CJRP Bulletin 2011

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

National
Report Series
August 2014

This bulletin is part of the
Juvenile Offenders and
Victims National Report Series.
The National Report offers a
comprehensive statistical
overview of the problems of
juvenile crime, violence, and
victimization and the response
of the juvenile justice system.
During each interim year, the
bulletins in the National
Report Series provide access
to the latest information on
juvenile arrests, court cases,
juveniles in placement, and
other topics of interest. Each
bulletin in the series high­
lights selected topics at the
forefront of juvenile justice
policymaking, giving readers
focused access to statistics
on some of the most critical
issues. Together, the National
Report and this series provide
a baseline of facts for juvenile
justice professionals, policy­
makers, the media, and con­
cerned citizens.

Juveniles in Residential
Placement, 2011
Sarah Hockenberry

A Message From OJJDP
How should a community hold juvenile offenders accountable for their offending behavior
while ensuring the public safety? As a growing body of evidence underscores the detrimental
effects that system involvement and confinement can have on healthy adolescent develop­
ment, many jurisdictions are examining and developing ways to divert nonserious offenders
from entering the system and to improve conditions of confinement for youth in the system.
As part of our effort to inform the discussions going on in many states and communities, the
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention sponsors the Census of Juveniles in
Residential Placement (CJRP), a biennial survey of public and private juvenile residential facili­
ties in every state. CJRP presents a detailed picture of the young people in residential place­
ment across the nation—including age, race, gender, offenses, adjudication status, and more.
Although findings of the 2011 survey are generally positive—the population of juvenile offend­
ers in residential placement has declined 42% since 1997, and the number of status offenders
in residential placement was down 64% from 1997—this bulletin highlights several areas
where improvement is needed, especially regarding rates of confinement for minority youth.
Nationwide, the residential placement rate for black youth was more than 4.5 times the rate
for white youth, and the rate for Hispanic youth was 1.8 times the rate for white youth.
We hope that the information this bulletin provides will encourage juvenile justice profession­
als and policymakers to investigate appropriate alternatives to confinement for young offend­
ers, improve their conditions of confinement, reduce the proportion of status offenders held in
residential placement, and provide the programs that these youth need to help them become
successful adults.
Robert L. Listenbee
Administrator

Access OJJDP publications online at ojjdp.gov

OJJDP’s placement data are the primary source of
information on juveniles in residential facilities
Detailed data are
available on juveniles in
residential placement
Since its inception, the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention
(OJJDP) has collected information on the
juveniles held in juvenile detention and
correctional facilities. Until 1995, these
data were gathered through the biennial
Census of Public and Private Juvenile
Detention, Correctional, and Shelter Facil­
ities, better known as the Children in
Custody Census. In 1997, OJJDP initiated
a new data collection program, the Cen­
sus of Juveniles in Residential Placement
(CJRP), to gather comprehensive and de­
tailed information about juvenile offend­
ers in residential placement.
CJRP is administered biennially and col­
lects information from all secure and
nonsecure residential placement facilities
that house juvenile offenders, defined as
persons younger than 21 who are held in
a residential setting as a result of some
contact with the justice system (they are
charged with or adjudicated for an of­
fense). This encompasses both status
offenders and delinquent offenders, in­
cluding those who are either temporarily
detained by the court or committed after
adjudication for an offense.
The census does not include federal
facilities or those exclusively for drug or
mental health treatment or for abused/
neglected youth. It also does not capture
data from adult prisons or jails. Therefore,
CJRP does not include all juveniles whom
criminal courts sentenced to incarceration
or placement in a residential facility.

2

The census typically takes place on the
fourth Wednesday in October of the
census year. CJRP asks all juvenile resi­
dential facilities in the United States to
describe each offender younger than 21
assigned a bed in the facility on the cen­
sus date. Facilities report individual-level
information on gender, date of birth, race,
placement authority, most serious offense
charged, court adjudication status, and
admission date.

One-day count and
admission data give
different views of
residential populations
CJRP provides 1-day population counts
of juveniles in residential placement facili­
ties. Such counts give a picture of the
standing population in facilities. One-day
counts are substantially different from
annual admission or release data, which
provide a measure of facility population
flow.
Juveniles may be committed to a facility
as part of a court-ordered disposition, or
they may be detained prior to adjudication
or after adjudication while awaiting dispo­
sition or placement elsewhere. In addi­
tion, a small proportion of juveniles may
be admitted voluntarily in lieu of adjudica­
tion as part of a diversion agreement.
Because detention stays tend to be short
compared with commitment placement,
detained juveniles represent a much larg­
er share of population flow data than of
1-day count data.

State variations in upper
age of juvenile court
jurisdiction influence
placement rates
Although state placement rate statistics
control for upper age of original juvenile
court jurisdiction, comparisons among
states with different upper ages are prob­
lematic. Youth ages 16 and 17 constitute
26% of the general youth population ages
10–17, but they account for more than
50% of arrests of youth younger than age
18, more than 40% of delinquency court
cases, and more than 55% of juveniles in
residential placement. If all other factors
were equal, one would expect higher juve­
nile placement rates in states where older
youth are under juvenile court jurisdiction.
Differences in age limits of extended juris­
diction also influence placement rates.
Some states may keep a juvenile in place­
ment for several years beyond the upper
age of original jurisdiction; others cannot.
Laws that control the transfer of juveniles
to criminal court also affect juvenile place­
ment rates. If all other factors were equal,
states with broad transfer provisions
would be expected to have lower juvenile
placement rates than other states.
Demographic variations among jurisdic­
tions should also be considered. The
urbanicity and economy of an area are
thought to be related to crime and place­
ment rates. Available bedspace also influ­
ences placement rates, particularly in rural
areas.

