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

By Todd D. Minton
BJS Statistician

B

etween midyear 2009 and midyear 2010, the
confined inmate population in county and
city jails (748,728) declined by 2.4% (18,706
inmates) (figure 1 and table 1). This is the second
decline in the jail population since the Bureau of
Justice Statistics (BJS) began the Annual Survey of
Jails in 1982. The first occurred between 2008 and
2009. The jail incarceration rate declined in 2010 to
242 jail inmates per 100,000 U.S. residents, the lowest
rate since 2003.
On June 30, 2010, adults represented 99% of all jail
inmates. Males accounted for 87.7%, and females
accounted for 12.3% (tables 6 and 7). At midyear whites
represented 44.3% of all jail inmates, blacks represented
37.8%, and Hispanics represented 15.8%. These jail
inmate distributions have remained nearly stable since
midyear 2000.

At midyear 2010, about 6 in 10 inmates were
unconvicted offenders in jail awaiting court action
on a current charge, unchanged since 2005. About 4
in 10 inmates were sentenced offenders or convicted
offenders awaiting sentencing.
Population decline was mostly concentrated in
large jails
During the 12-month period ending June 30, 2010,
the population in the largest jail jurisdictions with an
average daily population of 1,000 or more inmates
(based on the average daily population during the
12-month period ending June 30, 2009) declined by
18,187 inmates (table 3). This decline was offset by
increases in jail jurisdictions with an average daily
population between 100 and 249 inmates (up 2,471)
and jail jurisdictions with an average daily population
of fewer than 50 inmates (up 760).

Figure 1
Inmates confined in local jails at midyear and change in the jail population, 2000-2010
Annual percentage change

Number of inmates at midyear
800,000

8%

700,000

7%

600,000

6%

500,000

5%

400,000

4%

300,000

3%

200,000

2%

100,000

1%

0

0%
Percentage change

2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008*
2009*
2010
*Based on revised data from selected jail jurisdictions for 2008 and 2009. See Methodology for a description of revised data.

Bureau of Justice Statistics · Statistical Tables

Jail Inmates at Midyear
2010 - Statistical Tables

April 2011, NCJ 233431

-1%
-2%
-3%

BJS

Population declines were mostly concentrated among large
jails. Declines were reported in the inmate population
between midyear 2009 and midyear 2010 in two-thirds (111
jails) of the 170 jail jurisdictions with 1,000 or more inmates
on an average day during the 12-month period ending June
30, 2010. About a third (57 large jails) reported an increase
in their inmate population during the 12-month period
ending June 30, 2010. Data were estimated for two large jail
jurisdictions that did not respond to the survey in 2010,
resulting in no change in their inmate population during this
period. (See Methodology for a description of estimation and
weighting procedures.)
Six jail jurisdictions account for nearly half of the
decline in jail population
Six jail jurisdictions reported a drop of more than 1,000
inmates (accounting for 46% of the decline nationwide). Los
Angeles County, California, with a drop of 3,007 inmates,
led the nation in overall decline in their inmate population
during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2010. Five
other jail jurisdictions reported a decline of more than
1,000 inmates, including Maricopa County, Arizona (1,196
inmates); Orange County, California (1,143); Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania (1,111); Fresno County, California (1,105); and
Harris County, Texas (1,096).
Capacity to hold inmates continues to increase at
slower rate
The estimated rated capacity for all jail jurisdictions at
midyear 2010 reached 866,974 beds (table 2), an increase of
2.0% (17,079 beds) from midyear 2009. This was less than
the average annual increase each year since 2000 (2.5% or
22,281 beds). Rated capacity is the maximum number of
beds or inmates allocated to each jail facility by a state or
local rating official. The percentage of capacity occupied
at midyear 2010 (86.4%) was the lowest since 1984. Jail
jurisdictions holding 50 or more inmates experienced
a decline in the percent of bed space occupied between
midyear 2009 (91.5%) and 2010 (87.4%) (not shown in a
table). In jail jurisdictions holding fewer than 50 inmates,
the jail inmate population grew slightly faster than the
rated capacity. As a result, the percent of capacity occupied
at midyear 2010 (63.3%) was slightly larger than in 2009
(62.2%) (table 5).

2	

The amount of bed space occupied was also measured based
on an average daily population in jail jurisdictions (748,553)
in the year ending June 30, 2010, and the most crowded
day in jails during June 2010. Overall, the nation’s jails were
operating at about 86% of rated capacity on an average day
and about 91% of rated capacity on their most crowded day
in June 2010.
Local jails admitted almost 13 million persons during
the 12 months ending June 30, 2010
The jail population at midyear 2010 represented a
comparatively small percentage of all admissions reported
over the 12-month period. Local jails admitted an estimated
12.9 million persons during the 12 months ending June 30,
2010, or about 17 times the size of the inmate population
(748,728) at midyear. (See Methodology on page 15 for
methods used to estimate admissions.)
Nearly 4 in 10 (39%) admissions during the last week of
June 2010 were to the largest jail jurisdictions (table 4).
Small jail jurisdictions holding fewer than 50 inmates
accounted for 6.3% of all jail admissions, but the number
of inmates admitted was about 36 times the size of the
inmate population at midyear 2010. They also experienced
the highest turnover rate (136.7%), compared to large jail
jurisdictions (51.5%). The turnover rate takes into account
all admissions into and releases from jails. Higher turnover
rates mean relatively larger numbers of admissions and
releases relative to the size of the average daily population.

