2011 Imputation Methodology document

Attachment_J_-_Documentation_of_the_Imputation_Methodology_for_the_2011_CJRP[2].docx

Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP)

2011 Imputation Methodology document

OMB: 1121-0218

Document [docx]
Download: docx | pdf

August 28, 2012


MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD


From: Suzanne M. Dorinski Statistical Methods Branch Governments Division


Subject: Documentation of the Imputation Methodology for the 2011 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement


This memorandum presents a streamlined version of the imputation methodology for the 2011 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP).


This document uses intentional white space to improve readability. The document is available in PDF

format, because the reader’s computer might not reproduce the original formatting.


This document also serves as a guide to the programmer who works on the 2013 CJRP. Notes to the programmer are in brackets. The 2011 CJRP imputation system is reusable for the 2013 CJRP. [The programs are in the /govs/cjrp/2011 subdirectory on the steps45 machine.]


The imputation methodology for the 2001 CJRP and earlier censuses used the section and question numbers as variable names. It is very easy to make a typing mistake while using that convention. The naming convention also makes it more difficult to read the program code and debug it. For the 2011

CJRP, we assigned variable names that are more descriptive. Table 1 shows the naming conventions. The section and question number for each item are in parentheses.



Table of Contents


I. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 4


II. Summary of the Files ..................................................................................................................................... 6


III. Records Eligible for Imputation ..................................................................................................................... 7


IV. Critical Item Facilities ................................................................................................................................ 8


V. Questionnaire Items Eligible for Imputation.................................................................................................. 9


VI. Imputation Rates....................................................................................................................................... 9


VII. Collapsed Facility Type Codes .................................................................................................................. 11


VIII. Imputation Methodology for Section I Data ............................................................................................ 12


IX. Imputation Methodology for Item Nonresponse in Section II Data ............................................................. 13


X. Imputation Methodology for Section II Data for Critical Item Facilities ....................................................... 15


XI. Other Programming Notes .......................................................................................................................... 17


XII. Caution When Comparing State Data over Time ..................................................................................... 18


XIII. Issues to Consider for Next CJRP Collection ............................................................................................. 19


XIV. References .............................................................................................................................................. 21


Attachment A: Percentages of Juvenile Offenders Held in Critical Item Facilities by State of Facility ............. 22


Attachment B: Section II Item Imputation Rates by State of Facility............................................................... 23


Attachment C: Data Quality Issues in CJRP over Time .................................................................................... 25


Attachment D: 2011 CJRP Imputation System Script ...................................................................................... 29


Attachment E: Facility Type Question with Definitions .................................................................................. 35


Attachment F: Secure Facilities Holding Reported Status Offenders .............................................................. 36



Table 1. Naming conventions in the 2011 CJRP Imputation System

Concept

2011 CJRP

2010 JRFC

2010 CJRP

Persons assigned to

beds

total_2011

(S1Q10b)

total_2010_jrfc

(S1Q5b)

total_2010

(S1Q10b)

Persons assigned to

beds age 21 or older

adults_2011

(S1Q11)

adults_2010_jrfc

(S1Q6)

adults_2010

(S1Q11)

Persons under age 21

assigned to beds

kids_2011

(S1Q12b)

kids_2010_jrfc

(S1Q7b)

kids_2010

(S1Q12b)

Persons under age 21

assigned to beds due to

offenses

kid_offenders_2011

(S1Q13b)

kid_offenders_2010_jrfc

(S1Q8b)

kid_offenders_2010

(S1Q13b)

Persons assigned to

beds for reasons other than offenses

kid_nonoffenders_2011

(S1Q14b)

kid_nonoffenders_2010_jrfc

(S1Q9b)

kid_nonoffenders_2010

(S1Q14b)

Juvenile offender ID

kid_id

(S2Q1)



Juvenile offenders sex

kid_sex

(S2Q2)



Juvenile offenders birth date

kid_birth_month (S2Q3) kid_birth_day (S2Q3) kid_birth_year (S2Q3)



Juvenile offenders race

kid_race

(S2Q4)



Agency that placed the

juvenile offender in

facility

kid_placed_by

(S2Q5)



Juvenile offenders

most serious offense

kid_offense

(S2Q7)



Juvenile offenders

adjudication status

kid_adjudication_status

(S2Q9)



Juvenile offenders date

of admission

kid_admitted_month

(S2Q10) kid_admitted_day (S2Q10) kid_admitted_year (S2Q10)





I. Introduction

First conducted in 1997, the CJRP is a mail canvass census. The 2010 CJRP was the first collection to give facilities the option to respond online. The CJRP asks juvenile residential custody facilities in the U.S. to describe each youth assigned to a bed in the facility on the last Wednesday of October. Adult facilities, or facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment, or facilities for abused or neglected children are not included in the census. Normally conducted in odd-numbered years, the CJRP collection scheduled for 2005 occurred in early 2006, and the collection scheduled for 2009 occurred in early 2010. The reference date for the 2011 CJRP was Wednesday, October 26, 2011.


CJRP replaced the Census of Public and Private Juvenile Detention, Correctional, and Shelter Facilities, also known as the Children in Custody census, which began in the early 1970s. Previous censuses collected data on the facilities and the juvenile offenders held in the facilities.


CJRP collects an individual record on each offender less than 21 years of age held in the residential facility, with information on the juvenile’s sex, date of birth, race, agency or authority placing the offender there, most serious offense, court adjudication status, and date of admission to the facility.


The National Center for Juvenile Justice, the research division of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, maintains the CJRP databook online. The databook contains a set of pre-defined tables detailing the characteristics of juvenile offenders in residential placement facilities. Tables are currently available for 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2006, 2007, and 2010.


The National Archive of Criminal Justice Data holds the previous data files, where they are part of the restricted access collection. For more information, see http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/.


The project sponsor is the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). The Statistical Methods Branch (SMB) of Governments Division is responsible for imputation in the CJRP, while the Criminal Justice Statistics Branch (CJSB) of Governments Division is responsible for data collection and editing.


See Table 2 for the CJRP response accounting. A facility is temporarily out-of-scope when they do not hold juveniles on the reference date.


A facility is permanently out-of-scope for one of several reasons:


The facility is no longer a residential facility (might have converted to day treatment only).

The facility is a duplicate of a record already on the data file.

The facility has changed from public to private, or private to public. When this happens, the facility ID changes, and the previous facility ID is out-of-scope.

The facility no longer holds any juveniles (only handles adults).

The facility no longer holds any offenders (juveniles are all voluntary placements, or in the facility because of neglect, abuse, dependency, or abandonment).



There were 2,472 in-scope facilities on reference day. 2,356 of the 2,472 facilities responded to the

2011 CJRP, for a 95.3 percent unit response rate. 116 refused to participate in the 2011 CJRP, but we imputed records for the nontribal facilities in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. There were two tribal refusal facilities and one territorial refusal facility. Each is on the 2011 CJRP imputed file, but only the facility ID and the 2011 status flag exist for those facilities.


Table 2. CJRP response accounting


a

Mail for Reference Date October 26, 2011

2,636


b

Dead Facilities

108


c

Births (added after mail out)

13


d

Total Live Respondents (a-b+c)


2,541





e

Respondent Facilities

2,280


f

Facilities that only reported critical items

76


g

Non-Respondent Facilities

116


h

Total In-Scope Facilities (e+f+g)


2,472





i

Non-existent

0


j

Temporarily Out-of-Scope

23


k

Permanently Out-of-Scope

46


l

Total Out-of-Scope Facilities (i+j+k)


69





m

Closed Facilities

108

108






Total Mail out Facilities (h+l+m)


2,649






Total Mail out Facilities (a+c)


2,649



The 2011 questionnaire has two sections: Section I, which collects general information about the facility, and Section II, which collects individual person data for juvenile offenders held at the facility.


This document includes the response rates and describes the imputation methodology that we used to make complete data sets for analytical purposes. We summarize the numbers of facilities and records reporting on our 2011 edited and imputed files in Chapter II. Chapter III describes the records eligible for imputation. In Chapter IV, we discuss facilities, referred to as critical item facilities, which were only able to respond to a critical subset of the requested data. We did not impute for every item in the questionnaire, and Chapter V covers the items that were eligible for imputation.


The discussion of imputation rates is in Chapter VI. As described above, the unit response rate is high and leads to low imputation rates for Total Persons, Total Adults, Total Juveniles, Total Juvenile Offenders, and Total Juvenile Nonoffenders, as seen in Chapter VII.


Exercise caution when using State data over time. There was a marked increase in high imputation rates for 2007. The exact imputation rates by State for 2007 are in Attachment G of the 2007 imputation



documentation. Attachment B of this document shows the exact imputation rates by State for 2011. Highlighted Items have imputation rates that exceed 30 percent; exercise caution when using these data. Attachment C shows the items within each State with imputation rates of more than 30 percent for the period from 1997 through 2011.


A description of the imputation methodology follows in Chapters VII through X. Chapter XI discusses other programming notes, which will be useful when running the imputations for the next collection. Chapter XII discusses issues about comparing the data over time. Chapter XIII summarizes issues to consider for the next collection. The facility type question may not capture the desired information. References are included in Chapter XIV.



