but accounted for less of the decline
(44%) in the U.S. correctional population than did California.

(Continued on next page.)
Table 5
Estimated number of persons supervised by adult correctional systems and change in the population, by jurisdiction and
correctional status, 2012
U.S. correctional populationa
Californiaa
Probationb
Paroleb,c
State parole
Post-release community supervision
Prisond
Local jaile
All other jurisdictionsa
Probationb
Paroleb
Prisond
Local jaile

Population, 2012
6,937,600
598,600
297,700
89,300
56,300
32,900
132,900
78,700
6,339,000
3,645,000
761,900
1,351,000
665,800

Percent of total population
100%
8.6%
4.3
1.3
0.8
0.5
1.9
1.1
91.4%
52.5
11.0
19.5
9.6

Population change, 2012
Number
Percent of total decline
-51,000
100%
-28,700
56.3%
-200
:
-22,400
:
-42,400
:
20,000
:
-14,600
:
8,500
:
-22,200
43.5%
-38,100
:
21,900
:
-6,400
:
400
:

Note: Estimates were rounded to the nearest 100. Detail may not sum to total due to rounding and because offenders with multiple correctional statuses were
excluded from the total correctional population. See Methodology for information on methods used to calculate population change.
:Not calculated.
a Total population equals the sum of each correctional population and excludes the number of offenders with multiple correctional statuses. Change equals the sum of
the change for each correctional population.
bPopulation as of December 31, 2012. Change equals the difference between the January 1 and December 31 populations during 2012.
cIncludes offenders on state parole supervision and county-directed post-release community supervision.
dCustody prison population as of December 31. Change equals the difference between the December 31 custody prison populations for the prior year and reporting
year (e.g., December 31 of 2011 and 2012).
ePopulation as of the last weekday in June. Change equals the difference between the populations on the last weekday in June for the prior year and reporting year
(e.g., last weekday in June of 2011 and 2012).
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Annual Probation Survey, Annual Parole Survey, Annual Survey of Jails, and National Prisoner Statistics Program, 2011-2012.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

5

California’s Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011 and the U.S. correctional
populations (continued)
Yearend 2012 marked the first full year of the Public Safety
Realignment Act, and the impact was reflected in the changes in
California’s correctional populations during the year. Almost all of
the decrease in California’s correctional population during 2012
was attributed to declines in the parole (down 22,400 or 20%)
and prison (down 14,600 or 10%) populations (table 6).
All of the decrease in California’s parole population resulted from
the significant drop in state parole (down 42,400), as the number
of offenders under county-directed post-release community
supervision (up 20,000) increased during the year (table 5).
The percentage of prisoners in the state who were released
unconditionally to the community reached 62% of all releases
during 2012, up from 12% in 2011, and about 2% in 2010.5 The
significant increase in the number of unconditional releases from
prison during 2012 was consistent with the drop in California’s
state parole population. The 65% decline in the number of
admissions to California’s prison system during the year, which
5See Prisoners in the United States, 2012: Trends in Admissions and Releases,

1991-2012, BJS web, NCJ 243920, December 2013, for more information
about California’s prison population.

was driven by an 87% decline in the number of parole violators
admitted to prison, was associated with the decrease observed in
the state’s prison population.
Although California’s total correctional population dropped in
2012, the decrease was partially offset by an increase of about
8,500 inmates incarcerated in local jails (table 5). The state’s jail
population dropped to a record low in 2011 (70,200 inmates), but
that population increased by 12.1% during 2012.6
The number of probationers supervised in California remained
fairly stable during 2012, after decreasing an average of 5.6%
annually from 2005 to 2010 and 9.6% in 2011. The relative
stability in this population during 2012 was associated with an
increase in the number of offenders placed on probation. During
2012, the growth in entries to probation (up 6.7%) was about four
and half times larger than in 2011 (up 1.5%), the year in which
the largest decrease in California’s probation population was
observed since 2005.7
6See Jail Inmates at Midyear 2012 - Statistical Tables, BJS web, NCJ 241264,

May 2013, for more information about California’s jail population.