Jail Inmates at Midyear 2010 – Statistical Tables

Annual Survey of Jails (ASJ)—functions and definition of terms
Jails in the ASJ include confinement facilities—usually
administered by a local law enforcement agency—that are
intended for adults but may hold juveniles before or after
adjudication. Facilities include jails and city or county
correctional centers; special jail facilities, such as medical
or treatment release centers, halfway houses, and work
farms; and temporary holding or lockup facilities that are
part of the jail’s combined function. Inmates sentenced to
jail facilities usually are sentenced to serve a year or less.
Jail functions
Within the ASJ, jail functions are to—
ƒƒ
receive individuals pending arraignment and hold them
awaiting trial, conviction, or sentencing
ƒƒ
re-admit probation, parole, and bail bond violators and
absconders
ƒƒ
temporarily detain juveniles pending transfer to juvenile
authorities
ƒƒ
hold mentally ill persons pending their movement to
appropriate mental health facilities
ƒƒ
hold individuals for the military, for protective custody,
for contempt, and for the courts as witnesses
ƒƒ
release convicted inmates to the community upon
completion of sentence
ƒƒ
transfer inmates to federal, state, or other authorities
ƒƒ
house inmates for federal, state, or other authorities
because of crowding of their facilities
ƒƒ
sometimes operate community-based programs as
alternatives to incarceration.
Definition of terms
Admissions—persons are officially booked and housed
in jails by formal legal document and the authority of
the courts or some other official agency. Jail admissions
include persons sentenced to weekend programs and who
are booked into the facility for the first time. Excluded
from jail admissions are inmates re-entering the facility
after an escape, work release, medical or treatment facility
appointment, and bail and court appearances. BJS collects
jail admissions for the last 7 days in June.
Average daily population—derived by the sum of inmates
in jail each day for a year, divided by the number of days
in the year (i.e., between July 1, 2009, and June 30, 2010).

April 2011	

Average annual change—denotes the mean average
change across a 12-month time period.
Calculating annual admissions—the number of jail
admissions during the last 7 days in June. Annual
jail admissions are calculated by multiplying weekly
admissions by the sum of 365 days divided by 7 days.
Calculating weekly jail turnover rate—calculated by
adding admissions and releases and dividing by the
average daily population. See Methodology for additional
information.
Inmates confined at midyear—the number of inmates
held in custody on the last weekday in June.
Jail incarceration rate—the number of inmates held in
the custody of local jails, per 100,000 U.S. residents.
Percent of capacity occupied—calculated by taking the
number of inmates at midyear, dividing by the rated
capacity, and multiplying by 100.
Rated capacity—describes the number of beds or inmates
assigned by a rating official to a facility, excluding separate
temporary holding areas.
Releases—persons released after a period of confinement
(e.g., sentence completion, bail/bond releases, other
pretrial releases, transfers to other jurisdictions, and
deaths). Releases include those persons who have
completed their weekend program and who are leaving
the facility for the last time. Excluded from jail releases
are temporary discharges including work release, medical
or treatment center appointment, court appearance,
furlough, day reporting, and transfers to other facilities
within the jail jurisdiction.
Under jail supervision but not confined—includes all
persons in community-based programs operated by a jail
facility. Programs include electronic monitoring, house
arrest, community service, day reporting, and work
programs. The classification excludes persons on pretrial
release and who are not in a community-based program
run by the jail, as well as persons under supervision of
probation, parole or other agencies, inmates on weekend
programs, and inmates who participate in work release
programs and return to the jail at night.
Weekend programs—offenders in these programs are
allowed to serve their sentences of confinement only on
weekends (i.e., Friday through Sunday).

3

List of Tables
Table 1. Inmates confined in local jails at midyear, average daily population, and incarceration rates, 2000-2010
Table 2. Rated capacity of local jails and percent of capacity occupied, 2000-2010
Table 3. Inmates confined in local jails at midyear, by size of jurisdiction, 2009 and 2010
Table 4. Average daily jail population, admissions, and turnover rate, by size of jurisdiction,
week ending June 30, 2009 and 2010
Table 5. Percent of jail capacity occupied at midyear, by size of jurisdiction, 2009, and 2010
Table 6. Number of inmates in local jails, by characteristic, midyear 2000 and 2005-2010
Table 7. Percent of inmates in local jails, by characteristic, midyear 2000 and 2005-2010
Table 8. Inmate population in jail jurisdictions reporting on confined persons being held for U.S. Immigration
and Customs Enforcement, midyear 2002-2010
Table 9. The 50 largest local jail jurisdictions, by number of inmates held, average daily population,
and rated capacity, midyear 2008-2010
Table 10. Persons under jail supervision, by confinement status and type of program, midyear 2000
and 2006-2010
Table 11. Estimated standard errors, by confinement status, Annual Survey of Jails, 2010
Table 12. Estimated standard errors, by selected characteristics, Annual Survey of Jails, 2010
Table 13. Estimated percentages of local jail inmates, by selected characteristics and ratio estimates, 2010

4	

Jail Inmates at Midyear 2010 – Statistical Tables

Table 1
Inmates confined in local jails at midyear, average daily population, and incarceration rates, 2000-2010
Average daily populationa

Inmates confined at midyear
Year

Number

2000

621,149

2001

631,240

2002
2003

Percentage change

Jail incarceration rateb

Number

Percentage change

2.5%

618,319

1.7%

220

1.6

625,966

1.2

222

665,475

5.4

652,082

4.2

231

691,301

3.9

680,760

4.4

238

2004

713,990

3.3

706,242

3.7

243

2005

747,529

4.7

733,442

3.9

252

2006

765,819

2.4

755,320

3.0

256

2007

780,174

1.9

773,138

2.4

259

2008c

785,536

0.7

776,573

0.4

258

2009c

767,434

-2.3

768,135

-1.1

250

2010

748,728

-2.4

748,553

-1.1

242

Average annual change
2000-2009

2.4%

2.4%

2009-2010

-2.4

-2.5

aAverage daily population is the sum of all inmates in jail each day for a year, divided by the number of days in the year.
bNumber of inmates confined at midyear per 100,000 U.S. residents.

cBased on revised data from selected jail jurisdictions for the number of inmates confined at midyear 2008 and 2009 and for the average daily population in 2009. See
Methodology for a description of revised data.