II. Summary of the Files


Table 3. Summary of the records on the 2011 edited file


78

records for facilities that hold offenders and reported only critical items

0

facilities that hold nonoffenders only and reported only critical items

378

facilities that hold nonoffenders only and reported more than critical items

55,389

juvenile offender records in 1,902 facilities that reported more than critical items

55,845

records on the 2011 edited file



Shape1 Table 4. Summary of the facilities on the 2011 edited file


76

facilities that hold offenders and reported only critical items

0

facilities that hold nonoffenders only and reported only critical items

378

facilities that hold nonoffenders only and reported more than critical items

1,902

facilities that hold offenders and reported more than critical items

2,356

facilities in the 2011 edited file



Shape2 Shape3 Table 5. Summary of the records on the 2011 imputed file


6,744

juvenile offender records in facilities that reported only critical items

20

facilities that hold nonoffenders only and reported only critical items

378

facilities that hold nonoffenders only and reported more than critical items

55,389

juvenile offender records in 1,902 facilities that reported more than critical items

2

tribal facility refusal

1

territorial facility refusal

62,534

records on the 2011 imputed file



Table 6. Summary of the facilities on the 2011 imputed file


169

facilities that hold offenders and reported only critical items

20

facilities that hold nonoffenders only and reported only critical items

378

facilities that hold nonoffenders only and reported more than critical items

1,902

facilities that hold offenders and reported more than critical items

2

tribal facility refusal

1

territory facility refusal

2,472

facilities in the 2011 imputed file



Shape4 Table 7. 2011 CJRP counts (nontribal facilities in the 50 states and the District

of Columbia)


75,044

people in residential placement

292

adults

74,752

juveniles

61,423

juvenile offenders

13,329

juvenile nonoffenders

2,445

nontribal facilities in the 50 states and District of Columbia



[The programs summary_counts_for_edited_file.sas and summarize_imputed_file_counts.sas produce the counts in this section.]



III. Records Eligible for Imputation

In previous versions of CJRP, we imputed missing data for all facilities and all offender records. Starting with the 2010 CJRP, OJJDP requested that we not impute missing data for tribal facilities or for offenders in tribal facilities.


The 2010 CJRP was the first cycle to attempt to collect data from facilities in American Samoa, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. OJJDP requested that we not impute missing data for territorial facilities or for offenders in territorial facilities.


The 2011 CJRP has a 2011 status flag in column 642. Table 8 shows the values of the status flag. Records eligible for imputation in the 2011 CJRP have the 2011 status flag set to zero.


Table 8. Values for the 2011 status flag

2011 status flag value

Description

0

Nontribal facility in the 50 states or District of Columbia

1

Tribal facility (missing data is not imputed)

2

Territorial facility (missing data is not imputed)



IV. Critical Item Facilities

In follow-up interviewing, CJSB attempted to collect as much data as possible to fill in both sections of the questionnaire. The following data items were critical:


Section I:


Question 5 (type of facility)

Question 10a and 10b (total persons assigned to beds in the facility)

Question 11 (number of persons age 21 or over assigned to beds in the facility)

Question 12a and 12b (number of persons under age 21 assigned to beds in the facility)

Question 13a and 13b (number of offenders under age 21 assigned to beds in the facility)

Question 14a and 14b (number of nonoffenders under age 21 assigned to beds in the facility) Section II:

Question 2 (whether facility is all-male, all-female, or holds both sexes)

Question 5 (placement agency)

Question 6 (placement agency’s government level)

Question 7 (offense code)

Question 9 (adjudication status)



In previous CJRP data collections, the critical items field was set to either 0 or 1, with 1 indicating that

the facility responded only to critical items. Starting with the 2007 CJRP, we have expanded the possible values for the critical items field to include four statuses. See Table 9. Note that tribal facilities or territorial facilities that are refusals do not have a value for the critical item field.


Table 9. Value for critical items field


Critical

item field value

Meaning

0

Facility is neither a critical item facility nor a refusal.

1

Facility responded only to the critical items.

2

Facility responded to Section I of the questionnaire, but date of birth, offense, and date of

admission are missing for all records in Section II of the questionnaire, while the reported characteristics are the same for every juvenile offender in the facility.

3

Facility is a refusal; we imputed all data on the file for that facility.



The critical items field is column 611 on the data file.


Facilities with the critical item field set to 1 have only one record per facility on the edited file, and the information in Section II for those facilities is used to generate the juvenile offender roster for each facility.


Facilities with the critical item field set to 2 are imputed in the same manner as facilities with the critical item field set to 1. When date of birth, offense, and date of admission are missing for every juvenile



offender in the facility, and the reported characteristics are the same for every juvenile offender in the facility, we have to impute for every juvenile offender in the facility, and we want to avoid using the same donor repeatedly within the facility.


Refusal facilities are also imputed in the same manner as facilities with the critical item field set to 1, to minimize the number of records within a facility imputed using the same donor. The critical item field value of 3 is the way to readily identify refusals on the file that were eligible for imputation.



V. Questionnaire Items Eligible for Imputation

The following items were eligible for imputation in the 2011 CJRP. Section I:

Question 10b (total persons assigned to beds in the facility)

Question 11 (number of persons age 21 or over assigned to beds in the facility)

Question 12b (number of persons under age 21 assigned to beds in the facility)

Question 13b (number of offenders under age 21 assigned to beds in the facility)

Question 14b (number of nonoffenders under age 21 assigned to beds in the facility) Section II:

Question 2 (juvenile offender’s sex)

Question 3 (juvenile offender’s birth date)

Question 4 (juvenile offender’s race)

Question 5 (placement agency)

Question 7 (juvenile offender’s most serious offense code)

Question 9 (juvenile offender’s adjudication status)

Question 10 (juvenile offender’s date of admission to the facility)



Earlier versions of the CJRP have included questions about the number of locked doors in a facility. The

2011 CJRP included a set of questions about locked doors, which did not ask for numbers of locked doors. The 2011 questions asked about policies for locking juveniles into their sleeping rooms, types of doors confining juveniles to a specific area, and policies about locking outside doors. There was no imputation performed for these questions.



VI. Imputation Rates

Table 10 shows the facility imputation rates for Section I. The facility imputation rate is


Shape5 𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒�� 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑖�𝑖�𝑠 𝑤𝑖� 𝑖𝑚�𝑢�𝑑 �𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐼 𝑖�𝑚

𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒�� 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑖�𝑖�𝑠 𝑙𝑖�𝑖�𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑟 𝑖𝑚�𝑢��𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝐶𝐽�𝑃 �𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑖𝑙𝑒

× 100.


The only missing data in Section I was for the 113 facilities that refused to participate in the 2011 CJRP, so the imputation rates for each item in Section I are (113 / 2445) x 100.



Table 10. Section I facility imputation rates in the 2011 CJRP


Item

Percent Imputed

Total persons

4.6

Adults

4.6

Juveniles

4.6

Juvenile offenders

4.6

Juvenile nonoffenders

4.6



Table 11 shows the item imputation rates for Section II. The item imputation rate is:


Shape6 𝑢𝑚�𝑒� 𝑜𝑓 𝑗𝑢𝑣�𝑛𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑒�𝑒� 𝑟�𝑜�𝑠 𝑤𝑖� 𝑖𝑚�𝑢�𝑑 �𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑜𝑟 𝑖�𝑚

𝑢𝑚�𝑒� 𝑜𝑓 𝑗𝑢𝑣�𝑛𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑜�𝑛�𝑟 𝑟�𝑜𝑟�𝑠 𝑙𝑖�𝑖�𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑟 𝑖𝑚�𝑢��𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝐶𝐽�𝑃 �𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑖𝑙𝑒

× 100.


Table 11. Section II item imputation rates in 2011 CJRP


Item

Percent Imputed

Sex

6.1

Birth month

11.6

Birth day

11.7

Birth year

11.6

Race

11.6

Placed by

7.0

Offense

15.0

Adjudication status

8.9

Admitted month

12.4

Admitted day

12.5

Admitted year

12.4



There are 61,423 juvenile offender records eligible for imputation (offenders held in nontribal facilities in the 50 states and District of Columbia) on the imputed file. 11,046 (18.0 percent) of those offender records have at least one section II item imputed.


Each item has an imputation flag on the imputed file. The flag is set to 1 when the value has been imputed.


SMB calculates the age of the juvenile offender. The age imputation flag is set to 1 when any part of the birth date (month, day, or year) has been imputed.


SMB calculates the length of stay of the juvenile offender. The length of stay imputation flag is set to 1 when any part of the admission date (month, day, or year) has been imputed.


[The program tabulate_nonresponse.sas produces the tables for Section I and Section II item imputation rates.]



VII. Collapsed Facility Type Codes

For imputation purposes, we need to assign a collapsed facility type code (Cat) to every facility. Cat is the variable on the 2011 file that contains the collapsed facility type code (column 621). We only assign Cat codes to nontribal facilities in the 50 states and the District of Columbia in the 2011 CJRP data file, because we did not impute the tribal facilities or the territorial facilities.


The following procedure assigns the 2011 Cat code:


1. If the agency checks only one facility type box on the 2010 form, we map the checked box to the appropriate collapsed facility type and Cat is set. See Table 12. Cat codes for collapsed facility types. Note that if the agency only checks other, we do not assign a collapsed facility type here.


Table 12. Cat codes for collapsed facility types


Cat

Collapsed Facility Type

Check box on 2011 form

0

Detention Center

S1Q501

1

Shelter

S1Q508, S1Q509

2

Reception / Diagnostic Center

S1Q503

3

Training School

S1Q502

5

Ranch, Camp, or Farm

S1Q506, S1Q507

6

Halfway House / Group Home

S1Q504, S1Q505

Note: In the table above, the check box naming convention is S1Q5 , where S1 means Section I, Q5

means question 5, and the last two digits match the check box on the questionnaire.


2. If the agency checks more than one facility type box on the 2010 form, we determine the collapsed facility type based on a hierarchy. The Cat code is determined by the highest checked box on the list. If an agency checks boxes that indicate it is both a reception center and a training school, the assigned code is training school, since the training school is higher up in the hierarchy than the reception center is. Table 13 shows the hierarchy.


Table 13. Hierarchy used when more than one collapsed facility type marked on 2011 CJRP

Cat

Collapsed Facility Type

Check box on 2011 form

3

Training School

S1Q502

0

Detention Center

S1Q501

2

Reception / Diagnostic Center

S1Q503

5

Ranch, Camp, or Farm

S1Q506, S1Q507

1

Shelter

S1Q508, S1Q509

6

Halfway House / Group Home

S1Q504, S1Q505

Note: In the table above, the check box naming convention is S1Q5 , where S1 means Section I, Q5

means question 5, and the last two digits match the check box on the questionnaire.