7See Probation and Parole in the United States, 2012, BJS web, NCJ 243826,

December 2013, for more information on California’s probation and parole
populations.

Table 6
Estimated number of persons supervised by adult correctional systems in California, by correctional status, 2005–2012
Year
Total correctional populationa
2005
750,100
2006
774,700
2007
733,000
2008
700,000
2009
669,700
2010
633,900
2011
598,600
2012f
598,600
Average annual percent
change, 2005–2010
-3.4%
Percent change
2010–2011
-6.5%
-4.8
2011–2012g

Community supervision population
Probationb
Paroleb,c
388,300
111,700
401,700
118,600
354,000
123,800
325,100
120,800
312,000
106,000
292,900
105,100
269,800
111,100
297,700
89,300

Incarcerated population
Jaild
Prisone
82,100
168,000
82,300
172,300
84,200
171,400
83,300
171,100
83,200
168,800
73,300
162,800
70,200
147,600
78,700
132,900

-5.6%

-1.2%

-2.3%

-0.6%

-9.6%
-0.1

5.6%
-20.1

-4.2%
12.1

-9.4%
-9.9

Note: Estimates were rounded to the nearest 100. Detail may not sum to total due to rounding and because offenders with multiple correctional statuses were
excluded from the total correctional population. See Methodology.
aTotal population equals the sum of each correctional population and excludes the number of offenders with multiple correctional statuses.
bPopulation as of December 31. Change equals the difference between the January 1 and December 31 populations.
cThe 2011 and 2012 counts include offenders on state parole supervision and county-directed post-release community supervision.
dPopulation as of the last weekday in June. Change equals the difference between the populations on the last weekday in June for the prior year and reporting year
(e.g., last weekday in June of 2011 and 2012).
eCustody prison population as of December 31. Change equals the difference between the December 31 custody prison populations for the prior year and reporting
year (e.g., December 31 of 2011 and 2012).
fThe apparent stability in California’s total correctional population between December 31, 2011, and 2012 was due to a change in reporting of their probation
population counts. See Methodology for more information on this issue and the methods used to calculate annual change.
gSee table 5 for additional information on change within California’s total correctional population during 2012. See Methodology for information on the methods used
to calculate annual change.
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Annual Probation Survey, Annual Parole Survey, Annual Survey of Jails, and National Prisoner Statistics Program, 2005–2012.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

6

Methodology
Sources of data
The statistics presented in this report
include data from five separate BJS
data collections, each relying on the
voluntary participation of federal,
state, and local respondents. For more
information about any of the following
data collections, go to the Data
Collections page on the BJS website at
www.bjs.gov.
Annual Probation Survey; Annual
Parole Survey. The Annual Probation
Survey and Annual Parole Survey
began in 1980. They collect data from
probation and parole agencies in the
United States that supervise adults.
Both surveys cover the 50 states, the
District of Columbia, and the federal
system. In these data, adults are persons
who are subject to the jurisdiction of
an adult court or correctional agency.
Persons younger than age 18 who were
prosecuted in criminal court as if they
were adults are considered adults, but
persons under age 18 who were under
the jurisdiction of a juvenile court or
agency are excluded.
Annual Survey of Jails. The Annual
Survey of Jails (ASJ) has collected
data from a nationally representative
sample of local jails each year since
1982, except in 1983, 1988, 1993, 1999,
and 2005, when a complete census of
U.S. local jails was conducted. Jails
are confinement facilities, usually
administered by a local law enforcement
agency, that are intended to hold
adults, but they may also hold youth
under age 18 before or after they are
adjudicated. The data used in this report
include inmates under age 18 who were
held either before or after they were
adjudicated (about 5,400 persons in
2012).
Census of Jails. The Census of Jails
began in 1970 and was conducted in
1972, 1978, 1983, 1988, 1993, 1999,
2002, 2005, and 2006. The census is
part of a series of data collection efforts,
including the Census of Jail Inmates
and the Census of Jail Facilities, aimed
at studying the nation’s jails and their
inmate populations.