National Report Series Bulletin

The number of residents in placement decreased

across census years, but profiles remained similar

Nearly 9 in 10 residents
were juveniles held for
delinquency offenses
The vast majority of residents in juvenile
residential placement facilities on October
26, 2011, were juvenile offenders (89%).
Juvenile offenders held for delinquency
offenses accounted for 86% of all resi­
dents, and those held for status offenses
accounted for 3%. Delinquency offenses
are behaviors that would be criminal law
violations for adults. Status offenses are
behaviors that are not law violations for
adults, such as running away, truancy,
and incorrigibility. Some residents were
held in the facility but were not charged
with or adjudicated for an offense (e.g.,
youth referred for abuse, neglect, emo­
tional disturbance, or mental retardation,
or those whose parents referred them).
Together, these other residents and youth
age 21 or older accounted for 11% of all
residents.

Half of facilities were
private but held less
than one-third of
juvenile offenders
Private facilities are operated by private
nonprofit or for-profit corporations or
organizations; those who work in these
facilities are employees of the private cor­
poration or organization. State or local
government agencies operate public facili­
ties; those who work in these facilities are
state or local government employees. Pri­
vate facilities tend to be smaller than pub­
lic facilities. Thus, although there are
more private than public facilities nation­
wide, public facilities hold the majority of
juvenile offenders on any given day. In
2011, private facilities accounted for 50%
of facilities holding juvenile offenders;
however, they held just 31% of juvenile
offenders in residential placement.

August 2014

The profile of juvenile offenders in residential placement changed
little between 1997 and 2011
Number
Placement population
All residents
Juvenile offenders
Delinquency
Person offense
Violent offense
Status offenders
Other residents

Percent of total

1997

2003

2011

1997

2003

2011

116,701
105,055
98,813
35,138
26,304
6,242
11,646

109,094
96,531
92,022
33,170
22,039
4,509
12,563

68,815
61,423
59,184
22,964
15,683
2,239
7,392

100%
90
85
30
23
5
10

100%
88
84
30
20
4
12

100%
89
86
33
23
3
11

Notes: Other residents include youth age 21 or older and those held in the facility but not charged
with or adjudicated for an offense. Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.
Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 1997,
2003, and 2011 [machine-readable data files].

Although the number of public and private facilities was similar in
2011, public facilities housed more than twice as many offenders
Number
Facility operation
Facilities:
All facilities
Public facilities
Private facilities
Juvenile offenders:
All facilities
Public facilities
Private facilities

1997

2003

Percent change
2011

1997–2011

2003–2011

–28%
–7
–42

–28%
–12
–40

–42
–44
–36

–36
–36
–38

2,842
1,106
1,736

2,852
1,170
1,682

2,047
1,033
1,014

105,055
75,600
29,455

96,531
66,210
30,321

61,423
42,584
18,839

Overall, the number of juvenile offenders in residential placement decreased 42%
between 1997 and 2011.
n The decline in offenders held in public facilities accounted for 76% of the overall drop
in the youth residential placement population between 1997 and 2011.
n

Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 1997,
2003, and 2011 [machine-readable data files].

Private facilities hold a different popula­
tion of offenders than do public facilities.
Compared with public facilities, private
facilities have a greater proportion of
juveniles who have been committed to the
facility by the court following adjudication
as part of their disposition and a smaller
proportion of juveniles who are detained
pending adjudication, disposition, or
placement elsewhere.

Placement status profile, 2011:
Facility operation
Placement
status
Total Public Private
Total
Committed
Detained
Diversion

100%
68
31
1

100%
59
40
0

100%
88
10
1

Note: Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

Of all juveniles who were detained, 90%
were in public facilities. For committed
juveniles, 60% were in public facilities.

3

Nationwide, approximately 61,000 delinquents were
in residential placement on October 26, 2011
Public and private facility
populations have fairly
similar offense profiles
Public and private facilities had fairly
similar offense profiles in 2011, with
delinquent youth accounting for the vast
majority of juvenile offenders (98% in
public facilities and 92% in private facili­
ties). Compared with public facilities,
private facilities had larger proportions
of youth among their populations with
less serious offenses (e.g., simple
assault, drug, and status offenses).
Offense profile by facility type, 2011:
Facility operation
Most serious
offense
All Public Private
Total
100%
Delinquency
96
Person
37
Crim. homicide
1
Sexual assault
6
Robbery
9
Agg. assault
9
Simple assault
9
Other person
3
Property
24
Burglary
11
Theft
5
Auto theft
3
Arson
1
Other property
4
Drug
7
Drug trafficking
1
Other drug
6
Public order
12
Weapons
4
Other public ord.
8
Technical viol.
16
Status offense
4

100%
98
39
2
5
11
10
8
3
24
11
5
3
1
4
6
1
5
12
5
7
17
2

100%
92
34
0
8
5
6
10
4
23
10
6
3
1
3
10
1
9
12
4
8
14
8

Note: Detail may not total 100% because of
rounding.

On the census date in 2011, public facili­
ties held 71% of delinquents in residential
placement and 35% of status offenders.
Public facilities housed 76% of those held
for violent crimes (i.e., criminal homicide,
rape, robbery, and aggravated assault). In
contrast, only 57% of juvenile offenders
held for drug offenses were in public
facilities.