3. If the Cat code is still missing, we look at the information provided on the 2010 Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC). We use a hierarchy here, because a facility could have checked more than one box on the 2010 JRFC. The Cat code is determined by the highest checked box on the list. If an agency checks boxes that indicate it is both a detention center and



a shelter, the collapsed facility type is detention center, since the detention center is higher up in the hierarchy than the shelter is. Table 14 shows the hierarchy.


Table 14. Hierarchy used when more than one collapsed facility type marked on 2010 JRFC

Cat

Collapsed Facility Type

Check box on 2010 JRFC

3

Training School

S1Q1302

0

Detention Center

S1Q1301

2

Reception / Diagnostic Center

S1Q1303

5

Ranch, Camp, or Farm

S1Q1305, S1Q1307

1

Shelter

S1Q1308, S1Q1309

6

Halfway House / Group Home

S1Q1304, S1Q1306

Note: In the table above, the check box naming convention is S1Q13__, where S1 means Section I,

Q13 means question 13, and the last two digits match the check box on the questionnaire.


4. If the Cat code is still missing, we hold the Cat code constant from the 2010 CJRP.


5. For the refusals in the 2011 CJRP, we hold the facility type answers constant from the 2010

CJRP.


6. If a facility is still missing a Cat code, OJJDP will assign the code. [This situation occurred for 13 facilities in the 2011 CJRP.]



Table 15 shows the frequency of the methods used to assign Cat codes in the 2011 CJRP.


Table 15. Frequency of methods used to assign Cat codes


Method of assigning Cat code

Frequency


Facility checked one facility type box on the 2011 CJRP form


1,964

Facility checked multiple facility type boxes on the 2011 CJRP form


364

Facility responses from the 2010 JRFC form were used


107

Cat code from the 2010 CJRP was used


15

Cat code based on guidance from OJJDP


13



[The program assign_collapsed_facility_type.sas creates the Cat code.]




VIII. Imputation Methodology for Section I Data

The only missing data in Section I was for the refusal facilities. We only imputed Section I data for nontribal facilities in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.


Handling refusals

101 of the 113 nontribal facilities in the 50 states and the District of Columbia that are refusals for the

2011 CJRP were on the 2010 JRFC file, none were not on the 2010 JRFC file but were on the 2010 CJRP

file, and 12 were on neither the 2010 JRFC file nor the 2010 CJRP file.



For the 101 refusals that were on the 2010 JRFC data file, we calculated average 1-year growth rates by imputation cell and then applied those growth rates to the prior year data. When we apply the growth rate to prior year data, we round the result to the nearest whole number.


We calculate the 1-year growth rate for every facility that reported data in both the 2010 JRFC and the

2011 CJRP. The 1-year growth rate is the 2011 data item divided by the 2010 data item.


The imputation cell is all facilities within a given state and Cat (collapsed facility type) code. If there are fewer than 15 respondents or less than 70 percent response in the imputation cell, we collapse the imputation cell to the national level.


If we had refusals that were not on the 2010 JRFC file but were on the 2010 CJRP file, we would have calculated average 2-year growth rates by imputation cell and then applied those growth rates to prior year data.


We calculate the 2-year growth rate for every facility that reported data in both the 2010 CJRP and the

2011 CJRP. The 2-year growth rate is the 2011 data item divided by the 2010 data item. We collapse imputation cells for the 2-year growth rates in the same manner as for the 1-year growth rates.


If we had refusals that were on neither the 2010 JRFC file nor the 2010 CJRP file, we would have calculated imputation cell means, and collapsed in the same manner as for the 1-year and 2-year growth rates.


[The program impute_counts.sas does the Section I data imputations.]




IX. Imputation Methodology for Item Nonresponse in Section II Data Attachment A contains the imputation flag patterns on juvenile offender records for facilities that reported more than critical items.


Changes in methodology over time

The basic methodology for dealing with item nonresponse is still the hierarchical hot deck, used in the

2003, 2006, and 2007 CJRP collections. In 2007, we imputed juvenile offenders in tribal facilities separately from juvenile offenders in all other facilities. Staring In 2010, we do not impute juvenile offenders in tribal facilities or in territorial facilities. Juvenile offenders in tribal facilities or territorial facilities are not eligible to be donors for juvenile offenders in nontribal facilities in the 50 states and District of Columbia.


If the offense code is missing, the imputation system fills in the missing offense based on the code provided in the juvenile offender record. Code 97 indicates an unknown offense for both underage persons and adults, code 98 indicates an unknown offense for underage persons only, and code 99 indicates unknown offense. In previous years of CJRP, we used that missing offense code to guide the acceptable imputed offense code imputations. See Table 16 to understand how we impute missing offense codes.



Table 16. How we impute missing offense codes


Missing

offense code

Acceptable imputed offense code

97

Offenses against property, offenses against persons, drug-related offenses, offenses against

the public order, or probation or parole violation (offense codes 10 through 50)

98

Offenses for underage persons only (offense codes 60 through 69)

99

Any valid offense code (offense codes 10 through 69)



Status offenders are juveniles who have committed offenses for underage persons only. The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act prohibits the placement of status offenders in secure facilities in most instances. For the purposes of CJRP, we consider any facility that checks either the detention center or training school facility type box a secure facility. We have imputed some status offenders in secure facilities in previous CJRP collections, but will no longer do so. To prevent this from happening in the 2010 CJRP and future collections, we review the missing offense codes for offenders in facilities that checked either the detention center or training school facility type boxes, and we force the missing offense code to be 97, which means that the imputed offense will not be a status offense.


We note that secure facilities have reported juveniles with status offenses. We do not have an edit that verifies that a secure facility holds status offenders. In discussions with OJJDP and various stakeholders, we decided that we would accept the reported data as is.


Randomly imputing day of birth, month of birth, or day of admission

The first missing items that we impute are:


kid_admitted_day if both kid_admitted_month and kid_admitted_year are reported,

kid_birth_month if kid_birth_day is missing but kid_birth_year is reported, and

kid_birth_day if both kid_birth_month and kid_birth_year are not missing.


When a facility reports both kid_admitted_month and kid_admitted_year, but kid_admitted_day is missing, we impute kid_admitted_day by randomly selecting a day based on kid_birth_month. This prevents the imputation of days that do not exist, such as February 30th.


Age and stay calculations

The reference date of the questionnaire is October 26, 2011. Some facilities may report based on an alternative reference date. If an alternative reference date is used, the date is shown in the alternative reference date field contains the date (columns 612 through 619).


We calculate an age for all records where it is possible to do so. If the facility is reporting based on an alternative reference date, we calculate the age of the juvenile offender as of the alternative reference date; otherwise, we calculate the age of the juvenile offender as of October 26, 2011.


End users calculate a length of stay variable, based on the date that the juvenile offender enters the facility. If a facility is reporting based on an alternative reference date, we calculate the length of stay as



of the alternative reference date; otherwise, we calculate the stay as of October 26, 2011. We calculate length of stay for all records where it is possible to do so.


[The imputation of kid_admitted_day when we have reported kid_admitted_month and kid_admitted_year, the imputation of kid_birth_month and / or kid_birth_day when kid_birth_year is reported, and the calculation of age and stay when possible is performed in the program create_flags.sas]


Hierarchical hot-deck imputation for item nonresponse

The imputation methodology for item nonresponse in Section II data is hierarchical hot-deck. We match the record requiring imputation to a pool of records where none of the information is missing, and then we select a donor record. We replace the missing values in the record requiring imputation with the values from the donor record. We first try the match on all available information. If we do not find a match, we make the match less restrictive until we find a donor record.


The definition of records where none of the information is missing includes those records for which we only imputed kid_birth_month, kid_birth_day, or kid_admitted_day. These records are considered eligible donors because if kid_birth_year is not imputed, we have a good idea how old the offender is, and if kid_admitted_month and kid_admitted_year are not imputed, we have a good idea how long the offender has been held in the facility.


The available information for matching is the Cat code, the state where the facility is located, and any reported data for kid_sex, kid_age, kid_race, kid_placed_by, kid_offense, kid_adjudication_status, and length of stay.


When imputing kid_adjudication_status, those records with kid_adjudication_status = 08 (convicted in adult criminal court) are never part of the pool of potential donors. We confirmed with the sponsor that there should not be imputed values of 08 (convicted in adult criminal court) on the final data file.


The advantage of the hierarchical hot-deck method is that imputed values should be consistent with the rest of the juvenile offender record, because the donor record is a juvenile offender record that has passed the edits.



X. Imputation Methodology for Section II Data for Critical Item

Facilities


Changes in methodology over time

The basic methodology for dealing with nonresponse in critical item facilities is the same as it was in the

2003 and 2006 CJRP collections. For the 2007 CJRP, we imputed juvenile offenders in tribal facilities separately from juvenile offenders in non-tribal facilities. Beginning with the 2010 CJRP, OJJDP told us not to impute juvenile offenders in tribal facilities. The 2010 CJRP is also the first time we are collecting data from territorial facilities. OJJDP has instructed us not to impute juvenile offenders in territorial facilities.



We introduced a new classification of critical item facility in 2007. We noticed in the 2006 CJRP that some facilities would provide a roster of juvenile offenders, but not much information about the individual offenders. If the date of birth, offense, and date of admission are missing for all the juvenile offenders in a facility, we really do not have much information to work with.


If we try to impute those records as merely having item nonresponse, we run the risk of using the same donor repeatedly within the facility, creating what looks like duplicate records in the facility. To minimize that risk, we now handle such facilities like critical item facilities, and have assigned them a code of 2 (Facility responded to Section I of the questionnaire, but date of birth, offense, and date of admission are missing for all records in Section II of the questionnaire) in the critical item field.


Background

The edited file has one record per critical item facility if the critical item field is set to 1 (Facility responded to only the critical items) or 3 (Facility is a refusal; all data on the file for that facility has been imputed if the facility is a non-tribal facility in the 50 states or District of Columbia).


If the critical item facility holds juvenile offenders, the Section II data on the record refers to all the juveniles held by that facility. CJSB tried to find out as much as possible about the types of juveniles held in critical item facilities.