Survey of Jails in Indian Country.
The Annual Survey of Jails in Indian
Country (SJIC) has been conducted
annually since 1998, except in 2005
and 2006. The SJIC collects detailed
information on all adult and juvenile
confinement facilities, detention centers,
jails, and other facilities operated by
tribal authorities or the U.S. Department
of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian
Affairs. The data reflected in this report
exclude inmates under age 18 who were
confined in facilities that held juveniles
only (218 in 2012). The SJIC data are
only included in appendix table 2 of this
report.
National Prisoner Statistics Program.
The National Prisoner Statistics
(NPS) program began in 1926 under
a mandate from Congress and has
been conducted annually since then.
It collects data from the nation’s state
departments of corrections and the
federal Bureau of Prisons.
NPS distinguishes between prisoners
in custody and prisoners under
jurisdiction of correctional authorities.8
The prison data in this report reflect
the NPS custody counts and include all
inmates held within a state’s facilities.
These counts include inmates housed
for other correctional facilities,
prisoners held in privately operated
facilities, prisoners under age 18
who were serving time in a state or
federal correctional facility after being
sentenced in criminal court as if they
were adults (1,300 persons in 2012),
and inmates in the six states in which
prisons and jails form one integrated
system, including inmates under age 18
who may have been held before or after
adjudication.9
Through the annual NPS collection,
since 1994 BJS has obtained yearend
counts of prisoners in the custody
of U.S. military authorities from the
Department of Defense Corrections
Council. In 1994, the council, composed

of representatives from each branch of
military service, adopted a standardized
report (DD Form 2720) that obtains
data on persons held in U.S. military
confinement facilities inside and outside
of the continental United States. These
data are only included in appendix
tables 2 and 4 of this report.
In 1995, BJS began collecting
yearend counts of inmates from the
departments of corrections in the U.S.
Territories (American Samoa, Guam,
and the U.S. Virgin Islands) and U.S.
Commonwealths (Northern Mariana
Islands and Puerto Rico). These data are
only included in appendix tables 2 and 3
of this report and represent all inmates
in the physical custody of prison or local
jail facilities in the U.S. Territories or
Commonwealths.
Probation and parole populations
Total correctional population counts
reflect data reported by probation and
parole agencies within the specific
reporting year. For example, the 2012
probation and parole totals are the
December 31, 2012, population counts.
Some agencies may update their
probation and parole data after
submitting them or change their
reporting methods from one year
to the next.10 BJS does not request
updated data for prior years; as a
result, probation and parole population
counts on January 1 of the current year
may differ from population counts on
December 31 of the prior reporting year.
For these reasons, annual change in the
probation and parole populations was
calculated within the reporting year. See
page 9, Estimating annual change in the
total correctional populations, for more
information.
10See Probation and Parole in the United States,
2012, BJS web, NCJ 243826, December 2013, for
information about the reasons why agencies may
update their data.

8See

text box on page 2 that explains the difference
between the two types of prison populations.

9See

Prisoners in the United States, 2012: Trends
in Admissions and Releases, 1991-2012, BJS
web, NCJ 243920, December 2013, for more
information about the six states with combined
prison and jail systems.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

7

Local jail and custody prison
populations
Respondents to the ASJ report the
number of jail inmates confined as of
the last weekday in June of each year.
The total correctional population counts
in each year include jail population
counts as of the last weekday in June for
all inmates confined in local jails. This
is used as an estimate of the number of
inmates in local jails at yearend.
Respondents to the NPS submit
population counts of the number
of prisoners in custody and under
the jurisdiction of state or federal
correctional facilities on December 31
of each year. The total correctional
population count in each year reflects
the custody prison populations as of
December 31, and differs from the
jurisdiction population counts (See
Prisoners in the United States, 2012:
Trends in Admissions and Releases, 19912012, BJS web, NCJ 243920, December
2013.)
Counts adjusted for offenders with
multiple correctional statuses
Offenders under correctional
supervision may have multiple
correctional statuses for several
reasons. For example, probation or
parole agencies may not always be
notified immediately of new arrests,
jail admissions, or prison admissions;
absconders included in a probation
or parole agency’s population in one
jurisdiction may actually be incarcerated
in another jurisdiction; persons may be
admitted to jail or prison before formal
revocation hearings and potential
discharge by a probation or parole
agency; and persons may be serving
separate probation and parole sentences
concurrently.
In 1998, BJS began collecting data on
the number of offenders with multiple
correctional statuses and has expanded
on the information collected since
then. Table 6 includes adjustments that
were made to the total correctional
population estimates presented in
this report to exclude offenders with