Table 2
Rated capacity of local jails and percent of capacity occupied, 2000-2010
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008d
2009d
2010
Average annual change
2000-2009
2009-2010

Rated capacityb
677,787
699,309
713,899
736,471
755,603
786,954
794,984
810,543
828,714
849,895
866,974
2.5%
2.0

Year-to-year change in rated capacitya
Number
Percentage
25,466
3.9%
21,522
3.2
14,590
2.1
22,572
3.2
19,132
2.6
33,398
4.1
8,638
1.0
15,863
2.0
18,171
2.2
21,181
2.6
17,079
2.0

Percentage of capacity occupiedc
92.0%
90.0
93.0
94.0
94.0
95.0
96.3
96.3
94.8
90.3
86.4

22,281
17,079

Note: Rated capacity data for 2000-2004 and 2006-2010 were survey estimates subject to sampling error.
aIncrease or reduction in the number of beds during the 12 months ending midyear of each year. Number and percentage change for 2000 are calculated using the
rated capacity of 652,321 for 1999.
bRated capacity is the number of beds or inmates assigned by a rating official to facilities within each jurisdiction.
cNumber of confined inmates on the last weekday in June divided by the rated capacity and multiplied by 100.
dBased on revised data from selected jail jurisdictions for 2008 and 2009. See Methodology for a description of revised data.

April 2011	

5

Table 3
Inmates confined in local jails at midyear, by size of jurisdiction, 2009 and 2010
Jurisdiction sizea
Totalb
Fewer than 50 inmates
50 to 99
100 to 249
250 to 499
500 to 999
1,000 or moreb

Number of inmates
2009
2010
767,434
748,728
22,046
22,806
37,838
37,460
86,279
88,750
108,462
106,826
123,442
121,704
389,368
371,181

Difference
-18,706
760
-378
2,471
-1,636
-1,738
-18,187

Percentage change
-2.4%
3.4%
-1.0
2.9
-1.5
-1.4
-4.7

Percentage of all inmates
2009
2010
100.0%
100.0%
2.9%
3.0%
4.9
5.0
11.2
11.9
14.1
14.3
16.1
16.3
50.7
49.6

Note: Detail may not add to total due to rounding.
aBased on the average daily population during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2009. Average daily population is the sum of all inmates in jail each day for a year,
divided by the number of days in the year.
bBased on revised data from selected jail jurisdictions for the number of inmates confined at midyear 2009. See Methodology for a description of revised data.

Table 4
Average daily jail population, admissions, and turnover rate, by size of jurisdiction, week ending June 30, 2009 and 2010
Jurisdiction sizec
Total
Fewer than 50 inmates
50 to 99
100 to 249
250 to 499
500 to 999
1,000 or more

Average daily populationa
2009
2010
768,135
748,553
22,012
21,875
37,992
38,041
85,650
87,508
108,025
104,076
123,243
121,611
391,213
375,442

Estimated number of admissions
during the last week in June
2009
2010
245,385
246,919
14,627
15,644
17,889
18,955
36,860
36,932
37,314
41,468
36,977
37,882
101,718
96,037

Weekly turnover rateb
2009
2010
63.7%
64.9%
137.8%
136.7%
90.8
96.1
84.2
80.6
68.5
78.0
59.2
61.1
52.5
51.5

Note: See Methodology for greater detail on estimation procedures.
aAverage daily population is the sum of all inmates in jail each day for a year, divided by the number of days in the year. Based on revised data for selected jail
jurisdictions in 2009.
bTurnover rate was calculated by adding weekly admissions and releases, dividing by the average daily population and multiplying by 100.
cBased on the average daily population during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2009.

		

6	

Jail Inmates at Midyear 2010 – Statistical Tables

Table 5
Percent of jail capacity occupied at
midyear, by size of jurisdiction, 2009
and 2010
Jurisdiction sizeb
Total
Fewer than 50 inmates
50 to 99
100 to 249
250 to 499
500 to 999
1,000 or more

Percent of capacity
occupieda
2009c
2010
90.3%
86.4%
62.2%
63.3%
78.6
73.1
84.3
83.3
93.5
83.9
91.3
88.5
94.3
90.9

aNumber of inmates at midyear divided by the
rated capacity multiplied by 100.
bBased on the average daily population during the
12-month period ending June 30, 2009.
cBased on revised data from selected jail
jurisdictions for 2009. See Methodology for a
description of revised data.

Table 6
Number of inmates in local jails, by characteristic, midyear 2000 and 2005–2010
Characteristic
Total
Sex
Male
Female
Adults
Male
Female
Juvenilesb
Held as adultsc
Held as juveniles
Race/Hispanic origind
Whitee
Black/African Americane
Hispanic/Latino
Othere,f
Two or more racese

2000
621,149

2005
747,529

2006
765,819

2007
780,174

2008a
785,536

2009a
767,434

2010
748,728

550,162
70,987
613,534
543,120
70,414
7,615
6,126
1,489

652,958
94,571
740,770
646,807
93,963
6,759
5,750
1,009

666,819
99,000
759,717
661,164
98,552
6,102
4,835
1,268

679,654
100,520
773,341
673,346
99,995
6,833
5,649
1,184

685,865
99,670
777,832
678,660
99,172
7,703
6,410
1,294

673,728
93,706
760,216
667,039
93,176
7,218
5,846
1,373

656,360
92,368
741,168
649,284
91,884
7,560
5,647
1,912

260,500
256,300
94,100
10,200
...