If kid_sex = 1 in Section II of the critical item facility record, that means that the facility only holds males, while kid_sex = 2 means that the facility only holds females, and kid_sex = 3 means that the facility holds both males and females.


Some critical item facilities were unable to indicate for which types of offenses they held offenders, so kid_offense = 88 or 99 for those critical item facilities. Some critical item facilities were able to indicate that they held offenders for offense codes applicable to both underage persons and adults, so kid_offense = 97 for those critical item facilities. Some critical item facilities were able to indicate that they held offenders for those offense codes applicable to underage persons only, so kid_offense = 98 for those critical item facilities.


We generate the required number of juvenile offender records for each critical item facility and assign kid_id to each juvenile offender record for the critical item facility. Kid_id is a 15 character juvenile identifier. We number the records sequentially within each critical item facility, starting with

000000000000001. We also replicate the available reported information for each juvenile offender record within the critical item facility.

If we know that the facility only holds males or only holds females, we do not consider kid_sex imputed. The edited file may have multiple records if the critical item field is set to 2 (Facility responded to

Section I of the questionnaire, but date of birth, offense, and date of admission are missing for all

records in Section II of the questionnaire). For example, the facility may have two sets of offenders placed in the facility by two different types of authorities. If date of birth, offense, and date of admission are missing for all the offenders in that facility, we do not have much information to work



with. We handle these facilities as critical item facilities rather than item nonresponse facilities to minimize the amount of duplication in the imputed data.


Hierarchical hot-deck for critical item facilities

We modified the hierarchical hot-deck methodology used for item nonresponse for critical item facilities. Instead of finding a matching donor pool for an individual juvenile offender record, we find a donor pool for the critical item facility and then randomly select donors from the pool without replacement. This modified version of the hierarchical hot-deck requires that the donor pool have at least as many juvenile offenders as the critical item facility. This requirement ensures we do not duplicate the imputed juvenile offender records for the critical item facility within the facility.


The available information for matching is the Cat code, the state where the facility is located, and any reported data for kid_sex, age, kid_race, kid_placed_by, kid_offense, kid_adjudication_status, and stay.


When imputing kid_adjudication_status, those records with kid_adjudication_status = 08 (convicted in adult criminal court) are never part of the pool of potential donors. OJJDP does not want any imputed values of convicted in adult criminal court on the imputed file.


The advantage of the hierarchical hot-deck method is that imputed values should be consistent with the rest of the juvenile offender record, since the donor record is a juvenile offender record that has passed all the edits.


In the 2003 and 2006 CJRP files, we only used the top two levels of the hierarchical hot-deck for critical item facilities. For the 2007 CJRP, we used as many as four levels of the hierarchical hot-deck for critical item facilities. We had to use four levels in states with large numbers of juvenile offenders held in critical item facilities where the facility reported a relatively uncommon value for who placed the juvenile in the facility. In the 2010 and 2011 CJRP files, we only used the top two levels of the hierarchical hot-deck for critical item facilities.



XI. Other Programming Notes

The imputation system for the 2011 CJRP consists of 167 SAS programs and one Perl program. We run the programs on a Linux machine with a KornShell script. The script is included as Attachment D. The script shows the order we execute the programs. The script also includes statements to figure out how long the imputation processing takes. The imputation system for the 2011 CJRP takes 9 minutes to run.


Control.sas sets up a SAS data set that stores the values for macro variables used in the find .sas and match .sas programs. This arrangement makes the hierarchical hot-deck programs much easier to use over time. Instead of hard coding the survey year or missing values for each item in Section II in the hot-deck programs, the programs get the macro variable values from the SAS data set.


Control.sas also includes the seed for the random number generator. By storing the seed in a SAS data set, we can rerun the imputation system at any time and get the same results. The SAS programs that



use the seed for the random number generator also update the seed and store it, so we use a different seed in each program that needs random numbers.


The programs that create the data sets for the current year CJRP, the prior year CJRP, and the prior year JRFC are specific to each year, so we have to edit them for each census. 2011_edited_qa.sas checks the edited file for any unusual values before imputation. The program lists problems that need to be resolved before imputation, such as the number of juvenile offender records for a given facility not matching the reported number of juvenile offenders in Section I for that facility.


Juvenile_offender_item_nonresponse_patterns.sas creates a listing showing the nonresponse patterns for juvenile offender records in facilities that reported more than the critical items.


Juvenile_offender_item_imputation_report.sas opens the file juvenile_offender_item_imputation_report.txt. The text file shows the results of the hierarchical hot- deck from each find .sas program.


Critical_item_kid_imputation_report.sas opens the file critical_item_kid_imputation_report.txt. The text file shows the results of the hierarchical hot-deck from each match .sas program.


Impute_critical_item_kids.sas generates the correct number of juvenile offender records for each critical item facility and creates a listing showing the nonresponse patterns for juvenile offender records in critical item facilities.


There are three SAS programs that run checks on the final imputed file to ensure that the imputation processing system has successfully completed.


The Perl script that runs at the very end of processing checks all the SAS logs in the imputation processing directory. ErrorReport.txt notes the name of each SAS log. If the log has no error or warning statements, the script printsNo ERROR or WARNING message found in ErrorReport.txt. If the log has an error or warning statement, the script prints the text of the message in ErrorReport.txt. The first two errors or warnings are printed, and if there are more than two, there is an additional message printed to ErrorReport.txt noting that more than 2 messages were found. To verify that imputation processing has completed successfully, we review ErrorReport.txt instead of reviewing all 167 log files individually.



XII. Caution When Comparing State Data over Time

In the 2003 CJRP documentation, we noted that critical item facilities held 84.6 percent of all juvenile offenders in DC, which meant that we imputed an unusually large percentage of the data in DC for 2003. In 2007, critical item facilities held 95.7 percent of all juvenile offenders in DC. We do not recommend comparing juvenile offenders held in DC facilities across the 2003, 2006, 2007, and 2010 data

collections, due to extreme levels of missing data for the juvenile offenders.


Attachments A and B show some high levels of juvenile roster item imputation for 2011. Illinois had more than half of their juvenile offenders in facilities that only reported critical items. States with 30 percent or more imputation by item included Colorado (kid_offense), Florida (kid birth date,



kid_offense, kid admitted date), Hawaii (kid_race), Illinois, Nevada (kid_offense, kid admitted date), and

West Virginia.


Users should be aware the differences in DC data from 2003 to 2006 might be due in part to the high levels of imputation for DC in 2003, and from 2006 to 2007 due to high levels of imputation for DC in

2007, and from 2007 to 2010 due to high levels of imputation for DC in 2007.


Similarly, the differences in Colorado, Illinois, Rhode Island, and Wyoming data from 2003 to 2006 may be due in part to high levels of imputation for those states in 2006.


The differences in Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, South Carolina, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming from 2006 to 2007 may be due in part to high levels of imputation for those states in 2007.


The differences in Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Vermont, and West Virginia from 2007 to 2010 may be due in part to high levels of imputation for those states in 2010.


The differences in Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Nevada, and West Virginia from 2010 to 2011 may be due in part to high levels of imputation for those states in 2011.


Attachment C shows items by state for the 1997 through 2011 CJRP data collections. If the item imputation rate was 30 percent or more for a given year, we show the year in the cell of the table.


[The program nonresponse_by_state.sas produces Attachments A and B, while the program

2011_data_quality_concerns.sas produces Attachment C.]




XIII. Issues to Consider for Next CJRP Collection

We are concerned that facilities may not be answering the facility type question properly. As discussed in Chapter IX, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act prohibits the placement of status offenders in secure facilities in most instances. For the purposes of CJRP, we consider any facility that checks either the detention center or training school facility type box a secure facility.


We have imputed some status offenders in secure facilities in previous CJRP collections, but will no longer do so. To prevent this from happening in the 2010 CJRP and future collections, we review the missing offense codes for offenders in facilities that checked either the detention center or training school facility type boxes, and we force the missing offense code to be 97, which means that the imputed offense will not be a status offense.


We note that facilities that checked either the detention center or training school facility type boxes report juveniles with status offenses in their facilities. We do not have an edit that verifies that a secure facility holds status offenders. In discussions with OJJDP and various stakeholders, we decided that we would accept the reported data as is. Attachment E shows the facility type question from the 2011 questionnaire.



We consider detention centers secure facilities under the definition provided by OJJDP. However, when we checked the reported status offenders in secure facilities, and matched the facility name to those records, we discovered that some facilities with detention center in their name also have the word non-secure in their name. See Attachment F for the complete list of secure facilities holding reported status offenders.


We note that some secure facilities may be legitimately holding status offenders. The Lorain County

Juvenile Detention Home in Ohio is one such example. From the Lorain County web site

(http://www.loraincounty.com/domesticrelations/departments/department-residential-services.shtml),


Lorain County Juvenile Detention Home

Boy's Detention Home 9967 S. Murray Ridge Rd., Elyria 44035

Girl's Detention Home 9911 S. Murray Ridge Rd., Elyria 44035


The purpose of the detention homes is to provide secure confinement of appropriate juveniles under age 18. Judges and Magistrates determine if detention is appropriate as indicated by statute or the Ohio Supreme Court Rules. Unruly or ungovernable youth may not be placed in detention beyond twenty-four hours. Delinquent youth may be confined to detention by an order of the Court up to a period of 90 days.


The Lorain County Detention Homes are licensed and monitored by the Ohio Department of Youth Services. The facilities are designed to house 44 males and 12 females. The staff ratio during daylight hours is 12:1, with a ratio increasing to 25:1 during the 10 - 6 am shift.


During the admission process, each youth is administered the MAYSI II which screens for mental health issues. Applewood Centers will conduct an assessment if issues are present. The medical staff is available, at any time, for consultation and have regularly scheduled hours. Within seven days of admission, the detention home nurse or doctor physically examines every juvenile and administers a tuberculosis screening.


While in detention, education continues year-round through the Educational Service Center of Lorain County. Upgrades now provide for twenty-five individual computer stations with emphasis placed on the state proficiency exams.