4

The number of offenders in residential placement declined for all
offenses between 1997 and 2011

Most serious offense

Juvenile offenders in
residential placement, 2011
Type of facility
All
Public
Private

Total
Delinquency
Person
Criminal homicide
Sexual assault
Robbery
Aggravated assault
Simple assault
Other person
Property
Burglary
Theft
Auto theft
Arson
Other property
Drug
Drug trafficking
Other drug
Public order
Weapons
Other public order
Technical violation
Status offense

61,423
59,184
22,964
801
3,914
5,708
5,260
5,250
2,031
14,705
6,687
3,364
1,781
448
2,425
4,315
737
3,578
7,317
2,647
4,670
9,883
2,239

42,584
41,799
16,650
734
2,319
4,742
4,117
3,376
1,362
10,352
4,715
2,293
1,269
294
1,781
2,453
477
1,976
5,058
1,963
3,095
7,286
785

18,839
17,385
6,314
67
1,595
966
1,143
1,874
669
4,353
1,972
1,071
512
154
644
1,862
260
1,602
2,259
684
1,575
2,597
1,454

Percent change
1997–2011
Type of facility
All
Public Private
–42%
–40
–35
–58
–30
–39
–44
–21
–8
–54
–47
–54
–73
–50
–48
–52
–74
–42
–29
–36
–24
–20
–64

–44%
–44
–39
–59
–42
–40
–46
–18
–19
–55
–50
–55
–71
–57
–46
–61
–78
–52
–31
–40
–23
–29
–50

–36%
–30
–21
–34
–1
–30
–39
–25
28
–51
–37
–49
–76
–30
–53
–32
–62
–22
–24
–21
–25
23
–69

n

The number of juvenile offenders held for person offenses decreased 35% between
1997 and 2011, and the number of property and drug offenders was cut by more
than half (54% and 52% decrease, respectively).

n

Overall, the number of juvenile offenders held for both public order and technical
violation offenses declined between 1997 and 2011 (29% and 20%, respectively).
However, despite this downward trend, private facilities reported holding 23% more
juvenile offenders who had committed technical violations.

n

The number of status offenders in residential placement was cut substantially (64%)
between 1997 and 2011.

Note: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.

Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 2011
[machine-readable data files].

National Report Series Bulletin

The number of offenders in placement in 2011 was
at its lowest level since 1997
The largest delinquency
population reported to
CJRP was in 1999
The number of delinquents held in place­
ment increased 4% between 1997 and
1999 and then decreased 43% to its low­
est level in 2011. Although the number of
delinquents held in public facilities out­
numbered those held in private facilities,
delinquents held in private facilities ac­
counted for 82% of the overall increase
between 1997 and 1999. Since 1999, the
number of delinquents held in public facil­
ities decreased 44%, and the number held
in private facilities decreased 39%.
Private facilities reported the largest de­
crease in the number of status offenders
between 1997 and 2011—down 69%
compared with 50% in public facilities.

In 2011, juvenile residential facilities held 40% fewer delinquents and
64% fewer status offenders than in 1997
Offenders in juvenile facilities
120,000

Although data from CJRP cannot ex­
plain the continuing decline in the
number of offenders held in residen­
tial placement, they may reflect a
combination of contributing factors.
For example, the number of juvenile
arrests decreased 31% between 2002
and 2011, which in turn means that
fewer juveniles were processed
through the juvenile justice system.
Additionally, residential placement re­
form efforts have resulted in the
movement of many juveniles from
large, secure public facilities to less
secure, small private facilities. Finally,
economic factors have resulted in a
shift from committing juveniles to
high-cost residential facilities to pro­
viding lower cost options, such as
probation, day treatment, or other
community-based sanctions.

August 2014

Juvenile offenders

Delinquents

80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000

Status offenders
0
10/1997 10/1999 10/2001 10/2003 02/2006 10/2007 02/2010 10/2011
Census date
Offenders in juvenile facilities
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000

Several factors may affect the
placement population

Total

100,000

Delinquents

Total
Public facilities

40,000
20,000

Private facilities

0
10/97 10/99 10/01 10/03 02/06 10/07 02/10 10/11
Census date

Offenders in juvenile facilities
7,000
Status offenders
6,000
Total
5,000
4,000
3,000
Private facilities
2,000
1,000
Public facilities
0
10/97 10/99 10/01 10/03 02/06 10/07 02/10 10/11
Census date

n The total number of juvenile offenders in residential placement facilities rose 2% from 1997
to 1999 and then decreased 43% from 1999 to 2011. The result was an overall decrease of
42% between 1997 and 2011.
n The number of delinquents held in public facilities decreased 44% between 1997 and 2011,
while the number held in private facilities decreased 30%.
n The number of status offenders held in juvenile residential facilities dropped sharply (31%)
between 1997 and 1999. Between 1999 and 2006, the number of status offenders remained
relatively unchanged, decreased in 2007, and reached its lowest level in 2011.
n The number of status offenders held in public facilities peaked in 2001 and then decreased
53% by 2011. The number of status offenders held in private facilities increased 18%
between the 1999 low and 2006 and then decreased 57% between 2006 and 2011.
Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 1997, 1999,
2001, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2010, and 2011 [machine-readable data files].

5

Relative declines from 1997 to 2011 were greater

for the committed population than for the detained

Offense profiles differed
for detained and
committed offenders

Between 1997 and 2011, the detained delinquency population decreased
31% and the committed delinquency population decreased 43%

Delinquents accounted for 97% of de­
tained offenders and 96% of committed
offenders in 2011. Compared with the
detained population, the committed pop­
ulation had a greater proportion of youth
held for most major offense groups and
fewer youth held for technical violations
of probation or parole. The committed
population also had a slightly larger pro­
portion of youth held for status offenses.
Status offenders accounted for 4% of
committed youth and 3% of detained
youth.

Offenders in juvenile facilities
30,000

Offense profile of juvenile offenders in

placement, 2011:

Most serious
Detained Committed

offense
(19,014) (41,934)

Offenders in juvenile facilities
80,000

Total
Delinquency
Person
Crim. homicide
Sexual assault
Robbery
Agg. assault
Simple assault
Other person
Property
Burglary
Theft
Auto theft
Arson
Other property
Drug
Drug trafficking
Other drug
Public order
Weapons
Other public ord.
Technical viol.
Status offense

100%
97
36
2
4
9
9
8
3
22
10
5
3
1
4
6
1
5
12
5
7
22
3

100%
96
38
1
7
9
8
9
3
25
11
6
3
1
4
7
1
6
12
4
8
13
4

Note: Detail may not total 100% because of
rounding.