multiple correctional statuses (table 7).
These estimates are based on data
reported by the probation or parole
agencies that provided the information
within the specific reporting year.
Because some probation and parole
agencies did not provide these data each
year, the numbers may underestimate
the total number of offenders who had
multiple correctional statuses from 2000
to 2012. Due to these adjustments, the
sum of the four correctional populations
in tables 2, 3, and 4 will not equal
the total correctional population. In
addition, the sum of the probation and
parole populations from 2008 to 2012
will not yield the total community
supervision population because the total
was adjusted for parolees who were also
on probation.

2011 U.S. adult resident population
and then multiplying by 100,000. This
is the expected supervision rate if there
had been no change in the correctional
population from 2007 to 2011.
(3) The observed 2007 rate minus the
expected rate (from step 2) divided by
the total change (from step 1) times
100% represents the percentage of total
change due to the growth in the U.S.
adult resident population.
(4) The percentage of total change
due to the decline in the correctional
population is the residual difference
(100% – percent change in step 3).
The same method was used to
decompose the decline in the
correctional supervision rate from 2011
to 2012.

Decomposing the decline in the
correctional supervision rate

Estimating annual change in the
correctional populations

The decline in the correctional
supervision rate from 2007 to 2011 was
decomposed in four steps:

Because probation and parole
population counts on January 1 of
the current year may differ from
population counts on December 31
of the prior reporting year, annual
change in the probation and parole
populations was calculated within the
reporting year. (See page 7, Probation
and parole populations, and Probation
and Parole in the United States, 2012,
BJS web, NCJ 243826, December 2013,

(1) The change in the rate was calculated
by subtracting the 2011 rate from the
2007 rate.
(2) An expected rate per 100,000 in
2011 was calculated by dividing the
2007 correctional population by the

Table 7
Number of offenders with multiple correctional statuses at yearend, by correctional
status, 2000–2012
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012

Total
42,500
43,600
50,300
47,000
56,000
91,400
92,000
75,800
95,000
82,900
86,800
87,200
84,700

Probationers in—
Local
State or
jails
federal prison
20,400
22,100
23,400
20,200
29,300
20,900
25,500
21,500
34,400
21,600
32,600
22,100
33,900
21,700
19,300
23,100
23,800
32,400
21,400
23,100
21,300
21,500
21,100
22,300
21,200
21,600

In local
jails
-----18,300
20,700
18,800
19,300
19,100
21,400
18,000
18,500

Parolees—
In state or
federal prison
-----18,400
15,700
14,600
15,600
14,300
14,400
14,900
10,700

On probation
--------3,900
5,000
8,300
11,000
12,700

Note: Estimates were rounded to the nearest 100 and may not be comparable to previously published BJS reports
due to updated information. Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.
-- Not collected or excluded from total correctional population.
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Annual Probation Survey, and Annual Parole Survey, 2000–2012.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

8

for more information.) For example,
annual change in the probation
population in 2012 was calculated as
the difference between the January 1
and December 31, 2012, probation
populations. This same method was
used to calculate annual change in
the parole population and California’s
probation and parole populations.
The annual change in the community
supervision population was also
calculated within the reporting year for
the same reasons. For the years from
2008 to 2012, change in the community
supervision population was calculated
after accounting for offenders with
multiple community supervision
statuses. (See page 8, Counts adjusted
for offenders with multiple correctional
statuses.) For these reasons, from 2008
to 2012, the sum of the changes in
the probation and parole populations
does not equal the total change in the
community supervision population. For
example, the change in the probation
population (down 38,300) during 2012
plus the change in the parole population
(down 500) during the year does not
equal the total change in the community
supervision population (down 40,500).
The difference (1,700) is the change in
the number of parolees who were also
on probation during 2012.