331,000
290,500
111,900
13,000
1,000

336,500
295,900
119,200
13,500
700

338,200
301,700
125,500
13,900
800

333,300
308,000
128,500
14,000
1,300

326,400
300,500
124,000
14,800
1,800

331,600
283,200
118,100
15,000
800

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.
...Not collected.
aBased on revised data from selected jail jurisdictions for the number of inmates confined at midyear 2008 and 2009. See Methodology for a description of revised data.
bJuveniles are persons under the age of 18 at midyear.
cIncludes juveniles who were tried or awaiting trial as adults.
dEstimates are based on reported data adjusted for nonresponse.
eExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.
fIncludes American Indians, Alaska Natives, Asians, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders.

April 2011	

7

Table 7
Percent of inmates in local jails, by characteristic, midyear 2000 and 2005–2010
Characteristic
Sex
Male
Female
Adults
Male
Female
Juvenilesa
Held as adultsb
Held as juveniles
Race/Hispanic originc
Whited
Black/African Americand
Hispanic/Latino
Otherd,e
Two or more racesd
Conviction statusb
Convicted
Male
Female
Unconvicted
Male
Female

2000

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

88.6%
11.4
98.8%
87.4
11.3
1.2%
1.0
0.2

87.3%
12.7
99.1%
86.5
12.6
0.9%
0.8
0.1

87.1%
12.9
99.2%
86.3
12.9
0.8%
0.6
0.2

87.1%
12.9
99.1%
86.3
12.8
0.9%
0.7
0.2

87.3%
12.7
99.0%
86.4
12.6
1.0%
0.8
0.2

87.8%
12.2
99.1%
86.9
12.1
0.9%
0.8
0.2

87.7%
12.3
99.0%
86.7
12.3
1.0%
0.8
0.3

41.9%
41.3
15.2
1.6
...

44.3%
38.9
15.0
1.7
0.1

43.9%
38.6
15.6
1.8
0.1

43.3%
38.7
16.1
1.8
0.1

42.5%
39.2
16.4
1.8
0.2

42.5%
39.2
16.2
1.9
0.2

44.3%
37.8
15.8
1.3
0.6

44.0%
39.0
5.0
56.0%
50.0
6.0

38.0%
33.2
4.9
62.0%
54.2
7.7

37.9%
32.8
5.0
62.1%
54.3
7.8

38.0%
32.9
5.2
62.0%
54.3
7.7

37.1%
32.3
4.8
62.9%
55.2
7.8

37.8%
33.0
4.8
62.2%
54.8
7.4

38.9%
…
…
61.1%
…
…

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.
...Not collected. Starting in 2010, the Annual Survey of Jails does not collect data on conviction status by sex.
aPersons under age 18 at midyear.
bIncludes juveniles who were tried or awaiting trial as adults.
cEstimates are based on reported data and adjusted for nonresponse.
dExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.
eIncludes American Indians, Alaska Natives, Asians, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders.

8	

Jail Inmates at Midyear 2010 – Statistical Tables

Table 8
Inmate population in jail jurisdictions reporting on confined persons being held
for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, midyear 2002-2010
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010

Jurisdictions reporting
on holdings for ICEb
2,961
2,940
2,962
2,824
2,784
2,713
2,699
2,643
2,531

Total number
of inmates
626,870
637,631
673,807
703,084
698,108
683,640
704,278
685,500
622,954

Confined persons held for ICEa
Number
Percent of all inmates
12,501
2.0%
13,337
2.1
14,120
2.1
11,919
1.7
13,598
1.9
15,063
2.2
20,785
3.0
24,278
3.5
21,607
3.5

aICE—Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

bNot all jurisdictions reported on this specific characteristic.

April 2011	

9

Table 9
The 50 largest local jail jurisdictions, by number of inmates held, average daily population, and rated capacity, midyear
2008-2010
Jurisdiction
Los Angeles County, CA
New York City, NY
Harris County, TX
Cook County, IL
Philadelphia City, PA
Maricopa County, AZ
Dallas County, TX
Miami-Dade County, FL
Shelby County, TN
San Bernardino County, CA
Orange County, CA
San Diego County, CAe
Broward County, FL
Alameda County, CA
Sacramento County, CA
Bexar County, TX
Jacksonville City, FL
Baltimore City, MD
Orange County, FL
Santa Clara County, CA
DeKalb County, GA
Davidson County, TNe
Orleans Parish, LA
Riverside County, CA
Hillsborough County, FL
Tarrant County, TX
Allegheny County, PAe
Pinellas County, FL
Gwinnett County, GA
Clark County, NVf
District of Columbiag
Palm Beach County, FL
Milwaukee County, WI
Travis County, TX
Bernalillo County, NM
Kern County, CA
Cobb County, GA
King County, WA
York County, PA
Suffolk County, MAh
Mecklenburg County, NC
Fulton County, GA
Polk County, FL
Salt Lake County, UT
Essex County, NJ