As a cost-cutting measure, the Girl's Detention Home was closed. The female residents were relocated to the Boys Detention Home at the end of 2008. Both male and female residents are housed in separate wings of the Boys Detention Home. During this period, the Court has attempted to maintain a population of 36 male and 12 female residents.


The fact that facilities such as the Lorain County Juvenile Detention Home report status offenders should come as no surprise. OJJDP’s 2011 National Conference for Children’s Justice & Safety: Unite, Build, Lead featured a panel discussion titled Promising Examples of Judicial Leadership To Achieve Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders. Judge Brian Huff spoke about how status offenders end up

in secure facilities, and methods to prevent that. Judge Steve Teske was in the audience and provided



helpful commentary. Both judges are featured in a recent publication titled POSITIVE POWER: Exercising Judicial Leadership to Prevent Court Involvement and Incarceration of Non-Delinquent

Youth, which is available online at http://juvjustice.org/media/resources/public/resource_787.pdf.



XIV. References

Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement Databook, currently online at http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/cjrp/.


Dorinski, Suzanne M. How to collapse 2003 CJRP facility types for use in imputation, memo dated

October 21, 2003. (This document reproduces most of the memo.)


Dorinski, Suzanne M. How to impute section I data, memo dated January 8, 2004.


Dorinski, Suzanne M. How to calculate age on individual juvenile data records in 2003 CJRP, memo dated February 25, 2004.


Dorinski, Suzanne M. How to impute for item nonresponse on juvenile offender records in 2003 CJRP,

memo dated April 1, 2004.


Dorinski, Suzanne M. Documentation of the Imputation Methodology for the 2003 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY, memo dated December 1, 2004.


Dorinski, Suzanne M. Documentation of the Imputation Methodology for the 2006 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY, memo dated March 22, 2007.


Dorinski, Suzanne M. Documentation of the Imputation Methodology for the 2007 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY, memo dated January 15, 2009.


Dorinski, Suzanne M. Documentation of the Imputation Methodology for the 2010 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement, memo dated May 13, 2011.




Attachment A: Percentages of Juvenile Offenders Held in Critical Item

Facilities by State of Facility



Facility

State



Juvenile

Offenders

Percentage in critical item facilities

Montana

160

8.1

Nebraska

695

0.0

Nevada

853

26.3

New Hampshire

90

0.0

New Jersey

1,007

25.3

New Mexico

513

11.3

New York

2,176

5.1

North Carolina

563

3.0

North Dakota

148

0.0

Ohio

2,493

0.0

Oklahoma

586

2.0

Oregon

1,088

0.6

Pennsylvania

3,783

19.4

Rhode Island

201

9.0

South Carolina

725

0.0

South Dakota

438

7.8

Tennessee

843

3.4

Texas

4,655

2.9

Utah

772

15.4

Vermont

34

0.0

Virginia

1,729

0.9

Washington

1,058

3.7

West Virginia

674

39.3

Wisconsin

946

2.1

Wyoming

272

0.0

TOTAL

61,423

11.0


(Percentages of 30 or more have been highlighted)






Facility

State



Juvenile

Offenders

Percentage in critical item facilities

Alabama

1,047

1.9

Alaska

220

0.5

Arizona

1,268

27.4

Arkansas

743

3.4

California

9,801

6.9

Colorado

1,328

27.2

Connecticut

246

3.7

Delaware

159

0.0

D.C.

236

9.3

Florida

3,990

32.6

Georgia

1,786

0.0

Hawaii

97

0.0

Idaho

464

10.1

Illinois

2,095

58.8

Indiana

1,886

10.9

Iowa

937

0.0

Kansas

889

14.2

Kentucky

760

1.4

Louisiana

976

3.6

Maine

165

0.0

Maryland

898

5.3

Massachusetts

591

3.7

Michigan

2,061

1.6

Minnesota

878

7.3

Mississippi

258

4.3

Missouri

1,142

3.9




Attachment B: Section II Item Imputation Rates by State of Facility

(Imputation rates of 30 percent or more have been highlighted)



Facility

State




Offenders



Kid_

sex

Kid_birth_



Kid_

race

Kid_ placed_ by



Kid_

offense

Kid_ adjudication_ status

Kid_admitted_


month


day


year


month


day


year

Alabama

1,047

1.1

2.4

2.4

2.4

1.9

1.9

3.2

4.6

2.4

2.4

2.3

Alaska

220

0.0

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.0

3.2

3.2

0.5

0.5

0.5

Arizona

1,268

5.4

27.4

27.4

27.4

27.4

21.7

28.7

6.9

27.4

27.4

27.4

Arkansas

743

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.4

4.2

16.0

11.7

14.4

7.3

7.3

7.3

California

9,801

4.3

8.0

8.0

8.0

7.2

3.7

12.4

6.7

8.6

8.6

8.6

Colorado

1,328

3.2

27.3

27.3

27.3

27.2

26.4

69.6

10.8

27.6

27.6

27.6

Connecticut

246

3.7

3.7

3.7

3.7

3.7

3.7

4.1

10.6

3.7

3.7

3.7

Delaware

159

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.6

0.6

0.0

0.0

0.0

D.C.

236

9.3

11.0

11.0

11.0

9.3

9.3

9.3

9.7

9.3

9.3

9.3

Florida

3,990

10.3

35.3

35.3

35.3

35.5

8.5

38.5

11.9

32.6

32.6

32.6

Georgia

1,786

0.0

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.0

9.2

10.6

9.1

9.1

9.1

Hawaii

97

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

49.5

0.0

2.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Idaho

464

9.9

10.3

10.3

10.3

10.8

9.9

10.1

10.1

10.1

10.1

10.1

Illinois

2,095

58.8

58.8

58.8

58.8

58.8

58.8

58.9

60.7

58.9

58.9

58.9

Indiana

1,886

10.9

10.9

10.9

10.9

11.2

5.5

18.1

19.1

17.6

17.6

17.6

Iowa

937

0.0

0.6

0.6

0.6

0.7

1.2

0.3

2.8

1.5

1.5

1.5

Kansas

889

12.7

27.1

27.1

27.1

14.2

12.7

14.3

15.3

14.4

14.4

14.4

Kentucky

760

1.4

1.8

1.8

1.8

1.6

2.8

3.8

3.3

1.4

1.4

1.4

Louisiana

976

3.6

4.0

4.0

4.0

3.6

1.7

4.4

3.5

4.6

4.6

4.6

Maine

165

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.6

0.0

0.6

0.6

0.6

Maryland

898

0.0

5.3

5.3

5.3

5.3

5.3

9.0

0.2

5.3

5.3

5.3

Massachusetts

591

3.7

3.7

3.7

3.7

4.2

3.7

5.2

4.9

7.6

7.6

7.6

Michigan

2,061

1.7

1.6

1.6

1.6

1.8

1.3

2.4

6.9

1.6

1.6

1.6

Minnesota

878

7.3

7.4

7.4

7.4

7.7

7.3

8.8

8.7

7.3

7.3

7.3

Mississippi

258

4.3

4.7

4.7

4.7

4.3

4.3

5.8

26.0

10.1

10.1

10.1

Missouri

1,142

3.9

4.8

4.8

4.8

4.0

3.9

6.3

4.8

4.7

4.7

4.7

Montana

160

8.1

8.1

8.1

8.1

8.1

8.1

8.1

8.8

8.1

8.1

8.1

Nebraska

695

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

2.3

2.3

2.3

3.0

2.3

2.3

2.3



Attachment B: Section II Item Imputation Rates by State of Facility

(Imputation rates of 30 percent or more have been highlighted)



Facility

State




Offenders



Kid_

sex

Kid_birth_



Kid_

race

Kid_ placed_ by



Kid_

offense

Kid_ adjudication_ status

Kid_admitted_


month


day


year


month


day


year

Nevada

853

6.3

26.3

26.3

26.3

28.4

26.3

38.7

1.8

40.6

42.4

40.6

New Hampshire

90

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

1.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

New Jersey

1,007

0.0

25.4

25.4

25.4

25.3

0.0

26.7

0.2

28.0

28.0

28.0

New Mexico

513

11.3

11.3

11.3

11.3

11.3

11.3

12.3

11.7

11.3

11.3

11.3

New York

2,176

2.6

5.1

5.1

5.1

8.7

1.7

8.5

3.0

5.7

7.5

5.7

North Carolina

563

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.9

1.2

4.4

10.7

3.0

3.0

3.0

North Dakota

148

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.7

0.7

0.0

0.0

0.0

Ohio

2,493

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.1

0.0

0.2

1.5

0.0

0.0

0.0

Oklahoma

586

2.0

2.2

2.2

2.2

2.0

2.0

2.2

11.9

2.7

2.7

2.7

Oregon

1,088

0.0

2.2

2.2

2.2

0.7

0.0

1.7

2.4

0.6

0.6

0.6

Pennsylvania

3,783

4.1

19.4

19.4

19.4

19.4

4.1

20.6

7.0

19.7

19.7

19.7

Rhode Island

201

9.0

9.0

9.0

9.0

9.0

9.0

12.9

15.4

9.0

9.0

9.0

South Carolina

725

0.0

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.6

0.0

2.2

0.3

0.0

0.0

0.0

South Dakota

438

0.0

8.0

8.0

8.0

9.4

7.8

8.2

7.8

8.9

8.9

8.9

Tennessee

843

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.8

3.4

6.5

4.2

3.4

3.4

3.4

Texas

4,655

2.9

3.1

3.1

3.1

3.1

1.5

5.6

4.4

3.0

2.9

2.9

Utah

772

4.9

15.4

15.4

15.4

15.7

4.9

15.8

6.0

15.4

15.4

15.4

Vermont

34

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

20.6

0.0

0.0

0.0

Virginia

1,729

0.4

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.2

0.4

6.7

5.5

5.0

5.0

5.0

Washington

1,058

3.7

3.7

3.7

3.7

4.1

0.2

4.2

4.2

3.9

3.9

3.9

West Virginia

674

39.3

39.3

39.3

39.3

39.3

39.3

39.5

39.5

39.3

39.3

39.3

Wisconsin

946

1.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.1

1.5

3.5

1.7

2.7

2.9

2.6

Wyoming

272

7.4

0.0

0.0

0.0

7.4

7.4

3.7

7.7

0.0

0.0

0.0

TOTAL

61,423

6.1

11.6

11.6

11.6

11.6

7.0

15.0

8.9

12.4

12.5

12.4




Attachment C: Data Quality Issues in CJRP over Time

1997 through 2011 data collections

(Year is shown in table cell when imputation rate is 30 percent or more)




State




Sex

Birth




Race


Placed by




Offense


Adjudication status

Admitted

month

day

year

month

day

year

Alabama









2001

2001

2001

Alaska












Arizona







1999





2007

2007

2007

2007

2007


2007

2007

2007

2007

2007

Arkansas


2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007

California












Colorado







1999











2001











2006






2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007







2010











2011





Connecticut


2001

2001

2001

2001


2001


2001

2001

2001







2007





D.C.