The annual change in the jail and
custody prison populations was based
on the change from the prior year to
the current year because respondents
were asked only to report a population
count for one reference date. For
example, the annual change in the jail
population for 2012 is the difference
(up 8,900) between the populations
on the last weekday in June 2011 and
June 2012. The annual change in the
custody prison population for 2012 is
the difference (down 21,100) between
the December 31, 2011, and December
31, 2012, custody prison populations.
The change in the total incarcerated
population was calculated as the sum
of the change in the jail and custody
prison populations from the prior to the
current year.
The annual change in the total
correctional population for each
year was calculated as the sum of the
annual changes for each correctional
population. For example, the annual
change in the total correctional
population (down 51,000) during
2012 was calculated as the sum of
four components: (1) the change
in the probation population (down
38,300) during 2012; (2) the change
in the parole population (down 500)
during 2012; (3) the change in the jail
population (up 8,900) between 2011 and
2012; and (4) the change in the custody
prison population (down 21,100)
between 2011 and 2012. This same
method was used to calculate annual
change in California’s total correctional
population. (See table 4 for the change
in California’s total correctional
population and each correctional
population during 2012.)

Adjustments for nonresponse
Probation, parole, jail, and prison
population counts were adjusted to
account for nonresponse across the
data collections. The methods varied
and depended on the type of collection,
type of respondent, and availability of
information. For more information
for 2012, see the following reports:
Probation and Parole in the United
States, 2012, BJS web, NCJ 243826,
December 2013; Prisoners in the United
States, 2012: Trends in Admissions
and Releases, 1991-2012, BJS web,
NCJ 243920, December 2013; and Jail
Inmates at Midyear 2012 - Statistical
Tables, BJS web, NCJ 241264, May 2013.
The total number of prisoners in the
custody of correctional authorities in the
U.S. Territories and Commonwealths
(see appendix tables 2 and 3) in
2011 and 2012 includes estimates for
nonresponse. The U.S. Virgin Islands
did not provide any data in 2011 and
Guam did not provide any data in 2012.
Because of limited information, the
U.S. Virgin Islands’ prison population
in 2012 was used to impute its 2011
population and the estimate was
included in the U.S. total for 2011.
Guam’s prison population for 2011 was
used to impute its population for 2012
and the estimate was included in the
U.S. total for 2012. American Samoa
was unable to provide the number of
prisoners sentenced to more than one
year in 2012. Ratio estimation was used
to impute the data and the estimate
was included in the U.S. total for 2012.
Specifically, the ratio of the number
of prisoners sentenced to more than
one year in 2011 divided by American
Samoa’s total prison population in
2011 was applied to American Samoa’s
prison population in 2012 to generate
the estimate of the number of prisoners
sentenced to more than one year
in 2012.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

9

Appendix Table 1
Inmates held in custody in state or federal prisons or in local jails, 2000 and 2011–2012
Inmates in custody
Total
Federal prisonersa
Prisons
Federal facilities
Privately operated facilities
Community corrections centersb
State prisoners
State facilities
Privately operated facilities
Local jailsc
Incarceration rated
Adult incarceration ratee

2000
1,938,500
140,100
133,900
124,500
9,400
6,100
1,177,200
1,101,100
76,100
621,100
680
920

Number of inmates
2011
2,240,600
214,800
206,000
176,200
29,800
8,800
1,290,200
1,197,800
92,400
735,600
720
940

2012
2,228,400
216,900
208,000
176,500
31,500
8,900
1,267,000
1,170,200
96,800
744,500
710
920

Average annual percent
change, 2000–2011
1.3%
3.9%
3.9
3.2
10.5
3.3
0.8%
0.8
1.8
1.5%
0.5%
0.2

Percent change,
2011–2012
-0.5%
1.0%
1.0
0.2
5.7
1.1
-1.8%
-2.3
4.8
1.2%
-1.4%
-2.1

Note: Population counts were rounded to the nearest 100 and include imputed estimates for nonresponding jurisdictions; see Methodology. Rates were rounded to the nearest
10. Detail may not to sum to total due to rounding. Estimates may not be comparable to previously published BJS reports due to rounding or updated information. Total
includes all inmates held in local jails, state or federal prisons, or privately operated facilities. Excludes inmates held in U.S. Territories (appendix tables 2 and 3), military facilities
(appendix tables 2 and 4), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities, facilities contracted by the U.S. Marshals Service, jails in Indian country, or juvenile facilities. See
Methodology for sources of incarceration data and the text box on page 2 for a discussion of the differences between the custody and jurisdiction prison populations.
aAfter 2001, responsibility for sentenced prisoners from the District of Columbia was transferred to the federal Bureau of Prisons.
bNonsecure, privately operated community corrections centers.
cCounts for inmates held in local jails are for the last weekday in June of each year. Counts were estimated from the Annual Survey of Jails. See Methodology.
dThe total number of inmates in the custody of local jails, state or federal prisons, or privately operated facilities within the year per 100,000 U.S. residents. Resident population
estimates are from the U.S. Census Bureau for January 1 of the following year.
eThe total number of inmates in custody within the year per 100,000 U.S. residents age 18 or older. Adult resident population estimates are from the U.S. Census Bureau for
January 1 of the following year.
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Annual Survey of Jails, and National Prisoner Statistics Program, 2000 and 2011–2012; the total and adult resident population estimates are
based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s National Intercensal Estimates, 2001, and unpublished total and adult resident population estimates, January 1, 2012, and January 1, 2013.

Appendix Table 2
Number of inmates incarcerated by other adult correctional systems, 2000, 2005, and 2011–2012
Total
Territorial prisonsa
Military facilities
Jails in Indian countryb

2000
20,169
16,130
2,420
1,619

Number of inmates
2005
2011
19,678
16,529
15,735
12,990
2,322
1,527
1,621
2,012

2012
16,940
13,360
1,434
2,146

Average annual percent
change, 2000–2011
-1.8%
-2.0
-4.2
2.0

Percent change,
2011–2012
2.5%
2.8
-6.1
6.7

Note: Population counts are for December 31 of the reporting year. Totals exclude inmates held in local jails, state or federal prisons, privately operated prisons, U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities, facilities contracted by the U.S. Marshals Service, or juvenile facilities. See appendix table 3 for more information on inmates in
territorial prisons and appendix table 4 for inmates in military facilities.
aThe 2011 and 2012 totals include population counts that were imputed for some territories due to nonresponse. See Methodology.
bPopulation counts are for the last weekday in June of each year. The 2005 population count is estimated as the 2004 population count because the Survey of Jails in Indian
Country was not conducted in 2005 or 2006. Estimates exclude inmates under age 18 who were confined in facilities that held juveniles only. See Methodology.
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Prisoner Statistics Program, and Survey of Jails in Indian Country, 2000, 2004, 2005, and 2011–2012.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

10

Appendix Table 3
Prisoners in custody of correctional authorities in the U.S. Territories and Commonwealths, 2000, 2005, and 2011–2012

Total population
2000
2005
2011
2012
Incarceration rate, 2012b
Average annual percent change, 2000–2011
Percent change, 2011–2012
Population sentenced to more than 1 year
2000
2005
2011
2012
Incarceration rate, 2012b
Average annual percent change, 2000–2011
Percent change, 2011–2012

Number of prisoners
Commonwealth
of the Northern
Guam
Marina Islands

Totala

American
Samoa

16,130
15,735
13,010
13,810
340
-2.0%
6.1%

140
222
167
192
349
1.6%
15.0%

684
505
632
/
:
-0.7%
:

11,916
12,399
9,940
10,550
260
-1.6%
6.1%

114
174
117
/
:
0.2%
:

323
238
240
/
:
-2.7%
:

Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico

U.S. Virgin
Islands

97
149
162
168
327
4.7%
3.7%

14,691
14,263
11,470
12,244
332
-2.3%
6.7%

518
596
/
577
548
:
:

51
83
91
109
212
5.3%
19.8%

11,075
11,469
9,210
9,781
265
-1.7%
6.2%

353
435
/
281
267
:
:

Note: Population counts are for December 31 of the reporting year. Estimates were rounded to the nearest 10.
/Not reported.
:Not calculated.
aIncludes population counts for the U.S. Virgin Islands in 2011 and Guam and American Samoa in 2012 that were imputed because of nonresponse. See Methodology.
bThe number of prisoners with a sentence of more than one year per 100,000 U.S. residents on July 1, 2012.
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Prisoner Statistics Program, 2000, 2005, and 2011–2012; resident population estimates were based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s
International Database estimates.

Appendix Table 4
Prisoners under military jurisdiction, by branch of service, 2000, 2005, and 2011–2012
Branch of service
Total population
Prisoners who served in —
Air Force
Army
Marine Corps
Navy
Coast Guard
Prisoners held by —
Air Force
Army
Marine Corps
Navy
Population sentenced to more than 1 year
Prisoners who served in —
Air Force
Army
Marine Corps
Navy
Coast Guard
Prisoners held by —
Air Force
Army
Marine Corps
Navy

2000
2,420

Number of prisoners
2005
2011
2,322
1,527

2012
1,434

Average annual percent
change, 2000–2011
-4.2%

Percent change,
2011–2012
-6.1%

413
789
730
474
14

422
949
527
406
18

285
702
299
235
6

262
689
264
214
5

-3.4%
-1.1
-8.1
-6.4
-7.7

-8.1%
-1.9
-11.7
-8.9
-16.7

102
994
563
761
1,346

120
1,059
470
673
1,340

54
828
102
543
1,051

52
809
90
483
1,014

-5.8%
-1.7
-15.5
-3.1
-2.2%

-3.7%
-2.3
-11.8
-11.0
3.5

253
585
280
222
6

258
638
209
223
12

204
512
157
176
2

182
531
126
173
2

-2.0%
-1.2
-5.3
-2.1
-10.0

-10.8%
3.7
-19.7
-1.7
--

11
831
134
370

24
818
133
365

5
678
5
363

6
685
2
321

-7.2%
-1.8
-29.9
-0.2

20.0%
1.0
-60.0
-11.6

--Less than 0.05%.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Prisoner Statistics Program, 2000, 2005, and 2011–2012.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

11

Appendix Table 5
Estimated standard errors for local jail
inmates, 2000 and 2010–2012
Year
2000
2010
2011
2012

Total
621,100
748,700
735,600
744,500

Standard
error
2,550
5,640
6,170
7,870

Relative standard
error (percent)*
0.4%
0.8
0.8
1.1

Note: Population estimates were rounded to the
nearest 100. Standard errors were rounded to the
nearest 10.
*Calculated by dividing the standard error by the
survey estimate and multiplying by 100.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Annual Survey of
Jails, 2000 and 2010–2012.

co r r e c t i o n a l p o p u l at i o n s i n t h e u n i t e d s tat e s , 2012 | D e c e m b e r 2013	

12

The Bureau of Justice Statistics, located in the Office of Justice Programs,
U.S. Department of Justice, collects, analyses, and disseminates statistical
information on crime, criminal offenders, victims of crime, and the
operation of justice systems at all levels of government. William J. Sabol is
acting director.
Lauren E. Glaze and Erinn J. Herberman, Ph.D., wrote this report. Lauren E.
Glaze and Erinn J. Herberman analyzed the data and prepared the tables and
graphs. Todd D. Minton provided statistical verification and review.
Morgan Young edited the report, and Barbara Quinn produced the report.
December 2013, NCJ 243936

Office of Justice Programs
Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods
www.ojp.usdoj.gov