10	

Number of inmatesa
2008
2009
2010
19,533
19,869
16,862
13,804
13,130
12,745
10,063
11,360
10,264
9,984
9,737
9,777
8,824
9,436
8,325
9,536
8,745
7,549
6,252
6,222
6,909
7,082
5,992
5,653
5,925
5,961
5,560
5,596
5,923
5,720
6,216
5,990
4,847
5,435
5,215
4,863
5,509
4,915
4,631
4,345
4,405
4,132
4,592
4,796
3,972
4,256
4,191
4,242
3,799
3,950
3,837
4,265
3,957
3,595
4,665
3,721
3,591
4,664
4,244
3,776
3,365
3,304
3,516
3,934
3,748
3,636
2,370
3,473
3,505
3,597
3,675
3,342
3,857
3,503
3,296
3,574
3,151
3,135
3,219
3,196
3,342
3,463
3,233
3,220
3,415
3,289
3,233
3,121
3,109
3,311
3,046
3,364
3,071
2,987
2,973
3,059
3,025
2,884
2,525
2,533
2,459
2,722
2,589
2,724
2,688
2,368
2,291
2,364
2,467
2,369
2,373
2,517
2,437
2,328
2,235
2,238
2,264
2,494
2,399
2,934
2,647
2,285
2,258
2,821
3,026
2,271
2,369
2,293
2,214
2,021
2,022
2,238
2,389
2,365
2,136

Average daily populationb
2008 2009 2010
19,836 19,437 18,036
13,849 13,365 13,049
10,000 11,361 10,242
9,900 9,383
9,586
8,811 9,359
8,804
9,265 9,215
8,055
6,385 6,039
6,865
7,050 6,051
5,770
5,765 5,943
5,766
5,593 5,591
5,755
6,000 6,255
5,134
5,363 5,263
4,848
5,500 4,981
4,583
4,371 4,444
4,305
4,563 4,700
4,199
4,062 4,236
4,169
3,606 3,728
3,835
4,010 3,997
3,701
4,294 4,206
3,604
4,660 4,498
3,587
2,906 3,404
3,560
3,528 3,567
3,551
2,613 2,750
3,522
3,530 3,472
3,410
3,985 3,658
3,340
3,500 3,432
3,248
3,246 3,103
3,233
3,559 3,145
3,225
3,311 3,361
3,198
3,115 3,101
3,158
3,012 3,030
3,102
2,900 2,825
2,901
3,037 2,963
2,710
2,662 2,434
2,691
2,607 2,636
2,689
2,372 2,405
2,483
2,579 2,440
2,369
2,657 2,426
2,343
2,211 2,262
2,284
2,445 2,463
2,280
2,610 2,496
2,274
2,789 2,970
2,269
2,456 2,315
2,268
1,995 2,100
2,196
2,260 2,300
2,151

Rated capacityc
2008
2009 2010
22,349 22,477 18,112
19,554 19,636 19,404
9,391
9,391 9,391
10,158 10,607 10,607
8,685
8,685 8,685
9,395
9,395 9,395
7,665
8,097 7,805
5,845
5,845 6,035
6,675
6,669 6,912
5,970
5,914 5,984
5,078
5,063 5,063
4,972
4,664 4,692
5,722
5,504 5,144
4,243
4,673 4,673
5,075
5,075 4,318
4,596
4,596 4,596
3,137
3,137 3,137
3,683
3,683 3,683
4,721
4,721 4,721
3,825
3,825 3,825
3,636
3,636 3,636
3,679
4,010 4,010
2,633
3,514 3,514
3,132
3,132 3,132
4,190
4,190 4,190
3,386
3,386 3,386
3,371
3,713 3,727
4,155
4,151
/
3,419
3,492 4,196
2,957
2,984 2,984
3,825
3,522 3,250
3,359
3,366 3,165
3,000
2,974 2,835
3,137
3,008 3,659
2,236
2,236 2,236
2,698
2,698 2,698
2,559
2,559 3,451
3,154
3,154 3,154
2,446
2,446 2,497
2,990
2,644 2,644
2,668
2,668 2,988
3,115
2,949 2,652
1,808
1,808 1,808
2,000
2,088 2,098
2,434
2,434 2,434

Percent of capacity occupiedd
2008
2009
2010
%
%
87.4
88.4
93.1%
70.6
66.9
65.7
107.2
121.0
109.3
98.3
91.8
92.2
101.6
108.6
95.9
101.5
93.1
80.4
81.6
76.8
88.5
121.2
102.5
93.7
88.8
89.4
80.4
93.7
100.2
95.6
122.4
118.3
95.7
109.3
111.8
103.6
96.3
89.3
90.0
102.4
94.3
88.4
90.5
94.5
92.0
92.6
91.2
92.3
121.1
125.9
122.3
115.8
107.4
97.6
98.8
78.8
76.1
121.9
111.0
98.7
92.5
90.9
96.7
106.9
93.5
90.7
90.0
98.8
99.7
114.8
117.3
106.7
92.1
83.6
78.7
105.6
93.1
92.6
95.5
86.1
89.7
83.3
77.9
/
99.9
94.2
77.0
105.5
104.2
111.0
79.6
95.5
94.5
88.9
88.3
96.7
100.8
97.0
89.1
80.7
81.7
74.4
115.8
121.8
120.2
87.8
84.9
87.6
96.4
92.6
68.8
79.8
77.3
73.8
91.4
91.5
90.7
83.4
90.7
111.0
99.2
85.6
75.6
90.6
102.6
85.6
131.0
126.8
122.5
101.1
96.8
106.7
98.2
97.2
87.8

Jail Inmates at Midyear 2010 – Statistical Tables

Table 9 (continued)
The 50 largest local jail jurisdictions, by number of inmates held, average daily population, and rated capacity, midyear
2008-2010
Jurisdiction

Number of inmatesa
2008
2009
2010

Denver County, CO
Oklahoma County, OK
Marion County, INe
Clayton County, GA
Franklin County, OH