1999





2003

2003

2003

2003



2003

2003

2003

2003

2003

2007

2007

2007

2007



2007

2007

2007

2007

2007

Delaware







1999





Florida





2007













2010






2011

2011

2011

2011


2011


2011

2011

2011

Georgia







1999


1999

1999

1999

Hawaii





2011







Idaho
















State




Sex

Birth




Race


Placed by




Offense


Adjudication status

Admitted

month

day

year

month

day

year

Illinois


2006

2006

2006

2006


2006


2006

2006

2006


2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007

2010

2010

2010

2010

2010

2010

2010

2010

2010

2010

2010

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

Indiana












Iowa







2007





Kansas












Kentucky












Louisiana












Maine

2007

2007

2007

2007

2007

2007

2007

2007

2007

2007

2007

Maryland





2001














2003




Massachusetts


2001

2001

2001

2001


2001


2001

2001

2001

Michigan












Minnesota












Mississippi

1997

1997

1997

1997

1997


1997


1997

1997

1997

1999

1999

1999

1999

1999


1999


1999

1999

1999


2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007

Missouri












Montana


2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007

Nebraska












Nevada





1997


1997

1997





2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007







2011


2011

2011

2011

New Hampshire
















State




Sex

Birth




Race


Placed by




Offense


Adjudication status

Admitted

month

day

year

month

day

year

New Jersey







1997











1999





New Mexico


1999

1999

1999

1999


1999


1999

1999

1999

2007

2007

2007

2007

2007


2007

2007

2007

2007

2007

New York







1999






2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007

North Carolina












North Dakota







1999





Ohio












Oklahoma












Oregon












Pennsylvania







1999





Rhode Island

2006

2006

2006

2006

2006


2006

2006

2006

2006

2006

South Carolina


2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007

South Dakota


1997

1997

1997

1997


1997

1997

1997

1997

1997

1999

1999

1999

1999

1999


1999

1999

1999

1999

1999

Tennessee







1999











2001





Texas












Utah







1999






2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007

Vermont








2010




Virginia












Washington
















State




Sex

Birth




Race


Placed by




Offense


Adjudication status

Admitted

month

day

year

month

day

year

West Virginia


2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007





2010


2010





2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011

Wisconsin







1999





Wyoming

2006

2006

2006

2006

2006

2006

2006


2006

2006

2006

2007

2007

2007

2007

2007


2007


2007

2007

2007



Attachment D: 2011 CJRP Imputation System Script

echo " "

echo "CJRP 2011 production statistics for " date


# PROGRAMS LISTED IN THIS SECTION WILL CHANGE EACH

# SURVEY YEAR.


# NOTE FOR 2010 -- NEED TO REMOVE TRIBAL FACILITIES

# AND TERRITORIAL FACILITIES IN CREATE_2010_CJRP_DATA_SET.SAS,

# AND SET THEM ASIDE. WILL NEED THEM AT BOTTOM OF ASCII FILE

# AFTER IMPUTATION PROCESSING IS COMPLETED.


# 2011 IS LIKE 2010 -- STILL SETTING ASIDE THE TRIBAL FACILITIES

# AND TERRITORIAL FACILITIES.


sas92 control.sas

sas92 create_2010_cjrp_data_set.sas sas92 create_2010_jrfc_data_set.sas sas92 get_2010_facility_type_codes.sas sas92 create_2011_cjrp_data_set.sas


sas92 2011_edited_qa.sas

sas92 assign_collapsed_facility_type.sas sas92 create_flags.sas

sas92 check_missing_offense_code_in_secure_facilities.sas


# DO IMPUTATIONS FOR SECTION I. sas92 impute_counts.sas

# DO IMPUTATIONS FOR SECTION II.

# FIRST DEAL WITH ITEM NONRESPONSE

# ON JUVENILE RECORDS.


sas92 juvenile_offender_item_nonresponse_patterns.sas sas92 juvenile_offender_item_imputation_report.sas sas92 find_sex.sas

sas92 find_placed_by.sas sas92 find_race.sas

sas92 find_birthdate.sas

sas92 find_offense_kid_only.sas sas92 find_offense_both.sas sas92 find_offense_all.sas

sas92 find_adjudication_status.sas

sas92 find_adjudication_status_underage_offenses.sas sas92 find_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas


sas92 find_race_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_placed_by_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_race_and_adjudication_status.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_and_adjudication_status.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_offense_all_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_offense_both_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_offense_kid_only_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_birthdate_and_offense_all.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_and_offense_both.sas sas92 find_birthdate_and_offense_kid_only.sas sas92 find_offense_all_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_offense_both_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_offense_kid_only_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_race_and_offense_all.sas sas92 find_race_and_offense_both.sas sas92 find_race_and_offense_kid_only.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_and_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_offense_all_and_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_offense_both_and_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_offense_kid_only_and_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_race_and_offense_all_and_adjudication_status.sas

sas92 find_race_and_offense_both_and_adjudication_status.sas

sas92 find_race_and_offense_kid_only_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_birthdate_and_offense_all_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_birthdate_and_offense_both_and_adjudication_status.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_and_offense_kid_only_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_birthdate_and_race_and_offense_all.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_and_race_and_offense_both.sas sas92 find_birthdate_and_race_and_offense_kid_only.sas

# new find*.sas programs written for 2003 sas92 find_admit_month_and_day.sas

sas92 find_placed_by_offense_all_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_placed_by_offense_both_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_placed_by_offense_underage_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_race_and_placed_by.sas

sas92 find_race_placed_by_and_offense_all.sas sas92 find_race_placed_by_and_offense_both.sas sas92 find_race_placed_by_and_offense_underage.sas

sas92 find_race_placed_by_offense_all_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_race_placed_by_offense_both_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_race_placed_by_offense_underage_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_birthdate_admit_month_and_day.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_offense_all_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_offense_both_and_admit_date.sas


sas92 find_birthdate_offense_underage_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_and_race.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_race_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_race_admit_month_and_day.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_all_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_both_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_underage_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_all_and_admit_month_day.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_both_and_admit_month_day.sas sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_underage_and_admit_month_day.sas sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_all_and_adjudication_status.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_both_and_adjudication_status.sas sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_underage_and_adjudication_status.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_all_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_both_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_race_offense_underage_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_race_placed_offense_all_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_race_placed_offense_both_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_race_placed_offense_underage_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_sex_birthdate_and_race.sas

sas92 find_sex_birthdate_race_and_offense_all.sas sas92 find_sex_birthdate_race_and_offense_both.sas sas92 find_sex_birthdate_race_and_offense_underage.sas

sas92 find_sex_birthdate_race_offense_all_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_sex_birthdate_race_offense_both_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_sex_birthdate_race_offense_underage_status_and_admit_date.sas

# new find*.sas programs written for 2006 sas92 find_placed_by_offense_all.sas

sas92 find_placed_by_offense_both.sas sas92 find_placed_by_offense_underage.sas sas92 find_race_offense_all_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_race_offense_both_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_race_offense_underage_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_sex_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_sex_and_offense_all.sas sas92 find_sex_and_offense_both.sas sas92 find_sex_and_offense_underage.sas sas92 find_sex_and_race.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_sex_race_offense_all_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_sex_race_offense_both_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_sex_race_offense_underage_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birth_month.sas

sas92 find_admit_month.sas


# new find*.sas programs written for 2007




sas92 find_admit_year.sas

sas92 find_birthdate_race_and_adjudication_status.sas


# new find*.sas programs written for 2010


sas92 find_birthdate_offense_all_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_offense_both_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_birthdate_offense_underage_adjudication_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_admit_day_and_year.sas

sas92 find_birth_year.sas

sas92 find_birth_day_and_year.sas

# new find*.sas programs written for 2011 sas92 find_sex_and_status.sas

sas92 find_race_placed_by_offense_all_status_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_race_placed_by_offense_both_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_race_placed_by_offense_underage_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_race_offense_all_status_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_race_offense_both_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_race_offense_underage_status_and_admit_date.sas sas92 find_placed_by_and_admit_date.sas

sas92 find_sex_race_placed_by_and_adjudication_status.sas





# NOW DEAL WITH IMPUTING JUVENILE RECORDS

# FOR CRITICAL ITEM FACILITIES.


sas92 critical_item_kid_imputation_report.sas sas92 impute_critical_item_kids.sas

sas92 match_sex_placed_by_status_any_offense.sas

sas92 match_sex_placed_by_status_offense_both.sas

sas92 match_sex_placed_by_status_offense_underage_only.sas sas92 match_sex_race_placed_by_status_any_offense.sas

sas92 match_sex_race_placed_by_status_offense_both.sas sas92 match_sex_race_placed_by_status_offense_underage.sas sas92 match_sex_race_status_any_offense.sas

sas92 match_sex_race_status_offense_both.sas sas92 match_sex_race_status_offense_underage.sas sas92 match_sex_placed_by_any_offense.sas

sas92 match_sex_placed_by_offense_both.sas

sas92 match_sex_placed_by_offense_underage.sas sas92 match_sex_status_any_offense.sas

sas92 match_sex_status_offense_both.sas sas92 match_sex_status_offense_underage.sas


sas92 match_sex_any_offense.sas sas92 match_sex_offense_both.sas sas92 match_sex_offense_underage.sas

sas92 match_race_placed_by_any_offense.sas

sas92 match_race_placed_by_offense_both.sas sas92 match_race_placed_by_offense_underage.sas sas92 match_placed_by_status_any_offense.sas sas92 match_placed_by_status_offense_both.sas

sas92 match_placed_by_status_offense_underage.sas sas92 match_placed_by_any_offense.sas

sas92 match_placed_by_offense_both.sas sas92 match_placed_by_offense_underage.sas sas92 match_status_any_offense.sas

sas92 match_status_offense_both.sas

sas92 match_status_offense_underage.sas sas92 match_any_offense.sas

sas92 match_offense_both.sas sas92 match_offense_underage.sas

sas92 match_any_offense_sex_unknown.sas sas92 match_offense_both_sex_unknown.sas sas92 match_offense_underage_sex_unknown.sas