6

Total

25,000

Detained delinquents

Public facilities

20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000

Private facilities

0
10/1997 10/1999 10/2001 10/2003 02/2006 10/2007 02/2010 10/2011
Census date

70,000
60,000

Committed delinquents

Total

50,000
40,000

Public facilities

30,000
20,000

Private facilities

10,000
0
10/1997 10/1999 10/2001 10/2003 02/2006 10/2007 02/2010 10/2011
Census date

n Despite a slight increase between 1997 and 1999 in the number of detained delinquents
(those held prior to adjudication or disposition who were awaiting a hearing in juvenile or
criminal court or those held after disposition who were awaiting placement elsewhere), the
proportion of these youth remained relatively stable between 1997 and 2007 and then
decreased 23% between 2007 and 2011.
n The number of offenders in residential placement decreased 42% between 1997 and 2011;
a 49% decrease in the number of committed delinquents held in public facilities during this
period drove this trend.
n Between 1997 and 2011, declines were also evident in the number of detained and commit­
ted status offenders (60% and 62%, respectively) (not shown).
Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 1997, 1999,
2001, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2010, and 2011 [machine-readable data files].

National Report Series Bulletin

In 2011, 196 juvenile offenders were in placement

for every 100,000 juveniles in the U.S. population

In 2011, the national commitment rate was 2.2 times the detention rate, but rates varied by state
State of offense
U.S. total
Upper age 17
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Hawaii
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Maine
Maryland
Minnesota
Mississippi
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Jersey
New Mexico
North Dakota
Ohio

Juveniles in
placement

Placement rate per 100,000
Total
Detained Committed

61,423

196

61

134

1,026
222
936
711
9,810
1,254
180
258
3,744
99
399
1,878
729
813
747
165
939
828
258
168
669
720
1,005
522
156
2,490

198
270
130
224
233
234
194
618
203
75
213
258
225
255
163
129
153
145
77
169
337
245
106
229
241
200

49
121
49
62
97
70
87
323
41
20
70
71
46
97
52
19
76
32
36
48
92
75
41
71
23
75

138
150
80
160
135
164
107
294
156
52
142
188
170
157
109
108
77
108
41
114
244
170
65
158
218
125

State of offense

Juveniles in
placement

Upper age 17 (continued)
Oklahoma
576
Oregon
1,098
Pennsylvania
3,075
Rhode Island
186
South Dakota
429
Tennessee
783
Utah
732
Vermont
36
Virginia
1,686
Washington
1,062
West Virginia
489
Wyoming
249
Upper age 16
Connecticut*
252
Georgia
1,788
Illinois
2,106
Louisiana
957
Massachusetts
543
Michigan
2,085
Missouri
1,122
New Hampshire
90
South Carolina
726
Texas
4,671
Wisconsin
915
Upper age 15
New York
2,139
North Carolina
567

Placement rate per 100,000
Total
Detained Committed
141
281
238
180
492
116
200
59
203
150
278
433

58
40
44
104
100
37
49
20
67
39
92
31

78
240
194
75
386
78
151
39
136
111
186
396

75
184
171
222
95
221
202
76
173
175
174

31
90
56
80
31
64
45
3**
72
59
49

43
94
115
140
63
155
156
74
102
115
125

148
74

31
21

116
53

Commitment rate

Detention rate

DC

DC

0 to 40
41 to 61
62 to 82
83 to 325

0 to 84
85 to 134
135 to 165
166 to 400

* Connecticut’s upper age of juvenile court jurisdiction was raised from 16 to 17 in 2012. In 2011, it was 16.

** Rate is based on fewer than 10 juveniles.
Notes: Placement rate is the count of juvenile offenders in placement per 100,000 youth ages 10 through the upper age of juvenile court jurisdiction in each
state. U.S. total includes 2,324 youth in private facilities for whom state of offense was not reported and 5 youth who committed their offense in a U.S.
territory.
Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 2011 [machine-readable data files].

August 2014

7

Although national placement rates declined from 1997 to 2011, not all
states experienced declines
Detention

Unlike detained youth,
committed youth were
in a variety of facilities
Group home facilities held the largest
proportion of committed offenders
(42%), but 11% were committed to
detention centers.

DC

Facility type profiles, 2011:
Detained Committed
Facility type
offenders offenders
Total
Detention center
Shelter
Reception/diagnostic
Group home
Ranch/wilderness
camp
Long-term secure
Other

Change in detention
rate, 1997–2011
Decrease (39 states)
Increase (12 states)

Commitment

100%
86
3
2
3

100%
11
2
2
42

0
5
0

5
37
1

Note: Detail may not total 100% because of
rounding.

DC

Change in commitment
rate, 1997–2011
Decrease (46 states)
Increase (5 states)

n From 1997 to 2011, detention rates increased in about one-quarter of the states and declined
in the other three-quarters.
n In 2011, 9 in 10 states had lower commitment rates than in 1997, but in 5 states the com­
mitment rate increased.
Notes: Placement rate is the count of juvenile offenders in placement per 100,000 youth ages 10 through
the upper age of juvenile court jurisdiction in each state.
Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 1997 and 2011
[machine-readable data files].