2,299
2,263
2,336
1,997
2,544

2,217
2,133
2,541
1,991
2,313

2,085
2,100
2,303
1,966
2,194

Average daily populationb
2008 2009 2010
2,380
2,150
2,344
1,958
2,457

2,248
2,145
2,485
1,900
2,251

2,101
2,100
2,096
2,080
2,041

Rated capacityc
2008
2009 2010

Percent of capacity occupiedd
2008
2009
2010

1,792
2,635
2,656
2,146
2,541

128.3%
85.9
88.0
93.1
100.1

1,792
2,635
2,656
2,162
2,541

2,377
2,635
2,599
2,162
2,541

123.7%
80.9
95.7
92.1
91.0

87.7%
79.7
88.6
90.9
86.3

Note: Jurisdictions are ordered by their average daily population in 2010.
/Not reported.
aNumber of inmates held in jail facilities on the last weekday in June. Based on revised data from selected jail jurisdictions for the number of inmates confined at
midyear 2008 and 2009. See Methodology for a description of revised data.
bBased on the average daily population for the year ending June 30. Average daily population is the sum of all inmates in jail each day for a year, divided by the number
of days in the year. Based on revised data for selected jail jurisdictions in 2009.
cNumber of beds or inmates assigned by a rating official to facilities within each jurisdiction.
dNumber of inmates at midyear divided by the rated capacity and multiplied by 100.
eIncludes privately operated facilities.
fConfined population total for Clark County, NV, excludes inmates held in contract facilities.
gIncludes the Central Detention Facility (D.C. Jail), Correctional Treatment Facility (Contract Adult Detention Center), and contractual bed space at four halfway houses.
The maximum physical capacity is fixed at the Central Detention Facility and Correctional Treatment Facility, and new capacity has not been constructed since 2003.
The Central Detention Facility capacity is capped by D.C. Statute at 2,164, and the contracted bed space varies annually per budget and operational requirements.
hData for 2008 and 2009 exclude inmates held in the pre-trial facility. In 2010, inmates held in the pre-trial facility are included.

April 2011	

11

Table 10
Persons under jail supervision, by confinement status and type of program, midyear 2000 and 2006–2010
Confinement status and type of program
Totala
Held in jaila
Supervised outside of a jail facilityb
Weekend programsc
Electronic monitoring
Home detentiond
Day reporting
Community service
Other pretrial supervision
Other work programse
Treatment programsf
Other

2000
687,033
621,149
65,884
14,523
10,782
332
3,969
13,592
6,279
8,011
5,714
2,682

Number of persons under jail supervision
2006
2007
2008
2009
826,041
848,419
858,388
837,647
765,819
780,174
785,536
767,434
60,222
68,245
72,852
70,213
11,421
10,473
12,325
11,212
10,999
13,121
13,539
11,834
807
512
498
738
4,841
6,163
5,758
6,492
14,667
15,327
18,475
17,738
6,409
11,148
12,452
12,439
8,319
7,369
5,808
5,912
1,486
2,276
2,259
2,082
1,273
1,857
1,739
1,766

2010
809,360
748,728
60,632
9,871
12,319
736
5,552
14,646
9,375
4,351
1,799
1,983

aBased on revised data from selected jail jurisdictions for the number of inmates confined at midyear 2008 and 2009. See Methodology for a description of revised data.
bExcludes persons supervised by a probation or parole agency.

cPrograms that allow offenders to serve their sentences of confinement on weekends only (i.e., Friday to Sunday).
dIncludes only persons without electronic monitoring.

eIncludes persons in work release programs, work gangs, and other alternative work programs.
fIncludes persons under drug, alcohol, mental health, and other medical treatment.

Table 11
Estimated standard errors, by confinement status, Annual Survey of Jails, 2010
Characteristic
Total
Held in jail
Supervised outside a jail facilityb
Excluding weekenders
Weekend programs
Average daily population
Rated capacity
Admissions during the last week in June

Survey estimates Standard error
809,360
6,128
748,728
5,638
60,632
1,965
50,761
1,941
9,871
297
748,553
5,566
866,974
11,129
246,919
4,482

Relative standard errora
0.76%
0.75%
3.24
3.82
3.01
0.74%
1.28%
1.82%

aCalculated by dividing the standard error by the survey estimates and multiplying by 100.

bIncludes persons under jail supervision but confined. Excludes persons supervised by a probation or parole
agency. Weekend programs allow offenders to serve their sentences of confinement on weekends only (i.e.,
Friday to Sunday).

12	

Jail Inmates at Midyear 2010 – Statistical Tables

Table 12
Estimated standard errors, by selected characteristic, Annual Survey of Jails, 2010
Characteristic
Sex
Male
Female
Adults
Juvenilesc
Held as adultsd
Held as juveniles
Race/Hispanic origin
Whitee
Black/African Americane
Hispanic/Latino
Othere,f
Two or more racese
Conviction statusd
Convicted
Unconvicted

Totala

Relative standard
Survey estimate Standard error error (percentage)b

656,360
92,368
741,168
7,560
5,647
1,912

650,342
91,521
734,852
7,490
5,596
1,895

4,999
1,026
5,600
263
246
255

0.77%
1.12
0.76%
3.51%
4.40
13.47

331,600
283,200
118,100
15,000
800

274,907
234,738
97,869
12,448
689

3,672
3,182
2,143
1,063
153

1.34%
1.36
2.19
8.54
22.25

291,300
457,500

234,566
368,412

3,328
4,604

1.42%
1.25

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.
aTotal estimates were based on reported data, adjusted for nonresponse.
bCalculated by dividing the standard error by the survey estimates and multiplying by 100.
cJuveniles are persons under the age of 18 at midyear.
dIncludes juveniles who were tried or awaiting trial as adults.
eExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.
fIncludes American Indians, Alaska Natives, Asians, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders.

Table 13
Estimated percentages of local jail inmates, by selected characteristic and ratio
estimates, 2010
Characteristic
Sex
Male
Female
Race/Hispanic origin
Whitea
Black/African Americana
Hispanic/Latino
Othera,b
Two or more racesa
Conviction statusc
Convicted
Unconvicted

Estimate

Standard error

87.7%
12.3

0.10%
0.10

44.3%
37.8
15.8
1.3
0.6

0.41%
0.39
0.30
0.17
0.03

38.9%
61.1%

0.42%
0.42%

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.
aExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.
bIncludes American Indians, Alaska Natives, Asians, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders.
cIncludes juveniles who were tried or awaiting trial as adults.

April 2011	

13

Methodology
Annual Survey of Jails
In years between the complete census of local jails, BJS
conducts the Annual Survey of Jails (ASJ). ASJ is a sample
survey of local jails used to estimate the number and
characteristics of local inmates nationwide. For the 2010
ASJ, the U.S. Census Bureau, as the collection agent, drew
a sample of 873 jail jurisdictions represented by 936 jail
facilities (also referred to as reporting units). This sample
represents approximately 2,830 jail jurisdictions nationwide.
Local jail jurisdictions include counties (parishes in
Louisiana) or municipal governments that administer one or
more local jails.
The 2010 ASJ sample included all jails with certainty (67)
that were operated jointly by two or more jurisdictions, or
multi-jurisdictional jails. Other jail jurisdictions included
with certainty (268) were those that—
ƒƒ
held juvenile inmates at the time of the 2005 Census of Jail
Inmates and had an average daily population of 500 or
more inmates during the 12 months ending June 30, 2005.
ƒƒ
held only adult inmates and had an average daily
population of 750 or more.

adjustment procedures to account for missing data.
However, prior to implementing the plan, data were
estimated for 3 of the 8 survey nonrespondents. For the
confined population and average daily population (ADP),
the estimation method included applying the average annual
change from 2007-2009 to estimate the 2010 data. The
rated capacity for 2010 is the same as in 2009 because of
the stability of these numbers. After October, 21, 2010, BJS
implemented the nonresponse weight adjustment procedure
to account for five respondents that did not participate.
Nonresponse weight adjustment
The nonresponse weighting adjustment for the ASJ is
handled in two steps. The first step is to calculate a multijail factor for the jail jurisdictions with more than one
nonregional jail reporting unit. The second step is to
calculate the nonresponse weighting adjustment factor
within sample stratum.
Step 1: Multi-jail factor
When all the nonregional jail reporting units within the jail
jurisdiction respond, the multi-jail factor is 1. When none of
the nonregional jail reporting units within the jurisdiction
respond, the multi-jail factor is 0. When at least one
nonregional jail reporting unit within the jail jurisdiction
has responded and at least one nonregional jail reporting
unit has not responded, the multi-jail factor weights up the
data for the responding nonregional jail reporting unit to
account for the nonresponding nonregional jail reporting
units within the jail jurisdiction.

The remaining jurisdictions were stratified into two groups:
jurisdictions with jails holding at least one juvenile on
June 30, 2005, and jails holding only adults on that date.
Using stratified random sampling, 538 jurisdictions were
selected from eight strata based on the two conditions
The nonregional jail reporting units were match back to the
enumerated above and four strata
based onfactor
the average daily
Multi-jail
2005 Census of Jail Inmates, and the 2005 ADP was used in
jail inmate population during 2005. The average daily jail
the multi-jail factor. For 2010, the 5 nonrespondents were
inmate population was derived from the 2005 Census of Jail
The 54 jail jurisdictions with nonregional
jailand
reporting
units have
a total offactor.
111 individual j
self representative
not considered
for a multi-jail
Inmates.
reporting units. We match theThe
nonregional
jail
reporting
units
back
to
the
2005
Census of Ja
multi-jail factor F1hi is calculated as—
Data were obtained from sampled
jurisdictions
by the
mail-2005 ADP in the multi-jail factor. The multi-jail factor F1hi is calculate
Inmates,
and use
out and web-based survey questionnaires. After follow-up
���
phone calls and facsimiles to respondents, the response
��
�∑��� ����
rate for the survey was 100% for critical items, such as the
number of inmates confined, average daily population, and
�∑��� � ���� � ���� � ��
�
��� ���
���
rated capacity. (See tables 12, 13 and 14 for standard errors
���� �
�
��
associated with reported estimates from the ASJ 2010 at
�
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2195.)
�
Response rate, nonresponse adjustment, and out-ofscope jail facilities
where

� ����� � ���� � �����������������
�
���

where
There were 930 active respondents in the 2010 ASJ universe
J
=
Number
of
jail
reporting
units in jurisdiction i,
i
file.* Eight jail facilities were nonrespondents. For this
J
=
Number
of jail reporting
in jurisdiction
=
Number
of
responding
jail
reporting
units units
in jurisdiction
i, i,
J
i
Ri
collection year, BJS implemented nonresponse
weight
J
=
Number
of
responding
jail
reporting
units
Ri
Xhij = Value of 2005 ADP
for jail reporting unit j in jurisdiction i in stratum h.
*Of the 936 respondents in the 2010 ASJ universe file, two jail facilities were
in jurisdiction i,
determined to be out-of-scope for the 2009 ASJ and remained out-of-scope
Xhij = Value of 2005 ADP for jail reporting unit
for 2010. Four were out-of-scope for the
2010 data
because they jail reporting
When
all collection
the nonregional
units within
the jurisdiction
respond, the multi-jail fa
j in jurisdiction
i in stratum
h.
closed permanently, leaving 930 active respondents.

14	

is 1. When none of the nonregional jail reporting units within the jurisdiction respond, the m
jail factor is 0. When at least one nonregional jail reporting unit within the jurisdiction has
responded and at least one nonregional jail reporting unit has not responded, the multi-jail fa
Jail Inmates
at Midyear
2010 – Statistical
Tables for the
weights up the data for the responding
nonregional
jail reporting
unit to account
nonresponding nonregional jail reporting units within the jail jurisdiction.

east
nonregional
jail reporting
within
the jurisdiction
has factor
one one
nonregional
jail reporting
unit unit
has not
responded,
the multi-jail
e the
nonregional
jailnonregional
reporting unit
not responded,
the multi-jail
responding
jailhas
reporting
unit to account
for the factor
eonal
responding
nonregional
jail reporting
unit to account for the
jail reporting
units within
the jail jurisdiction.
al jail reporting units within the jail jurisdiction.
ng adjustment
Stepfactor
2: Nonresponse weighting adjustment factor
Calculating annual admissions
adjustmentThe
factor
nonresponse weighting adjustment factor is calculated
BJS determined that the June admission data on the 2004
hting adjustment
is calculated
within
each
stratum.
We use Survey
the of Large Jails (SLJ) were a reliable source to calculate
withinfactor
each stratum.
The sample
weights
in the
nonresponse
adjustment
are used.
The
nonresponse
weighting
ng
adjustment
factor isfactor
calculated
within
each stratum.
We use
thea nationwide annual admission estimate. Although the
nonresponse
adjustment
factor.
The
nonresponse
weighting
adjustment
adjustment factor.
factor F2hThe
is calculated
as— weighting adjustment
number of admissions to jails fluctuated throughout the
response
adjustment
nonresponse
as
year, the SLJ tracked monthly movements from January
��
��
∑��� ∑��� ����
2003 to January 2004 and showed that the June 2003 count
�
�
� � �∑� � ��
��� ∑
�����
(339,500) closely matched the annual average number of
���
���
��� � ��∑������∑��� ����
admissions (342,956). The number of annual admissions was
∑��� ∑��� ����
calculated by multiplying the weekly admissions by 365 days
jurisdictions in stratum h,
and dividing by 7 days.
isdictions
inwhere
stratum
h,
eight for jail
j in jurisidiction
i in stratum h.
Calculating weekly turnover rates
ght for jail j in jurisidiction i in stratum h.
nh = number of jurisdictions in stratum h,
whij = sample weight for jail j in jurisidiction i in stratum h.

Weekly jail turnover rates were modeled after the Bureau of
Labor Statistics’ Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey.
Additional information on turnover rates is available at
Final weight
for each individual
jail reporting
unitindividual
on the 2010
ASJ data
file is http://www.bls.gov/jlt/. Jail turnover rates were calculated
The final weight
FWhij for each
jail reporting
unit
by adding admissions and releases and dividing by the
each individual
unit
on the 2010
on thejail
2010reporting
ASJ data file
is calculated
as— ASJ data file is
average daily population. The turnover rate takes into
account admissions into and releases from jails and gives an
����� � ���� � ���� � ��� .
indication of the fluctuation of the jail population. Higher
turnover rates mean larger numbers of admissions and
����� � ���� � ���� � ��� .
Weekly admission and release estimation procedures
releases relative to the size of the average daily population.
Based on the 2010 ASJ, 821 of the 925 jail facilities (89%)
Revised 2008 and 2009 data
provided valid data on weekly admissions or releases
(including estimates for five nonrespondents). To calculate
The number of inmates held at midyear 2008 and 2009 and
an overall weekly estimate, data on offender flows through
the average daily population in 2009 for Bexar County, TX,
local jails were estimated for the 104 jail facilities that did
are based on revised data.
not report data on admissions and releases.
The rated capacity data for Bexar County, TX, and the
Estimates were calculated based on the following criteria:
District of Columbia have been revised for 2008 and 2009.
Revised rated capacity data for Kern County, CA, have been
ƒƒ
Data for 64 jail facilities included admission and release
revised for 2009.
data based on estimates from the 2009 Annual Survey of
Jails.
ƒƒ
Data for 13 jail facilities included admission and release
data based on estimates from the 2008 Annual Survey of
Jails.
ƒƒ
Release data for 13 jail facilities was based on admission
data reported in 2009.
ƒƒ
Data for 11 jail facilities included admission and release
data based on estimates from the 2007 Annual Survey of
Jails.
ƒƒ
Admission data for 2 jail facilities was based on release
data reported in 2009.
ƒƒ
Admission data for 1 jail facility was based on admission
data reported in 2009.

April 2011	

15

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Washington, DC 20531

ncj233431

PRESORTED STANDARD
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
DOJ/BJS
Permit No. G-91

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

Office of Justice Programs • Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods • http://www.ojp.gov
The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the
U.S. Department of Justice. James P. Lynch is director.
These Statistical Tables were prepared and data were analyzed
by Todd D. Minton. Margaret Noonan verified the report.
Lisa A. McNelis and Jennifer Deppe carried out the data
collection and processing with assistance provided by Joshua
Giunta, Alonzo Johnson, and Andrea Arroyo, under the
supervision of Stephen Simoncini and Heather C. West, Ph.D.,
Governments Division, Census Bureau, U.S. Department of
Commerce. Suzanne Dorinski and Andrew Post provided
statistical and technical assistance, respectively.
Catherine Bird and Jill Thomas edited the report, Tina Dorsey
produced the report, and Jayne Robinson prepared the report
for final printing under the supervision of Doris J. James.
April 2011, NCJ 233431
This report in portable document format and in ASCII and
its related statistical data and tables are available at the BJS
website: http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2375.