# new match*.sas programs written for 2006 sas92 match_race_any_offense.sas

sas92 match_race_offense_both.sas

sas92 match_race_offense_underage.sas


# NOW DEAL WITH TRIBAL OFFENDERS

# 4/5/11 not imputing tribal offenders for 2010, so comment

# these programs out.


# find*.sas programs needed for tribal facilities

# in 2007


#sas92 tribal_find_adjudication_status.sas


# match*.sas programs written for tribal facilities

# in 2006 research


#sas92 tribal_match_sex_race_placed_by_status_offense_underage.sas


#sas92 tribal_match_race_placed_by_any_offense.sas

#sas92 tribal_match_race_placed_by_offense_both.sas

#sas92 tribal_match_race_placed_by_offense_underage.sas

#sas92 tribal_match_race_any_offense.sas

#sas92 tribal_match_race_offense_both.sas


#sas92 tribal_match_race_offense_underage.sas sas92 end_html.sas

# NOW COMBINE ALL DATA TOGETHER IN

# FINAL IMPUTED DATA SET.


sas92 bring_all_data_together.sas




# THIS SECTION IS QUALITY ASSURANCE.

# CHECKING TO SEE THAT FLAGS ARE SET

# CORRECTLY, AND ALL VALUES I WORKED

# WITH ARE CODED AS VALID.


sas92 adjust_birthdates.sas sas92 check_juvenile_flags.sas sas92 final_qc_check.sas

sas92 compare.sas

sas92 check_offense_codes_in_secure_facilities.sas




# NEED TO BRING BACK TRIBALS AND TERRITORIALS FOR 2010

# ASCII FILE!!!!


# CREATE ASCII OUTPUT FILE FOR GOVS


sas92 create_ascii_output_file.sas




# PERL SCRIPT CHECKS ALL THE SAS LOGS

# IN THIS SUBDIRECTORY. ErrorReport.txt

# IS THE OUTPUT FILE, WHICH SHOWS ERROR

# MESSAGES, IF ANY. perl check_logs

echo " "

echo "Run finished at " date




Shape7 AttachmentE: Facili1y Type Qnestion with Definitions



Attachment F: Secure Facilities Holding Reported Status Offenders





Obs




ID




Facility Name


Juvenile

Offenders


Reported

Status

Offenders

1

020000000053080000000

MCLAUGHLIN YOUTH CENTER

99

8

2

030000000053050000201

ADOBE MOUNTAIN SCHOOL

291

5

3

031002002050020000000

COCHISE CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

15

1

4

031007007050010009901

MARICOPA CO JUVENILE COURT CENTER-PHOENIX

111

6

5

031007007050020009902

MARICOPA CO JUVENILE COURT CENTER-MESA

81

3

6

031008008050010000000

MOHAVE COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

27

3

7

031011011050040000000

PINAL CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

37

1

8

041026026051020000000

GARLAND COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

20

5

9

041035035051030000000

JEFFERSON COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

65

4

10

041072072053010000000

REGIONAL JUVENILE CENTER

17

2

11

041075075053020000000

YELL COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

23

1

12

051009009051010000000

JUVENILE TREATMENT CENTER & CHALLENGE PROGRAM

18

3

13

051014014050010000000

INYO COUNTY JUVENILE CENTER


7

1

14

051015015050020009201

JAMES G BOWLES JUVENILE HALL

102

1

15

051019019050190007502

CENTRAL JUVENILE HALL

422

2

16

051019019053200000601

DOROTHY KIRBY CTR

76

1

17

051019019055110000611

CAMP WILLIAM MENDENHALL

94

1

18

051030030050060000701

ORANGE CO JUVENILE HALL

314

3

19

051033033055040005806

YOUTHFUL OFFENDER PROGRAM DESERT CAMPUS

51

5

20

051034034050050000000

SACRAMENTO CO YOUTH DETENTION FACILITY

151

37

21

051036036050050000000

CENTRAL VALLEY JUV DETENTION & ASSESSMENT CTR

209

1

22

051037037050120000801

KEARNY-MESA JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY

286

1

23

051037037055180000806

EAST MESA JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY

209

1

24

051040039050010000000

SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY JUVENILE HALL

36

2





Obs




ID





Facility Name


Juvenile

Offenders

Reported

Status

Offenders

25

051042041050040000902

SUSAN J. GIONFRIDDO JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER

99

1

26

051047046050010000000

SISKIYOU COUNTY JUVENILE HALL

15

2

27

051054053050020000000

TULARE COUNTY JUVENILE HALL

133

3

28

060000000050020001102

PUEBLO YOUTH SERVICES JUVENILE DETENTION CNTR

22

3

29

060000000055180001109

MARVIN FOOTE YOUTH SERVICE CENTER

81

3

30

060000000055190001110

PLATTE VALLEY YOUTH SERVICES CENTER

120

5

31

060000000055200001111

SPRING CREEK YOUTH SERVICES CENTER

101

3

32

070000000053150000000

CONNECTICUT JUVENILE TRAINING SCHOOL

127

3

33

080000000053020001403

FERRIS SCHOOL


50

1

34

080000000053040001405

MOWLDS COTTAGE


16

1

35

092001001053300001505

YOUTH SERVICES CENTER (DETENTION)

90

6

36

100000000050010001601

LEON REGIONAL JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

36

1

37

100000000050020001602

ESCAMBIA REGIONAL JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

18

1

38

100000000050070001606

BREVARD REGIONAL JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

27

1

39

100000000050090001608

HILLSBOROUGH REG JUV DETENTION CENTER- WEST

92

1

40

100000000056440001650

OKALOOSA REGIONAL JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

16

1

41

110000000050020001802

DEKALB CO REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

52

3

42

110000000050030001803

MARIETTA REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

69

8

43

110000000050040001804

MACON REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

54

5

44

110000000050190001805

AUGUSTA REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

63

2

45

110000000050200001806

SANDERSVILLE REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CTR

28

4

46

110000000050210001807

BOB RICHARDS REGIONAL YTH DETENTION CENTER

53

6

47

110000000050230001809

WAYCROSS REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

30

1

48

110000000050240001810

GAINESVILLE REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

53

3

49

110000000050350001813

DALTON REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

30

2





Obs




ID





Facility Name


Juvenile

Offenders


Reported

Status

Offenders

50

110000000053180001816

AUGUSTA YOUTH DEVELOPMENT CAMPUS

115

1

51

110000000053320001818

MACON YOUTH DEVELOPMENT CAMPUS

55

1

52

110000000053350001820

CLAXTON REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

30

3

53

110000000053360001821

LOFTISS REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CTR

30

1

54

110000000056260001825

SAVANNAH REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

102

3

55

110000000056270001826

CLAYTON REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

46

2

56

110000000056280001827

GWINNETT REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

43

4

57

110000000056320001831

METRO REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

182

14

58

110000000056370001836

COHN REGIONAL YOUTH DETENTION CENTER

55

3

59

110000000056390001838

MACON GIRLS REGIONAL YOUTH DEEVELOPMENT CENTE

22

5

60

120000000053010000000

HI YOUTH CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

63

1

61

131001001050010000000

ADA CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

30

2

62

131028028050020000000

DISTRICT 1 JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

42

6

63

131042042050010000000

SNAKE RIVER JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

17

3

64

150000000053020002001

SOUTH BEND JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

85

2

65

150000000053040002003

MADISON JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

63

2

66

150000000056130002011

LOGANSPORT JUVENILE CORR FAC/TREATMENT UNIT

129

2

67

151003003056010006501

DETENTION



8

1

68

151036036056020000000

JAKCKSON CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

19

1

69

151046046050010000000

LA PORTE COUNTY JUVENILE SERVICES CENTER

31

6

70

151084084050010000000

VIGO COUNTY JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER

24

6

71

158018000056011067602

DETENTION CENTER

34

4

72

158042000051020000000

SOUTHWEST INDIANA REGIONAL YOUTH VILLAGE

77

12

73

161042042050010000000

CENTRAL IOWA JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

29

2





Obs




ID





Facility Name


Juvenile

Offenders


Reported

Status

Offenders

74

172105003050010000000

WYANDOTTE CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

44

1

75

180000000056520002331

WARREN REGIONAL JUVENILE DETENTION

22

3

76

191009009050020000000

CADDO PARISH JUVENILE DETENTION

25

3

77

191037035050010000000

GREEN OAKS JUVENILE DETENTION

26

5

78

191047045050020000000

ST JAMES YOUTH CENTER

33

2

79

192050003056020000000

ST MARTIN PARISH JUVENILE FACILITY

31

4

80

194052201050030000000

FLORIDA PARISHES JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

84

3

81

210000000056250002514

LOWER EASTERN SHORE CHILDRENS CENTER

25

1

82

228013000050012045801

SPECTRUM GIRLS DETENTION UNIT


8

1

83

230000000053080002703

MAXEY TRAINING SCHOOL

42

2

84

230000000056530002715

BAY PINES CENTER


24

5

85

231003003050010000000

WESTON HALL


17

5

86

231025025051011000000

GENESEE VALLEY REGIONAL CENTER

54

1

87

231052052051010000000

MARQUETTE CO YOUTH HOME


5

2

88

231063063055020000000

0AKLAND CO CHLDRENS VILLAGE

128

12

89

231070070050010000000

OTTAWA CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

33

1

90

231081081050010000000

WASHTENAW CO JUVENILE DETENTION

18

1

91

231082082050020000000

WAYNE CO JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY

141

9

92

238073000056045061804

WOLVERINE SECURE TREATMENT CENTER

78

3

93

238082000056660046213

THE HAVEN


20

8

94

238082000056697082101

LINCOLN CENTER


79

4

95

238082000056698082102

CALUMET TREATMENT CENTER

70

6

96

241004004056030002803

MAIN FACILITY (NORTHWEST MN JUVENILE CENTER)