For all facilities except
detention centers, the
majority of offenders
were committed youth
Not all offenders held in detention centers
were held with detained placement status.
In 2011, 21% of offenders in detention
centers had been committed to the
facility.
Offender population profiles, 2011:
Detained Committed
Facility type
offenders offenders
Detention center
Shelter
Reception/diagnostic
Group home
Ranch/wilderness
camp
Long-term secure
Other

78%
44
31
3

21%
53
69
95

1
6
10

98
94
90

Note: Detail may total less than 100% because some
facilities held youth other than detained or committed
youth.

8

National Report Series Bulletin

Person offenses accounted for the largest share of

both detained and committed offenders in 25 states

In 11 states in 2011, technical violations accounted for a greater share of detained offenders than did
person offenses
Offense profile of detained offenders, 2011
State of
offense

Person Property Drugs

U.S. total
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi

36%
27
24*
20
29
42
40
6
30*
47
27
38
44*
27
33
30
30
34
40
33
25*
52
52
25
33
28

22%
29
*27
18
20
24
30
3
19*
27
29
22
11*
30
20
29
36
25
16
25
38*
21
22
19
22
40

6%
7
3*
11
8
4
11
0
11*
4
6
4
11*
14
6
7
10
8
3
9
0*
15
3
3
3
10

Public Technical
order violation Status
12%
15
6*
8
9
14
14
3
15*
7
10
15
11*
14
19
12
6
11
16
10
25*
11
17
10
12
13

22%
18
36*
41
32
15
4
91
22*
11
27
15
22*
9
22
16
16
22
24
12
13*
0
7
37
25
5

3%
4
3*
3
3
1
2
0
0*
4
1
6
0*
5
0
6
2
1
3
10
0*
1
2
5
5
5

n The proportion of juvenile offenders detained for a technical
violation of probation or parole or a violation of a valid court
order was less than 35% in all but nine states.

Offense profile of detained offenders, 2011
State of
offense
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

Person Property Drugs
40%
19*
30
33
–
51
20
43
42
–
40
24
35
31
50
28
14*
37
33
17
–
38
40
41
43
–

25%
13*
20
12
–
9
19
18
17
–
21
29
17
17
14
19
10*
23
19
17
–
20
35
19
34
–

7%
13*
3
21
–
7
7
4
4
–
3
9
6
6
6
4
14*
11
8
7
–
3
5
6
5
–

Public Technical
order violation Status
7%
13*
5
18
–
15
4
9
8
–
12
11
10
6
8
17
7*
13
9
13
–
6
9
9
13
–

17%
44*
34
18
–
18
50
19
28
–
23
23
33
37
25
27
48*
13
30
45
–
31
8
13
2
–

5%
0*
10
0
–
0
0
8
2
–
2
4
0
2
0
6
10*
4
1
2
–
2
4
11
5
–

Percent of detained juvenile offenders held for person offenses

n Maryland and Massachusetts had the highest proportions of per­
son offenders among detained juveniles (52% each). Connecticut
had the lowest proportion (6%).

DC

n With the exception of Nevada, the proportion of juvenile offenders
detained for drug offenses was 15% or less.
n In all states but Louisiana, Nebraska, South Dakota, and West
Virginia, status offenders accounted for less than 10% of
detained offenders.
* Percentage is based on a small denominator (fewer than 100 but at least
20 juveniles total) and may be unreliable.
– Too few juveniles (fewer than 20) to calculate a reliable percentage.
Notes: U.S. total includes 209 youth detained in private facilities for whom state
of offense was not reported. Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

5% to 28%
29% to 34%
35% to 41%
42% to 52%
Not calculated

Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 2011 [machine-readable data files].

August 2014

9

In 23 states in 2011, the percentage of committed offenders held for person offenses was greater than the
national average (38%)
Offense profile of committed offenders, 2011
State of
offense
U.S. total
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi

Person Property Drugs
38%
24
34
22
41
40
38
29
36*
51
32
44
35*
24
50
30
40
42
32
45
37
38
55
35
42
22

25%
31
22
30
24
21
24
25
18*
20
34
31
61*
34
26
28
30
26
24
29
39
26
22
24
22
59

7%
6
2
16
7
5
7
6
9*
7
10
4
0*
16
5
9
12
8
4
6
7
13
4
3
2
4

Public Technical
order violation Status
12%
11
5
14
9
14
18
23
18*
7
10
11
0*
18
9
16
11
22
16
7
15
10
14
14
20
15

13%
18
29
17
13
19
12
15
15*
12
14
8
0*
8
10
8
3
2
16
3
2
6
2
13
11
2

4%
10
5
3
5
1
1
4
3*
2
0
2
0*
1
0
9
4
1
8
11
0
7
2
11
3
0

n Except for New Mexico and Wyoming, the number of juvenile
offenders committed for a technical violation of probation or
parole was less than one-third of the total offenders committed in
each state.

Offense profile of committed offenders, 2011
State of
offense
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

Person Property Drugs
30%
34
30
17
48*
47
26
40
44
17
47
42
55
32
19*
30
18
47
44
24
50*
52
51
28
49
12

32%
34
30
27
24*
19
16
22
43
19
19
40
23
18
35*
24
19
23
23
18
25*
27
22
25
25
20

9%
16
10
20
3*
7
7
2
3
13
4
4
5
12
35*
5
14
9
6
22
0*
2
3
6
4
12

Public Technical
order violation Status
9%
5
11
11
3*
17
6
8
4
17
10
12
14
12
0*
11
20
7
9
29
0*
4
8
9
18
8

10%
3
9
16
7*
11
46
11
2
0
18
2
2
22
15*
25
17
10
17
4
0*
12
13
17
0
33

10%
11
10
6
10*
0
1
17
3
34
2
0
0
4
0*
5
12
5
0
3
13*
2
2
14
2
16

Percent of committed juvenile offenders held for person offenses

n Massachusetts and Oregon had the highest proportions of person
offenders among committed juveniles (55% each). Wyoming had
the lowest proportion (12%).

DC

n In more than half of all states, status offenders accounted for less
than 5% of committed offenders.
* Percentage is based on a small denominator (fewer than 100 but at least
20 juveniles total) and may be unreliable.
Notes: U.S. total includes 2,097 committed youth in private facilities for
whom state of offense was not reported and 5 youth who committed their
offense in a U.S. territory. Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

12% to 27%
28% to 37%
38% to 45%
46% to 55%

Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 2011 [machine-readable data files].

10

National Report Series Bulletin

Females account for a small proportion of the
residential placement population
Females accounted for
14% of offenders in
residential placement
Male offenders dominate the juvenile jus­
tice system. This is especially true of the
residential placement population. Males
represent half of the juvenile population
and are involved in approximately 70% of
juvenile arrests and delinquency cases
that juvenile courts handle each year, but
they represented 86% of juvenile offend­
ers in residential placement in 2011. The
proportion of female juveniles in residen­
tial placement was slightly greater for
private facilities (15%) than for public
facilities (13%) and greater for detained
juveniles (16%) than committed juveniles
(12%). The proportion of females among
those admitted to placement under a di­
version agreement was 18%. Although the
number of females in residential place­
ment has declined since 1997, their pro­
portion of the placement population has
remained stable.

One-third of females in
residential placement
were held in private
facilities
In 2011, private facilities held 33% of
females and 30% of males in juvenile
residential placement. The proportion of
females placed in private facilities varied
substantially by offense category: 66% of
all females held for a status offense were
in private facilities, as were 43% of those
held for drug offenses aside from traffick­
ing, 37% of those held for simple assault,
and 34% of those held for auto theft. In
general for both males and females, the
less serious the offense category, the
greater the likelihood the youth was in a
private facility.

August 2014

Females in residential
placement tended to be
younger than their male
counterparts

of offenders age 18 and older among
males (15%) than among females (9%).

In 2011, 38% of females in residential
placement were younger than 16, com­
pared with 29% of males. For females
in placement, the peak age was 16, ac­
counting for 27% of all females in place­
ment facilities. For males, the peak age
was 17. There was a greater proportion

Total
12 and younger
13
14
15
16
17
18 and older

Age profile of residents, 2011:

Age
Total Male Female

100%
1
3
8
18
28
28
14

100%
1
3
8
17
27
29
15

100%
1
4
11
21
27
26
9

Note: Detail may not total 100% because of
rounding.

Females were more likely than males to be held for technical
violations or status offenses

Most serious offense

Offense profile for juvenile offenders
in residential placement, 2011
All facilities
Public facilities
Private facilities
Male Female
Male Female
Male Female

Total
Delinquency
Person
Violent Crime Index*
Other person
Property
Property Crime Index†
Other property
Drug
Drug trafficking
Other drug
Public order
Technical violation‡
Status offense

100%
97
38
27
11
25
21
4
7
1
6
12
15
3

100%
89
32
14
18
18
14
3
6
1
5
9
24
11

100%
99
40
30
10
25
21
4
6
1
5
12
15
1

100%
95
33
16
17
18
14
4
5
1
5
10
28
5

100%
95
34
22
12
24
21
4
10
2
9
13
14
5

100%
78
30
10
21
17
14
3
8
1
7
8
15
22

n

Status offenders were 11% of females in residential placement in 2011—down from
21% in 1997.

n

Person offenders were 32% of females in residential placement in 2011—up from
25% in 1997.

n

Technical violations and status offenses were more common among females in place­
ment than among males. Person, property, and public order offenses were more
common among males in placement than among females.

* Violent Crime Index = criminal homicide, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault.
† Property Crime Index = burglary, theft, auto theft, and arson.
‡ Technical violation = violation of probation, parole, and valid court order.
Note: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.

Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 2011
[machine-readable data files].

11

Minority youth accounted for 68% of offenders in
residential placement in 2011
Blacks made up the
largest share of youth
offenders in placement
In 2011, the population of juvenile offend­
ers held in residential placement was 40%
black, 32% white, and 23% Hispanic.
Youth of other races, including those of
two or more races, accounted for 5% of
youth in residential placement. The race/
ethnicity profile of offenders in residential
placement shifted substantially from a
decade earlier. In 2001, 40% of juvenile
offenders in residential placement were
white, 39% were black, and 18% were
Hispanic.
Between 2001 and 2011, the population of
offenders dropped 41%. The declines,
however, did not affect all race/ethnicity
groups equally. Since 2001, when the
white proportion was at its peak, the num­
ber of whites dropped 52%. In compari­
son, the number of minority offenders in
residential placement declined only 34%
over the time period. Hispanic offenders
had the smallest relative decrease (22%)
between 2001 and 2011.
Juvenile offenders in placement, 2011:
Percent change
Race/
2001– 1997–
ethnicity
Number 2011 2011
Total
White
Minority
Black
Hispanic
Amer. Indian
Asian
2 or more

61,423
19,927
41,496
24,574
13,973
1,191
566
1,192

–41%
–52
–34
–40
–22
–41
–63
92

–42%
–49
–37
–41
–28
–26
–74
112

In 2011, minority youth made up the
majority of both males and females in
residential placement (69% and 61%,
respectively). Black offenders represented
the largest racial proportion among males
(41%), and white offenders were the larg­
est proportion among females (39%).

12

Black youth accounted for 65% of juveniles held for robbery and 52%
of those held for weapons offenses
Racial/ethnic profile of juvenile offenders in placement, 2011
American
Most serious offense
Total
White Black Hispanic Indian
Asian
Total
Delinquency
Criminal homicide
Sexual assault
Robbery
Aggravated assault
Simple assault
Burglary
Theft
Auto theft
Drug trafficking
Other drug
Weapons
Technical violations
Status offense

100%
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

32%
32
17
53
9
22
37
31
37
33
26
42
16
33
47

40%
40
42
28
65
42
39
45
42
38
43
28
52
36
33

23%
23
33
14
23
32
19
20
16
24
27
26
29
26
10

2%
2
2
2
1
2
3
2
2
2
1
2
0
2
4

1%
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0

10% of white youth in residential placement were held for sexual
assault, compared with 6% of American Indian youth and 4% each of
black, Hispanic, and Asian youth

Most serious offense

Offense profile of juvenile offenders in placement, 2011
American
Total
White Black Hispanic Indian
Asian

Total
Delinquency
Criminal homicide
Sexual assault
Robbery
Aggravated assault
Simple assault
Burglary
Theft
Auto theft
Drug trafficking
Other drug
Weapons
Technical violations
Status offense

100%
96
1
6
9
9
9
11
5
3
1
6
4
16
4

100%
95
1
10
3
6
10
10
6
3
1
7
2
17
5

100%
97
1
4
15
9
8
12
6
3
1
4
6
14
3

100%
98
2
4
10
12
7
10
4
3
1
7
6
18
2

100%
92
2
6
3
8
12
8
5
3
1
7
1
18
8

100%
96
7
4
8
13
9
11
5
3
1
5
3
11
4

Notes: Racial categories (i.e., white, black, American Indian, and Asian) do not include youth of Hispanic
ethnicity. The American Indian racial category includes Alaska Natives; the Asian racial category includes
Other Pacific Islanders. Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.

Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 2011
[machine-readable data files].

National Report Series Bulletin

Nationally, placement rates were highest for black
youth
For every 100,000 black juveniles living in the United States, 521 were in a residential facility on October 26,
2011; the rate was 202 for Hispanic youth and 112 for white youth
Placement rate (per 100,000), 2011
State of
offense
U.S. total
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi

Placement rate (per 100,000), 2011

White

Black

Hispanic

American
Indian

Asian

112
122
156
98
140
106
157
23
74
107*
161
72
123
197
92
204
163
191
113
98
114
48
40
117
68
26

521
364
639
287
564
795
1,063
287
500
791
533
378
557
361*
432
602
949
1,003
533
422
517
348
328
660
664
140

202
87
49*
140
132
278
236
121
114
198*
38
93
50*
247
164
147
294
171
171
65
224*
81
243
153
151
31*

361
85*
568
203
210*
216
534
0*
0*
0*
103*
0*
0*
667
946
429*
850
314
339*
81*
490*
0*
0*
111*
1,146
0*

36
45*
44*
29*
174*
40
83
0*
0*
0*
23
9*
35
106*
34
24*
91*
106*
0*
43*
142*
0*
28*
22*
85
0*

n In every state but Vermont, the placement rate for black juvenile
offenders exceeded the rate for whites.
n In half of the states, the ratio of the minority placement rate to
the nonminority placement rate exceeded 3.5 to 1. In five states
(Connecticut, District of Columbia, Minnesota, Pennsylvania,
and Wisconsin), the ratio of minority to white rates was 6 to 1
or higher.

State of
offense
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

White

Black

148
122
197
166
67
33
140
61
29
153
114
86
231
98
93
90
298
60
91
142
58
96
109
232
70
388

464
504*
1,476
684
372*
412
295
453
190
608*
603
524
888
903
874
337
716
312
446
726
0*
548
430
715
981
1,378

Hispanic
172
251
340
243
177*
101
276
134
43
290*
117
99
359
334
208
81
424
53
180
392
0*
117
203
193*
150
416

American
Indian

Asian

269*
518
1,683
284*
0*
298*
184
140*
107
916
185*
146
751
123*
0*
0*
1,588
163*
64*
533
0*
0*
455
898*
487
1,166

28*
0*
70*
66
0*
7*
0*
11
15*
0*
26*
35*
108
31
89*
0*
261*
26*
18
204
0*
24
35
0*
53*
0*

Ratio of minority placement rate to white placement rate

DC

* Rate is based on fewer than 10 juveniles.
Notes: The placement rate is the number of juvenile offenders in residential
placement on October 26, 2011, per 100,000 juveniles age 10 through the
upper age of original juvenile court jurisdiction in each state. U.S. total
includes 2,324 juvenile offenders in private facilities for whom state of
offense was not reported and 5 youth who committed their offense in a
U.S. territory. Racial categories (i.e., white, black, American Indian, and
Asian) do not include youth of Hispanic ethnicity. The American Indian
racial category includes Alaska Natives; the Asian racial category includes
Other Pacific Islanders.

Less than 2.0
2.0 to 3.0
3.0 to 4.0
4.0 or more

Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 2011 [machine-readable data files]

August 2014

13

On the 2011 census date, person offenders had been
committed or detained longer than other offenders
CJRP provides individuallevel data on time spent
in placement
Information on length of stay is key to
understanding the justice system’s han­
dling of juveniles in residential placement.
Ideally, length of stay would be calculated
for individual juveniles by totaling the
days of their stay in placement, from their
initial admission to their final release re­
lating to a particular case. These individu­
al lengths of placement would then be
averaged for different release cohorts of
juveniles (cohorts would be identified by
year of release, offense, adjudication sta­
tus, or demographic characteristics).
CJRP captures information on the number
of days since admission for each juvenile
in residential placement. These data repre­
sent the number of days the juvenile had
been in the facility up to the census date.
Because CJRP data reflect only a juve­
nile’s placement at one facility, the
complete length of stay—from initial
admission to the justice system to final
release—cannot be determined. Neverthe­
less, CJRP provides an overall profile of
the time juveniles had been in the facility
at the time of the census—a 1-day snap­
shot of time in the facility.
Because CJRP data are reported for indi­
viduals, averages can be calculated for
different subgroups of the population. In
addition, analysts can use the data to get
a picture of the proportion of residents
remaining after a certain number of days
(e.g., what percentage of youth have been
held longer than a year). This sort of anal­
ysis provides juvenile justice policymakers
with a useful means of comparing the
time spent in placement for different cate­
gories of juveniles.

In 2011, 29% of committed offenders, but just 5% of detained offenders,
remained in placement 6 months after admission
Percent of residents remaining in placement
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%

Committed

50%
40%
30%

Detained

20%
10%
0%

0

30

60

90

120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Days since admission

n Among detained offenders (those awaiting adjudication, disposition, or placement else­
where), 72% had been in the facility for at least a week, 52% for at least 15 days, and 33%
for at least 30 days.
n Among committed juveniles (those held as part of a court-ordered disposition), 80% had
been in the facility for at least 30 days, 66% for at least 60 days, and 55% for at least 90
days. After a full year, 10% of committed offenders remained in placement.
Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 2011
[machine-readable data files].

Offenders’ average time in the facility varied by adjudication status,
offense, and facility type
Median days in placement
Most serious offense
All offenses
Delinquency
Person
Property
Drugs
Public order
Technical violation
Status offense

Committed

Detained
(all facilities)

Public

Private

15
16
22
15
13
16
12
11

97
98
128
85
77
97
50
68

111
111
127
103
93
120
93
100

n Half of all offenders committed to public facilities remained in placement after 97 days (111 for

private facilities). In contrast, half of detained offenders remained in placement after only 15 days.
n With the exception of those adjudicated for person offenses, offenders committed to private facili­

ties had been in the facilities longer than those committed to public facilities.
Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 2011
[machine-readable data file].

14

National Report Series Bulletin

In 2011, males tended to stay in facilities longer than females
Percent of residents remaining in placement
100%
90%

Percent of residents remaining in placement
100%

Detained

80%

90%

70%

70%

60%

60%

50%

50%

40%

Male

40%

30%

Male

Female

30%

20%

20%

10%
0%

Committed

80%

Female
0

30

10%
60

90

120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Days since admission

0%

0

30

60

90

120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Days since admission

n After 30 days, 35% of detained males and 24% of detained females remained in residential placement.
n After 60 days, 19% of detained males and 11% of detained females remained in residential placement.
n After 180 days (approximately half a year), 30% of committed males and 25% of committed females remained in residential placement.
n After a full year (365 days), 11% of committed males and 7% of committed females remained in residential placement.

Minority youth were detained longer than white youth, but there was virtually no difference in the time in
residential placement between minority and white committed youth
Percent of residents remaining in placement
100%
90%

Percent of residents remaining in placement
100%

Detained

80%

90%

70%

70%

60%

60%

50%

50%

40%

40%

30%

Minority

20%

White

10%
0%

0

30

60

Committed

80%

30%

Minority

20%

White

10%
90

120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Days since admission

0%

0

30

60

90

120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Days since admission

n Among detained offenders, 28% of white youth had been in the facility at least 30 days, compared with 36% of minority youth.
n Among committed offenders, time in residential placement was virtually the same for white youth and minority youth.
n After 180 days, approximately one-third of both committed white and minority youth remained in residential placement.
Data source: Author’s analysis of OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 2011 [machine-readable data files].

August 2014

15

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

PRESORTED STANDARD
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
DOJ/OJJDP
PERMIT NO. G–91

Washington, DC 20531
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

National Report Series Bulletin

Data sources
National Center for Health Statistics (prepared under a collaborative arrangement with the U.S.
Census Bureau), Vintage 2012 Postcensal Estimates of the Resident Population of the United
States (April 1, 2010, July 1, 2010–July 1, 2012), by Year, County, Single-Year of Age (0, 1,
2, . . . , 85 Years and Over), Bridged Race, Hispanic Origin, and Sex [machine-readable data files
available online at www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/bridged_race.htm, released 6/13/13].
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2007, 2008,
2011, and 2012. Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement for 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003,
2006, 2007, 2010, and 2011 [machine-readable data files]. Washington, DC: U.S. Census
Bureau (producer).

Visit OJJDP’s Statistical Briefing Book for more juvenile placement
information
OJJDP’s online Statistical Briefing Book (SBB) offers access to a wealth of information
about juvenile crime and victimization and about youth involved in the juvenile justice
system. Visit the “Juveniles in Corrections” section of the SBB at ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/
corrections/faqs.asp for the latest information about juveniles in corrections. The Census
of Juveniles in Residential Placement Databook contains a large set of predefined tables
detailing the characteristics of juvenile offenders in residential placement facilities. Easy
Access to the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement is a data analysis tool that
gives users quick access to national data on the characteristics of youth held in residential
placement facilities. CJRP questionnaires are available online by clicking SBB’s National
Data Sets tab and choosing CJRP in the dropdown menu.

NCJ 246826
Acknowledgments
This bulletin was written by Sarah
Hockenberry, Research Associate, with
assistance from Melissa Sickmund,
Ph.D., Director, at the National Center
for Juvenile Justice, with funds provid­
ed by OJJDP to support the National
Juvenile Justice Data Analysis Project.

This bulletin was prepared under cooperative
agreement number 2010–MU–FX–K058 from the
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention (OJJDP), U.S. Department of Justice.
Points of view or opinions expressed in this
document are those of the author and do not
necessarily represent the official position or
policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department of
Justice.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention is a component of the Office of
Justice Programs, which also includes the
Bureau of Justice Assistance; the Bureau of
Justice Statistics; the National Institute of
Justice; the Office for Victims of Crime; and
the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing,
Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and
Tracking.