37

1

97

241014014050010000000

WEST CENTRAL REGIONAL JUVENILE CENTER

19

9

98

241027027053050000000

HENNEPIN COUNTY HOME SCHOOL

50

1





Obs




ID




Facility Name


Juvenile

Offenders


Reported

Status

Offenders

99

241060060056020000000

RED RIVER VALLEY JUVENILE CENTER


9

3

100

241070070051010000000

SCOTT COUNTY JUVENILE ALTERNATIVE FACILITY


8

1

101

251001001051020000000

JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER


1

1

102

251025025050010000000

HENLEY YOUNG JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER

37

1

103

251034034050010000000

JONES COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

15

1

104

251042042050010000000

LEFLORE COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTR

15

1

105

251057057050010000000

PIKE COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

13

3

106

251075075051010000000

WARREN COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER


8

2

107

260000000056690000000

JOHNSON COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER


8

2

108

261010010050320000000

ROBERT L PERRY JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER

19

3

109

261011011053010000000

BUCHANAN CO ACADEMY

15

1

110

261048048050060003001

JACKSON CO DETENTION CENTER

31

2

111

261050050050010000000

JEFFERSON COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

24

1

112

261092092051020000000

ST CHARLES COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY


5

1

113

261104104050010000000

STODDARD COUNTY JUVENILE SERVICES


6

1

114

281028028050030000000

DOUGLAS CO YOUTH CENTER

107

7

115

288090000050010000000

JUVENILE DETENTION

37

6

116

290000000053020000000

CALIENTE YOUTH CENTER

135

1

117

311009009050030000000

HUDSON CO JUVENILE DETENTION

41

1

118

320000000052020003301

CAMINO NUEVO YOUTH CENTER-(MALES AND FEMALES)

94

2

119

321005005050010000000

CURRY COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY

18

1

120

338001000050033048903

GIRLS DETENTION (CARMELA HOUSE)


2

1

121

338001000051011048902

BOYS DETENTION (EMMIT HOUSE)


7

3

122

338011000056051064306

BURNHAM YOUTH SAFE CENTER (NON SECURE DET)


8

1





Obs




ID





Facility Name


Juvenile

Offenders


Reported

Status

Offenders

123

338028000055023049902

NORTHHAVEN NON-SECURE DETENTION

10

9

124

338031000053153062204

BARBARA BLUM NON SECURE DETENTION

10

1

125

338031000056044062207

NELSON MANDELLA HOUSE


9

4

126

338035000056020049906

ONTARIO CO YOUTH CARE FACILITY (HOPEWELL)


1

1

127

338044000056030080601

NEW BRIDGES


11

1

128

340000000050010006001

CUMBERLAND REGIONAL JUVENILE DETENTION CTR

17

3

129

341041041050010000000

GUILFORD CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

29

1

130

350000000053030000000

NORTH DAKOTA YOUTH CORRECTIONAL CENTER

60

2

131

361003003050010000000

CO JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY

10

1

132

361012012050010000000

CLARK COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION HOME

38

4

133

361013013050010000000

CLERMONT CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

21

1

134

361015015050010003701

LOUIS TOBIN ATTENTION CENTER

20

1

135

361018018050050000000

CUYAHOGA CO DETENTION CENTER

134

1

136

361047047050010000000

LORAIN CO DETENTION HOME

48

19

137

361067067050010000000

PORTAGE-GEAUGA CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

28

1

138

361079079050010003708

TUSCARAWAS ATTENTION CENTER

18

1

139

361085085050010003710

LINDA MARTIN ATTENTION CENTER

16

2

140

361086086051020000000

NORTHWEST OHIO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

30

4

141

371009009056010000000

CANADIAN COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

17

1

142

371055055050010000000

OKLAHOMA CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

54

2

143

371063063050010000000

POTTAWATOMIE CO REGIONAL JUV DETENTION CTR

13

1

144

378014000050010000000

CLEVELAND CO REG JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

25

1

145

378040000051014000000

LEFLORE COUNTY DETENTION CENTER

10

1

146

378051000050010000000

MUSKOGEE CO REG JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER


7

2

147

378077000055010000000

NORTHWEST OKLAHOMA JUVENILE DETENTION

10

2





Obs




ID




Facility Name


Juvenile

Offenders


Reported

Status

Offenders

148

391006006050070000000

BERKS CO YOUTH CENTER (JUVENILE DETENTION)

12

2

149

391059058050030009401

TIOGA CO DETENTION


9

1

150

398002000056280000000

COMMUNITY SPECIALIST CORPORATION

24

1

151

398028000056070000000

CORNELL ABRAXAS YOUTH CENTER

41

2

152

410000000050020004301

JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

72

2

153

420000000055070000000

PATRICK H BRADY ACADEMY

49

1

154

421052051050010000000

WESTERN SO DAKOTA JUVENILE SERVICES CENTER

59

2

155

431002002051010000000

BEDFORD COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION


8

3

156

431005005051020000000

BLOUNT COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

19

1

157

431006006051020000000

BRADLEY COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

11

1

158

431033033050050000000

HAMILTON COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

17

1

159

431071071051020000000

PUTNAM COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

11

2

160

431075075051020000000

RUTHERFORD COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER\

26

1

161

432047001050010000000

RICHARD L BEAN JUVENILE SERVICE CENTER

28

1

162

438023000050020000000

MCDOWELL CTR FOR CHILDREN (DET & RES TREAT)


7

3

163

441015015050040000000

BEXAR CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

132

1

164

441031031050010000000

DARRELL B HESTER JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER

46

1

165

441061061050010000000

DENTON CO JUVENILE DETENTION

50

1

166

441102102050010000000

HARRISON CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

10

1

167

441116116050010000000

HUNT CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

29

2

168

441205205050010000000

SAN PATRICIO COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CTR


9

1

169

441227227050010000000

GARDNER-BETTS JUV JUSTICE CENTER (DETENTION)

43

1

170

441235235050010000000

VICTORIA COUNTY JUVENILE JUSTICE FACILITY

39

1

171

441240240050010000000

WEBB CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

33

1

172

448085000051010000000

GARZA COUNTY REGIONAL JUVENILE CENTER

53

1





Obs




ID





Facility Name


Juvenile

Offenders


Reported

Status

Offenders

173

448163000056020000000

EVER CHANGE ACADEMY

14

3

174

450000000050020004702

SLATE CANYON YOUTH CENTER

58

1

175

450000000053010004706

MILLCREEK YOUTH CENTER

63

1

176

450000000053020004707

DECKER LAKE YOUTH CENTER

63

1

177

450000000053030004708

S W UTAH YOUTH CENTER

15

1

178

450000000053070004712

CACHE VALLEY YOUTH CENTER

12

3

179

450000000053100004715

CENTRAL UTAH YOUTH CENTER

10

2

180

450000000053110004716

SPLIT MOUNTAIN YOUTH CENTER

11

1

181

458006000056010000000

FARMINGTON BAY YOUTH CENTER

44

1

182

460000000050010000000

WOODSIDE JUVENILE REHABILITATION CENTER

23

7

183

470000000053130004805

BON AIR JCC


197

1

184

471076076050010000000

PRINCE WILLIAM DETENTION HOME

24

1

185

472102001050010000000

HIGHLANDS JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

21

3

186

472113001050010000000

RAPPAHANNOCK JUVENILE DETENTION HOME

40

1

187

472122001050030000000

NORFOLK DETENTION HOME

51

1

188

472132001051060000000

VIRGINIA BEACH JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

42

2

189

472134001056020000000

MERRIMAC CENTER


34

2

190

480000000053070005102

NASELLE YOUTH CAMP

74

1

191

481003003050010000000

BENTON FRANKLIN JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER

35

2

192

481008008050010000000

COWLITZ CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

18

3

193

481013013050010000000

GRANT COUNTY YOUTH SERVICES


9

1

194

481014014050010000000

COUNTY JUVENILE FACILITY

33

12

195

481023023051011000000

MASON COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER


3

1

196

481024024050010000000

OKANOGAN JUVENILE CORRECTIONS CENTER

15

3

197

481036036051011000000

WALLA WALLA JUVENILE JUSTICE CTR (DETENTION)

20

1





Obs




ID




Facility Name


Juvenile

Offenders


Reported

Status

Offenders

198

481039039050010000000

YAKIMA CO JUV JUSTICE (JUVENILE DETENTION)

32

1

199

488032000056093000000

MARTIN HALL JUVENILE FACILITY

12

2

200

490000000055110005208

GENE SPADARO JUVENILE CENTER

15

11

201

501037037051030008202

MARATHON COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY

11

1

202

501054054050020000000

ROCK CO JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

17

2

203

508071000051053000000

THOMPSON SHELTER CARE HOME


4

4

204

510000000053030000000

WYOMING BOYS' SCHOOL

55

4

205

510000000053040000000

WYOMING GIRLS SCHOOL

42

7

206

518013000056030000000

REGIONAL JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER

20

1




9,963

586



File Typeapplication/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Authordorin001
File Modified0000-00-00
File Created2021-01-30

© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy