JRFC all attachments

JRFC - All Attachments (FINAL).pdf

Juvenile Residential Facilty Census (JRFC)

JRFC all attachments

OMB: 1121-0219

⚠️ Notice: This form may be outdated. More recent filings and information on OMB 1121-0219 can be found here:

Document [pdf]

Download: pdf | pdf

Page 1 of 144

Table of Contents— JRFC Attachments
Attachment A— Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (34 U.S.C. 11161)............................2
Attachment B— Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act (34 U.S.C. 10121-10122) ................... 10
Attachment C— Death in Custody Reporting Act (H.R. 1447) ................................................................. 15
Attachment D— JRFC web reporting form screenshots ........................................................................... 19
Attachment E— JRFC paper form ............................................................................................................. 34
Attachment F – JRFC mailout letter..........................................................................................................56
Attachment G— Confidentiality of information (34 U.S.C. 10231) ........................................................ 58
Attachment H— Privacy certification requirements (28 C.F.R. 22) ........................................................ 60
Attachment I— List of advisors ................................................................................................................. 66
Attachment J— 2016 JRFC Bulletin ......................................................................................................... 68
Attachment K— 2016 JRFC Data Snapshot ............................................................................................ 88
Attachment L— JRFC nonresponse mailout letter .................................................................................. 89
Attachment M— JRFC nonresponse call instructions ..............................................................................91
Attachment N— Documentation of the JRFC imputation methodology ..................................................95

Page 2 of 144

Title 34, United States Code, Section 11161
Part D—Research; Evaluation; Technical Assistance; Training
PRIOR PROVISIONS
A prior part D of title II of Pub. L. 93–415 related to gang-free schools and communities and
gang intervention, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title II, §12210(1), Nov. 2,
2002, 116 Stat. 1880.

§11161. Research and evaluation; statistical analyses; information
dissemination
(a) Research and evaluation
(1) The Administrator shall—
(A) annually publish a plan to identify the purposes and goals of all agreements carried out
with funds provided under this subsection; and
(B) conduct research or evaluation in juvenile justice matters, for the purpose of providing
research and evaluation relating to—
(i) the prevention, reduction, and control of juvenile delinquency and serious crime
committed by juveniles;
(ii) the link between juvenile delinquency and the incarceration of members of the
families of juveniles;
(iii) successful efforts to prevent status offenders and first-time minor offenders from
subsequent involvement with the juvenile justice and criminal justice systems;
(iv) successful efforts to prevent recidivism;
(v) the juvenile justice system;
(vi) juvenile violence;
(vii) the prevalence and duration of behavioral health needs (including mental health,
substance abuse, and co-occurring disorders) among juveniles pre-placement and postplacement in the juvenile justice system, including an examination of the effects of secure
detention in a correctional facility;
(viii) reducing the proportion of juveniles detained or confined in secure detention
facilities, secure correctional facilities, jails, and lockups who are members of minority
groups;
(ix) training efforts and reforms that have produced reductions in or elimination of the
use of dangerous practices;
(x) methods to improve the recruitment, selection, training, and retention of professional
personnel who are focused on the prevention, identification, and treatment of delinquency;
(xi) methods to improve the identification and response to victims of domestic child sex
trafficking within the juvenile justice system;
(xii) identifying positive outcome measures, such as attainment of employment and
educational degrees, that States and units of local government should use to evaluate the
success of programs aimed at reducing recidivism of youth who have come in contact with
the juvenile justice system or criminal justice system;
(xiii) evaluating the impact and outcomes of the prosecution and sentencing of juveniles
as adults;
(xiv) successful and cost-effective efforts by States and units of local government to
reduce recidivism through policies that provide for consideration of appropriate alternative

Page 3 of 144

sanctions to incarceration of youth facing nonviolent charges, while ensuring that public
safety is preserved;
(xvi) 1 evaluating services, treatment, and aftercare placement of juveniles who were
under the care of the State child protection system before their placement in the juvenile
justice system;
(xvii) determining—
(I) the frequency, seriousness, and incidence of drug use by youth in schools and
communities in the States using, if appropriate, data submitted by the States pursuant to
this subparagraph and subsection (b); and
(II) the frequency, degree of harm, and morbidity of violent incidents, particularly
firearm-related injuries and fatalities, by youth in schools and communities in the States,
including information with respect to—
(aa) the relationship between victims and perpetrators;
(bb) demographic characteristics of victims and perpetrators; and
(cc) the type of weapons used in incidents, as classified in the Uniform Crime
Reports of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and
(xviii) other purposes consistent with the purposes of this subchapter and subchapter I.
(2) The Administrator shall ensure that an equitable amount of funds available to carry out
paragraph (1)(B) is used for research and evaluation relating to the prevention of juvenile
delinquency.
(3) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to permit the development of a national
database of personally identifiable information on individuals involved in studies, or in datacollection efforts, carried out under paragraph (1)(B)(x).
(4) Not later than 1 year after December 21, 2018, the Administrator shall conduct a study
with respect to juveniles who, prior to placement in the juvenile justice system, were under the
care or custody of the State child welfare system, and to juveniles who are unable to return to
their family after completing their disposition in the juvenile justice system and who remain
wards of the State in accordance with applicable confidentiality requirements. Such study shall
include—
(A) the number of juveniles in each category;
(B) the extent to which State juvenile justice systems and child welfare systems are
coordinating services and treatment for such juveniles;
(C) the Federal and local sources of funds used for placements and post-placement
services;
(D) barriers faced by State and Indian Tribes in providing services to these juveniles;
(E) the types of post-placement services used;
(F) the frequency of case plans and case plan reviews;
(G) the extent to which case plans identify and address permanency and placement
barriers and treatment plans;
(H) a description of the best practices in discharge planning; and
(I) an assessment of living arrangements for juveniles who, upon release from confinement
in a State correctional facility, cannot return to the residence they occupied prior to such
confinement.
(b) Statistical analyses
The Administrator shall—
(1) plan and identify the purposes and goals of all agreements carried out with funds
provided under this subsection; and

Page 4 of 144

(2) undertake statistical work in juvenile justice matters, for the purpose of providing for the
collection, analysis, and dissemination of statistical data and information relating to juvenile
delinquency and serious crimes committed by juveniles, to the juvenile justice system, to
juvenile violence, and to other purposes consistent with the purposes of this subchapter and
subchapter I.
(c) Grant authority and competitive selection process
The Administrator may make grants and enter into contracts with public or private agencies,
organizations, or individuals and shall use a competitive process, established by rule by the
Administrator, to carry out subsections (a) and (b).
(d) Implementation of agreements
A Federal agency that makes an agreement under subsections (a)(1)(B) and (b)(2) with the
Administrator may carry out such agreement directly or by making grants to or contracts with
public and private agencies, institutions, and organizations.
(e) Information dissemination
The Administrator may—
(1) review reports and data relating to the juvenile justice system in the United States and
in foreign nations (as appropriate), collect data and information from studies and research
into all aspects of juvenile delinquency (including the causes, prevention, and treatment of
juvenile delinquency) and serious crimes committed by juveniles;
(2) establish and operate, directly or by contract, a clearinghouse and information center
for the preparation, publication, and dissemination of information relating to juvenile
delinquency, including State and local prevention and treatment programs, plans, resources,
and training and technical assistance programs; and
(3) make grants and contracts with public and private agencies, institutions, and
organizations, for the purpose of disseminating information to representatives and personnel
of public and private agencies, including practitioners in juvenile justice, law enforcement, the
courts, corrections, schools, and related services, in the establishment, implementation, and
operation of projects and activities for which financial assistance is provided under this
subchapter.
(f) National recidivism measure
The Administrator, in accordance with applicable confidentiality requirements and in
consultation with experts in the field of juvenile justice research, recidivism, and data collection,
shall—
(1) establish a uniform method of data collection and technology that States may use to
evaluate data on juvenile recidivism on an annual basis;
(2) establish a common national juvenile recidivism measurement system; and
(3) make cumulative juvenile recidivism data that is collected from States available to the
public.
(Pub. L. 93–415, title II, §251, as added Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title II, §12211, Nov. 2,
2002, 116 Stat. 1888; amended Pub. L. 115–385, title II, §207, Dec. 21, 2018, 132 Stat. 5140.)
CODIFICATION
Section was formerly classified to section 5661 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare,
prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

Page 5 of 144

AMENDMENTS
2018—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 115–385, §207(1)(A)(i), substituted "shall" for "may" in
introductory provisions.
Subsec. (a)(1)(A). Pub. L. 115–385, §207(1)(A)(ii), substituted "annually publish a plan to
identify" for "plan and identify".
Subsec. (a)(1)(B)(iii). Pub. L. 115–385, §207(1)(A)(iii)(I), added cl. (iii) and struck out former
cl. (iii) which read as follows: "successful efforts to prevent first-time minor offenders from
committing subsequent involvement in serious crime;".
Subsec. (a)(1)(B)(vii). Pub. L. 115–385, §207(1)(A)(iii)(II), added cl. (vii) and struck out former
cl. (vii) which read as follows: "appropriate mental health services for juveniles and youth at risk
of participating in delinquent activities;".
Subsec. (a)(1)(B)(ix) to (xviii). Pub. L. 115–385, §207(1)(A)(iii)(III), (IV), added cls. (ix) to (xiv)
and redesignated former cls. (ix) to (xi) as (xvi) to (xviii), respectively.
Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 115–385, §207(1)(B)(i), in introductory provisions, substituted
"December 21, 2018" for "November 2, 2002" and inserted "in accordance with applicable
confidentiality requirements" after "wards of the State".
Subsec. (a)(4)(D). Pub. L. 115–385, §207(1)(B)(ii), inserted "and Indian Tribes" after "State".
Subsec. (a)(4)(H), (I). Pub. L. 115–385, §207(1)(B)(iii)–(v), added subpars. (H) and (I).
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 115–385, §207(2), substituted "shall" for "may" in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 115–385, §207(3), added subsec. (f).
EFFECTIVE DATE OF 2018 AMENDMENT
Amendment by Pub. L. 115–385 not applicable with respect to funds appropriated for any
fiscal year that begins before Dec. 21, 2018, see section 3 of Pub. L. 115–385, set out as a note
under section 11102 of this title.
EFFECTIVE DATE
Part effective on the first day of the first fiscal year that begins after Nov. 2, 2002, and
applicable only with respect to fiscal years beginning on or after the first day of the first fiscal
year that begins after Nov. 2, 2002, see section 12223 of Pub. L. 107–273, set out as an
Effective Date of 2002 Amendment note under section 11101 of this title.
1

So in original. There is no cl. (xv).

Page 6 of 144

Title 34, United States Code, Section 11117
§11117. Annual report

Not later than 180 days after the end of each fiscal year, the Administrator shall submit to the
President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the President pro tempore of the
Senate a report that contains the following with respect to such fiscal year:
(1) A detailed summary and analysis of the most recent data available regarding the
number of juveniles taken into custody, the rate at which juveniles are taken into custody, and
the trends demonstrated by the data required by subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C). Such
summary and analysis shall set out the information required by subparagraphs (A), (B), (C),
and (D) separately for juvenile nonoffenders, juvenile status offenders, and other juvenile
offenders. Such summary and analysis shall separately address with respect to each
category of juveniles specified in the preceding sentence—
(A) the types of offenses with which the juveniles are charged;
(B) the race, gender, and ethnicity, as such term is defined by the Bureau of the Census,
of the juveniles;
(C) the ages of the juveniles;
(D) the types of facilities used to hold the juveniles (including juveniles treated as adults
for purposes of prosecution) in custody, including secure detention facilities, secure
correctional facilities, jails, and lockups;
(E) the number of juveniles who died while in custody and the circumstances under
which they died;
(F) the educational status of juveniles, including information relating to learning and
other disabilities, failing performance, grade retention, and dropping out of school;
(G) a summary of data from 1 month of the applicable fiscal year of the use of restraints
and isolation upon juveniles held in the custody of secure detention and correctional
facilities operated by a State or unit of local government;
(H) the number of status offense cases petitioned to court, number of status offenders
held in secure detention, the findings used to justify the use of secure detention, and the
average period of time a status offender was held in secure detention;
(I) the number of juveniles released from custody and the type of living arrangement to
which they are released;
(J) the number of juveniles whose offense originated on school grounds, during schoolsponsored off-campus activities, or due to a referral by a school official, as collected and
reported by the Department of Education or similar State educational agency; and
(K) the number of juveniles in the custody of secure detention and correctional facilities
operated by a State or unit of local or tribal government who report being pregnant.
(2) A description of the activities for which funds are expended under this part, including
the objectives, priorities, accomplishments, and recommendations of the Council.
(3) A description, based on the most recent data available, of the extent to which each
State complies with section 11133 of this title and with the plan submitted under such section
by the State for such fiscal year.
(4) An evaluation of the programs funded under this subchapter and their effectiveness in
reducing the incidence of juvenile delinquency, particularly violent crime, committed by
juveniles.

Page 7 of 144

(5) A description of the criteria used to determine what programs qualify as evidence-based
and promising programs under this subchapter and subchapter V and a comprehensive list of
those programs the Administrator has determined meet such criteria in both rural and urban
areas.
(6) A description of funding provided to Indian Tribes under this chapter or for a juvenile
delinquency or prevention program under the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 (Public Law
111–211; 124 Stat. 2261), including direct Federal grants and funding provided to Indian
Tribes through a State or unit of local government.
(7) An analysis and evaluation of the internal controls at the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention to determine if grantees are following the requirements of the Office
of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention grant programs and what remedial action the
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention has taken to recover any grant funds
that are expended in violation of the grant programs, including instances—
(A) in which supporting documentation was not provided for cost reports;
(B) where unauthorized expenditures occurred; or
(C) where subrecipients of grant funds were not compliant with program requirements.
(8) An analysis and evaluation of the total amount of payments made to grantees that the
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention recouped from grantees that were
found to be in violation of policies and procedures of the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention grant programs, including—
(A) the full name and location of the grantee;
(B) the violation of the program found;
(C) the amount of funds sought to be recouped by the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention; and
(D) the actual amount recouped by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
(Pub. L. 93–415, title II, §207, as added Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, §7255, Nov. 18, 1988, 102
Stat. 4437; amended Pub. L. 102–586, §2(e), Nov. 4, 1992, 106 Stat. 4986; Pub. L. 107–
273, div. C, title II, §12207, Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1872; Pub. L. 115–385, title II, §203, Dec.
21, 2018, 132 Stat. 5128.)
REFERENCES IN TEXT
This chapter, referred to in par. (6), was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 93–
415, Sept. 7, 1974, 88 Stat. 1109, known as the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Act of 1974, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act
to the Code, see Short Title of 1974 Act note set out under section 10101 of this title and
Tables.
The Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010, referred to in par. (6), is title II of Pub. L. 111–
211, July 29, 2010, 124 Stat. 2261. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short
Title of 2010 Amendment note set out under section 2801 of Title 25, Indians, and Tables.
CODIFICATION
Section was formerly classified to section 5617 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare,
prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.
PRIOR PROVISIONS
A prior section 207 of title II of Pub. L. 93–415, as added Pub. L. 96–509, §9, Dec. 8,
1980, 94 Stat. 2753, related to establishment and functions of National Advisory Committee for

Page 8 of 144

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, prior to repeal eff. Oct. 12, 1984, by Pub. L. 98–
473, title II, §624, Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2111.
Another prior section 207 of title II of Pub. L. 93–415, Sept. 7, 1974, 88 Stat. 1117; Pub. L.
95–115, §3(e), Oct. 3, 1977, 91 Stat. 1050, related to National Advisory Committee for Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention, its membership, terms of office, etc., prior to repeal
by Pub. L. 96–509, §9, Dec. 8, 1980, 94 Stat. 2753.
AMENDMENTS
2018—Pub. L. 115–385, §203(1), substituted "each fiscal year" for "a fiscal year" in
introductory provisions.
Par. (1)(B). Pub. L. 115–385, §203(2)(A), substituted ", gender, and ethnicity, as such term is
defined by the Bureau of the Census," for "and gender".
Par. (1)(F). Pub. L. 115–385, §203(2)(C), inserted "and other" before "disabilities," and
substituted semicolon for period at end.
Par. (1)(G) to (K). Pub. L. 115–385, §203(2)(B), (D), added subpars. (G) to (K).
Pars. (5) to (8). Pub. L. 115–385, §203(3), added pars. (5) to (8).
2002—Pars. (4), (5). Pub. L. 107–273 added par. (4) and struck out former pars. (4) and (5)
which read as follows:
"(4) A summary of each program or activity for which assistance is provided under part C or D
of this subchapter, an evaluation of the results of such program or activity, and a determination
of the feasibility and advisability of replicating such program or activity in other locations.
"(5) A description of selected exemplary delinquency prevention programs for which
assistance is provided under this subchapter, with particular attention to community-based
juvenile delinquency prevention programs that involve and assist families of juveniles."
1992—Par. (1)(D). Pub. L. 102–586, §2(e)(1)(A), inserted "(including juveniles treated as
adults for purposes of prosecution)".
Par. (1)(F). Pub. L. 102–586, §2(e)(1)(B), (2), (3), added subpar. (F).
EFFECTIVE DATE OF 2018 AMENDMENT
Amendment by Pub. L. 115–385 not applicable with respect to funds appropriated for any
fiscal year that begins before Dec. 21, 2018, see section 3 of Pub. L. 115–385, set out as a note
under section 11102 of this title.
EFFECTIVE DATE OF 2002 AMENDMENT
Amendment by Pub. L. 107–273 effective on the first day of the first fiscal year that begins
after Nov. 2, 2002, and applicable only with respect to fiscal years beginning on or after the first
day of the first fiscal year that begins after Nov. 2, 2002, see section 12223 of Pub. L. 107–
273, set out as a note under section 11101 of this title.
EFFECTIVE DATE
Section effective Oct. 1, 1988, with the report required by this section with respect to fiscal
year 1988 to be submitted not later than Aug. 1, 1989, notwithstanding the 180-day period
provided in this section, see section 7296(a), (b)(3) of Pub. L. 100–690, as amended, set out as
an Effective Date of 1988 Amendment note under section 11101 of this title.

Page 9 of 144

TERMINATION OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
For termination, effective May 15, 2000, of provisions in this section relating to submittal to
the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate of an
annual report, see section 3003 of Pub. L. 104–66, as amended, set out as a note under section
1113 of Title 31, Money and Finance, and item 10 on page 177 of House Document No. 103–7.

Page 10 of 144

Title 34, United States Code, Section 10121
SUBCHAPTER II—NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE
§10121. Statement of purpose

It is the purpose of this subchapter to establish a National Institute of Justice, which shall
provide for and encourage research and demonstration efforts for the purpose of—
(1) improving Federal, State, and local criminal justice systems and related aspects of the
civil justice system;
(2) preventing and reducing crimes;
(3) insuring citizen access to appropriate dispute-resolution forums; and
(4) identifying programs of proven effectiveness, programs having a record of proven
success, or programs which offer a high probability of improving the functioning of the
criminal justice system.
The Institute shall have authority to engage in and encourage research and development to
improve and strengthen the criminal justice system and related aspects of the civil justice
system and to disseminate the results of such efforts to Federal, State, and local governments,
to evaluate the effectiveness of programs funded under this chapter, to develop and
demonstrate new or improved approaches and techniques, to improve and strengthen the
administration of justice, and to identify programs or projects carried out under this chapter
which have demonstrated success in improving the quality of justice systems and which offer
the likelihood of success if continued or repeated. In carrying out the provisions of this
subchapter, the Institute shall give primary emphasis to the problems of State and local justice
systems and shall insure that there is a balance between basic and applied research.
(Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §201, as added Pub. L. 96–157, §2, Dec. 27, 1979, 93 Stat. 1172;
amended Pub. L. 98–473, title II, §604(a), Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2078.)
REFERENCES IN TEXT
This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this title", meaning title I of Pub. L. 90–
351, as added by Pub. L. 96–157, §2, Dec. 27, 1979, 93 Stat. 1167, which is classified
principally to this chapter. For complete classification of title I to the Code, see Tables.

CODIFICATION
Section was formerly classified to section 3721 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare,
prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.
PRIOR PROVISIONS
A prior section 201 of Pub. L. 90–351, title I, June 19, 1968, 82 Stat. 198; Pub. L. 93–83, §2,
Aug. 6, 1973, 87 Stat. 197; Pub. L. 94–503, title I, §104, Oct. 15, 1976, 90 Stat. 2408, set out
Congressional statement of purpose in providing for a program of planning grants, prior to the
general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 96–157.
AMENDMENTS
1984—Pub. L. 98–473 redesignated par. (5) as (4), struck out former par. (4) relating to
improvement of efforts to detect, investigate, prosecute, and otherwise combat and prevent
white-collar crime and public corruption, and in closing provisions struck out "to develop

Page 11 of 144

alternatives to judicial resolution of disputes," after "local governments,", and inserted "and
demonstrate" after "to develop".
EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1984 AMENDMENT
Amendment by Pub. L. 98–473 effective Oct. 12, 1984, see section 609AA(a) of Pub. L. 98–
473, set out as an Effective Date note under section 10101 of this title.
NATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM FOR STATE AND LOCAL PROSECUTORS
Pub. L. 110–424, Oct. 15, 2008, 122 Stat. 4819, provided that:
"SECTION 1. TRAINING FOR STATE AND LOCAL PROSECUTORS.

"The Attorney General is authorized to award a grant to a national nonprofit organization
(such as the National District Attorneys Association) to conduct a national training program for
State and local prosecutors for the purpose of improving the professional skills of State and
local prosecutors and enhancing the ability of Federal, State, and local prosecutors to work
together.
"SEC. 2. COMPREHENSIVE CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION.

"The Attorney General may provide assistance to the grantee under section 1 to carry out the
training program described in such section, including comprehensive continuing legal education
in the areas of trial practice, substantive legal updates, support staff training, and any other
assistance the Attorney General determines to be appropriate.
"SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

"There are authorized to be appropriated to the Attorney General to carry out this Act
$4,750,000 for each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2012, to remain available until expended."

§10122. National Institute of Justice
(a) Establishment; general authority of Attorney General over Institute
There is established within the Department of Justice, under the general authority of the
Attorney General, a National Institute of Justice (hereinafter referred to in this subchapter as the
"Institute").
(b) Director of Institute; appointment by President; authority; restrictions
The Institute shall be headed by a Director appointed by the President. The Director shall
have had experience in justice research. The Director shall report to the Attorney General
through the Assistant Attorney General. The Director shall have final authority over all grants,
cooperative agreements, and contracts awarded by the Institute. The Director shall not engage
in any other employment than that of serving as Director; nor shall the Director hold any office
in, or act in any capacity for, any organization, agency, or institution with which the Institute
makes any contract or other arrangement under this chapter.
(c) Duties and functions
The Institute is authorized to—
(1) make grants to, or enter into cooperative agreements or contracts with, public agencies,
institutions of higher education, private organizations, or individuals to conduct research,
demonstrations, or special projects pertaining to the purposes described in this subchapter,
and provide technical assistance and training in support of tests, demonstrations, and special
projects;
(2) conduct or authorize multiyear and short-term research and development concerning
the criminal and civil justice systems in an effort—
(A) to identify alternative programs for achieving system goals;

Page 12 of 144

(B) to provide more accurate information on the causes and correlates of crime;
(C) to analyze the correlates of crime and juvenile delinquency and provide more
accurate information on the causes and correlates of crime and juvenile delinquency;
(D) to improve the functioning of the criminal justice system;
(E) to develop new methods for the prevention and reduction of crime, including the
development of programs to facilitate cooperation among the States and units of local
government, the detection and apprehension of criminals, the expeditious, efficient, and fair
disposition of criminal and juvenile delinquency cases, the improvement of police and
minority relations, the conduct of research into the problems of victims and witnesses of
crime, the feasibility and consequences of allowing victims to participate in criminal justice
decisionmaking, the feasibility and desirability of adopting procedures and programs which
increase the victim's participation in the criminal justice process, the reduction in the need
to seek court resolution of civil disputes, and the development of adequate corrections
facilities and effective programs of correction; and
(F) to develop programs and projects to improve and expand the capacity of States and
units of local government and combinations of such units, to detect, investigate, prosecute,
and otherwise combat and prevent white-collar crime and public corruption, to improve and
expand cooperation among the Federal Government, States, and units of local government
in order to enhance the overall criminal justice system response to white-collar crime and
public corruption, and to foster the creation and implementation of a comprehensive
national strategy to prevent and combat white-collar crime and public corruption.
In carrying out the provisions of this subsection, the Institute may request the assistance of both
public and private research agencies;
(3) evaluate the effectiveness, including cost effectiveness where practical, of projects or
programs carried out under this chapter;
(4) make recommendations for action which can be taken by Federal, State, and local
governments and by private persons and organizations to improve and strengthen criminal
and civil justice systems;
(5) provide research fellowships and clinical internships and carry out programs of training
and special workshops for the presentation and dissemination of information resulting from
research, demonstrations, and special projects including those authorized by this subchapter;
(6) collect and disseminate information obtained by the Institute or other Federal agencies,
public agencies, institutions of higher education, and private organizations relating to the
purposes of this subchapter;
(7) serve as a national and international clearinghouse for the exchange of information with
respect to the purposes of this subchapter;
(8) after consultation with appropriate agencies and officials of States and units of local
government, make recommendations for the designation of programs or projects which will
be effective in improving the functioning of the criminal justice system, for funding as
discretionary grants under subchapter V;
(9) encourage, assist, and serve in a consulting capacity to Federal, State, and local justice
system agencies in the development, maintenance, and coordination of criminal and civil
justice programs and services; and
(10) research and development of tools and technologies relating to prevention, detection,
investigation, and prosecution of crime; and
(11) support research, development, testing, training, and evaluation of tools and
technology for Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies.
(d) Criminal and civil justice research

Page 13 of 144

To insure that all criminal and civil justice research is carried out in a coordinated manner, the
Director is authorized to—
(1) utilize, with their consent, the services, equipment, personnel, information, and facilities
of other Federal, State, local, and private agencies and instrumentalities with or without
reimbursement therefor;
(2) confer with and avail itself of the cooperation, services, records, and facilities of State or
of municipal or other local agencies;
(3) request such information, data, and reports from any Federal agency as may be
required to carry out the purposes of this section, and the agencies shall provide such
information to the Institute as required to carry out the purposes of this subchapter;
(4) seek the cooperation of the judicial branches of Federal and State Government in
coordinating civil and criminal justice research and development; and
(5) exercise the powers and functions set out in subchapter VII.
(Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §202, as added Pub. L. 96–157, §2, Dec. 27, 1979, 93 Stat. 1172;
amended Pub. L. 98–473, title II, §604(b), Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2078; Pub. L. 103–322, title
XXXIII, §330001(h)(1), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2139; Pub. L. 107–296, title II, §237, Nov. 25,
2002, 116 Stat. 2162; Pub. L. 112–166, §2(h)(3), Aug. 10, 2012, 126 Stat. 1285.)
CODIFICATION
Section was formerly classified to section 3722 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare,
prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section. Some section numbers or
references in amendment notes below reflect the classification of such sections or references
prior to editorial reclassification.
PRIOR PROVISIONS
A prior section 202 of Pub. L. 90–351, title I, June 19, 1968, 82 Stat. 198; Pub. L. 93–83, §2,
Aug. 6, 1973, 87 Stat. 198, provided for making of grants to State planning agencies, prior to the
general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 96–157.
AMENDMENTS
2012—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 112–166 struck out ", by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate" before period at end of first sentence.
2002—Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 107–296, §237(1), inserted ", including cost effectiveness
where practical," after "evaluate the effectiveness".
Subsec. (c)(10), (11). Pub. L. 107–296, §237(2), added pars. (10) and (11).
1994—Subsec. (c)(2)(E). Pub. L. 103–322 substituted "crime," for "crime,,".
1984—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–473, §604(b)(1), required Director to report to Attorney
General through Assistant Attorney General.
Subsec. (c)(2)(A). Pub. L. 98–473, §604(b)(2)(A)(i), struck out ", including programs
authorized by section 3713 of this title" after "system goals".
Subsec. (c)(2)(E). Pub. L. 98–473, §604(b)(2)(A)(ii), struck out "the prevention and reduction
of parental kidnaping" after "reduction of crime,".
Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 98–473, §604(b)(2)(B), substituted "chapter" for "subchapter".
Subsec. (c)(4) to (7). Pub. L. 98–473, §604(b)(2)(C), (F), redesignated pars. (5) to (8) as (4)
to (7), respectively, and struck out former par. (4) relating to evaluation of programs and projects
under other subchapters of this chapter to determine their impact upon criminal and civil justice

Page 14 of 144

systems and achievement of purposes and policies of this chapter and for dissemination of
information.
Subsec. (c)(8). Pub. L. 98–473, §604(b)(2)(D)(i), (ii), (F), redesignated par. (10) as (8) and, in
par. (8) as so designated, struck out "nationality priority grants under subchapter V of this
chapter and" after "for funding as" and substituted "subchapter V" for "subchapter VI". Former
par. (8) redesignated (7).
Subsec. (c)(9). Pub. L. 98–473, §604(b)(2)(E), (F), redesignated par. (11) as (9), and struck
out former par. (9) relating to a biennial report to President and Congress on state of justice
research.
Subsec. (c)(10), (11). Pub. L. 98–473, §604(b)(2)(F), redesignated pars. (10) and (11) as (8)
and (9), respectively.
EFFECTIVE DATE OF 2012 AMENDMENT
Amendment by Pub. L. 112–166 effective 60 days after Aug. 10, 2012, and applicable to
appointments made on and after that effective date, including any nomination pending in the
Senate on that date, see section 6(a) of Pub. L. 112–166, set out as a note under section 113 of
Title 6, Domestic Security.
EFFECTIVE DATE OF 2002 AMENDMENT
Amendment by Pub. L. 107–296 effective 60 days after Nov. 25, 2002, see section 4 of Pub.
L. 107–296, set out as an Effective Date note under section 101 of Title 6, Domestic Security.
EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1984 AMENDMENT
Amendment by Pub. L. 98–473 effective Oct. 12, 1984, see section 609AA(a) of Pub. L. 98–
473, set out as an Effective Date note under section 10101 of this title.

Page 15 of 144

PUBLIC LAW 113–242—DEC. 18, 2014

DEATH IN CUSTODY REPORTING ACT OF 2013

Page 16 of 144

128 STAT. 2860

PUBLIC LAW 113–242—DEC. 18, 2014

Public Law 113–242
113th Congress
Dec. 18, 2014
[H.R. 1447]
Death in Custody
Reporting Act
of 2013.
42 USC 13701
note.
42 USC 13727.

Waiver authority.

An Act

To encourage States to report to the Attorney General certain information regarding
the deaths of individuals in the custody of law enforcement agencies, and for
other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Death in Custody Reporting
Act of 2013’’.
SEC. 2. STATE INFORMATION REGARDING INDIVIDUALS WHO DIE IN
THE CUSTODY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.

(a) IN GENERAL.—For each fiscal year after the expiration of
the period specified in subsection (c)(1) in which a State receives
funds for a program referred to in subsection (c)(2), the State
shall report to the Attorney General, on a quarterly basis and
pursuant to guidelines established by the Attorney General,
information regarding the death of any person who is detained,
under arrest, or is in the process of being arrested, is en route
to be incarcerated, or is incarcerated at a municipal or county
jail, State prison, State-run boot camp prison, boot camp prison
that is contracted out by the State, any State or local contract
facility, or other local or State correctional facility (including any
juvenile facility).
(b) INFORMATION REQUIRED.—The report required by this section shall contain information that, at a minimum, includes—
(1) the name, gender, race, ethnicity, and age of the
deceased;
(2) the date, time, and location of death;
(3) the law enforcement agency that detained, arrested,
or was in the process of arresting the deceased; and
(4) a brief description of the circumstances surrounding
the death.
(c) COMPLIANCE AND INELIGIBILITY.—
(1) COMPLIANCE DATE.—Each State shall have not more
than 120 days from the date of enactment of this Act to comply
with subsection (a), except that—
(A) the Attorney General may grant an additional 120
days to a State that is making good faith efforts to comply
with such subsection; and
(B) the Attorney General shall waive the requirements
of subsection (a) if compliance with such subsection by
a State would be unconstitutional under the constitution
of such State.

Page 17 of 144

PUBLIC LAW 113–242—DEC. 18, 2014

128 STAT. 2861

(2) INELIGIBILITY FOR FUNDS.—For any fiscal year after
the expiration of the period specified in paragraph (1), a State
that fails to comply with subsection (a), shall, at the discretion
of the Attorney General, be subject to not more than a 10percent reduction of the funds that would otherwise be allocated
for that fiscal year to the State under subpart 1 of part E
of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act
of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3750 et seq.), whether characterized as
the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement
Assistance Programs, the Local Government Law Enforcement
Block Grants Program, the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice
Assistance Grant Program, or otherwise.
(d) REALLOCATION.—Amounts not allocated under a program
referred to in subsection (c)(2) to a State for failure to fully comply
with subsection (a) shall be reallocated under that program to
States that have not failed to comply with such subsection.
(e) DEFINITIONS.—In this section the terms ‘‘boot camp prison’’
and ‘‘State’’ have the meaning given those terms, respectively, in
section 901(a) of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets
Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3791(a)).
(f) STUDY AND REPORT OF INFORMATION RELATING TO DEATHS
IN CUSTODY.—
(1) STUDY REQUIRED.—The Attorney General shall carry
out a study of the information reported under subsection (b)
and section 3(a) to—
(A) determine means by which such information can
be used to reduce the number of such deaths; and
(B) examine the relationship, if any, between the
number of such deaths and the actions of management
of such jails, prisons, and other specified facilities relating
to such deaths.
(2) REPORT.—Not later than 2 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall prepare and
submit to Congress a report that contains the findings of the
study required by paragraph (1).
SEC. 3. FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT DEATH IN CUSTODY REPORTING
REQUIREMENT.

(a) IN GENERAL.—For each fiscal year (beginning after the
date that is 120 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act), the head of each Federal law enforcement agency shall submit
to the Attorney General a report (in such form and manner specified
by the Attorney General) that contains information regarding the
death of any person who is—
(1) detained, under arrest, or is in the process of being
arrested by any officer of such Federal law enforcement agency
(or by any State or local law enforcement officer while participating in and for purposes of a Federal law enforcement operation, task force, or any other Federal law enforcement capacity
carried out by such Federal law enforcement agency); or
(2) en route to be incarcerated or detained, or is incarcerated or detained at—
(A) any facility (including any immigration or juvenile
facility) pursuant to a contract with such Federal law
enforcement agency;
(B) any State or local government facility used by
such Federal law enforcement agency; or

42 USC 13727a.
Effective date.

Page 18 of 144

128 STAT. 2862

PUBLIC LAW 113–242—DEC. 18, 2014

(C) any Federal correctional facility or Federal pretrial detention facility located within the United States.
(b) INFORMATION REQUIRED.—Each report required by this section shall include, at a minimum, the information required by
section 2(b).
(c) STUDY AND REPORT.—Information reported under subsection
(a) shall be analyzed and included in the study and report required
by section 2(f).
Approved December 18, 2014.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 1447:
HOUSE REPORTS: No. 113–285 (Comm. on the Judiciary).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:
Vol. 159 (2013): Dec. 12, considered and passed House.
Vol. 160 (2014): Dec. 10, considered and passed Senate.

Page 19 of 144

JRFC Web Form Screenshots

Contents
Login .............................................................................................................................................................. 2
Dashboard ..................................................................................................................................................... 3
Burden Statement ......................................................................................................................................... 4
FAQs .............................................................................................................................................................. 5
History ........................................................................................................................................................... 7
Section 0........................................................................................................................................................ 8
Section 1 – General Facility Information....................................................................................................... 9
Section 2 – Mental Health Services ............................................................................................................ 10
Section 3 – Educational Services ................................................................................................................. 11
Section 4 – Substance Abuse Services ........................................................................................................ 12
Section 5 – The Last Month ........................................................................................................................ 13
Section 6 – The Last Year ............................................................................................................................ 14
Section 7 – General information ................................................................................................................. 15

Page 20 of 144

Page 21 of 144

Dashboard

Page 22 of 144

Burden Statement

Page 23 of 144

FAQs

Page 24 of 144

Page 25 of 144

History

Page 26 of 144

Section 0

Page 27 of 144

Section 1 – General Facility Information

Page 28 of 144

Section 2 – Mental Health Services

Page 29 of 144

Section 3 – Educational Services

Page 30 of 144

Section 4 – Substance Abuse Services

Page 31 of 144

Section 5 – The Last Month

Page 32 of 144

Section 6 – The Last Year

Page 33 of 144

Section 7 – General information

Page 34 of 144

Conducted by
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Economics and Statistics Administration
U.S. CENSUS BUREAU
FOR
OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE AND
DELINQUENCY PREVENTION

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Juvenile Residential Facility Census
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR

This questionnaire asks about services, staff, and persons assigned
beds in this facility on Wednesday, OCTOBER 24, 2018.

PLEASE COMPLETE AND MAIL THIS FORM IN THE ENCLOSED
ENVELOPE BY NOVEMBER 30, 2018
Return the completed form to:

U.S. Census Bureau
P.O. Box 5000
Jeffersonville, IN 47199-5000
ERD/JRFC
WEBSITE: https://respond.census.gov/jrfc
Fax: 1–888–262–3974
EMAIL: [email protected]

If you have any questions, call Sabrina Webb
U.S. Census Bureau, 1–800–352–7229.

PERSON COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE

Name

E-mail address

Title
Telephone

Business address – Number and street/or P.O. Box/Route number
Area code

Number

Area code

Number

Extension

Fax Number
City
FORM

CJ-15

State
(5-3-2018)

ZIP Code

OMB No. 1121-0219: Approval Expires 10/31/2019

Page 35 of 144

Section 1 – GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION

IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS

Please call 1–800–352–7229 to request an
additional questionnaire for each building
with living/sleeping units associated with this
facility that is not at the site of this facility
building or campus.

Complete this questionnaire for the facility
listed on the cover. If additional
questionnaires are needed for other facilities
for which you report, call 1–800–352–7229 to
request more forms.
A juvenile residential facility is a place
where young persons who have committed
offenses may be housed overnight. A facility
has living/sleeping units, such as wings,
floors, dorms, barracks, or cottages on one
campus or in one building.
Any buildings with living/sleeping units that
are not on the same campus should be
considered separate facilities and should be
recorded on separate questionnaires in this
census.

Is the PREPRINTED facility name and mailing
address on the BACK cover page of this form
correct, or do they need to be corrected?
01

Preprinted facility name and mailing
address on the BACK cover page of this
form are correct
Preprinted facility name or mailing address
need to be corrected – Please make necessary
corrections on the BACK cover page of this
form.

On Wednesday, October 24, 2018, did this
facility house any overflow detention
population? "Overflow detention population" refers
to those young persons who, because of the
unavailability of beds in a detention center, are
placed temporarily in a non-detention facility.
If this is a detention center, mark "No".
01

Yes

IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
The following items ask you to use your records
to provide counts of persons who had assigned
beds in this facility at the end of the day on
Wednesday, October 24, 2018. This date has
been chosen carefully to give a standardized
count of persons in facilities like yours across
the country. You will be asked to classify your
facility population into two age groups:
1. those persons under age 21; and

Which of the following best describes the
physical layout of this facility?
Mark (X) ONE response.
This facility is –
01

a part of one building

all of one building

more than one building at a single site or
on one campus
Other – Specify

2. those persons age 21 and older.
You will then be asked to classify each person
UNDER THE AGE OF 21 into just one of the two
following categories:
1. those here because they have been charged
with or court-adjudicated for an offense. An
offense is any behavior that is illegal in your
state for underage persons alone or for both
underage persons and adults.
2. those here for reasons other than offenses
Detailed descriptions of the above categories are
provided in the questions themselves.
Please use your records for October 25, 2000,
to answer the following questions.

Page 2

Are there any other buildings with
living/sleeping units that are associated with
this facility that are not next to this facility
building or on the same campus?
01

Yes

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 36 of 144

Section 1 – GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION – Continued
5a. According to your records, at the end of the
day on October 24, 2018, did ANY persons
have assigned beds in this facility? Include
persons who were temporarily away, but had
assigned beds on October 24. Do NOT include staff.
01

Yes

No ➔

STOP HERE and mail this form
ONLY if there were NO PERSONS IN
YOUR FACILITY OR THE FACILITY
WAS CLOSED (permanently or
temporarily) on this date

b. According to your records, at the end of the day
on October 24, 2018, how many persons had
assigned beds in this facility?

Persons

6. How many of the persons who had assigned
beds at the end of the day on Wednesday,
October 24, 2018 were AGE 21 or older?
Include persons who were temporarily away, but
had assigned beds on October 24.
Do NOT include staff. Please write "0" if there are
NO persons age 21 or older.

Persons 21 or older

7a. At the end of the day on Wednesday,
October 24, 2018, did ANY persons UNDER
AGE 21 have assigned beds in this facility?
INCLUDE juveniles being tried as adults in criminal
court. Do NOT include staff.
01

Yes

No ➔ STOP HERE and mail this form ONLY
IF there were no persons under 21 in
your facility on this date

b. According to your records, at the end of the
day on Wednesday, October 24, 2018, how
many young persons under age 21 had
assigned beds in this facility? Include young
persons who were temporarily away but had
assigned beds on October 24. Do NOT include staff.

8a. At the end of the day on Wednesday,
October 24, 2018, did ANY of the young
persons UNDER AGE 21 have assigned
beds in this facility SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE
they were CHARGED WITH OR
COURT-ADJUDICATED FOR AN OFFENSE?
An offense is any behavior that is illegal in your
state for underage persons alone or for both
underage persons and adults.
INCLUDE in your count persons UNDER AGE 21
here BECAUSE THEY WERE CHARGED WITH OR
ADJUDICATED FOR:

• ANY offense that is illegal for both adults and
underage persons.

• AN offense that is ILLEGAL IN YOUR STATE for
underage persons but not for adults. Examples are
running away, truancy, incorrigibility, curfew
violation, and underage liquor violations. Count
persons with these behaviors here ONLY IF THE
BEHAVIORS ARE ILLEGAL IN YOUR STATE. This
includes those CHINS (Children in Need of
Services) and PINS (Persons in Need of Services)
who are here BECAUSE of an offense.
• ANY offense being adjudicated in juvenile or
criminal court, including a probation or parole
violation.
DO NOT INCLUDE here:
• Young persons under age 21 who have committed
one or more offenses in the past, BUT HAVE
ASSIGNED BEDS ON OCTOBER 24 FOR REASONS
OTHER THAN OFFENSES.
• Young persons under 21 assigned beds here
BECAUSE OF REASONS OTHER THAN
OFFENSES, such as neglect, abuse, dependency,
abandonment, mental health problems, substance
abuse problems. These persons will be counted in
questions 9a and 9b.
• Young persons under 21 who have run away,
been truant or incorrigible, or violated curfew, IF
THESE BEHAVIORS ARE NOT CONSIDERED
ILLEGAL IN YOUR STATE. These young persons
will be counted in questions 9a and 9b.
• Those persons who are PINS (Persons in Need of
Services) or CHINS (Children in Need of Services)
who have assigned beds because of REASONS
OTHER THAN OFFENSES. These young persons
will be counted in questions 9a and 9b.
01

Yes

No ➔

Go to Question 9a on page 4

b. According to your records for the end of the
Young persons under the age of 21

NOTE
As a check, the sum of question 6
(persons 21 and older) and 7b (young
persons under age 21) should equal
the sum reported in question 5b
(number of persons assigned beds in
the facility).

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

day on Wednesday, October 24, 2018, HOW
MANY YOUNG PERSONS UNDER AGE 21 had
assigned beds in the facility SPECIFICALLY
BECAUSE they were CHARGED WITH OR
COURT-ADJUDICATED FOR AN OFFENSE, as
defined in question 8a?
Include young persons who were temporarly
away but had assigned beds on October 24. Do
NOT include staff.
Young persons under age 21
here because they were charged
with or court-adjudicated for an
offense.
Page 3

Page 37 of 144

Section 1 – GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION – Continued
9a. At the end of the day on Wednesday,

10a. Does this facility provide ON-SITE

October 24, 2018, did ANY of the young
persons UNDER AGE 21 have assigned beds
in this facility FOR REASONS OTHER THAN
OFFENSES? DO NOT include staff.
INCLUDE here:
• Young persons under age 21 assigned beds here for
NON-OFFENSE REASONS, such as neglect, abuse,
dependency, abandonment, mental health
problems, substance abuse problems, or another
non-offense reason

RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT?
01

Yes

➔

Go to Question 11

b. What kind of treatment is provided INSIDE this
facility? Mark (X) all that apply.

• Young persons under age 21 who have committed
one or more offenses in the past, BUT ARE
ASSIGNED BEDS HERE ON OCTOBER 24 FOR
REASONS OTHER THAN THESE OFFENSES

Mental health treatment

Substance abuse treatment

Sex offender treatment

Treatment for arsonists

Treatment specifically for violent offenders

Other – Specify

• Young persons under age 21 who have run away,
been truant or incorrigible, or violated curfew, IF
THESE BEHAVIORS ARE NOT CONSIDERED
ILLEGAL IN YOUR STATE.
• Young persons assigned beds here due to
voluntary or non-offense related admissions.

11.

Does this facility provide foster care?

Do NOT INCLUDE:

Yes, for all young persons

• Young persons assigned beds here BECAUSE
THEY WERE CHARGED WITH OR
COURT-ADJUDICATED FOR AN OFFENSE. These
persons are counted in questions 8a and 8b.

Yes, for some but not all young persons

Yes

No ➔

Go to NOTE below

b. According to your records for the end of the
day on Wednesday, October 24, 2018, HOW
MANY YOUNG PERSONS UNDER AGE 21 had
assigned beds in this facility FOR REASONS
OTHER THAN OFFENSES, AS DEFINED IN 9a?

12.

Does this facility provide independent living
arrangements for any young persons?
01

Yes

Include young persons who were temporarily away
but had assigned beds on October 24. Do NOT
include staff.
Young persons under age 21 here
because of non-offense reasons.

NOTE
As a check, the sum of questions 8b
(young persons under 21 with offenses)
and 9b (young persons under 21 with
reasons other than offenses) should equal
7b (the number of young persons under
age 21).

Page 4

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 38 of 144

Section 1 – GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION – Continued
13. What type of residential facility is the one listed
on the front cover? Mark (X) those that apply.
01

Detention center: A short-term facility that
provides temporary care in a physically restricting
environment for juveniles in custody pending court
disposition and, often, for juveniles who are
adjudicated delinquent and awaiting disposition or
placement elsewhere, or are awaiting transfer to
another jurisdiction. In some jurisdictions,
detention centers may also hold juveniles
committed for short periods of time as part of their
disposition (e.g., weekend detention).
Training school/Long-term secure facility: A
specialized type of facility that provides strict
confinement and long-term treatment generally for
post-adjudication committed juvenile offenders.
Includes training schools, juvenile correctional
facilities, youth development centers.
Reception or diagnostic center: A short-term
facility that screens juvenile offenders committed
by the courts and assigns them to appropriate
correctional facilities.
Group home/Halfway house: A long-term facility
that is generally non-secure and intended for
post-adjudication commitments in which young
persons are allowed extensive contact with the
community, such as attending school or holding a
job.
Residential treatment center: A facility that
focuses on providing some type of individually
planned treatment program for youth (substance
abuse, sex offender, mental health, etc.) in
conjunction with residential care. Such facilities
generally require specific licensing by the state
that may require that treatment provided is
Medicaid-reimbursable.
Boot camp: A secure facility that operates like
military basic training. It is designed to combine
elements of basic military training programs,
correctional components and treatment programs.
The emphasis is on strict discipline, drills, and
work.
Ranch, forestry camp, wilderness or marine
program or farm: These are long-term generally
non-secure residential facilities often located in a
relatively remote area. The juveniles participate in a
structured program that emphasizes outdoor work,
including conservation and related activities.
Runaway and homeless shelter: A short-term
facility that provides temporary care in a physically
unrestricted environment. It can also provide
longer-term care under a juvenile court disposition
order.
Other type of shelter: This includes emergency
non-secure shelters where juveniles are housed
short-term until another placement can be found.
Other: This includes independent living programs
and anything that cannot be classified above.
Specify

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

14a. Does this facility have one or more
living/sleeping units, such as wings, floors,
dorms, barracks, or cottages, designed to keep
any young persons separate in housing and
activities from other residents for specialized
care or security? Do NOT include time-out rooms,
isolation rooms or infirmaries.
IF THE ONLY REASON for separate housing and
activities ARE SEX OR AGE, ANSWER NO.
01

Yes

➔

Go to NOTE A

b. Do any of these separate living/sleeping units
differ in terms of –
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

average length of stay of young persons

physical security and/or monitoring of young
persons

number of staff per young person

type of treatment program

characteristics of young persons

specialized criteria for staff selection

other? – Specify

c. What is the purpose for having separate
living/sleeping units? Mark (X) all that apply.
01

To provide two or more types of
specialized care in separate living/sleeping
units

To provide a series of separate
living/sleeping units with different
specialized care that all young persons
move through from the time they enter
until the time they leave

To provide two or more levels of security

Some other reason – Specify

d. Do the separate living/sleeping units within
this facility share any of the following –
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

The same agency affiliation

The same mailing address

The same on-site administrators

One or more staff directly caring for the
young persons

One or more security staff

The same school rooms

The same dining room at the same time

The same recreational areas at the same time

The same laundry services

None of the above services are shared
Page 5

Page 39 of 144

Section 1 – GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION – Continued
NOTE
A

19a. Are ANY young persons in this facility locked

Questions 15 and 16 ask who OWNS
this facility. Later you will be asked
who OPERATES this facility.

into their sleeping rooms by staff at ANY time
to confine them?

15a. Is this facility OWNED by one or more of the
following –
Mark (X) all that apply.
01
a private non-profit agency
02

a for profit agency

a government agency

➔

Yes

Mark (X) all that apply.
Go to Question 16

➔

Go to
NOTE B

What is the level of the government agency
that OWNS this facility?
Mark (X) all that apply.

When they are out of control

When they are suicidal

Rarely, no set schedule

During shift changes

Whenever they are in their sleeping rooms

At night

Part of each day

Most of each day

A Native American Tribal Government

All of each day

Federal

Other – Specify

State

County

Municipal (includes Washington, DC)

Other – Specify

NOTE
B

20.

Does this facility have any of the following
features intended to confine young persons
within specific areas? Mark (X) all that apply.
01

Doors for secure day rooms that are locked
by staff to confine young persons within
specific areas

Wing, floor, corridor, or other internal
security doors that are locked by staff to
confine young persons within specific areas

Outside doors that are locked by staff to
confine young persons within specific
buildings

External gates in fences or walls WITHOUT
razor wire that are locked by staff to
confine young persons

External gates in fences or walls WITH
razor wire that are locked to confine young
persons

Other – Specify

The facility has none of the above features.

Questions 17 and 18 ask who
OPERATES this facility.

17a. Is this facility OPERATED by one or more of the
following –
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

a private non-profit agency

a for profit agency

a government agency

➔

Go to Question 18

b. What is the name of the private non-profit or
for-profit agency that OPERATES this facility?

➔

Page 6

Go to Question 20

into their sleeping rooms by staff?

for-profit agency that OWNS this facility?

18.

➔

b. When are young persons in this facility locked

b. What is the name of the private non-profit or

16.

Go to
Question
19a

What is the level of the government agency
that OPERATES this facility (either directly or
under a contract with)?
Mark (X) all that apply.

21a. Are outside doors to any buildings with

A Native American Tribal Government

living/sleeping units in this facility ever locked?

Federal

Yes

State

County

Municipal (includes Washington, DC)

Other – Specify

➔

Go to Question 22

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 40 of 144

Section 1 – GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION – Continued
21b. Why are outside doors to buildings with

24.

living/sleeping units in this facility locked?

On the night of Wednesday, October 24, 2018,
what were the sleeping room arrangements for
young persons assigned beds in this facility in
terms of the number of ACTUAL OCCUPANTS
per sleeping room? Answer in terms of the actual
occupancy status on October 24, 2018, regardless of
whether it reflects the occupancy for which the
sleeping room(s) was/were originally designed, and
whether or not young persons slept on makeshift
beds within these sleeping rooms.

Mark (X) all that apply.

living/sleeping units in this facility locked?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

To keep intruders out

To keep young persons inside this facility

c. WHEN are outside doors to buildings with

22.

Rarely, no set schedule

At night

Part of each day

Most of each day

All of each day

06
07

1 young person per sleeping room (single
occupancy)

2 young persons per sleeping room (double
occupancy)

3 young persons per sleeping room (triple
occupancy)

When the facility is unoccupied

4 young persons per sleeping room

Other – Specify

Between 5 and 10 young persons per sleeping
room

Between 11 and 25 young persons per
sleeping room

More than 25 young persons per sleeping
room

What was the TOTAL NUMBER OF STANDARD
BEDS for young persons in this facility on the
night of Wednesday, October 24, 2018?
Do NOT include staff beds.
• A single bed is one standard bed
• A double bunked bed is two standard beds

Total number of standard beds

25.

Are young persons assigned beds in this
facility given opportunities for VOLUNTARY
participation in large muscle activity at a
location either INSIDE or OUTSIDE of this
facility? Large muscle activity includes such
exercises as group sports, running, aerobics, and
weight training.
01

Yes

23a. On the night of Wednesday, October 24, 2018,
were there ANY OCCUPIED MAKESHIFT BEDS
in this facility?
Makeshift beds are:
• Roll-out mats
• Fold-out cots
• Roll-away beds
• Pull-out mattresses
• Sofas
• Any other beds that are put away or
moved during non-sleeping hours
01

Yes

➔

26a. Are young persons assigned beds in this
facility REQUIRED to participate in large
muscle activity at a location either INSIDE or
OUTSIDE of this facility? Large muscle activity
includes such exercises as group sports, running,
aerobics, and weight training.
01

Yes

➔

Go to Section 2 on page 8

b. How many MINUTES per day are young
Go to Question 24

persons REQUIRED to participate in large
muscle activity at a location either INSIDE
or OUTSIDE this facility?

b. How many makeshift beds were occupied
that night?
Minutes per DAY
Occupied makeshift beds

c. How many DAYS per week are young
persons REQUIRED to participate in large
muscle activity at a location either INSIDE
or OUTSIDE this facility?

Days per WEEK
FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 7

Page 41 of 144

Section 2 – MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
1a.

After arrival in this facility, are ANY young
persons asked questions or administered a
form which asks questions to determine risk
for suicide?

When are young persons FIRST asked
questions or administered a form which asks
questions to determine risk of suicide?
Mark (X) all that apply.

Yes

➔

Go to Question 6 on page 9

What best describes the process through
which young persons are asked questions or
administered a form which asks questions to
determine risk of suicide?

03
04

Within less than 24 hours after arrival
Between 24 hours and less than 7 days after
arrival
Seven or more days after arrival
Other – Specify

Mark (X) all that apply.
01

02
03

04
05
06
07

One or more questions about suicide
incorporated into the medical history or
intake process
A form or questions designed by this
facility to assess suicide risk
A form or questions designed by a county
or state juvenile justice system to assess
suicide risk
MAYSI- Full Form
MAYSI- Suicide/depression module
V-DISC
Other – Specify

Which young persons are asked questions or
administered a form which asks questions to
determine risk of suicide?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

ALL young persons are asked questions or
administered a form which asks questions to
determine suicide risk ➔ Go to Question 5a

Young persons who come directly from
home, rather than from another facility
Young persons who display or
communicate suicide risk
Young persons known to have prior suicide
attempts
Young persons for whom no mental health
care record is available
Other young persons not listed above –
Specify

03
04
05

IMPORTANT NOTE
"Mental health professionals" are limited in this
census to – psychiatrists, psychologists with at
least a Master’s degree in PSYCHOLOGY, and
social workers with at least a Master’s in SOCIAL
WORK (MSW, LCSW).
"Counselors" in this census are persons with a
Master’s degree in a field other than psychology
or social work, or persons whose highest degree
is a Bachelor’s in any field.

5a.

Are ANY young persons re-asked questions or
re-administered a form which asks questions
to determine risk for suicide?
01
02

Who asks questions or administers a form
which asks questions to determine risk of
suicide?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

Counselors/intake workers who have NOT been
trained by mental health professionals

Counselors/intake workers who have been
trained by mental health professionals
A mental health professional, as defined in the
box above

03
04

Some other person – Specify

Go to Question 6 on page 9

Which best describes the conditions under
which young persons are re-asked questions
or re-administered a form that asks questions
to determine suicide risk?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

02
03

Page 8

Yes
No ➔

No young persons are re-asked questions
or re-administered a form which asks
questions to determine suicide risk
As necessary on a case-by-case basis
Systematically, based on length of stay, facility
events, or negative life events (for example, after
each court appearance, every time the young
person re-enters the facility, after a death in the
family)
Other – Specify

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 42 of 144

Section 2 – MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES – Continued
6.

Does this facility assign different levels of risk
to young persons based on their perceived risk
of suicide?
01

Yes

NOTE
D

7a.

Yes
No ➔

Do young persons assigned beds receive
mental health services other than a suicide
evaluation either INSIDE or OUTSIDE this
facility?
Mental health services include:
• evaluations and appraisals conducted by
mental health professionals to diagnose or
to identify mental health needs
• ongoing mental health therapy
• ongoing counseling

Are young persons who are determined to be
at risk for suicide ever placed in a sleeping
room or observation room that is locked or
under staff security?
01

The following questions ask about
preventative measures taken once a young
person is identified to be at risk for suicide.
Please include all levels of suicide risk used
by this facility, if any, when answering
these questions.

NOTE
E

Go to Question 8

Which of the following best describes what
happens in the sleeping room or observation
room that is locked or under staff security?

03
04

Mark (X) all that apply.

Camera observation

15 minute staff checks

5 minute staff checks

Line of site supervision (direct or through glass)

Staff assigned to doorway or in sleeping
room/One-on-one supervision/Arms
length supervision

Other – Specify

10a.

No preventative measures are taken when a
young person is determined to be at risk for
suicide

One-on-one supervision/Arms length
supervision

Yes, provided both INSIDE and OUTSIDE
this facility
Yes, provided INSIDE this facility
Yes, provided OUTSIDE this facility
No, this facility does not provide mental
health services ➔ Go to Question 16a on page 11

Is ongoing COUNSELING provided for these
mental health problems provided INSIDE or
OUTSIDE this facility by a COUNSELOR?
Counselors are limited to:
• persons with a Master’s degree in a field
other than psychology or social work
• persons whose highest degree is a
Bachelor’s in any field.

Are any of the following preventative
measures taken when a young person is
determined to be at risk for suicide?
Mark (X) all that apply.

Questions 9 through 18 ask about mental
health services provided at a location either
INSIDE or OUTSIDE this facility. INSIDE
refers to any location on the facility
grounds. OUTSIDE refers to any location
in the community or off facility grounds.

Yes, INSIDE and OUTSIDE this facility

Yes, INSIDE this facility

Yes, OUTSIDE this facility

No, ongoing counseling is
not provided ➔ Go to Question 11 on page 10

Which forms of ongoing COUNSELING for
mental health problems are provided by a
COUNSELOR?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

Individual counseling
Group counseling

Line-of-sight supervision

Special clothing to identify young persons as at
risk for suicide

Family counseling

Other – Specify

Special clothing designed to prevent suicide
attempts

Restraints used to prevent suicide attempts

Removal of personal items that may be used to
attempt suicide

Removal from the general population

Other – Specify

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 9

Page 43 of 144

Section 2 – MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES – Continued
11.

Are ANY young persons evaluated or appraised
by a MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL at a
location INSIDE or OUTSIDE this facility?

14a. Is ongoing THERAPY for mental health
problems provided to young persons by a
MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL INSIDE or
OUTSIDE this facility?

Evaluations and appraisals are conducted by
mental health professionals to diagnose or to
identify mental health needs.

Mental health professionals are limited to:
• psychiatrists
• psychologists with at least a Master’s
degree in PSYCHOLOGY
• social workers with at least a Master’s
degree in SOCIAL WORK (MSW, LCSW)

01
02

Yes, INSIDE and OUTSIDE this facility
Yes, INSIDE this facility
Yes, OUTSIDE this facility

01
02

12.

➔

03
04

Go to Question 14a

b. Which forms of ongoing THERAPY for mental
health problems are provided by MENTAL
HEALTH PROFESSIONALS?

When are young persons evaluated or
appraised by a MENTAL HEALTH
PROFESSIONAL?

Mark (X) all that apply.

Individual therapy

Within less than 24 hours

Group therapy

Between 24 hours and less than 7 days
after arrival

Family therapy

Other – Specify

Seven or more days after arrival

Other – Specify

c.
13.

Yes, INSIDE and OUTSIDE this facility
Yes, INSIDE this facility
Yes, OUTSIDE this facility
No, ongoing THERAPY is
not provided ➔
Go to Question 15

Which young persons are evaluated or
appraised by a MENTAL HEALTH
PROFESSIONAL?

Which of the following best describes this
facility policy on providing THERAPY by a
MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL INSIDE or
OUTSIDE this facility?
Mark (X) ONLY ONE response.

Mark (X) all that apply.

All young persons receive some therapy at
some point during their stay

ALL young persons are evaluated or appraised
by a MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL?

Young persons receive therapy only as
needed on a case-by-case basis

Young persons who come directly from
home, rather than from another facility

Other – Specify

Young persons who are ordered by the
court to get an evaluation

Young persons whom staff identify as
needing an evaluation

Young persons known to have mental
health problems

Young persons for whom no mental health
record is available

Other young persons not listed above –
Specify

Page 10

15.

Do MEDICAL health professionals INSIDE or
OUTSIDE this facility prescribe and/or monitor
psychotropic medication for young persons
assigned beds here?
01

Yes, INSIDE and OUTSIDE this facility

Yes, INSIDE this facility

Yes, OUTSIDE this facility

No, psychotropic medications are not prescribed

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 44 of 144

Section 2 – MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES – Continued
16a. Are there one or more special living/sleeping
unit(s) in this facility reserved just for young
persons with mental health problems that are
separate from other living/sleeping units?
01
02

Yes
No ➔

Go to Question 17a

b. Do any of these special living/sleeping units
reserved just for young persons with mental
health problems differ from the other
living/sleeping units in –
Mark (X) all that apply.

18.

Are there one or more special living/sleeping
units reserved just for sex offenders that are
separate from other living/sleeping units?
01

Yes

19a. Upon a young person’s departure from this
facility, is information regarding their mental
health status, services and/or needs
communicated to the young persons’ new
placement or residence?

average length of stay?

Yes

physical security and/or monitoring of
young persons?

No ➔

number of staff per young persons?

type of treatment program?

characteristics of young persons?

specialized criteria for staff selection?

specialized curriculum of treatment for the
residents of these units?

b. For which young persons is this information
shared?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01
02

Other? – Specify

17a. Is there a specialized SEX OFFENDER
Yes

No ➔

Young persons returning to the community
under juvenile justice supervision through
probation, parole, or aftercare

Young persons returning to the community
(their homes, independent living, foster care,
or another type of guardian’s care) without
further juvenile justice supervision
Young persons being placed in adult criminal
justice facilities (prisons, jails)

Go to Question 18

b. Are any of the following provided to young

All young persons that depart from the facility
Young persons being placed in other juvenile
justice facilities, including halfway houses,
shelters or other transition homes

treatment program located inside this
facility?
01

Go to Section 3 on page 12

Young persons going to another living or
placement situation – Please explain

persons charged with or adjudicated for a sex
offense?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

A curriculum of treatment designed
specifically for sex offenders

Individual therapy/counseling specifically
for sex offenders

Group therapy in which all members of the
group are sex offenders

Family therapy/counseling specifically for
sex offenders

Other – Specify

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 11

Page 45 of 144

Section 3 – EDUCATIONAL SERVICES
1.

After arrival in this facility, are ANY young
persons evaluated to determine their
educational grade levels and their educational
needs at a location either INSIDE or OUTSIDE
this facility?
01

Yes

No ➔

Go to Question 5

After arrival in this facility, when are young
persons evaluated to determine their
educational grade level?
Mark (X) all that apply.

Within less than 24 hours after arrival

Between 24 hours and less than 7 days
after arrival

Seven or more days after arrival

Other – Specify

Which of the following methods are used to
evaluate young persons to determine their
educational grade levels and their educational
needs?
Mark (X) all that apply.

Review of previous academic records

Interview with an education specialist

Administration of one or more written or
computerized tests

Interview with an intake or admissions
counselor

Interview with guidance counselor

Other – Specify

As part of the DISCHARGE process from this
facility, are ANY young persons evaluated to
determine their educational grade levels and
their educational needs?
01

Yes

No ➔

Go to NOTE F on page 13

Which young persons are evaluated to
determine their educational grade levels and
their educational needs as part of the
DISCHARGE process from this facility?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

ALL young persons are
evaluated ➔ Go to NOTE F on page 13

Young persons going home or to live on
their own

Young persons who have been at this
facility long enough to demonstrate a
change in academic performance

Young persons who have not yet earned a
high school diploma

Young persons who have not yet earned a
GED

As many young persons as the educational
specialists have time to evaluate

Other – Specify

Which young persons are evaluated to
determine their educational grade levels and
their educational needs?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

ALL young persons are
evaluated ➔ Go to Question 5

Young persons who come directly from
home, rather than from another facility

Young persons whom the staff identify as
needing an assessment

Young persons for whom no educational
record is available

Young persons with known educational
problems

Other young persons not listed above –
Specify

Page 12

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 46 of 144

Section 3 – EDUCATIONAL SERVICES – Continued

NOTE
F

7a.

Which of the following educational services
are provided to young persons assigned beds
here at a location either INSIDE or OUTSIDE
this facility?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

Elementary-level education

Middle school-level education

High school-level education

Do ANY young persons assigned beds here
attend school or receive teacher instruction at
a location either INSIDE or OUTSIDE this
facility?

Special education

GED preparation

GED testing

Mark (X) ONE response.

Yes, provided both INSIDE and OUTSIDE
this facility

Post-high school education or post-high
school correspondence courses

Vocational/technical education

Yes, provided INSIDE this facility

Life skills training

Yes, provided OUTSIDE this facility

Other – Specify

No, educational services are not provided
to young persons while assigned beds
here ➔ Go to Section 4 on page 15

01
02

Questions 7 through 9 ask about
educational services provided either
INSIDE and/or OUTSIDE this facility.
INSIDE this facility refers to any location
on the facility grounds. OUTSIDE this
facility refers to any location in the
community or off facility grounds.

Which young persons attend school or receive
teacher instruction?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

ALL young persons are required to
attend school or receive teacher
instruction ➔ Go to Question 8

Those young persons who have not
completed high school or their GED

Those young persons with special needs for
remedial education

Those young persons who have been in the
facility long enough to receive educational
services

Those young persons who are required by the
state to attend school because of their age

Those young persons assigned beds in special
living/sleeping units –Specify unit type

Other young persons not listed above –
Specify

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

9a.

How many hours per WEEK do young persons
attend school or receive teacher instruction
during the scheduled academic school year at a
location either INSIDE or OUTSIDE this
facility?
INSIDE
OUTSIDE
Instructional
hours per WEEK

b. How many months per YEAR do young persons
assigned beds attend school or receive teacher
instruction at a location either INSIDE or
OUTSIDE this facility?
INSIDE

OUTSIDE

Instructional
months per YEAR

Page 13

Page 47 of 144

Section 3 – EDUCATIONAL SERVICES – Continued
10a. Upon a young person’s departure from this
facility, is information regarding their
educational status, services and/or needs
communicated to the young persons’ new
placement or residence?
01

Yes

No ➔

Go to Section 4 on page 15

b. For which young persons is this information
shared?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01
02

Young persons returning to the community
under juvenile justice supervision through
probation, parole, or aftercare

05
06

Page 14

All young persons that depart from the facility
Young persons being placed in other juvenile
justice facilities, including halfway houses,
shelters or other transition homes

Young persons going to another living or
placement situation – Please explain

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 48 of 144

Section 4 – SUBSTANCE ABUSE SERVICES
1a.

After arrival in this facility, are ANY young
persons evaluated to determine whether they
have substance abuse problems?
Substance abuse problems include problems with
drugs and/or alcohol.

Yes

No ➔ Go to Question 4a

Which of the following methods are used to
evaluate persons after arrival in this facility to
determine whether they have substance abuse
problems?
Mark (X) all that apply.

3a.

Visual observation

Standardized self-report instruments, such
as the SASSI, JASI, ACDI, ASI

Self-report check list inventory which asks
about substance use and abuse

A staff-administered series of questions
which asks about substance use and abuse

None of these methods are used

Other – Specify

When are young persons FIRST evaluated to
determine whether they have substance abuse
problems?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

Within less than 24 hours after arrival

Between 24 hours and less than 7 days
after arrival

Seven or more days after arrival

Other – Specify

Are ALL young persons evaluated after arrival
in this facility to determine whether they have
substance abuse problems?
01

Yes ➔ Go to Question 4a

No ➔ Continue with Question 3b

After arrival in this facility, which young
persons are evaluated for substance abuse
problems?
Mark (X) all that apply.

4a.

Young persons charged with or adjudicated
for a drug or alcohol-related offense

Young persons identified by the court or a
probation officer as potentially having
substance abuse problems

Young persons identified by facility staff as
potentially having substance abuse
problems

Other young persons not listed above – Specify

Are ANY young persons required to provide urine FOR DRUG ANALYSIS after arrival IN THIS FACILITY?
01

Yes ➔ Continue with Question 4b

No ➔ Go to NOTE G on page 16

Which statements below describe the circumstances under which young persons are required to
provide urine INSIDE this facility FOR DRUG ANALYSIS? Mark (X) all that apply.

PERSONS PROVIDING
URINE SAMPLE

After initial
arrival in this
facility
(1)

a. Young persons who are
suspected of recent drug or
alcohol use
b. Young persons with substance
abuse problems
c. ALL young persons assigned
beds here
FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

CIRCUMSTANCES OF TESTING
Each time young
When drug use is At the request of
At randomly
persons reenter
or drug
the court or
the facility during scheduled times suspected
is
present
probation
officer
their stay
(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Page 15

Page 49 of 144

Section 4 – SUBSTANCE ABUSE SERVICES – Continued

NOTE
G

Questions 5 through 9 ask about substance
abuse services provided at a location
either INSIDE or OUTSIDE this facility.
INSIDE refers to any location on the
facility grounds. OUTSIDE refers to any
location in the community or off facility
grounds.

Mark (X) all that apply.

IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
Substance abuse services include:
• developing a substance abuse
treatment plan
• assigning a case manager to oversee
substance abuse treatment
• assigning young persons to special
living units just for those with substance
abuse problems
• ongoing substance abuse therapy or
counseling
• substance abuse education
Substance abuse treatment professionals
are limited in this census to:
• CERTIFIED substance abuse or
addictions counselors
• psychiatrists
• psychologists with at least a Master’s
degree in PSYCHOLOGY
• social workers with at least a Master’s
degree in SOCIAL WORK (MSW, LCSW)

Assignment of a case manager to oversee
substance abuse treatment

Development of a treatment plan to specifically
address substance abuse problems

Special living units in which all young persons
have substance abuse offenses and/or problems

None of these services are offered

Which of the following self-led, self-help
groups are provided INSIDE or OUTSIDE
this facility?

8a.

Yes, provided INSIDE this facility

Yes, provided OUTSIDE this facility

No, this facility does not provide
substance abuse services ➔ Go to Section 5
on page 18

Alcoholics Anonymous

Narcotics Anonymous

Other – Specify

None of these are provided

Is ongoing COUNSELING for substance abuse
problems provided to young persons INSIDE
or OUTSIDE this facility by a COUNSELOR
who is NOT a substance abuse treatment
professional?
Counselors who are NOT substance
abuse treatment professionals are:
• persons with a Master’s degree in a field
other than psychology or social work
• persons whose highest degree is a
Bachelor’s in any field
01

Yes, provided both INSIDE and OUTSIDE this
facility

Yes, provided INSIDE this facility

Yes, provided OUTSIDE this facility

No, ongoing COUNSELING for
substance abuse problems is not
provided ➔ Go to Question 9a on page 17

Yes, provided both INSIDE and OUTSIDE this
facility

Page 16

Substance abuse education

Do ANY young persons assigned beds here
receive substance abuse services INSIDE or
OUTSIDE this facility other than urinalysis or a
substance abuse screening?
01

Mark (X) all that apply.

Counselors who are NOT substance abuse
treatment professionals are limited to:
• persons with a Master’s degree in a field
other than psychology or social work
• persons whose highest degree is a
Bachelor’s in any field

Which of the following SUBSTANCE ABUSE
services are provided INSIDE or OUTSIDE this
facility?

Which forms of ongoing COUNSELING for
substance abuse problems are provided
INSIDE or OUTSIDE this facility to young
persons by a COUNSELOR who is NOT a
substance abuse treatment professional?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01

Individual counseling

Group counseling

Family counseling

None of these are provided

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 50 of 144

Section 4 – SUBSTANCE ABUSE SERVICES – Continued
9a.

Is ongoing THERAPY for substance abuse
problems provided to young persons INSIDE
or OUTSIDE this facility by a SUBSTANCE
ABUSE TREATMENT PROFESSIONAL?
Substance abuse treatment professionals are
limited to:
• CERTIFIED substance abuse/addictions
counselors
• psychiatrists
• psychologists with at least a Master’s
degree in psychology
• social workers with a Master’s degree in
SOCIAL WORK (MSW, LCSW)

Yes, provided both INSIDE and OUTSIDE this
facility

Yes, provided INSIDE this facility

Yes, provided OUTSIDE this facility

No, ongoing THERAPY for
substance abuse problems is
not provided ➔ Go to Section 5 on page 18

Which forms of ongoing THERAPY for
substance abuse problems are provided
INSIDE or OUTSIDE this facility to young
persons by a SUBSTANCE ABUSE
TREATMENT PROFESSIONAL?

10a. Upon a young person’s departure from this
facility, is information regarding their
substance abuse status, services and/or needs
communicated to the young persons’ new
placement or residence?
01

Yes

No ➔

Go to Section 5 on page 18

b. For which young persons is this information
shared?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01
02

All young persons that depart from the facility
Young persons being placed in other juvenile
justice facilities, including halfway houses,
shelters or other transition homes

Young persons returning to the community
under juvenile justice supervision through
probation, parole, or aftercare

05
06

Young persons going to another living or
placement situation – Please explain

Mark (X) all that apply.

Individual therapy

Group therapy

Family therapy

None of these are provided

Which of the following best describes this
facility policy on providing ongoing therapy
for substance abuse problems INSIDE or
OUTSIDE this facility to persons by a
SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT
PROFESSIONAL?
Mark (X) ONLY ONE response.
01

All young persons receive specialized
therapy or counseling for substance abuse
problems

Young persons receive specialized therapy
or counseling for substance abuse
problems only as needed on a case-by-case
basis

Other – Specify

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 17

Page 51 of 144

Section 5 – THE LAST MONTH
3.
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
The following items ask you to answer questions
about different events that may have occurred at
this facility over a 30-day period.

Mechanical restraints include handcuffs, leg cuffs,
waist bands, leather straps, restraining chairs,
strait jackets or other mechanical devices

The 30-day REFERENCE PERIOD for this section
covers the time between the beginning of the day,
September 1, 2018 and the end of the day on
September 30, 2018.

During the month of September 2018, were
there ANY UNAUTHORIZED DEPARTURES of
any young persons who were assigned beds at
this facility?
An "unauthorized departure" includes any incident
in which a young person leaves without staff
permission or approval for more than 10 minutes
from:
• The physical security perimeter of the facility
• The mandatory supervision of a staff member
when there is no physical security
• The mandatory supervision of transportation
staff
• Any other approved area
01
02

2a.

Yes
No

During the month of September 2018, were
ANY young persons assigned beds at this
facility transported to a hospital emergency
room by facility staff, transportation staff, or
by an ambulance?
01
02

Yes
No ➔

During the month of September 2018, were
ANY of the young persons assigned beds here
restrained by facility staff with a mechanical
restraint?

If the facility staff ONLY used mechanical
restraints during transportation to and from this
facility answer NO.
01
02

Yes
No

During the month of September 2018, were
ANY of the young persons assigned beds here
locked for more than four hours alone in an
isolation, seclusion, or sleeping room to regain
control of their unruly behavior?
Answer NO if:
• Young persons were locked in their
sleeping rooms as part of the facility
routine
OR
• Young persons were locked in their rooms
ONLY for purposes of quarantine, suicide
watch, facility-wide lockdown, or
self-requested seclusion
01
02

Yes
No

Go to Question 3

For what reason(s) were the young persons
transported to a hospital emergency room
DURING THIS 30 DAY PERIOD in September?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01
02
03

05
06
07
08
09

Page 18

Sports-related injury
Work or chore-related injury
An injury that resulted from interpersonal
conflict between one or more young persons,
not including a sports-related injury
An injury that resulted from interpersonal
conflict between a young person and a
non-resident (including staff, visitors, or
persons from the community).
Illness
Pregnancy complications
Labor and delivery
Suicide attempt
A non-emergency injury or illness that occurred
when no physical health professional was
available at the facility or on call
A non-emergency injury or illness that
occurred when no doctor’s appointment
could be obtained in the community
Other – Specify

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 52 of 144

Section 5 – THE LAST MONTH – Continued
5a.

During the month of September 2018 were
there any instances in which this facility was
unable to secure PHYSICAL HEALTH CARE (at
locations either inside or outside of this
facility) for any young persons with a physical
health complaint or need for physical health
care (both urgent and non-urgent)?

6a.

During the month of September 2018 were
there any instances in which this facility was
unable to secure MENTAL HEALTH CARE (at
locations either inside or outside of this
facility) for any young persons with a mental
health complaint or need for mental health care
(both urgent and non-urgent)?

Yes

No, this facility does not provide or broker
physical health care services (except through
contacting emergency services like
ambulances) ➔ Go to question 6a

No, this facility does not provide or broker
mental health care services (except through
contacting emergency services like
ambulances) ➔ Go to question 7a on page 20

No, there were no such instances ➔
Go to question 6a

No, there were no such instances ➔
Go to question 7a on page 20

b. What reasons prevented PHYSICAL HEALTH
CARE from being secured for young persons in
need?
Mark (X) all that apply.

b. What reasons prevented MENTAL HEALTH
CARE from being secured for young persons
in need?
Mark (X) all that apply.

Long-term shortages of physical health care
staffing at this facility

Long-term shortages of mental health care
staffing at this facility

Short-term, temporary shortages of physical
health care staffing at this facility

Short-term, temporary shortages of mental
health care staffing at this facility

Shortages, temporary interruptions in, or
absence of contracts with physical health care
providers in the community

Shortages, temporary interruptions in, or
absence of contracts with mental health care
providers in the community

Shortages in line staff or other direct care staff
to fill in for staff who accompany young
persons to health care services

Shortages in line staff or other direct care staff
to fill in for staff who accompany young
persons to mental health care services

Shortages in transportation staff or vehicles

Single or multiple instances of facility lock
downs or other security issues that prevented
health care “services as usual” from occurring
for all young persons in the facility or all
young persons in specific units or wings of
this facility

Single or multiple instances of facility lock
downs or other security issues that prevented
mental health care “services as usual” from
occurring for all young persons in the facility
or all young persons in specific units or wings
of this facility

Single or multiple instances of security risks
for individual young persons that prevented
health care “services as usual” from occurring

Planned and/or unplanned requirements to
appear before the court or to meet with legal
counsel

Single or multiple instances of security risks
for individual young persons that prevented
mental health care “services as usual” from
occurring

Planned and/or unplanned requirements to
appear before the court or to meet with legal
counsel

Other reasons – Specify

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 19

Page 53 of 144

Section 5 – THE LAST MONTH – Continued
7a.

During the month of September 2018 were
there any instances in which this facility was
unable to secure EDUCATIONAL INSTRUCTION
(at locations either inside or outside of this
facility) for any young persons who are
required by state statute to receive educational
instruction?
NOTE: Do not consider planned breaks from
educational instruction (such as summer recess
or religious holidays) as an inability to provide
educational instruction.
01

Yes

No, this facility does not provide, broker,
or arrange through public schools in the
community any educational instruction ➔
Go to question 8a

No, there were no such instances ➔
Go to question 8a

b. What reasons prevented EDUCATIONAL

Page 20

8a.

During the month of September 2018 were
there any instances in which this facility was
unable to secure SUBSTANCE ABUSE
SERVICES (at locations either inside or outside
of this facility) for any young persons with a
substance use or abuse complaint or need for
substance abuse services (both urgent and
non-urgent)?
01

Yes

No, this facility does not provide or broker
substance abuse services (except through
contacting emergency services like
ambulances) ➔
Go to section 6 on page 21

No, there were no such instances ➔
Go to section 6 on page 21

b. What reasons prevented SUBSTANCE ABUSE
SERVICES from being secured for young
persons in need?
Mark (X) all that apply.

INSTRUCTION from being secured for young
persons in need?

Long-term shortages of substance abuse
service staffing at this facility

Mark (X) all that apply.

Short-term, temporary shortages of substance
abuse service staffing at this facility

Shortages, interruptions in, or absences of
contracts with substance abuse service providers
in the community

Shortages in line staff or other direct care staff
to fill in for staff who accompany young
persons to substance abuse services

Shortages in transportation staff or vehicles

Single or multiple instances of facility lock
downs or other security issues that prevented
substance abuse “services as usual” from
occurring for all young persons in the facility
or all young persons in specific units or wings
of this facility

Single or multiple instances of security risks
for individual young persons that prevented
substance abuse “services as usual” from
occurring

Planned and/or unplanned requirements to
appear before the court or to meet with legal
counsel

Other reasons – Specify

Long-term shortages in educational
instructors at this facility

Short-term, temporary shortages of educational
instructors at this facility

Shortages, interruptions in, or absences of
contracts with educational instruction service
providers in the community

Shortages in line staff or other direct care staff
to fill in for staff who accompany young
persons to educational instruction

Shortages in transportation staff or vehicles

Single or multiple instances of facility lock
downs or other security issues that prevented
educational “instruction as usual” from
occurring for all young persons in the facility
or all young persons in specific units or wings
of this facility

Single or multiple instances of security risks
for individual young persons that prevented
educational “instruction as usual” from
occurring

Planned and/or unplanned requirements to
appear before the court or to meet with legal
counsel

Other reasons – Specify

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 54 of 144

Section 6 – THE LAST YEAR

IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
Questions 1 through 3 ask about deaths of young persons at locations either INSIDE and/or OUTSIDE this
facility during the period between October 1, 2017 and September 30, 2018.
INSIDE this facility refers to any location on the facility grounds.
OUTSIDE this facility refers to any location in the community or off facility grounds.

During the YEAR between October 1, 2017 and September 30, 2018, did ANY young persons
die while assigned a bed at this facility at a location either INSIDE or OUTSIDE of this facility?
01

Yes

➔

Go to Section 7 on page 22

How many young persons died while assigned beds at this facility during the year between
October 1, 2017 and September 30, 2018?

Person(s)

What were the cause of death, location of death, age, sex, race, date of admission to the facility,
and date of death for each young person who died while assigned a bed at this facility?

a. Cause of death
1 – Illness/natural causes
(excluding AIDS)
2 – Injury suffered prior to
placement here
3 – AIDS
4 – Suicide
5 – Homicide or manslaughter
by another resident
6 – Homicide or manslaughter
by non-resident(s)
7 – Accidental death
8 – Other – Specify in box ➔
b. Location of death
1 – Inside this facility
2 – Outside this facility

Young person 1

Young person 2

Young person 3

(1)

(2)

(3)

Code

c. Age at death (in years)
d. Sex
1 – Male
2 – Female
e. Race
1 – White, not Hispanic origin
2 – Black or African American,
not of Hispanic origin
3 – Hispanic or Latino
4 – American Indian/
Alaskan Native
5 – Asian
6 – Native Hawaiian or other
Pacific Islander
8 – Other – Specify in box ➔
f. Date of admission to
facility (mm/dd/yyyy)
g. Date of death
(mm/dd/yyyy)
FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 21

Page 55 of 144

Section 7 – GENERAL INFORMATION
1a.

Are there any other juvenile residential facilities located within the same building or on the
same campus as the facility being reported on here?
01

Yes

➔

Go to NOTE H below

How many OTHER juvenile residential facilities are located within the same building or on the
same campus as the facility being reported on here?

Juvenile residential facilities

Does the facility being reported on here share any of the following with the other facilities
located in the same building or on the same campus?
Mark (X) all that apply.
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11

The same agency affiliation
The same mailing address
The same on-site administrators
One or more staff directly caring for the young persons
One or more security staff
The same school rooms
The same infirmary
The same food services
The same dining room
The same laundry services
None of the above services are shared

Thank you for completing this questionnaire. If you would like to give us any comments on this form,
please write them at the bottom of this page or attach another sheet.
Please make a copy of this questionnaire for your records so that if we need to contact you about a
response, you will be able to refer to your copy.
NOTE
H

Please mail the completed form in the enclosed postage-paid envelope to –
U.S. Census Bureau
P.O. Box 5000
Jeffersonville, IN 47199-5000
ERD/JRFC
or FAX toll free to: 1–888–262–3974.

Comments

Page 22

FORM CJ-15 (5-3-2018)

Page 56 of 144

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
National Institute of Justice
______________________________________________________________________________
Washington, DC 20531

,
Dear Facility Administrator:
The National Institute of Justice (NIJ), in coordination with the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), is pleased to announce the 2020 Juvenile Residential
Facility Census (JRFC). The JRFC is an ongoing data collection sponsored by OJJDP and
managed by NIJ, which asks for information on characteristics of juvenile facilities and the
services provided to youth housed in these facilities. The U.S. Census Bureau is the data
collection agent, and we request your assistance in completing and returning your
information to the Census as soon as possible.
The reference date for this survey is Wednesday, October 28, 2020. Please complete this
questionnaire on, or shortly after, that date and return it by November , , via
the online web application (see flyer) or via US mail using the enclosed postage-paid
envelope.
Enclosed you will also find a sample of the types of publications produced with this
information to educate policymakers, practitioners, and the public about the country’s
juvenile justice residential facilities. Your full and timely response is important to the
continued success of this effort. The confidentiality of the information you provide is
protected by federal law (Title 34, Section 10231 of the United States Code) and will only
be revealed or used for research purposes (see reverse side for more details).
I hope that we can count on your support as we have in the past. If you have any
questions, please contact of the U.S. Census Bureau at or
1-800-352-7229.
Thank you for your time and assistance in this endeavor.
Sincerely,
David B. Muhlhausen, Ph.D.
Director, National Institute of Justice
Attachments

Page 57 of 144

FEDERAL ASSURANCES OF CONFIDENTIALITY AND OTHER NOTICES

The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (see, 34 U.S.C. § 1012110122) and the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 2002 (see, 34
U.S.C. § 11161), provide the authority for conducting this data collection. We rely
on your cooperation to present a clear picture of the state of juvenile justice
placement in this country. The confidentiality of the information you provide on this
questionnaire is guaranteed by Title 34, Section 10231 of the United States code.
This law requires both the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Census Bureau
to hold strictly confidential any information that could identify individual youth,
employees, or private facilities. The penalty for anyone violating this confidentiality
is $10,000. While public facilities are not subject to this statutory protection,
OJJDP’s policy is that the information collected for the Juvenile Residential Facility
Census (JRFC) will only be used or revealed for research or statistical purposes,
and it will take appropriate measures to protect the confidentiality of public facilities.
The identities of all youth residing in facilities are protected. Further, per the Federal
Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2015 (6 U.S.C. § 151), your data are protected
from cybersecurity risks through screening of the systems that transmit your data.
Your compliance with the request for information is entirely voluntary. If you would
like more information concerning this authorization or the confidentiality guarantee,
please write to Benjamin Adams at the address below.
Under the Federal Paperwork Reduction Act, a person is not required to respond to
a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
We try to create forms and instructions that are accurate, can be easily understood,
and which impose the least possible burden on you to provide us with information.
We estimate that it will take one to three hours to complete this questionnaire with
two hours being the average. This estimate includes time for reviewing the
instructions, searching for and gathering the data, completing the form, and
reviewing answers. If you have comments regarding the accuracy of this estimate,
or suggestions for making this form simpler, you can write to:
Benjamin Adams
Social Science Analyst
National Institute of Justice
810 7th Street, NW
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington, DC 20531

Page 58 of 144

Title 34, United States Code, Section 10231
§10231. Confidentiality of information
(a) Research or statistical information; immunity from process; prohibition against
admission as evidence or use in any proceedings
No officer or employee of the Federal Government, and no recipient of assistance under the provisions
of this chapter shall use or reveal any research or statistical information furnished under this chapter by
any person and identifiable to any specific private person for any purpose other than the purpose for
which it was obtained in accordance with this chapter. Such information and copies thereof shall be
immune from legal process, and shall not, without the consent of the person furnishing such information,
be admitted as evidence or used for any purpose in any action, suit, or other judicial, legislative, or
administrative proceedings.

(b) Criminal history information; disposition and arrest data; procedures for collection,
storage, dissemination, and current status; security and privacy; availability for law
enforcement, criminal justice, and other lawful purposes; automated systems: review,
challenge, and correction of information
All criminal history information collected, stored, or disseminated through support under this chapter
shall contain, to the maximum extent feasible, disposition as well as arrest data where arrest data is
included therein. The collection, storage, and dissemination of such information shall take place under
procedures reasonably designed to insure that all such information is kept current therein; the Office of
Justice Programs shall assure that the security and privacy of all information is adequately provided for
and that information shall only be used for law enforcement and criminal justice and other lawful
purposes. In addition, an individual who believes that criminal history information concerning him
contained in an automated system is inaccurate, incomplete, or maintained in violation of this chapter,
shall, upon satisfactory verification of his identity, be entitled to review such information and to obtain a
copy of it for the purpose of challenge or correction.

(c) Criminal intelligence systems and information; prohibition against violation of privacy
and constitutional rights of individuals
All criminal intelligence systems operating through support under this chapter shall collect, maintain,
and disseminate criminal intelligence information in conformance with policy standards which are
prescribed by the Office of Justice Programs and which are written to assure that the funding and
operation of these systems furthers the purpose of this chapter and to assure that such systems are not
utilized in violation of the privacy and constitutional rights of individuals.

(d) Violations; fine as additional penalty
Any person violating the provisions of this section, or of any rule, regulation, or order issued
thereunder, shall be fined not to exceed $10,000, in addition to any other penalty imposed by law.
(Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §812, formerly §818, as added Pub. L. 96–157, §2, Dec. 27, 1979, 93 Stat.
1213 ; renumbered §812 and amended Pub. L. 98–473, title II, §609B(f), (k), Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat.
2093 , 2096; Pub. L. 109–162, title XI, §1115(c), Jan. 5, 2006, 119 Stat. 3104 .)
CODIFICATION
Section was formerly classified to section 3789g of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to
editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

Page 59 of 144

PRIOR PROVISIONS
A prior section 812 of Pub. L. 90–351 was classified to section 3789a of Title 42, The Public Health
and Welfare, prior to repeal by section 609B(e) of Pub. L. 98–473.
AMENDMENTS
2006-Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 109–162 substituted "No" for "Except as provided by Federal law other than
this chapter, no".
1984-Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 98–473, 609B(k), substituted "Office of Justice Programs" for "Office
of Justice Assistance, Research, and Statistics".
EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1984 AMENDMENT
Amendment by section 609B(k) of Pub. L. 98–473 effective Oct. 12, 1984, see section 609AA(a) of
Pub. L. 98–473, set out as an Effective Date note under section 10101 of this title.
CONSTRUCTION
Terms "this chapter" and "this section", as such terms appear in this section, deemed to be references to
chapter 501 and section 50105 of this title, respectively, and reference to the Office of Justice Programs in
this section deemed to be a reference to the Attorney General, see section 50105 of this title.

Page 60 of 144

28 CFR Part 22
Confidentiality of Identifiable Research and Statistical Information
(28 CFR Part 22)
PART 22—CONFIDENTIALITY OF IDENTIFIABLE RESEARCH AND STATISTICAL INFORMATION
Sec.
22.1

Purpose.

22.2

Definitions.

22.20

Applicability.

22.21

Use of identifiable data.

22.22

Revelation of identifiable data.

22.23

Privacy certification.

22.24

Information transfer agreement.

22.25

Final disposition of identifiable materials.

22.26

Requests for transfer of information.

22.27

Notification.

22.28

Use of data identifiable to a private person for judicial, legislative or administrative purposes.

22.29

Sanctions.

AUTHORITY: Secs. 801(a), 812(a), Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3701,
et seq., as amended (Pub. L. 90–351, as amended by Pub. L. 93–83, Pub. L. 93–415, Pub. L. 94–430, Pub. L.
94–503, Pub. L. 95–115, Pub. L. 96–157, and Pub. L. 98–473); secs. 262(b), 262(d), Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. 5601, et seq., as amended (Pub. L. 93–415, as amended by
Pub. L. 94–503, Pub. L. 95–115, Pub. L. 99–509, and Pub. L. 98–473); and secs. 1407(a) and 1407(d) of the
Victims of Crime Act of 1984, 42 U.S.C. 10601, et seq., Pub. L. 98–473.
SOURCE: 41 FR 54846, Dec. 15, 1976, unless otherwise noted.

§ 22.1 Purpose.
The purpose of these regulations is to:
(a) Protect privacy of individuals by requiring that information identifiable to a private person obtained
in a research or statistical program may only be used and/or revealed for the purpose for which obtained;
(b) Insure that copies of such information shall not, without the consent of the person to whom the
information pertains, be admitted as evidence or used for any purpose in any judicial or administrative
proceedings;
(c) Increase the credibility and reliability of federally-supported research and statistical findings by
minimizing subject concern over subsequent uses of identifiable information;

Page 61 of 144

(d) Provide needed guidance to persons engaged in research and statistical activities by clarifying the
purposes for which identifiable information may be used or revealed; and
(e) Insure appropriate balance between individual privacy and essential needs of the research community
for data to advance the state of knowledge in the area of criminal justice.
(f) Insure the confidentiality of information provided by crime victims to crisis intervention counselors
working for victim services programs receiving funds provided under the Crime Control Act, the Juvenile
Justice Act, and the Victims of Crime Act.
[41 FR 54846, Dec. 15, 1976, as amended at 51 FR 6400, Feb. 24, 1986]

§ 22.2 Definitions.
(a) Person means any individual, partnership, corporation, association, public or private organization or
governmental entity, or combination thereof.
(b) Private person means any person defined in § 22.2(a) other than an agency, or department of Federal,
State, or local government, or any component or combination thereof. Included as a private person is an indi
vidual acting in his or her official capacity.
(c) Research or statistical project means any program, project, or component thereof which is supported
in whole or in part with funds appropriated under the Act and whose purpose is to develop, measure, evaluate,
or otherwise advance the state of knowledge in a particular area. The term does not include “intelligence” or
other information-gathering activities in which information pertaining to specific individuals is obtained for
purposes directly related to enforcement of the criminal laws.
(d) Research or statistical information means any information which is collected during the conduct of a
research or statistical project and which is intended to be utilized for research or statistical purposes. The term
includes information which is collected directly from the individual or obtained from any agency or individual
having possession, knowledge, or control thereof.
(e) Information identifiable to a private person means information which either—
(1) Is labeled by name or other personal identifiers, or
(2) Can, by virtue of sample size or other factors, be reasonably interpreted as referring to a particular
private person.
(f) Recipient of assistance means any recipient of a grant, contract, interagency agreement, subgrant, or
subcontract under the Act and any person, including subcontractors, employed by such recipient in connection
with performances of the grant, contract, or interagency agreement.
(g) Officer or employee of the Federal Government means any person employed as a regular or special
employee of the U.S. (including experts, consultants, and advisory board members) as of July 1, 1973, or at
any time thereafter.
(h) The act means the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended.
(i) Applicant means any person who applies for a grant, contract, or subgrant to be funded pursuant to
the Act.

Page 62 of 144

(j) The Juvenile Justice Act means the “Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, as
amended.”
(k) The Victims of Crime Act means the Victims of Crime Act of 1984.
[41 FR 54846, Dec. 15, 1976, as amended at 43 FR 16974, Apr. 21, 1978; 51 FR 6400, Feb. 24, 1986]

§ 22.20 Applicability.
(a) These regulations govern use and revelation of research and statistical information obtained, collect
ed, or produced either directly by BJA, OJJDP, BJS, NIJ, or OJP or under any interagency agreement, grant,
contract, or subgrant awarded under the Crime Control Act, the Juvenile Justice Act, and the Victims of
Crime Act.
(b) The regulations do not apply to any records from which identifiable research or statistical informa
tion was originally obtained; or to any records which are designated under existing statutes as public; or to
any information extracted from any records designated as public.
(c) The regulations do not apply to information gained regarding future criminal conduct.
[41 FR 54846, Dec. 15, 1976, as amended at 43 FR 16974, Apr. 21, 1978; 51 FR 6400, 6401, Feb. 24, 1986]

§ 22.21 Use of identifiable data.
Research or statistical information identifiable to a private person may be used only for research or
statistical purposes.

§ 22.22 Revelation of identifiable data.
(a) Except as noted in paragraph (b) of this section, research and statistical information relating to a
private person may be revealed in identifiable form on a need-to-know basis only to—
(1) Officers, employees, and subcontractors of the recipient of assistance;
(2) Such individuals as needed to implement sections 202(c)(3), 801, and 811(b) of the Act; and sections
223(a)(12)(A), 223(a)(13), 223(a)(14), and 243 of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act.
(3) Persons or organizations for research or statistical purposes. Information may only be transferred for
such purposes upon a clear demonstration that the standards of § 22.26 have been met and that, except where
information is transferred under paragraphs (a) (1) and (2) of this section, such transfers shall be conditioned
on compliance with a § 22.24 agreement.
(b) Information may be revealed in identifiable form where prior consent is obtained from an individual
or where the individual has agreed to participate in a project with knowledge that the findings cannot, by
virtue of sample size, or uniqueness of subject, be expected to totally conceal subject identity.
[41 FR 54846, Dec. 15, 1976, as amended at 51 FR 6400, Feb. 24, 1986]

§ 22.23 Privacy certification.
(a) Each applicant for BJA, OJJDP, BJS, NIJ, or OJP support either directly or under a State plan shall
submit a Privacy Certificate as a condition of approval of a grant application or contract proposal which has
a research or statistical project component under which information identifiable to a private person will be
collected.

Page 63 of 144

(b) The Privacy Certificate shall briefly describe the project and shall contain assurance by the applicant
that:
(1) Data identifiable to a private person will not be used or revealed, except as authorized under
§§ 22.21, 22.22.
(2) Access to data will be limited to those employees having a need therefore and that such persons shall
be advised of and agree in writing to comply with these regulations.
(3) All subcontracts which require access to identifiable data will contain conditions meeting the require
ments of § 22.24.
(4) To the extent required by § 22.27 any private persons from whom identifiable data are collected or
obtained, either orally or by means of written questionnaire, shall be advised that the data will only be used or
revealed for research or statistical purposes and that compliance with requests for information is not mandato
ry. Where the notification requirement is to be waived, pursuant to § 22.27(c), a justification must be included
in the Privacy Certificate.
(5) Adequate precautions will be taken to insure administrative and physical security of identifiable data.
(6) A log will be maintained indicating that identifiable data have been transmitted to persons other than
BJA, OJJDP, BJS, NIJ, or OJP or grantee/contractor staff or subcontractors, that such data have been returned,
or that alternative arrangements have been agreed upon for future maintenance of such data.
(7) Project plans will be designed to preserve anonymity of private persons to whom information relates,
including, where appropriate, name-stripping, coding of data, or other similar procedures.
(8) Project findings and reports prepared for dissemination will not contain information which can rea
sonably be expected to be identifiable to a private person except as authorized under § 22.22.
(c) The applicant shall attach to the Privacy Certification a description of physical and/or administrative
procedures to be followed to insure the security of the data to meet the requirements of § 22.25.
[41 FR 5486, Dec. 15, 1976, as amended at 51 FR 6401, Feb. 24, 1986]

§ 22.24 Information transfer agreement.
Prior to the transfer of any identifiable information to persons other than BJA, OJJDP, BJS, NIJ, or OJP
or project staff, an agreement shall be entered into which shall provide, as a minimum, that the recipient of
data agrees that:
(a) Information identifiable to a private person will be used only for research and statistical purposes.
(b) Information identifiable to a private person will not be revealed to any person for any purpose except
where the information has already been included in research findings (and/or data bases) and is revealed on a
need-to-know basis for research or statistical purposes, provided that such transfer is approved by the person
providing information under the agreement, or authorized under § 22.24(e).
(c) Knowingly and willfully using or disseminating information contrary to the provisions of the agree
ment shall constitute a violation of these regulations, punishable in accordance with the Act.
(d) Adequate administrative and physical precautions will be taken to assure security of information
obtained for such purpose.

Page 64 of 144

(e) Access to information will be limited to those employees or subcontractors having a need therefore in
connection with performance of the activity for which obtained, and that such persons shall be advised of, and
agree to comply with, these regulations.
(f) Project plans will be designed to preserve anonymity of private persons to whom information relates,
including, where appropriate, required name-stripping and/or coding of data or other similar procedures.
(g) Project findings and reports prepared for dissemination will not contain information which can
reasonably be expected to be identifiable to a private person.
(h) Information identifiable to a private person (obtained in accordance with this agreement) will, unless
otherwise agreed upon, be returned upon completion of the project for which obtained and no copies of that
information retained.
[41 FR 5486, Dec. 15, 1976, as amended at 51 FR 6401, Feb. 24, 1986]

§ 22.25 Final disposition of identifiable materials.
Upon completion of a research or statistical project the security of identifiable research or statistical
information shall be protected by:
(a) Complete physical destruction of all copies of the materials or the identifiable portion of such
materials after a three-year required recipient retention period or as soon as authorized by law, or
(b) Removal of identifiers from data and separate maintenance of a name-code index in a secure
location.
The Privacy Certificate shall indicate the procedures to be followed and shall, in the case of paragraph
(b) of this section, describe procedures to secure the name index.

§ 22.26 Requests for transfer of information.
(a) Requests for transfer of information identifiable to an individual shall be submitted to the person
submitting the Privacy Certificate pursuant to § 22.23.
(b) Except where information is requested by BJA, OJJDP, BJS, NIJ, or OJP, the request shall describe
the general objectives of the project for which information is requested, and specifically justify the need for
such information in identifiable form. The request shall also indicate, and provide justification for the conclu
sion that conduct of the project will not, either directly or indirectly, cause legal, economic, physical, or social
harm to individuals whose identification is revealed in the transfer of information.
(c) Data may not be transferred pursuant to this section where a clear showing of the criteria set forth
above is not made by the person requesting the data.
[41 FR 5486, Dec. 15, 1976, as amended at 51 FR 6401, Feb. 24, 1986]

§ 22.27 Notification.
(a) Any person from whom information identifiable to a private person is to be obtained directly, either
orally, by questionnaire, or other written documents, shall be advised:
(1) That the information will only be used or revealed for research or statistical purposes; and

Page 65 of 144

(2) That compliance with the request for information is entirely voluntary and may be terminated at
any time.
(b) Except as noted in paragraph (c) of this section, where information is to be obtained through obser
vation of individual activity or performance, such individuals shall be advised:
(1) Of the particular types of information to be collected;
(2) That the data will only be utilized or revealed for research or statistical purposes; and
(3) That participation in the project in question is voluntary and may be terminated at any time.
(c) Notification, as described in paragraph (b) of this section, may be eliminated where information is
obtained through field observation of individual activity or performance and in the judgment of the researcher
such notification is impractical or may seriously impede the progress of the research.
(d) Where findings in a project cannot, by virtue of sample size, or uniqueness of subject, be expected to
totally conceal subject identity, an individual shall be so advised.

§ 22.28 Use of data identifiable to a private person for judicial, legislative or administrative
purposes.
(a) Research or statistical information identifiable to a private person shall be immune from legal process
and shall only be admitted as evidence or used for any purpose in any action, suit, or other judicial, legislative
or administrative proceeding with the written consent of the individual to whom the data pertains.
(b) Where consent is obtained, such consent shall:
(1) Be obtained at the time that information is sought for use in judicial, legislative or administrative
proceedings;
(2) Set out specific purposes in connection with which information will be used;
(3) Limit, where appropriate, the scope of the information subject to such consent.
[41 FR 54846, Dec. 15, 1976, as amended at 45 FR 62038, Sept. 18, 1980]

§ 22.29 Sanctions.
Where BJA, OJJDP, BJS, NIJ, or OJP believes that a violation has occurred of section 812(a) of the Act
or section 1407(d) of the Victims of Crime Act, these regulations, or any grant or contract conditions entered
into thereunder, it may initiate administrative actions leading to termination of a grant or contract, commence
appropriate personnel and/or other procedures in cases involving Federal employees, and/or initiate appropri
ate legal actions leading to imposition of a fine not to exceed $10,000 against any person responsible for such
violations.
[41 FR 54846, Dec. 15, 1976, as amended at 45 FR 62038, Sept. 18, 1980; 51 FR 6401, Feb. 24, 1986]

Page 66 of 144

Individuals Involved in Informing JRFC Collection, Analysis,
and Dissemination Activities:
Benjamin Adams
Social Science Analyst
National Institute of Justice
Brecht Donoghue
Senior Social Science Analyst
National Institute of Justice
Phelan Wyrick, Ph.D.
Director, Crime and Crime Prevention Research Division
National Institute of Justice
Peter M. Brien
Attorney Advisor
Office of the General Counsel
Office of Justice Programs
Nicole Adolph
Chief, Criminal Justice Statistics Branch
Economic Reimbursable Surveys Division
US Census Bureau
Crecilla Scott
Supervisory Statistician, Criminal Justice Statistics Branch
Economic Reimbursable Surveys Division
US Census Bureau
Krystal Jimerson
Statistician, Criminal Justice Statistics Branch
Economic Reimbursable Surveys Division
US Census Bureau
Sabrina Webb
Statistician, Criminal Justice Statistics Branch
Economic Reimbursable Surveys Division
US Census Bureau
Suzanne Dorinski
Mathematical Statistician
Economic Statistical Methods Division
US Census Bureau
Magdalena Ramos
Assistant Division Chief

Page 67 of 144

Methodology Director for Public Sector Statistics
Economic Statistical Methods Division
US Census Bureau
Jessica Stroop
Statistician
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Jennifer Bronson, Ph.D.
Statistician
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Melissa Sickmund, Ph.D.
Director
National Center for Juvenile Justice
Charles Puzzanchera
Senior Research Associate
National Center for Juvenile Justice
Sarah Hockenberry
Research Associate
National Center for Juvenile Justice
Michael P. Dempsey
Executive Director
Council of Juvenile Correctional Administrators
Justin Noble
Project Manager for Data Services
National Archive of Criminal Justice Data
Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research

U.S. Department of Justice
Page 68 of 144

Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

JUVENILE JUSTICE
STATISTICS
NATIONAL REPORT SERIES BULLETIN
December 2018

Caren Harp, Administrator

Juvenile Residential Facility Census,
2016: Selected Findings
Sarah Hockenberry and Anthony Sladky

Highlights
Nationally, 45,567 juvenile offenders were held in 1,772 residential placement facilities on October 26,
2016. Facilities that hold juvenile offenders vary in their operation, type, size, confinement features,
screening practices, and services provided. To better understand the characteristics of these facilities,

Most facilities reported screening youth for service needs in 2016
Percentage of facilities screening youth
100
5%
7%
90

n More than half of all facilities were publicly
14%
35%

12%

60
40

operated in 2016; they held 71% of
offenders.
n Nearly 6 in 10 facilities (56%) were small

70
50

the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention sponsors the Juvenile Residential
Facility Census (JRFC), a biennial survey of
public and private juvenile residential facilities in
every state. Findings in this bulletin are based
on JRFC data collected for 2016.

93%

88%

74%
65%

(20 or fewer residents), but more than half
(57%) of all offenders were held in mediumsize facilities (holding 21–100 residents).

n A small proportion (3%) of facilities operated

over capacity in 2016; these facilities held
4% of all offenders.

Suicide risk

Education
needs

Substance
abuse

Mental health
needs

■ All youth ■ Some youth ■ No youth
Notes: The mental health needs percent is based on facilities that reported using an in-house mental health
professional to screen youth, not the total number of facilities that responded to questions about mental health
screening. For all other service needs, the percentages are based on all reporting facilities.

Access OJJDP publications online at ojjdp.gov

n About 9 in 10 facilities screened all youth

for suicide risk and educational needs.
n Six youth died in placement in 2016; one of

these was ruled a suicide.

Page 69 of 144

A Message From OJJDP
On October 26, 2016, OJJDP
conducted the ninth Juvenile
Residential Facility Census,
a snapshot of the facilities—
both publicly and privately
operated—that house youth
charged with or adjudicated
for law violations.
OJJDP’s biennial census
collects data on how juvenile
facilities operate and the
services they provide.
The census also provides
information on facility
ownership, security, capacity
and crowding, and injuries and
deaths of youth in custody.
Data from the 2016 census
indicate that the number of
youth in residential placement
continues to decline, a trend that
has lasted nearly two decades.
In 2016, more youth were held
in county, city, or municipally
operated facilities on the census
date than were held in stateoperated facilities. Facility
crowding affected a relatively
small proportion of youth in
custody. Most responding
facilities routinely evaluated all
youth for suicide risk, education
needs, substance abuse, and
mental health needs.
We hope this bulletin will serve
as an important resource to
inform and support efforts
to ensure that the nation’s
juvenile residential facilities are
safe and that youth in custody
receive the necessary
treatment and services.
Caren Harp
Administrator

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census
provides data on facility operations
Facility census describes
2,345 juvenile facilities
In October 2016, the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)
administered the ninth Juvenile Residential
Facility Census (JRFC). JRFC began in 2000
with data collections occurring every other
year. JRFC routinely collects data on how
facilities operate and the services they
provide. It includes questions on facility
ownership and operation, security, capacity
and crowding, and injuries and deaths in
custody. The census also collects
supplementary information each year on
specific services, such as mental and physical
health, substance abuse, and education.
JRFC does not capture data on adult prisons
or jails, nor does it include facilities used
exclusively for mental health or substance
abuse treatment or for dependent children.
Thus, JRFC includes most, but not all,
facilities that hold juvenile offenders (i.e.,
youth who were charged with or adjudicated
for law violations). The reporting facilities
may also hold adults or youth for nonoffense
reasons (e.g., abuse/neglect, mental health/
substance abuse problems), but data were
included only if the facility held at least one
juvenile offender on the census date.
In this bulletin, the term resident is used
when discussing facility size or crowding, as
these are characteristics related to all persons
in the facility. The terms offender and/or youth
are used when discussing all other information
directly related to offenders who were
younger than 21 on the census date.
The 2016 JRFC collected data from 2,345
juvenile facilities. Analyses in this bulletin
were based only on data from facilities
housing juvenile offenders on the census
date (October 26, 2016); 1,772 facilities were
included in the analyses. Excluded from the
analyses were data from 1 facility in the
Virgin Islands, 5 facilities in Puerto Rico,
14 tribal facilities, and 553 facilities that held
no juvenile offenders on that date.

The 1,772 facilities housed a total of 45,567
juvenile offenders. This represents the fewest
such youth in residential placement since the
1975 Children in Custody Census (the
predecessor data collection to the JRFC and
its companion collection, the Census of
Juveniles in Residential Placement), which
reported 48,043 offenders in juvenile facilities
on the census date. From 1975 to 2000, the
data collections recorded increasingly larger
1-day counts of juvenile offenders in public
and private residential placement facilities.
From 2000 to 2016, those increases were
erased, resulting in the lowest census
population recorded since 1975.

Local facilities were more
numerous, but state
facilities held nearly as
many youth
Historically, local facilities (those staffed by
county, city, or municipal employees) held
fewer juvenile offenders than state facilities,
even though they comprised more than half
of all public facilities. In recent years, the gap
narrowed and, in 2016, local facilities held
more youth than state facilities.
Facilities

Juvenile
offenders

Number Percent Number Percent
Total
1,772
100% 45,567 100%
Public
978
55
32,301
71
State
365
21
15,095
33
Local
613
35
17,206
38
Private
794
45
13,266
29
Note: Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

In 2016, JRFC asked facilities if a for-profit
agency owned and/or operated them. Of
reporting facilities, only a small percentage
said that these types of agencies owned (8%)
or operated (8%) them. In both cases, these
facilities tended to hold 100 or fewer
residents and were most likely to classify
themselves as residential treatment centers.

National Report Series Bulletin

Page 70 of 144
On October 26, 2016, 55% of juvenile facilities were publicly operated; they held 71% of juvenile offenders

Juvenile facilities
State
Total
U.S. total
1,772
Alabama
39
Alaska
18
Arizona
18
Arkansas
31
California
150
Colorado
31
Connecticut
5
Delaware
8
District of Columbia
6
Florida
82

Juvenile offenders

Public Private
978
794
14
25
7
11
14
4
17
14
92
58
16
15
3
–
6
–
–
4
27
55

Juvenile facilities

Total
45,567
894
217
661
673
6,006
1,001
99
180
156
3,078

Public
32,301
457
167
514
491
5,225
826
95
165
–
1,130

Private
13,266
437
50
147
182
781
175
–
–
24
1,948

State
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio

Georgia

1,584

1,469

115

Oklahoma

Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi

3
19
33
64
44
19
36
30
2
29
51
48
44
16

–
13
24
31
10
12
27
16
–
13
22
27
19
16

–
6
9
33
34
7
9
14
–
16
29
21
25
–

37
476
1,154
1,446
867
407
598
783
69
603
507
1,676
756
242

–
395
1,048
865
252
349
432
579
–
426
219
832
522
242

–
81
106
581
615
58
166
204
–
177
288
844
234
–

Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

Juvenile offenders

Total
56
15
10
18
4
23
17
85
28
8
70

Public
50
5
5
13
–
21
14
20
23
3
59

Private
6
10
5
5
–
–
3
65
5
5
11

Total
874
139
426
529
96
555
387
1,182
473
104
2,105

Public
844
97
247
511
–
553
343
457
399
62
1,981

Private
30
42
179
18
–
–
44
725
74
42
124

563

391

172

43
106
14
22
17
26
92
34
2
41
32
42
51
16

29
22
–
9
9
17
72
18
–
40
31
10
23
4

14
84
13
13
8
9
20
16
–
–
–
32
28
12

965
2,753
213
657
189
641
4,430
537
15
1,070
871
674
720
229

791
678
–
396
81
459
3,802
333
–
1,037
856
242
512
128

174
2,075
123
261
108
182
628
204
–
–
–
432
208
101

Notes: “State” is the state where the facility is located. Youth sent to out-of-state facilities are counted in the state where the facility is located, not the state where they
committed their offense. Detail is not displayed in states with one or two private facilities to preserve the privacy of individual facilities.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

Training schools tend to be state facilities, detention centers tend to be local facilities, and group homes tend to be
private facilities
Facility type
Facility operation

Total

Detention
center

Shelter

Reception/
diagnostic center

Group
home

Ranch/
wilderness camp

Training
school

Residential
treatment center

Number of facilities
Operations profile
All facilities
Public
State
Local
Private
Facility profile
All facilities
Public
State
Local
Private

1,772

662

131

344

189

678

100%
55
21
35
45

100%
92
21
72
8

100%
36
2
34
64

100%
72
55
17
28

100%
18
8
10
82

100%
63
17
47
37

100%
80
56
24
20

100%
33
20
14
67

100%
100
100
100
100

37%
62
37
77
7

7%
5
1
7
11

3%
4
9
2
2

19%
6
8
5
36

2%
2
1
2
1

11%
15
29
8
5

38%
23
37
15
57

•n Detention centers, reception/diagnostic centers, ranch/wilderness camps, and training schools were more likely to be public facilities than private facilities.
•n Most shelters, group homes, and residential treatment centers were private facilities.
•n Detention centers made up the largest proportion of all local facilities and nearly two-thirds of all public facilities.
•n Detention centers and residential treatment centers accounted for the largest proportions of all state facilities (37% each); training schools accounted for 29%.
•n Residential treatment centers accounted for 57% of all private facilities, and group homes accounted for 36%.
Notes: Counts (and row percentages) may sum to more than the total number of facilities because facilities could select more than one facility type. Detail may not sum to
total because of rounding.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

December 20183

Page 71 of 144

Confinement features and size varied across types of
facilities
Facilities varied in their
use of confinement
features
Overall, 46% of facilities said that, at least
some of the time, they locked youth in their
sleeping rooms. Among public facilities, 81% of
local facilities and 68% of state facilities
reported locking youth in sleeping rooms.
Few private facilities locked youth in sleeping
rooms (8%).
Percentage of facilities locking youth in
sleeping rooms
Total
46%
Public
State
Local
Private

76
68
81
8

Note: Percentages are based on facilities that
reported confinement information (37 of 1,772
facilities [2%] did not report).

Among facilities that locked youth in sleeping
rooms, most did this at night (89%) or when
a youth was out of control (76%). Locking
doors whenever youth were in their sleeping
rooms (58%) and locking youth in their
rooms during shift changes (49%) were also
fairly common. Fewer facilities reported
locking youth in sleeping rooms for a part of
each day (25%) or when they were suicidal
(21%). Very few facilities reported that they
locked youth in sleeping rooms most of each
day (2%) or all of each day (less than 1%).
Eight percent (8%) had no set schedule for
locking youth in sleeping rooms.
Facilities indicated whether they had various
types of locked doors or gates to confine
youth within the facility (see sidebar, this
page). Of all facilities that reported
confinement information, 60% said they had
one or more confinement features (other

than locked sleeping rooms, with a greater
proportion of public facilities using these
features than private facilities (85% vs. 29%).
Percentage of facilities
No
One or more
confinement confinement
features
features
Total
Public
State
Local
Private

40%
15
16
14
71

60%
85
84
86
29

Note: Percentages are based on facilities that
reported confinement information (37 of 1,772
facilities [2%] did not report).

Among detention centers and training schools
that reported confinement information, more
than 9 in 10 said they had one or more
features (other than locked sleeping rooms).
Facilities reporting one or more
confinement features (other than
locked sleeping rooms)
Facility type
Number Percentage
Total facilities
Detention center
Shelter
Reception/
diagnostic center
Group home
Ranch/wilderness
camp
Training school
Residential
treatment center

1,046
638
35

60%
97
27

179

316

Note: Detail sums to more than totals because
facilities could select more than one facility type.

Among group homes, 1 in 8 facilities said
they had locked doors or gates to confine
youth. Facility staff also serves to confine
youth. For some facilities, the remote location
is a feature that also helps to keep youth
from leaving.

The Juvenile Residential
Facility Census asks
facilities about their
confinement features
n Are any young persons in this facility

locked in their sleeping rooms by
staff at any time to confine them?
n Does this facility have any of the

following features intended to
confine young persons within
specific areas?
• Doors for secure day rooms that
are locked by staff to confine
young persons within specific
areas?
• Wing, floor, corridor, or other
internal security doors that are
locked by staff to confine young
persons within specific areas?
• Outside doors that are locked by
staff to confine young persons
within specific buildings?
• External gates in fences or walls
without razor wire that are
locked by staff to confine young
persons?
• External gates in fences or walls
with razor wire that are locked by
staff to confine young persons?
Overall, 27% of facilities reported external
gates in fences or walls with razor wire.
This arrangement was most common
among training schools (51%), detention
centers (49%), and reception/diagnostic
centers (41%).

National Report Series Bulletin

Page 72 of 144

In general, the use of
confinement features
increased as facility
size increased
In the past, among facilities providing
confinement information, the largest facilities
(those with more than 200 residents) were
most likely to report using a variety of
features. Although the use of confinement
generally increased as facility size increased,
for the first time in 2016 the proportion of
facilities holding more than 200 residents
using these features was lower than the
proportion of facilities holding between 101
and 200 residents. Nearly 90% of facilities
holding between 101 and 200 residents
reported using one or more confinement
features, compared with 63% of facilities
holding more than 200 residents.
Although the use of razor wire is a far less
common confinement measure, more than
half (52%) of facilities holding between 101
and 200 residents said they had locked gates
in fences or walls with razor wire.

More than half of facilities were small (holding 20 or fewer residents),
although more than half of juvenile offenders were held in medium
facilities (holding 21–100 residents)
Total facilities
1–10 residents
11–20 residents
21–50 residents
51–100 residents
101–200 residents
201+ residents

In 2006, 3% of facilities held more than 200
residents, compared with 1% in 2016.
Additionally, the proportion of youth held at
these facilities has also decreased. In 2006,
one-quarter (24%) of youth held in facilities
on the census date were in large facilities,
compared with 8% of youth held in 2016.

Large facilities were most
likely to be state operated
Few (19%) state-operated facilities (68 of
365) held 10 or fewer residents in 2016. In
contrast, 43% of private facilities (341 of 794)
were that small. In fact, these small private
facilities made up the largest proportion of
private facilities.

Percentage of
facilities

1,772
598
389
495
209
65
16

100%
34
22
28
12
4
1

Number of
offenders

Percentage of
offenders

45,567
3,171
4,912
13,788
12,165
7,698
3,833

100%
7
11
30
27
17
8

•n Although the largest facilities—those holding more than 200 residents—accounted for 1% of
all facilities, they held 8% of all youth in placement.
•n Inversely, although the smallest facilities—those holding 10 or fewer residents—accounted for
34% of all facilities, they held 7% of all youth in residential placement.
Note: Column percentages may not add up to 100% because of rounding.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

Among group homes and shelters, those holding 20 or fewer residents
were most common

Facility size

The number of facilities
that reported holding more
than 200 residents has
declined since 2006

Number of
facilities

Facility size

Facility type
Reception/
Ranch/
Residential
Detention
diagnostic Group wilderness Training treatment
center Shelter center
home
camp
school
center

Number of facilities

662

131

344

189

678

Total facilities
1–10 residents
11–20 residents
21–50 residents
51–100 residents
101–200 residents
201+ residents

100%
26
23
33
12
4
1

100%
59
21
15
5
2
0

100%
24
17
19
14
22
3

100%
61
22
12
4
0
0

100%
17
23
37
23
0
0

100%
5
10
39
30
14
3

100%
26
22
32
16
3
1

•n 61% of group homes and 59% of shelters held 10 or fewer residents. For other facility types,
this proportion was 26% or less.
•n 3% each of reception/diagnostic centers and training schools held more than 200 residents.
For other facility types, this proportion was 1% or less.
Notes: Facility type counts sum to more than 1,772 facilities because facilities could select more than 1 facility
type. Column percentages may not add up to 100% because of rounding.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

Facility operation
Facility size
Total facilities
1–10 residents
11–20 residents
21–50 residents
51–100 residents
101–200 residents
201+ residents

State
365
68
87
117
55
33
5

Local Private
613
794
189
341
135
167
195
183
72
82
16
16
6
5

State-operated facilities made up 21% of all
facilities and accounted for 31% of facilities
holding more than 200 residents. Private
facilities constituted 45% of all facilities and
accounted for 57% of facilities holding 10 or
fewer residents.

December 20185

Page 73 of 144

Facility crowding affected a relatively small proportion of
youth in custody
One in five youth were in
facilities that were at or
over their standard bed
capacity
Facilities reported both the number of
standard beds and the number of makeshift
beds they had on the census date.
Occupancy rates provide the broadest
assessment of the adequacy of living space.
Although occupancy rate standards have not
been established, as a facility’s occupancy
surpasses 100%, operational functioning
may be compromised.
Crowding occurs when the number of
residents occupying all or part of a facility
exceeds some predetermined limit based on
square footage, utility use, or even fire codes.
Although it is an imperfect measure of
crowding, comparing the number of residents
to the number of standard beds gives a
sense of the crowding problem in a facility.
Even without relying on makeshift beds, a
facility may be crowded. For example, using
standard beds in an infirmary for youth who
are not sick or beds in seclusion for youth
who have not committed infractions may
indicate crowding problems.
Twenty-two percent (22%) of facilities said
that the number of residents they held on the
2016 census date put them at or over the
capacity of their standard beds or that they
relied on some makeshift beds. These
facilities held 20% of offenders in 2016
compared with 42% of offenders in 2000. In
2016, 3% of facilities reported being over
capacity (having fewer standard beds than
they had residents or relying on makeshift
beds). These facilities held 4% of offenders.
In comparison, 8% of facilities in 2000
reported being over capacity and they held
20% of offenders.

Compared with other types of private facilities, ranch/wilderness camps
were more likely to be over their standard bed capacity
Percentage of facilities at
their standard bed capacity
Facility type

Percentage of facilities over
their standard bed capacity

Total

Public

Private

Total

Public

Private

Total

18%

13%

24%

Detention center

Shelter

Reception/diagnostic center

Group home

Ranch/wilderness camp

Training school

Residential treatment center

Notes: A single bed is counted as one standard bed, and a bunk bed is counted as two standard beds.
Makeshift beds (e.g., cots, rollout beds, mattresses, and sofas) are not counted as standard beds.
Facilities are counted as over capacity if they reported more residents than standard beds or if they
reported any occupied makeshift beds. Facilities could select more than one facility type.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

Facilities holding between 101 and 200 residents were the most likely
to be crowded

Facility size
Total facilities
1–10 residents
11–20 residents
21–50 residents
51–100 residents
101–200 residents
201+ residents

Number of
facilities
1,772
598
389
495
209
65
16

Percentage of facilities
under, at, or over their
Mean number of
standard bed capacity
makeshift beds at
<100% 100% >100% facilities over capacity
78%
76
78
80
79
77
94

18%
20
20
16
15
15
6

3%
4
2
4
5
8
0

2
2
1
2
2
9
0

National Report Series Bulletin

Page 74 of 144

Private facilities were more
likely than public facilities
to be operating at or above
capacity
Among privately operated facilities, 4%
exceeded standard bed capacity or had
residents occupying makeshift beds on the
2016 census date. For publicly operated
facilities, the proportion was 3%. In addition,
a larger proportion of private facilities (24%)
compared with public facilities (13%) said
they were operating at 100% capacity. Of
publicly operated facilities, a slightly larger

proportion of state-operated facilities than
locally operated facilities exceeded capacity
(4% and 2%, respectively).

Facility
operation
Total
Public
State
Local
Private

Percentage of facilities
at or over their
standard bed capacity
≥100
22%
16
24
11
28

100 >100
18%
3%
13
3
20
4
9
2
24
4

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

Use of makeshift beds
varied widely
There were 62 facilities that reported having
occupied makeshift beds, averaging 2 such
beds per facility. Although some facilities rely
on makeshift beds, many others operate well
below standard bed capacity. On average,
there were 16 unoccupied standard beds per
facility. This average masks a wide range: 1
facility with 146 residents had 130 standard
beds and 16 residents without standard beds;
another facility with 596 standard beds had
137 residents, leaving 459 unoccupied beds.

Nationwide, 383 juvenile facilities (22%) were at or over standard capacity or relied on makeshift beds
Number of
facilities under, at,
or over capacity
Total
State
facilities <100% 100% >100%
U.S. total
1,772 1,389
321
62
Alabama
39
32
5
2
Alaska
18
12
5
1
Arizona
18
14
4
0
Arkansas
31
18
13
0
California
150
126
24
0
Colorado
31
27
2
2
Connecticut
5
5
0
0
Delaware
8
7
0
1
District of Columbia
6
3
2
1
Florida
82
49
26
7
Georgia
39
24
12
3
Hawaii
3
3
0
0
Idaho
19
18
1
0
Illinois
33
29
3
1
Indiana
64
53
8
3
Iowa
44
40
4
0
Kansas
19
17
2
0
Kentucky
36
30
3
3
Louisiana
30
23
6
1
Maine
2
2
0
0
Maryland
29
23
5
1
Massachusetts
51
39
12
0
Michigan
48
44
4
0
Minnesota
44
33
10
1
Mississippi
16
15
1
0

Percentage of
offenders in
facilities at or
over capacity
100% >100%
15%
4%
11
2
49
5
15
0
39
0
7
0
1
18
0
0
0
39
9
53
32
11
33
12
0
0
27
0
4
2
9
3
4
0
3
0
5
4
8
2
0
0
3
1
35
0
4
0
5
1
6
0

Number of
facilities under, at,
or over capacity
Total
State
facilities <100% 100% >100%
Missouri
56
42
12
2
Montana
15
13
2
0
Nebraska
10
10
0
0
Nevada
18
10
8
0
New Hampshire
4
3
1
0
New Jersey
23
21
2
0
New Mexico
17
16
0
1
New York
85
68
17
0
North Carolina
28
23
1
4
North Dakota
8
8
0
0
Ohio
70
59
7
4
Oklahoma
35
17
15
3
Oregon
43
35
6
2
Pennsylvania
106
88
15
3
Rhode Island
14
7
5
2
South Carolina
22
19
2
1
South Dakota
17
15
2
0
Tennessee
26
20
6
0
Texas
92
83
6
3
Utah
34
14
20
0
Vermont
2
1
1
0
Virginia
41
36
5
0
Washington
32
26
5
1
West Virginia
43
19
20
3
Wisconsin
51
34
11
6
Wyoming
16
16
0
0

Percentage of
offenders in
facilities at or
over capacity
100% >100%
26%
8%
6
0
0
0
53
0
17
0
4
0
0
8
22
0
6
5
0
0
17
13
29
9
8
9
20
1
15
46
7
1
5
0
19
0
6
2
57
0
40
0
10
0
37
3
29
16
34
6
0
0

Notes: A single bed is counted as one standard bed, and a bunk bed is counted as two standard beds. Makeshift beds (e.g., cots, rollout beds, mattresses, and sofas) are
not counted as standard beds. Facilities are counted as over capacity if they reported more residents than standard beds or if they reported any occupied makeshift beds.
Facilities could select more than one facility type. “State” is the state where the facility is located. Youth sent to out-of-state facilities are counted in the state where the
facility is located, not the state where they committed their offense.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

December 20187

Page 75 of 144

Most youth were evaluated for educational needs and
attended school while held in facilities
Facilities that screened all
youth for educational
needs held 85% of the
youth in custody
As part of the information collected on
educational services, the JRFC questionnaire
asked facilities about their procedures
regarding educational screening.
In 2016, 88% of facilities that reported
educational screening information said that
they evaluated all youth for grade level and
educational needs. An additional 5%
evaluated some youth. Only 7% did not
evaluate any youth for educational needs.
Of the 73 facilities in 2016 that screened some
but not all youth, 59% evaluated youth whom
staff identified as needing an assessment,
52% evaluated youth with known educational
problems, 54% evaluated youth for whom no
educational record was available, and 22%
evaluated youth who came directly from home
rather than from another facility. In addition,
39% reported evaluating youth based on some
“other” reason.
In 2016, those facilities that screened all youth
held 85% of the juvenile offenders in custody.
An additional 3% of such youth in 2016 were
in facilities that screened some youth.

Most facilities reported
that youth in their facility
attended school

all youth attended school (69% of facilities)
accounted for 69% of the juvenile offender
population in residential placement.
Reception/diagnostic centers were the least
likely to report that all youth attended
school (43%) and the most likely to report
that no youth attended school (22%).

Eighty-eight percent (88%) of facilities
reported that at least some youth in their
facility attended school either inside or
outside the facility. Facilities reporting that

The smallest facilities were the least likely to evaluate all youth for
grade level
Facility size based on residential population
Total

1–10

11–20

21–50

Total facilities

Education screening

1,772

598

389

495

209

Facilities reporting

1,565

497

364

448

181

All reporting facilities

100%

All youth screened

The vast majority of facilities (92%) that
screened some or all youth for grade level and
educational needs used previous academic
records. Some facilities also administered
written tests (63%) or conducted an
education-related interview with an education
specialist (60%), intake counselor (38%), or
guidance counselor (28%).

201+

Some youth screened

No youth screened

•n Facilities holding 51–100 residents were the most likely to evaluate all youth for grade
level in 2016.
Notes: Reporting total excludes five facilities that did not indicate which youth were screened. Column
percentages may not add up to 100% because of rounding.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

Most facilities evaluated youth for grade level between 24 hours and
7 days after arrival
Number of juvenile facilities

Most facilities used
previous academic records
to evaluate educational
needs

51–100 101–200

When youth are
evaluated for
educational needs
Total reporting facilities

As a percentage of facilities that
evaluated youth for grade level

Some
Facilities
Some
All
All youth youth
that
All youth
youth
facilities evaluated evaluated evaluated evaluated evaluated
1,455

1,377

100%

95%

Less than 24 hours

297

286

24 hours to 7 days

1,129

1,090

107

317

–

7 or more days
Other
Facilities not evaluating
(or not reporting)

Note: Reporting facilities sum to more than 1,455 because they could select more than one time period.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

National Report Series Bulletin

Page 76 of 144

Facilities with 11–20 and 21–50 residents
were most likely to report that all youth
attended school (73% each), while facilities
with 101–200 residents were least likely
(58%) to have all youth attend school.
Facilities reporting that no youth attended
school (12%) accounted for 9% of all juvenile
offenders in residential placement.

Facilities offered a variety
of educational services
Facilities that provided both middle and high
school-level education housed 90% of all
juvenile offenders. Eighty-seven percent
(87%) of all facilities provided high schoollevel education, and 80% provided middle
school-level education. Most facilities also
reported offering special education services
(76%) and GED preparation (67%). A much
smaller percentage of facilities provided
vocational or technical education (36%) and
post-high school education (33%).
In 2016, facilities were asked if they
communicated information regarding the
education status, services, and/or needs
to the young person’s new placement or
residence; 82% of facilities said that they
did. Most of these (88%) said that they
communicated education status information
for all youth departing the facility.

Group homes and small facilities were the least likely to report that youth in
their facility attended school
Percentage of facilities with
youth attending school
Facility type

Total

All youth

Some youth

No youth

Total facilities

100%

69%

19%

12%

Detention center

100

Shelter

100

Reception/diagnostic center

100

Group home

100

Ranch/wilderness camp

100

Training school

100

Residential treatment center

100

1–10 residents

100%

64%

19%

17%

11–20 residents

100

21–50 residents

100

51–100 residents

100

101–200 residents

100

201+ residents

100

Facility size

Note: Row percentages may not add up to 100% because of rounding.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

Most facilities provided middle and high school-level education
Facility type
Education
level
Elementary
level
Middle school
High school
Special
education
GED preparation
GED testing
Post-high school
Vocational/
technical
Life skills
training

Reception/
Ranch/
Residential
All Detention
diagnostic Group wilderness Training treatment
facilities center Shelter
center
home
camp
school
center
42%
80
87

61%
88
91

56%
92
93

28%
67
76

23%
66
82

13%
67
90

32%
84
94

34%
79
86

67
46
33

64
36
20

69
44
24

62
47
28

65
56
41

77
67
53

85
74
66

70
51
41

Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

December 20189

Page 77 of 144

Most facilities reported screening youth for substance
abuse problems
Facilities that screened all
youth held 70% of the
juvenile offenders in
custody
In 2016, 74% of facilities that reported
substance abuse evaluation information said
that they evaluated all youth, 12% said that
they evaluated some youth, and 14% did not
evaluate any youth.
Of the 190 facilities that evaluated some but
not all youth, 88% evaluated youth that the
court or a probation officer identified as
potentially having substance abuse problems,
74% evaluated youth that facility staff
identified as potentially having substance
abuse problems, and 65% evaluated youth
charged with or adjudicated for a drug- or
alcohol-related offense. Those facilities that
screened all youth held 70% of the juvenile
offenders in custody. An additional 12% of
offenders were in facilities that screened
some youth.

Drug testing was a routine
procedure in most facilities
in 2016
As part of the information collected on
substance abuse services, JRFC asked
facilities if they required any youth to
undergo drug testing after they arrived at the
facility. The majority of facilities (69%)
reported that they required at least some

youth to undergo drug testing. Of facilities
that reported testing all or some youth, the
most common reason for testing was
because of a request from the court or the
probation officer (66% for facilities that
tested all youth, 68% for facilities that tested
youth suspected of recent drug or alcohol
use, and 65% for facilities that tested youth
with substance abuse problems).

Facilities holding 11–20 residents were the least likely to evaluate all
youth for substance abuse problems
Facility size based on
residential population

Substance
abuse screening

Total

1–10

11–20

Total facilities

1,772

598

389

Facilities reporting

1,569

499

365

449

181

All reporting facilities

100%

All youth screened

Some youth screened

No youth screened

21–50 51–100 101–200 201+
495

209

Note: Column percentages may not add up to 100% because of rounding.

The most common form of
evaluation was a series
of staff-administered
questions
The majority of facilities (75%) that
evaluated some or all youth for substance
abuse problems had staff administer a
series of questions that ask about substance
use and abuse, 60% visually observed youth
to evaluate them, 56% used a self-report
checklist inventory that asks about
substance use and abuse to evaluate youth,
and 41% said they used a standardized selfreport instrument, such as the Substance
Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory.

Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

More than half of reporting facilities evaluated youth for substance
abuse within their first day at the facility

Number of juvenile facilities
When youth are
evaluated for
substance abuse

As a percentage of facilities that
evaluated youth for
substance abuse

Some
Facilities
Some
All
All youth youth
that
All youth
youth
facilities evaluated evaluated evaluated evaluated evaluated
1,355

1,165

190

100%

Less than 24 hours

860

803

24 hours to 7 days

530

445

7 or more days

124

417

–

Total reporting facilities

Other
Facilities not evaluating
(or not reporting)

86%

14%

Note: Reporting facilities sum to more than 1,355 because they were able to select more than one time
period.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

National Report Series Bulletin

Page 78 of 144

Percentage
Circumstances of testing
of facilities
All youth
After initial arrival
32%
At each reentry
25
Randomly
33
When drug use is suspected
54
or drug is present
At the request of the court
66
or probation officer
Youth suspected of recent drug/alcohol use
After initial arrival
36%
At each reentry
23
Randomly
35
When drug use is
58
suspected or drug is present
At the request of the
68
court or probation officer
Youth with substance abuse problems
After initial arrival
28%
At each reentry
21
Randomly
37
When drug use is suspected
54
or drug is present
At the request of the court
65
or probation officer

In 2016, JRFC asked facilities if they
communicated information regarding the
substance abuse status, services, and/or
needs to the young person’s new placement
or residence; 57% of facilities said that they
did. Of these facilities, many (73%) said that
they communicated substance abuse status
information for all youth departing the facility.

Substance abuse education was the most common service provided at all
reporting facilities
Facility size based on
residential population

Substance
abuse screening

Total

1–10

11–20

Total facilities

1,772

598

389

495

209

Facilities reporting

1,245

380

280

362

156

Substance abuse education

97%

96%

95%

98%

99%

100%

Case manager to
oversee treatment

Treatment plan for
substance abuse

100

Special living units

None of above
services provided

21–50 51–100 101–200 201+

•n Of the facilities holding more than 100 residents that reported providing substance abuse
services, all provided substance abuse education and were more likely than smaller facilities to
have special living units in which all young persons have substance abuse offenses and/or
problems.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

The majority of facilities that provided substance abuse counseling or
therapy were most likely to provide services on an individual basis
Facility type
Service
provided

Total

Total facilities
1,772
Facilities reporting
counseling
860
Individual
92%
Group
82
Family
46
Facilities reporting
therapy
1,095
Individual
96%
Group
83
Family
50

Reception/
Ranch/
Residential
Detention
diagnostic Group wilderness Training treatment
center Shelter center
home
camp
school
center
662

131

344

189

678

249
91%
78
33

54
96%
74
54

23
83%
83
30

179
93%
77
49

21
81%
86
33

112
93%
90
52

384
90%
87
54

313
94%
74
38

76
97%
79
59

33
97%
97
45

236
98%
83
49

22
82%
82
41

167
98%
95
62

501
95%
90
58

•n In 2016, shelters were most likely to provide individual counseling, and group homes and
training schools were most likely to provide individual therapy.
•n Training schools were the most likely to provide group counseling, and 97% of reception/
diagnostic centers reported providing group therapy.
•n Half of all facilities provided family therapy, and almost half provided family counseling.
Note: Counts (and row percentages) may sum to more than the total number of facilities because facilities
could select more than one facility type.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

December 201811

Page 79 of 144

Most youth were evaluated for mental health needs while
held in facilities
In nearly two-thirds of
facilities, in-house mental
health professionals
evaluated all youth held
Facilities provided information about their
procedures for evaluating youth’s mental
health needs. Among facilities that responded
to mental health evaluation questions in
2016, 65% reported they evaluated all youth
for mental health needs using an in-house
mental health professional. These facilities
held 57% of offenders on the census date.
Facilities that reported using an in-house
mental health professional to evaluate some
youth (35%), held 28% of youth.
In 2016, a greater proportion of privately
operated than publicly operated facilities said
that in-house mental health professionals
evaluated all youth (83% vs. 54% of facilities
reporting mental health evaluation
information). However, in a greater proportion
of public facilities than private facilities
(46% vs. 17%), in-house mental health
professionals evaluated some youth.
Evaluation by
in-house mental
health professional
Total reporting facilities
All reporting facilities
All youth screened
Some youth screened

Facility type

Public

Private

774
100%

511
100%

54
46

83
17

Facilities also indicated whether treatment
was provided onsite. Facilities that said they
provided mental health treatment inside the
facility were likely to have had all youth
evaluated by an in-house mental health
professional. Facilities that did not provide
onsite mental health treatment were more
likely to have had some youth evaluated by
an in-house mental health professional.

In 2016, JRFC asked facilities if they
communicated information regarding the
mental health status, services, and/or
needs to the young person’s new placement
or residence; 80% of facilities said that
they did. Most of these (74%) said that they
communicated mental health status
information for all youth departing the facility.

Onsite mental
Evaluation by in-house
health treatment?
mental health
professional
Yes
No
Total reporting facilities
1,158
127
All reporting facilities
100%
100%
All youth screened
Some youth screened

70
30

21
79

The largest facilities were most likely to have in-house mental health
professionals evaluate all youth for mental health needs
Facility size based on
residential population

In-house mental
health evaluation

Total

1–10

11–20

Total facilities

1,772

598

389

495

209

Facilities reporting

1,285

332

298

405

176

All reporting facilities

100%

All youth evaluated

Some youth evaluated

21–50 51–100 101–200 201+

Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

Group homes and residential treatment centers were more likely than other
types of facilities to have in-house mental health professionals evaluate all
youth for mental health needs
Facility type
Reception/
Ranch/
Residential
In-house mental Detention
diagnostic Group wilderness Training treatment
health evaluation
center Shelter center
home
camp
school
center
Total facilities

662
Facilities reporting
525
All reporting
facilities
100%
All youth evaluated 43
Some youth
evaluated
57

131
84

58
42

344
165

30
20

189
173

678
545

100%
48

100%
71

100%
79

100%
70

100%
77

100%
79

Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

National Report Series Bulletin

Page 80 of 144

The most common approach to in-house mental health evaluation was to screen all youth by the end of their first
day or first week at the facility
As a percentage of facilities that evaluated youth
in-house for mental health needs

Number of juvenile facilities
When youth are evaluated for
mental health needs

All facilities

All youth
evaluated

Some youth
evaluated

Facilities that
evaluated

All youth
evaluated

Some youth
evaluated

1,281

840

441

100%

66%

34%

Less than 24 hours

555

432

123

24 hours to 7 days

503

357

146

168

152

Total reporting facilities

7 or more days
Other

•n In 62% of facilities that reported using an in-house mental health professional to perform mental health evaluations, they evaluated all youth for
mental health needs by the end of their first week in custody.
Notes: Percentage detail may not add up to total because of rounding. Four facilities that reported youth were evaluated did not report when they were evaluated.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

Of facilities that reported using in-house mental health professionals to conduct mental health evaluations,
37% of juvenile offenders were in facilities that evaluated all youth on the day they arrived at the facility
As a percentage of offenders
in facilities that provided in-house
evaluation for mental health needs

Number of offenders
When youth are evaluated for
mental health needs

All facilities

All youth
evaluated

Some youth
evaluated

Facilities that
evaluated

All youth
evaluated

Some youth
evaluated

Total offenders residing
in reporting facilities

38,242

25,718

12,524

100%

67%

33%

Less than 24 hours

18,085

14,022

4,063

24 hours to 7 days

14,199

9,665

4,534

7 or more days

1,267

920

347

Other

4,691

1,111

3,580

•n Facilities reporting that they evaluated all youth by the end of their first week held 62% of juvenile offenders who resided in facilities that reported
using in-house mental health evaluation procedures.
Note: Percentage detail may not add up to total because of rounding.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

December 201813

Page 81 of 144

Most offenders were held in facilities that evaluate all
youth for suicide risk on their first day
Facilities that screened all
youth for suicide risk held
89% of the youth in custody
As part of the information collected on mental
health services, the JRFC questionnaire asks
facilities about their procedures regarding
screening youth for suicide risk.
In 2016, 93% of facilities that reported
information on suicide screening said that
they evaluated all youth for suicide risk. An
additional 2% said that they evaluated some
youth. Some facilities (5%) said that they did
not evaluate any youth for suicide risk.
In 2016, a larger proportion of public than
private facilities said that they evaluated all
youth for suicide risk (96% vs. 89%).
In 2016, among facilities that reported
suicide screening information, those that
screened all youth for suicide risk held 97%
of juvenile offenders who were in residential
placement—up from 81% in 2002. An
additional 1% of such youth in 2016 were in
facilities that screened some youth.
Suicide screening
Total offenders
Offenders in
reporting facilities
Total
All youth screened
Some youth screened
No youth screened

2002
102,235

2016
45,567

99,972

41,506

100%
81
12
7

100%
97
1
2

or social work conducted the screenings.
Approximately one-third (31%) used neither
mental health professionals nor counselors
whom a mental health professional had
trained to conduct suicide screenings.
Facilities reported on the screening methods
used to determine suicide risk. Facilities
could choose more than one method. Of
facilities that conducted suicide risk
screening, a majority (76%) reported that
they incorporated one or more questions
about suicide in the medical history or intake
process to screen youth, 38% used a form
their facility designed, and 25% used a form
or questions that a county or state juvenile
justice system designed to assess suicide
risk. Nearly half of facilities (47%) reported
using the Massachusetts Youth Screening
Instrument (MAYSI)—39% reported using the
MAYSI full form, and 8% used the MAYSI
suicide/depression module. Very few facilities
(less than 1%) used the Voice Diagnostic
Interview Schedule for Children.
Of facilities that reported screening youth for
suicide risk, 88% reassessed youth at some
point during their stay. Most facilities (86%)
reported rescreening on a case-by-case basis
or as necessary. An additional 39% of
facilities also reported that rescreening
occurred systematically and was based on a

More than half (53%) of facilities that
screened some or all youth for suicide risk
reported that mental health professionals
with at least a master’s degree in psychology

All facilities used some type
of preventive measure once
they determined a youth
was at risk for suicide
Facilities that reported suicide screening
information were asked a series of questions
related to preventive measures taken for
youth determined to be at risk for suicide. Of
these facilities, 63% reported placing at-risk
youth in sleeping or observation rooms that
are locked or under staff security. Aside from
using sleeping or observation rooms, 87% of
facilities reported using line-of-sight
supervision, 86% reported removing personal
items that could be used to attempt suicide,
and 75% reported using one-on-one or arm’slength supervision. Nearly half of facilities
(48%) reported using special clothing to
prevent suicide attempts, and 28% reported
removing the youth from the general
population. Twenty-two percent (22%) of
facilities used restraints to prevent suicide
attempts, and 19% of facilities used special
clothing to identify youth at risk for suicide.

Suicide screening was common across facilities of all sizes
Facility size based on
residential population

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

Some facilities used
trained counselors or
professional mental
health staff to conduct
suicide screening

variety of factors (e.g., length of stay, facility
events, or negative life events). Less than
1% of facilities did not reassess youth to
determine suicide risk.

Suicide screening

Total

1–10

11–20

21–50 51–100 101–200 201+

Total facilities

1,772

598

389

495

209

Facilities reporting

1,568

498

365

448

182

All reporting facilities

100%

All youth screened

Some youth screened

No youth screened

Note: Column percentages may not add up to 100% because of rounding.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

National Report Series Bulletin

Page 82 of 144

Ranch/wilderness camps and group homes were the least likely to screen youth for suicide risk
Facility type
Detention
center

Shelter

Reception/
diagnostic
center

Total facilities

662

131

Facilities reporting
All reporting facilities
All youth screened
Some youth screened
No youth screened

613
100%
98
0
1

124
100%
90
3
7

Suicide screening

46
100%
89
2
9

Group
home

Ranch/
wilderness
camp

Training
school

Residential
treatment
center

344

189

678

178
100%
97
1
3

590
100%
94
2
3

289
100%
82
4
15

28
100%
71
4
25

Note: Column percentages may not add up to 100% because of rounding.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

In 2016, the majority (94%) of juvenile offenders in facilities that screened for suicide risk were in facilities that
conducted suicide screenings on all youth on the day they arrived
When suicide risk screening occurs
Total

Less than 24
hours

24 hours
to 7 days

7 days
or more

Other

Never or not
reported

Total

1,487

1,374

285

All youth screened

1,460

1,362

–

100%

92%

–

In facilities that screened

40,813

38,828

1,638

125

222

4,754

In facilities that screened all youth

40,353

38,517

1,589

125

122

–

460

311

100

–

Suicide screening
Number of facilities that screened

Some youth screened
Percentage of facilities that screened
Total
All youth screened
Some youth screened
Number of offenders

In facilities that screened some youth
Percentage of offenders
In facilities that screened
In facilities that screened all youth
In facilities that screened some youth

100%

95%

–

•n Nearly all facilities (98%) that reported screening for suicide risk said they screened all youth by the end of the first week of their stay at the
facility. A large portion (92%) said they screened all youth on their first day at the facility; these facilities that screened all youth accounted for
94% of juvenile offenders held in facilities that conducted suicide screenings.
•n Very few facilities that reported screening for suicide risk reported that they conducted the screenings at some point other than within the first
week of a youth’s stay (1%). Facilities that conducted screenings within other time limits gave varying responses. For example, some facilities
reported that screenings occurred as needed or as deemed necessary. Some reported that screenings were court ordered. A small number of
facilities indicated that screenings occurred before the youth was admitted.
Note: Percentage detail may not add up to total because of rounding.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

December 201815

Page 83 of 144

JRFC asks facilities about certain activities that may
have occurred in the month before the census date
In addition to information gathered on the
census date, JRFC collected data on the
following questions for the 30-day period of
September 2016:
n Were there any unauthorized departures

of any young persons who were assigned
beds at this facility?
n Were any young persons assigned beds

at this facility transported to a hospital
emergency room by facility staff,
transportation staff, or by an ambulance?
n Were any of the young persons assigned

beds here restrained by facility staff with
a mechanical restraint?

Sports-related injuries were the
most common reason for
emergency room (ER) visits in
the previous month
Reason for ER visit
Total
Injury
Sports-related
Work/chore-related
Interpersonal conflict
(between residents)
Interpersonal conflict (by
nonresident)
Illness
Pregnancy
Complications
Labor and delivery
Suicide attempt
Nonemergency
No other health
professional available
No doctor’s appointment
could be obtained
Other

Percentage
of facilities
34%
41
3

One-fifth of facilities (19%) reported unauthorized departures in the
month before the census date

Facility type
Total facilities

611

Shelter

131

124

344

289

Reception/diagnostic center
Group home
Ranch/wilderness camp

Training school

189

178

Residential treatment center

678

591

•n Shelters and group homes were most likely to report one or more unauthorized departures.
Note: Detail may sum to more than the totals because facilities could select more than one facility type.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

Nearly equal proportions of facilities reported using mechanical
restraints and locking youth in some type of isolation; use of these
practices differed by facility type

Detention center

12
22

Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile
Residential Facility Census 2016 [machinereadable data file].

Percentage of reporting
facilities with
unauthorized departures
19%

662

5
34

Number of facilities
Total
Reporting
1,772
1,567

Detention center

Facility type
Total facilities

Note: Percentages are based on facilities that
reported emergency room information (162 of
1,772 facilities [9%] did not report).

beds here locked for more than 4 hours
alone in an isolation, seclusion, or

4
1
11

sleeping room to regain control of
their unruly behavior?

n Were any of the young persons assigned

Shelter
Reception/diagnostic center
Group home

Percentage of reporting facilities
Used mechanical
Locked youth in room for
restraints
4 or more hours
24%
22%
44

Ranch/wilderness camp

Training school

Residential treatment center

•n Detention centers and reception/diagnostic centers were the most likely type of facility to
use mechanical restraints (i.e., handcuffs, leg cuffs, waist bands, leather straps, restraining
chairs, strait jackets, or other mechanical devices) in the previous month. Detention centers
and training schools were the most likely to lock a youth alone in some type of seclusion for
4 or more hours to regain control of their unruly behavior.
•n Group homes were the facility type least likely to use either of these measures.
Note: Percentages are based on 1,568 facilities that reported mechanical restraints information and 1,569 that
reported locked isolation information, out of a total of 1,772 facilities.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

National Report Series Bulletin

Page 84 of 144

Facilities reported six deaths of youth in placement over
12 months—one was a suicide
Youth in residential
placement rarely died
in custody
Facilities holding juvenile offenders reported
that six youth died while in the legal custody
of the facility between October 1, 2015, and
September 30, 2016. One facility reported
two deaths.
Routine collection of national data on deaths
of youth in residential placement began with
the 1988–1989 Children in Custody (CIC)
Census of Public and Private Juvenile
Detention, Correctional, and Shelter Facilities.
Accidents or suicides have usually been the
leading cause of death. Over the years 1988–
1994 (CIC data reporting years), an average
of 46 deaths were reported nationally per
year, including an annual average of 18
suicides. Over the years 2000–2016 (JRFC
data reporting years), those averages
dropped to 17 deaths overall and 7 suicides.
In 2016, the number of suicides that occurred
at residential facilities (one) was the lowest
since OJJDP first started collecting data from
JRFC in 2000.
Residential treatment centers reported two of
the six deaths in 2016—one accidental death
and one suicide. Detention centers also
accounted for two deaths as the result of an
illness and an accident. Group homes
accounted for one of the six deaths, an
accident, and ranch/wilderness camps
accounted for one death as a result of an
illness/natural cause.

There is no pattern in the
timing of deaths in 2016
In 2016, the timing of death varied between
1 and 244 days after admission. One death
as a result of an illness/natural cause
occurred within 24 hours after admission;
another occurred within 40 days.

During the 12 months prior to the census, accidental deaths were the
most commonly reported cause of death in residential placement
Inside the facility
Cause of death

Outside the facility

Total

All

Public

Private

All

Public

Private

Total

Accident

Illness/natural

Suicide

•n In 2016, four deaths occurred at private facilities and two at public facilities.
Notes: Data are reported deaths of youth in custody from October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016.
None of the deaths from illness were AIDS related.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

In 2016, the death rate was higher for private facilities than for public
facilities
Deaths per 10,000 youth held on
the census date, October 26, 2016
Cause of death

Total

Public facility

Private facility

Total

1.3

0.6

3.0

Accident

0.7

0.3

1.5

Illness/natural

0.4

0.3

0.8

Suicide

0.2

0.0

0.8

Deaths per 10,000 youth held on
the census date, October 26, 2016
Type of facility

Total

Public facility

Private facility

Detention center

1.0

0.0

Ranch/wilderness camp

11.0

0.0

43.1

Group home

3.1

0.0

3.8

Residential treatment center

1.2

0.0

2.0

•n The death rate in 2016 (1.3) was lower than that in 2000 (2.8). Of the 30 reported deaths
of youth in residential placement in 2000, accidents were the most commonly reported
cause. The same was true in 2016.
Notes: Data are reported deaths of youth in custody from October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016.
None of the deaths from illness were AIDS related. One death was reported in a privately operated ranch/
wilderness camp, but the relatively small size of the population of youth held in such facilities in 2016
(approximately 230 youth) results in a high death rate.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

One accidental death occurred 4 days after
admission, one occurred 4 months after
admission, and one occurred 8 months after

admission. The remaining death, a suicide,
occurred approximately 8 months (244 days)
after admission.

December 201817

Page 85 of 144

Of the total deaths in residential placement (six), five involved males and one involved a female
Cause of death
Total
Race/ethnicity

Accident

Illness/natural

Suicide

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Total

White non-Hispanic

Black non-Hispanic

American Indian/Alaska Native

Asian/Pacific Islander

Hispanic

Other race/ethnicity

Note: Data are reported deaths of youth in custody from October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016.
Source: Authors’ analysis of Juvenile Residential Facility Census 2016 [machine-readable data file].

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census asks facilities about deaths of young persons
at locations inside or outside the facility
During the year between October 1, 2015, and September 30, 2016, did any young persons die while assigned to a bed at this facility at a
location either inside or outside of this facility?
If yes, how many young persons died while assigned beds at this facility during the year between October 1, 2015, and September 30, 2016?
What was the cause of death?
n Illness/natural causes (excluding AIDS)

n Homicide by another resident

n Injury suffered prior to placement here

n Homicide by nonresident(s)

n AIDS

n Accidental death

n Suicide

n Other (specify)

What was the location of death, age, sex, race, date of admission to the facility, and date of death for each young person who died while
assigned a bed at this facility?

National Report Series Bulletin

Page 86 of 144

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census includes data that tribal facilities submitted
OJJDP works with the Bureau of Indian
Affairs to ensure a greater representation of
tribal facilities in the CJRP and JRFC data
collections. As a result, the 2016 JRFC
collected data from 14 tribal facilities. The
tribal facilities were in Arizona, Colorado,
Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, New
Mexico, Oklahoma, and South Dakota and
held 113 youth charged with or adjudicated
for an offense (down from 133 in 2014,
when 13 facilities reported).
Tribal facilities were asked what agency
owned and/or operated their facilities. The
tribe owned and operated 10 of the 14
facilities. The remaining four facilities

Other OJJDP data
collection efforts
describe youth in
residential placement
JRFC is one component in a
multitiered effort to describe the youth
placed in residential facilities and the
facilities themselves. Other
components include:
n National Juvenile Court Data Archive:

Collects information on sanctions
that juvenile courts impose.
n Census of Juveniles in Residential

Placement: Collects information on
the demographics and legal
attributes of each youth in a
juvenile facility on the census date.
n Survey of Youth in Residential

Placement: Collected a broad range
of self-reported information from
interviews in 2003 with individual
youth in residential placement.

were owned and operated by the federal
government.
Thirteen tribal facilities identified
themselves as detention centers and one
as a training school. Tribal facilities were
small, most holding 20 or fewer residents;
74% of juvenile offenders were held at
facilities that held between 11 and 20
residents. On the census day, almost all
facilities (12) were operating at less than
their standard bed capacity, and the
remaining 2 facilities were operating at
capacity. Standard bed capacities ranged
from 1 to 198; only 2 facilities had more
than 100 standard beds.

Resources
OJJDP’s online Statistical Briefing Book (SBB)
offers access to a wealth of information about
youth 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 youth in
corrections. The Juvenile Residential Facility
Census Databook is a data analysis tool that
gives users quick access to national and state
data on the characteristics of residential
placement facilities, including detailed
information about facility operation,
classification, size, and capacity.

Data sources
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention. Variable. Juvenile Residential
Facility Census for the years 2000, 2002,
2004, 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, and
2016 [machine-readable data files].
Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau
(producer).

Twelve of the 14 tribal facilities reported
locking youth in their sleeping rooms.
Among tribal facilities that locked youth in
their rooms, 11 did so when the youth was
out of control. Nine facilities locked youth
in their room at night, eight facilities
locked youth in rooms during shift
changes, and six locked youth in their
rooms whenever the youth was in their
room. Four facilities locked youth in their
rooms when the youth was suicidal and
four facilities locked youth in their rooms
for part of each day. One facility stated
there was no set schedule for locking
youth in rooms.

Acknowledgments
This bulletin was written by Sarah
Hockenberry, Research Associate, and
Anthony Sladky, Senior Computer
Programmer, at the National Center for
Juvenile Justice, with funds provided
by OJJDP to support the National
Juvenile Justice Data Analysis Project.
This bulletin was prepared under grant number
2016–JF–FX–K001 from the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S.
Department of Justice.
The opinions, findings, and conclusions or
recommendations expressed in this publication
are those of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect those of the 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.

December 201819

Page 87 of 144

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
8660 Cherry Lane
Laurel, MD 20707-4651

*NCJ~251785*

PRESORTED STANDARD
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
DOJ/OJJDP/GPO
PERMIT NO. G – 26

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

National Report Series Bulletin

NCJ 251785

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Page 88 of 144

Service availability increased in juvenile
residential placement facilities
Juvenile residential placement facilities are increasingly likely to screen for needs and provide special services
The percentage of facilities screening all youth for
service needs has increased since 2000
Percent of facilities screening all youth
100%
90%

93%
78%

70%
60%
50%

Percent of facilities screening youth within 1 week of admission
100%

2000
2016

88%

80%

Facilities were more likely to screen youth for service
needs within 1 week of admission in 2016 than in 2000

90%

61%

70%
60%

60%

59%

30%

20%

10%

10%
Education
needs

Substance
abuse

Mental health
needs

In general, the proportion of facilities offering onsite
residential treatment services has increased since 2000

50%

Suicide
risk

Education
needs

80%
70%

70%

Substance abuse

60%

Mental health

88% 87%

87%

20%

84%
70%
63%

30%
20%

Violent offender

10%
0%
2000

10%
0%

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

Public

State

Of facilities providing onsite services, long-term secure
facilities were more likely than other types to offer mental
health and substance abuse services
Percent of facilities providing onsite services, 2016
100%
Mental health

92% 92%

88%

Substance abuse
87%

87%
80%

75%

72%

Private

ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb

Access more information on residential
facilities and youth in placement

n Analyze data with the Juvenile Residential Facility
Census Databook

57%

50%

Local

n Review FAQs about residential facility characteristics

80%

60%

Note: This publication was prepared by Charles Puzzanchera and
Sarah Hockenberry, National Center for Juvenile Justice, with funds
provided by OJJDP through grant #2016-JF-FX-K001. May 2018.

40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Substance abuse

40%

Sex offender

30%

70%

Mental health
needs

50%

40%

80%

85%

79%

60%

50%

90%

Substance
abuse

Among facilities that provided onsite services, 87% of public
and 84% of private facilities offered mental health services

90%

Mental health

80%

76%

64%

Percent of facilities providing onsite services, 2016
100%

Percent of facilities providing onsite services
100%
90%

69%

40%

30%

Suicide
risk

79%

75%

50%

47%

40%

86%

80%

74%

2000
2016

94%

Detention
center

Long-term
secure

Reception/
diagnostic
center

Group
home

Residential
treatment
center

Data source: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention. Juvenile Residential Facility Census [machine-readable
data files]. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau (producer).

Page 89 of 144

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
National Institute of Justice
______________________________________________________________________________
Washington, DC 20531

,
Dear Facility Administrator:
I understand that you have not yet responded to the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention’s (OJJDP) 2018 Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC). I am
writing to personally request your participation in this important data collection.
I know there are many competing demands for your time and attention, but the JRFC
provides the most detailed picture of juvenile facilities ever produced and provides
statistical data to policymakers at all levels of government for program planning and
funding. We are relying on your cooperation to help OJJDP in its efforts to advance juvenile
justice reforms across the nation.
Since JRFC was first conducted in 2000, it has achieved close to a 100 percent response
rate, despite participation being voluntary. Your response is important to the continued
success of this effort. The confidentiality of the information you provide on this
questionnaire is protected by federal law (Title 34, Section 10231 of the United States
Code) and will only be revealed or used for research purposes (see below for more details).
Enclosed you will find a publication advisory for the new JRFC bulletin (which includes a
link to the document), as well as a flier for the OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book (which
includes information on how to access web resources related to juvenile statistics, FAQs,
data tools, publications).
I hope that we can count on your support as we have in the past. If you have any
questions or need us to resend the form or web link, please contact of the
U.S. Census Bureau at or 1-800-352-7229.
Thank you for your time and assistance in this endeavor.
Sincerely,

Benjamin Adams
Social Science Analyst
National Institute of Justice

Page 90 of 144

FEDERAL ASSURANCES OF CONFIDENTIALITY AND OTHER NOTICES

Page 91 of 144

Juvenile Residential Facility Census
Non-Response Call Instructions

Table of Contents
Section 1: General Information ..................................................................................................................... 1
Section 2: Login Instructions ........................................................................................................................ 2
Section 3: Summary of CRM Module .......................................................................................................... 4
Section 4: Central Reporters ......................................................................................................................... 5
Section 5: Action Details .............................................................................................................................. 6
Section 6: Filter by Follow-up Date.............................................................................................................. 8
Section 7: Making a Call............................................................................................................................... 9
Section 8: Example of a Script.................................................................................................................... 10

Page 92 of 144

Section 1: General Information

Contact Information
Sabrina Webb, Project Manager
Phone: 301-763-4782
Email: [email protected]
Survey Email: [email protected]
Questionniares NPC will be requesting
CJ-15
Schedule of Operations
Week of 03/18 – Begin 1st round of calls
Week of 03/25 – Begin 2nd round of calls
Material that will be provided to NPC
1) Blank PDF of CJ-15
2) Username and passwords for web submission
3) NPC will use the assigned Non-Response listing (CRM) in GPS
Methods of Return
•
•
•
•

Fax to NPC: 1-888-262-3974
Web: https://respond.census.gov/jrfc
Email: [email protected]
Mail:
US Census Bureau
PO Box 5000
Jeffersonville, IN 47199-5000
GOVS/CJRP

Call Guidelines
•
•

Acceptable calling times are Monday through Friday 8:00am to 8:00pm EST or 11:00am to 5:00pm PST.
If you get a busy signal or there is no voicemail, call back at a different time, but do not attempt more
than three (3) times in the same day.

Where to get the Non-Response Listing:
Non-response listing is provided on GPS in the ‘Customer Relationship Management’ (CRM). Details and
instructions on use are included below.

Page 93 of 144

Section 8: Example of a Script

When speaking to the respondent or respondent’s voicemail:
FOR SINGLE UNIT NON-RESPONSE
Introduction and Purpose of Call: “Hello my name is … (your name)… and I’m calling from the U.S. Census
Bureau. I’m calling with regards to the Juvenile Residential Facility Census, which was mailed to you in mid
October and was due back on November (day), (year). As of today, our records show that we have not received
the questionnaire from you.
FOR MULTIUNIT (CENTRAL REPORTER) NON-RESPONSE
Introduction and Purpose of Call: “Hello my name is … (your name)… and I’m calling from the U.S. Census
Bureau. I’m calling with regards to the Juvenile Residential Facility Census, which was mailed to you in mid
October and was due back on November (day), (year). As of today, our records show that we have not received
the questionnaire from one or more of your facilities.”
If leaving a message: “Please give us a call on (your number) and let us know when you’ll be able to submit the
questionnaire to us”. If we don’t hear from you then we’ll call back in a few days. If you’ve already submitted
please disregard this message.” [add action called left message]
If speaking to respondent: “Do you know when you’ll be submitting the questionnaire to us?”
If they provide a date: “Ok, I have that documented and we’ll look for our questionnaire then. Thank
you and have a wonderful day.” [add action extension – 2 weeks]
If they cannot provide a date: “Ok ma’am/sir this was just a reminder call. If we have not received your
questionnaire in a couple of weeks we’ll be calling back. Thank you and have a wonderful day.” [add
action extension - 2 weeks]
If they say they’ve already submitted: “Thank you for your submission and we apologize for the
burden. Do you remember when you submitted? And how did you submit (fax, web, mail)? Ok, we will
verify this information and get back with you if we have any follow up questions. Thank you and have a
wonderful day.” [add action refer to analyst]
If they need another questionnaire: “Sure, we will send one right over. Is it best to fax you or email
you?” [verify the fax number/email address] “Thank you, I will be sending it in a few minutes. Please let
me know if we can assist with anything else. Have a wonderful day.” [ Prior to sending the
questionnaire, place the 21 digit facility ID and Facility Name on front cover of blank questionnaire
using the label maker. If being sent via email, Scan the PDF with ID and facility name before sending it
to the respondent.] [add action requested survey questionnaire]
If they need their User ID and Password to complete the questionnaire via the Web: Provide the user
with their user ID and password. Instruct the user that passwords are case sensitive. [add action provided
web information]

Page 94 of 144

If speaking to someone who is not the respondent or cannot forward you to the respondent (or the
respondent’s voicemail): “Is there a good time to call back (state the respondent’s name)?” If yes: “Ok,
thank you I will call back at that time” [add action called left message]
If the respondent is no longer there: “Ok, do you know who has replaced them, or who may have
received the survey package when it was mailed out in mid October?” [When they give you the name]
“May I speak with that person?”
If the respondent is no longer there and the person on the phone can’t give you any information:
“Ok, thank you for your time, someone will be calling your office later to follow up. Have a wonderful
day.” [add action refer to analyst]
If the respondent says they want to complete the survey over the phone: Get a date and time that
would be convenient to call them back and inform the respondent that someone will call them back to
complete the form over the phone. [add action refer to analyst]
If the facility has been closed/temporarily closed: “OK. What date did (facility name) close?” Also, if
the respondent is forthcoming with a date, ask why the facility closed (i.e., lost contract, re-opened as a
different type of facility, etc.) and note it in the comments section. [add action other]

Page 95 of 144

November 28, 2017
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
From:

Suzanne Dorinski
Public Sector Statistical Methods Branch
Economic Statistical Methods Division

Subject:

Documentation of the Imputation Methodology for the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility
Census, Creation of the Imputation File and Creation of Tabulated Results

This memorandum documents the imputation methodology for the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility
Census (JRFC). The imputation methodology describes both methods used to create a record for
nonresponding units and for missing data for responding units.
This document uses intentional white space to improve readability. This document is available as PDF to
preserve the original formatting.
This document also serves as a guide to the programmer who works on the 2018 JRFC. Notes to the
programmer are in brackets. The 2016 JRFC imputation system is reusable for the 2018 JRFC. [The
programs are in the \\govs009fs\smb\jrfc\2016\Imputation production folder.]
The imputation methodology for the 2010 JRFC and earlier censuses used the section and question
numbers as variable names. Starting with the 2014 JRFC, variables have new names, rather than using
the section number and question number as the variable name. The variable names for Section 1 have
changed for the 2016 JRFC, compared to 2014. We needed to use prior year files for the 2016 JRFC
imputation processing, so we updated the variable names on the prior year (2014 Juvenile Residential
Facility Census and 2015 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement) files to use the current naming
convention. Please see the short version of the 2016 JRFC record layout in Attachment A for more
details. Attachment B shows how the variable names have changed over time. Users of the data file
should use the Excel version of the 2016 JRFC record layout.
The Economic Directorate of the Census Bureau regularly conducts quality audits of survey and census
programs. Some of the discussion in this document is based on feedback from the last JRFC quality
audit. Some parts of the discussion may not be of interest to the sponsor but are required for the
purpose of the quality audit.

Page 96 of 144

Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 4
Figure 1. Juvenile Residential Facility Census response method percentages over time........................ 5
Figure 2. Juvenile Residential Facility Census response method counts over time................................. 6
Definition of Out-of-scope Facilities ......................................................................................................... 6
Unit Response Rate ................................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3. Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP) and Juvenile Residential Facility Census
(JRFC) revised unit response rates over time ........................................................................................... 7
Summary of Changes during 2016 Data Collection ...................................................................................... 8
Figure 4. Self-led, self-help groups question on 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census .................... 9
Table 1. Edit messages in paradata about self-led, self-help substance abuse groups ............................ 9
Figure 5. Screen shot of edit message for population counts in 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility
Census ..................................................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 6. "Review Your Responses" screen using red for pages that have issues ................................. 12
Figure 7. "Review Your Responses" screen with box checked to view potential issues only ................ 13
Summary of the File .................................................................................................................................... 13
Table 2. Summary of the facilities in the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census imputed file ......... 13
Table 3. 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census counts (nontribal facilities in the 50 states and DC
that held juveniles on reference day) ..................................................................................................... 14
Records Eligible for Imputation .................................................................................................................. 14
Table 4. Values of the status flag for the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census ............................. 15
Table 5. Values of the occupied flag for the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census ........................ 15
Critical Item Facilities .................................................................................................................................. 16
Table 6. Value for CheckInStatus code................................................................................................... 16
Item Response Rates................................................................................................................................... 17
Table 7. Juvenile Residential Facility Census Item Response Rates by Year .......................................... 17
Figure 8. Juvenile Residential Facility Census item response rates by section over time ..................... 23
Questionnaire Items Eligible for Imputation .............................................................................................. 24
Table 8. Items eligible for imputation .................................................................................................... 24
Imputation Rates......................................................................................................................................... 26
Table 9. Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC) item response rates and total quantity response
rates over time ........................................................................................................................................ 26
Figure 9. Juvenile Residential Facility Census key item response rates over time ................................ 28
Figure 10. Juvenile Residential Facility Census total quantity response rates over time ...................... 29

Page 97 of 144

Collapsed Facility Type Codes ..................................................................................................................... 29
Table 10. Collapsed facility type code when only one box marked ....................................................... 30
Table 11. Hierarchy used when more than one facility type marked in 2016 Juvenile Residential
Facility Census ......................................................................................................................................... 30
Table 12. Frequency of methods used to assign collapsed facility code ............................................... 31
Pulling Forward Prior Year Data .................................................................................................................. 31
Table 13. Questions for which we pull forward data from prior year if current year is missing ........... 31
Creation of Imputation Groups ................................................................................................................... 32
Table 14. Imputation variables added to the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census file................. 33
Collapsing of Imputation Groups ................................................................................................................ 34
Table 15. 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census imputation groups with records needing
imputation .............................................................................................................................................. 34
Table 16. Collapsed facility type counts for selected years ................................................................... 37
Figure 11. Reception / Diagnostic Center and Ranch, Camp, or Farm collapsed facility types have
decreased over time ............................................................................................................................... 38
Calculations within Imputation Groups ...................................................................................................... 39
Table 17. Trimmed mean growth rates for prior year population counts for 2016 Juvenile Residential
Facility Census imputation ...................................................................................................................... 40
Table 18. Selected medians for 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census imputation ......................... 41
Table 19. Most commonly reported answers for sleeping room arrangements for 2016 Juvenile
Residential Facility Census imputation ................................................................................................... 42
Table 20. Median or most commonly reported answers for large muscle activity questions for 2016
Juvenile Residential Facility Census imputation ..................................................................................... 43
Imputing Population Counts ....................................................................................................................... 44
Imputing the Rest of the Values for the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census ................................... 45
Quality Checks Performed During and After Imputation............................................................................ 45
Description of the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census Imputed File ................................................ 46
Notes on the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census Imputation System .............................................. 46
Data Quality Issues for Standard Beds and Makeshift Beds ....................................................................... 47
Recommendations for Future Collections .................................................................................................. 47
Evaluate the collapsed facility types ....................................................................................................... 47
Track response rates by collapsed facility type ...................................................................................... 47
Analyze the “other specify” responses, add check box options as appropriate .................................... 47
Consider changing the order the of the population count questions .................................................... 47
Do research on reporting unit definition ................................................................................................ 48

Page 98 of 144

Add screener questions at beginning of form ........................................................................................ 48
Give more prominence to definition of juvenile residential facility on form ......................................... 48
Figure 12. Description of juvenile residential facility............................................................................. 49
References .................................................................................................................................................. 49

Introduction
First conducted in 2000, the Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC) is a mail canvass census. The 2010
JRFC was the first collection to give facilities the opportunity to respond online. The JRFC asks juvenile
residential custody facilities in the U.S. to describe their facilities. Adult facilities, and facilities exclusively
for drug or mental health treatment (regardless of the age of the residents), or facilities for abused or
neglected children are not included in the census. The JRFC is conducted in even-numbered years. The
reference date for the 2016 JRFC was October 26, 2016.
The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP) is conducted in alternative years and describes
the characteristics of youth in custody. JRFC collects information about facilities that hold juvenile
offenders. The 2016 JRFC asks about facility characteristics such as size, structure, type, ownership, and
security arrangements. JRFC also reports the number of juveniles who died in custody during the past
twelve months. The 2016 JRFC also includes sections that ask about mental health services, educational
services, and substance abuse services provided to the offenders.
The National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD) holds the previous data files, where they are part
of a restricted-access collection. For more information, see
http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/content/NACJD/index.html.
The project sponsor is the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). The Public
Sector Statistical Methods Branch (PSSMB) of the Economic Statistical Methods Division is responsible
for imputation, creation of the final survey files and tabulations of the JRFC results for the sponsor, while
the Criminal Justice Branch (CJB) in the Economic Reimbursable Surveys Division is responsible for the
data collection and editing of reported data.
The 2016 JRFC questionnaire has seven sections:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Section 1, which collects general facility information,
Section 2, which collects information about mental health services,
Section 3, which collects information about educational services,
Section 4, which collects information about substance abuse services,
Section 5, which collects information about the last month (September 2016),
Section 6, which collects information about the last year (October 1, 2015 through September
30, 2016),
Section 7, which collects general information.

Page 99 of 144

Currently the JRFC data can be collected by six different methods—completed by mail, other, via fax
transmission, by telephone (both in-bound and out-bound calls), by electronic mail or Email or via
website (online) responses to an automated Centurion data collection instrument. Below we present
two graphics displaying the percentages and counts of responses by each of these response methods
over time. Figure 1 shows the percentage distribution of response method for each year since 2010.
Figure 2 shows the response method counts for each year since 2010. The online option is becoming
more popular with JRFC respondent facilities. While mail responses dropped from 47.6 percent to 35.8
percent between 2010 and 2016, web response increased from 30.5 percent to 54.2 percent during this
same timeframe. The other methods of reporting also decreased overall.
Note that the counts and percentages are based on the method of return variable on each year’s file.
Some responses are received from facilities that are determined to be out-of-scope, so the counts may
not match the number of in-scope facilities each year.
JRFC method of response over time (percentages)
50

Percentage

0
Completed
mail

Other

47.6
42.2
39.7
35.8

0.1
2.4
0.6
0.0

Fax

2012

2010
2010
2012
2014
2016

Phone

9.8
7.8
2.4
1.8

2014
10.4
10.8
9.5
5.1

Web

1.7
3.1
4.3
3.1

30.5
33.7
43.5
54.2

2016

Figure 1. Juvenile Residential Facility Census response method percentages over time

Page 100 of 144

JRFC method of response over time (counts)
1,250

Frequency

1,000

750

500

250

0
Completed
mail

Other

1,303
1,076
965
778

2
61
14
0

Fax

2012

2010
2010
2012
2014
2016

Phone

268
198
58
39

2014
284
274
231
112

Web

46
80
105
68

834
858
1,056
1,178

2016

Figure 2. Juvenile Residential Facility Census response method counts over time
Definition of Out-of-scope Facilities
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 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).

Unit Response Rate
There were 2,173 in-scope facilities on reference day. 1,920 of the 2,173 facilities responded to the
2016 JRFC, for a unit response rate of 88.4 percent. 195 of the facilities refused to participate in the

Page 101 of 144

2016 JRFC. We imputed full records for the 186 nontribal facilities in the 50 states and DC that were
refusals.
There were four tribal refusal facilities and five territorial refusal facilities. Each is on the 2016 JRFC
imputed file, but only the facility ID, contact information, method of return, the check-in status code,
the status flag, and the occupied flag are available for those facilities. Other flags were set to 0 by
default (to be consistent with the Liger processing system).
The unit response rate was calculated differently before 2014 for both CJRP and JRFC. Previously
reported unit response rates counted critical item facilities as respondents. The revised unit response
rate is
𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 (𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟) = �

(𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 + 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴)
(𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 + 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 + 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 + 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼)

based on the value of the check-in status code for each facility. Full Additions are new facilities
discovered during the data collection cycle.
Figure 3 shows the revised unit response rates for CJRP and JRFC over time.

The extraordinary number of critical item facilities in the 2007 CJRP (676) explains the 76.1 percent
revised unit response rate for that year. The 2006 Juvenile Residential Facility Census questionnaire
had eight sections, and was 26 pages long. The 2008 Juvenile Residential Facility Census questionnaire
had four sections, and was 10 pages long. The longer form in 2006 may have affected the response rate.
CJRP and JRFC unit response rates over time
96.0

92.2

Unit response rate

91.5

90.0

89.6
88.5
87.2

87.6

87.0

88.0
87.4

88.3

88.4

86.6

80.0
76.1

75
2001

2002

2003

2004

2006

2007

2008
CJRP

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

JRFC

Figure 3. Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP) and Juvenile Residential
Facility Census (JRFC) revised unit response rates over time

2016

Page 102 of 144

[The program JRFC_and_CJRP_unit_response_rates_over_time.sas calculates the revised unit response
rates and generates one graphic display. The program online_response_rates_over_time.sas calculates
the method of return values over time and generates two graphic displays.]

Summary of Changes during 2016 Data Collection
There were several changes for the 2016 JRFC:
•
•
•
•
•
•

JRFC variable names in Section 1 have been renamed.
The way we imputed standard beds has changed.
The question about self-led, self-help substance abuse groups provided inside or outside the
facility now has a check box for facilities to indicate “None”.
The edit messages for the population counts in the Centurion online data collection instrument
now include the data that the facility has entered and is causing the discrepancies.
Online respondents can now view potential issues only when reviewing their answers for a
specific section.
There is an edit that compares the sum of standard beds and occupied makeshift beds to the
number of persons assigned to beds.

The variable names in Section 1 have changed from the variable names used for the 2014 JRFC. Since
we use prior survey year files while imputing the current year JRFC, we had to rename the variables on
the prior year files. The 2016 JRFC record layout includes columns for the 2015 CJRP and the 2014 JRFC,
with the original variable names on those files.
In the 2014 JRFC, we pulled forward the value for standard beds from the prior year JRFC if it was
missing in the current JRFC (whether it was reported or imputed). For the 2016 JRFC, we pull forward
the value for standard beds from the prior year JRFC only if it was reported in the 2014 JRFC. If the prior
year value was imputed, we use a ratio imputation method instead. This is done to prevent the
perpetuation of imputing with the reported number of standard beds the facility may have reported
four or more years ago.
After the 2014 JRFC, the author analyzed the paradata from the 2013 CJRP and the 2014 JRFC. One of
the recommendations incorporated for the 2016 JRFC was to add a check box to the question for selfled, self-help substance abuse programs provided inside or outside the facility, so that facilities could
indicate that none were provided, when appropriate. Figure 4 is a screen shot of the question on the
2016 JRFC form.

Page 103 of 144

Figure 4. Self-led, self-help groups question on 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census
The Centurion online reporting tool has an edit associated with each question that will prompt the
respondent to answer the question if the respondent has not provided an answer. Table 1 shows the
difference the “None” check box made for online respondents. The number of facilities seeing an edit
message for this question dropped dramatically, as did the number of facilities skipping the question.
The program that creates the tables has been updated to show the “None” option for this question.

Table 1. Edit messages in paradata about self-led, self-help substance abuse groups
Facilities seeing edit messages on self-led, self-help groups question
Resolution
Facilities skipping the question
Facilities selecting “other” and writing in “None”
Facilities choosing answers that resolve the edit message

2014 JRFC
197

2016 JRFC
18

48
67
82

1
17

Another finding from the analysis of the 2013 CJRP and 2014 JRFC paradata is that respondents have
difficulty providing population counts that add up correctly. In previous years, the edit message
indicated that the data did not add up. The questions are spread over multiple screens, so the
respondent would have to navigate to find the numbers. For 2016, the edit message includes the data
that the respondent has entered.
Figure 5 shows what the edit message looked like when the analyst was testing the 2016 Centurion
application. Persons assigned to beds was reported on the previous screen. The edit message is
displayed after the facility enters the number of persons age 21 or older and the number of persons
under age 21.

Page 104 of 144

In the 2014 JRFC paradata, 20 facilities provided final answers for counts for juvenile nonoffenders,
juvenile offenders, and adults that did not add up to the reported number of persons assigned to beds,
while 17 facilities provided final answers for counts for juvenile nonoffenders and juvenile offenders
that did not add up to the reported number of juveniles.
In the 2016 paradata, 11 facilities provided final answers for counts for juvenile nonoffenders, juvenile
offenders, and adults that did not add up to the reported number of persons assigned to beds, while 9
facilities provided final answers for counts for juvenile nonoffenders and juvenile offenders that did not
add up to the reported number of juveniles. The updated edits help to reduce these occurrences by
more than 52 percent.

Figure 5. Screen shot of edit message for population counts in 2016 Juvenile Residential
Facility Census

Page 105 of 144

Facilities responding online for the 2013 CJRP and the 2014 JRFC had the opportunity to provide
comments for each survey. Respondents told us that the review page for each section was difficult to
use, because every page was listed, whether it had an issue or not. Respondents asked for the ability to
filter that screen to show only the pages with issues. Respondents also suggested using a different color
to show which pages have issues they should review.
Figure 6 shows the review screen for Section 1. There are 35 screens for Section 1. When the number
of issues were all shown in black, it was difficult to quickly see which pages had issues. Now that pages
with issues are listed in red, it’s easier to see which pages need review. Figure 7 shows the same review
screen for Section 1, but with the box checked to view potential issues only. Now the respondent sees
only 4 pages on the list, rather than all 35 screens in Section 1

Page 106 of 144

Figure 6. "Review Your Responses" screen using red for pages that have issues

Page 107 of 144

Figure 7. "Review Your Responses" screen with box checked to view potential issues only

Summary of the File
Table 2. Summary of the facilities in the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census
imputed file
172
2173
58
45
13
195
186
28
158
9
4
5
1920
1589
331
2,345

OUT of SCOPE FACILITIES
IN-SCOPE FACILITIES
CRITICAL ITEMS ONLY REPORTED
facilities that hold offenders and reported only critical items
facilities that hold nonoffenders only and reported only critical items
REFUSALS
Nontribal Refusals (FULL Imputes)
nontribal facilities in the 50 states or DC that hold nonoffenders only and were refusals
nontribal facilities in the 50 states or DC that hold offenders and were refusals
Not Imputed Refusals
tribal facility refusals
territorial facility refusals
TOTAL FULL RESPONDENT FACILITIES
HOLD OFFENDERS: facilities that hold offenders and reported more than critical items
NONOFFENDRES ONLY: facilities that hold nonoffenders only and reported more than critical
items
TOTAL: facilities in the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census imputed file

Page 108 of 144

Table 3. 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census counts (nontribal facilities in the 50
states and DC that held juveniles on reference day)
59,049
416
58,633
45,567
13,066
2,143

people in residential placement
adults
juveniles
juvenile offenders
juvenile nonoffenders
nontribal facilities in the 50 states and DC that held juveniles on reference day

[The program summarize_JRFC_imputed_file.sas produces the counts in this section.]

Records Eligible for Imputation
In earlier versions of JRFC, we imputed missing data for all facilities. Starting with the 2010 JRFC, OJJDP
requested that we not impute missing data for tribal facilities. The 2010 JRFC was the first cycle to
attempt to collect data from facilities in American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico,
and the Virgin Islands. OJJDP and Census agreed that we would not impute missing data for the
territorial facilities either.
Tribal facilities face special challenges; that is one reason that we do not impute them. The reader is
directed to “From Broken Homes to a Broken System”, written by Sari Horwitz and published in the
Washington Post on November 28, 2014, and accessible online at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2014/11/28/from-broken-homes-to-a-broken-system/.
Researchers want to examine juvenile residential facilities over time, so starting with the 2012 JRFC, we
include the out-of-scope facilities, the temporarily closed facilities, and the permanently closed facilities
on the final file, even though those records are not eligible for imputation. By doing this, all facilities
can be easily tracked over time.
There are two flags on the 2016 file that help quickly classify records as eligible for imputation or not.
The status_flag_2016 describes who operates the facility. The occupied_flag_2016 indicates whether
the facility held juveniles on reference day.
Table 4 explains the status flag, while Table 5 explains the occupied flag. The first two digits of the
facility ID indicate the state where the facility is located. Note that since we do not impute missing data
for tribal or territorial facilities, the occupied flag is set to 0 when the tribal or territorial facility does not
answer the questions about persons assigned to beds and juveniles assigned to beds on reference day.

Page 109 of 144

Table 4. Values of the status flag for the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census
Status_flag_2016
Description
value
1
State-operated public facilities in the 50 states and
DC
2
Locally-operated public facilities in the 50 states
and DC
3
Private facilities in the 50 states and DC
4
Tribal facilities (missing data are not imputed)
5
Territorial facilities (missing data are not imputed)

How constructed
3rd digit of ID = 0
3rd digit of ID is 1, 2, 3, or 4
3rd digit of ID = 8
3rd digit of ID = 7
Based on state code

Table 5. Values of the occupied flag for the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census
Occupied_flag_2016
Description
value
0
Facility had no persons assigned to beds or
had no juveniles assigned to beds on
reference day
1
Facility had juveniles assigned to beds on
reference day

How constructed
G_ASSIGNED_BEDS is missing
or set to 2, G_UNDER_21 is
missing or set to 2
G_NUM_UNDER_21 greater
than 0

Page 110 of 144

Critical Item Facilities
In follow-up interviewing, the Criminal Justice Branch (CBJ) in the Economic Reimbursable Surveys
Division attempted to collect as much data as possible to fill in the seven sections of the questionnaire.
The following data items were critical:
Section 1:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Question 5a and 5b (total persons assigned to beds in the facility)
Question 6 (number of persons age 21 or over assigned to beds in the facility)
Questions 7a and 7b (number of persons under age 21 assigned to beds in the facility)
Questions 8a and 8b (number of offenders under age 21 assigned to beds in the facility)
Questions 9a and 9b (number of nonoffenders under age 21 assigned to beds in the facility)
Question 13 (type of facility)—see Table 10
Question 17a (who operates facility: private non-profit agency, for profit agency, or
government agency)
Question 22 (total number of standard beds in facility)
Question 23a and 23b (occupied makeshift beds in the facility)

Section 5:
•
•

Question 2a (any juvenile transported to hospital emergency room during September?)
Question 2b (reason why juvenile transported to hospital emergency room)

Section 6:
•
•
•

Question 1 (any juveniles die while assigned bed at facility within last 12 months?)
Question 2 (how many juveniles died while assigned bed at facility within last 12 months)
Question 3 (cause of death, location, age, sex, race, date of admission, date of death)

The value of CheckInStatus indicates which facilities are critical item facilities. See Table 6 for more
details. Note that the values for CheckInStatus have changed for the 2016 JRFC.

Table 6. Value for CheckInStatus code
CheckInStatus
value
0
1
4
5
6
7
9
10
12

Meaning
Non-respondent
Completed questionnaire
Permanently closed
Temporarily closed
Out-of-scope
Total Refusal (No Data provided)
New Facility, Completed Questionnaire
New Facility, Critical Items Only
Critical Item Only Facility

Page 111 of 144

Item Response Rates
We calculated the item response rates for the 2016 JRFC by looking at the item values before
imputation. There were 2,143 nontribal facilities in the 50 states and DC that held juveniles on
reference day. The calculations consider the skip patterns. If a facility was skipped out of a question on
the form, they were not counted as an item nonrespondent. For example, if the facility answered No to
the question asking if they held juveniles on reference day for reasons other than offense
(G_NONOFFENSE), they were not considered an item nonrespondent for G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE
because they were instructed to skip G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE.
Table 7 shows the item response rates for the 2012 JRFC, the 2014 JRFC, and the 2016 JRFC. Figure 8
shows the response rates in a graphic. Note that the item response rates were higher in 2012 except for
the very first question on the form. The response rate trends for 2016 are similar to those of 2014,
except for the question about why outside doors are locked. In Table 7, — means that question was not
on the questionnaire that year.
[The program JRFC_response_rates_over_time.sas produces the table and graphic in this section.]

Table 7. Juvenile Residential Facility Census Item Response Rates by Year
2012
response
rate

2014
response
rate

2016
response
rate

S1-Question 1-Address Correct?

87.9

88.1

88.8

S1-Question 2-Physical Layout of Facility

90.4

88.3

88.9

S1-Question 3-Other bldgs w/units-beds?

90.4

88.3

88.9

S1-Question 4-Any detention overflow?

90.4

88.4

88.9

S1-Question 5a-Any persons assigned beds?

94.9

92.2

91.6

S1-Question 5b-Number assigned beds

94.8

92.2

91.6

S1-Question 6-Number assigned beds >21 yrs

94.8

92.2

91.6

S1-Question 7a-Any persons under 21 yrs?

94.8

92.2

91.6

S1-Question 7b-Number assigned <21

94.8

92.2

91.6

S1-Question 8a-Any assigned for offense?

94.8

92.1

91.6

S1-Question 8b-Number assigned for offense

94.8

92.1

91.6

S1-Question 9a-Any assigned for non-offense?

94.8

92.2

91.6

S1-Question 9b-Number assigned for non-offense

94.8

92.2

91.6

S1-Question 10a-On site residential treatment?

90.4

88.0

88.9

S1-Question10b-Type of Residential Treatment

90.4

88.0

88.9

S1-Question 11-Provide foster care?

90.4

88.0

89.0

S1-Question 12-Provide independent living?

90.4

88.0

88.9

Description

Page 112 of 144

2012
response
rate

2014
response
rate

2016
response
rate

S1-Question 13-Type of facility

94.9

91.4

91.3

S1-Question 14a-Separate housing units?

90.4

88.1

88.9

S1-Question 14b-Separate housing units differ

90.2

88.1

88.9

S1-Question 14c-Purpose of separate housing

89.9

88.1

88.9

S1-Question 14d-Do separate units share

90.4

88.1

88.9

S1-Question 15a-Is facility owned by

90.4

89.8

S1-Question 15b-Name of private agency

90.4

89.8

S1-Question 16-Level of government agency

90.4

89.8

S1-Question 17a-Is facility operated by

94.9

91.0

91.3

S1-Question 17b-Name of private agency

92.6

91.0

90.3

S1-Question 18-Level of Government agency

94.2

91.0

90.8

S1-Question 19a-Any persons locked in rooms?

90.4

88.2

88.9

S1-Question 19b-When locked in rooms

90.4

88.2

88.9

S1-Question 20-Features intended to confine

90.4

88.0

88.9

S1-Question 21a-Are outside doors locked?

90.4

88.2

88.9

S1-Question 21b-Why are outside doors locked

90.4

88.2

84.1

S1-Question 21c-When are outside doors locked

90.4

88.2

88.9

S1-Question 22-Total number standard beds

94.9

92.2

91.3

S1-Question 23a-Any occupied makeshift beds

94.8

90.1

91.2

S1-Question 23b-How many makeshift beds occupied

94.8

90.1

91.2

S1-Question 24-Number of Actual Occupants per Room

90.4

88.0

88.9

S1-Question 25.-Voluntary Large Muscle Activity?

90.4

88.0

88.9

S1-Question 26a.-Required Large Muscle Activity?

90.4

88.0

88.9

S1-Question 26b-Required Minutes Per Day

90.4

88.0

88.9

S1-Question 26c.-Required Days Per Week

90.4

88.0

88.9

S2-Question 1a-Risk of Suicide

88.0

88.7

S2-Question 1b-What best describes the process

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 2-Who asks questions

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 3-When are young persons first asked questions

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 4-Which young persons are asked questions

88.0

88.6

Description

Page 113 of 144

2012
response
rate

2014
response
rate

2016
response
rate

S2-Question 5a-Are any young persons re-asked questions

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 5b-Which best describes reason for re-asking

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 6-Does facility assign different levels of risk to young persons

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 7a-Are at risk young persons placed in observation room

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 7b-What happens in observation room

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 8-Preventive measures

87.8

88.5

S2-Question 9-Any other mental health services Inside/outside:Yes, both available

88.0

88.7

S2-Question 10a-Is ongoing counseling provided

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 10b-Which forms of ongoing counseling

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 11-Are any young persons evaluated by a professional

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 12-When are young persons evaluated by a professional

87.5

88.2

S2-Question 13-Which young persons are evaluated

87.7

88.5

S2-Question 14a-Ongoing therapy for mental health provided

87.9

88.6

S2-Question 14b-Which forms of ongoing therapy are provided

87.9

88.6

S2-Question 14c-Which best describes the facility policy on mental health

87.9

88.6

S2-Question 15-Do medical professionals prescribe medication

88.0

88.6

S2-Question 16a-Are there one or more special living/sleeping units in the facility reserved
for mental health

88.0

88.7

S2-Question 16b-How do these living/sleeping units differ

88.0

88.7

S2-Question 17a-Is there a specialized sex offender treatment program

88.0

88.7

S2-Question 17b-Are any provided to young persons charged with or adjudicated for a sex
offense

88.0

88.7

S2-Question 18-Are there one or more special living/sleeping units for sex offenders

88.0

88.7

S2-Question 19a-Are information regarding their mental health status, services and or
needs communicated to new residence or placement

88.0

88.7

S2-Question 19b-For which is this information shared

88.0

88.7

S3-Question 1-After arrival are any young persons evaluated to determine grade level

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 2-When are young persons evaluated for grade level:

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 3-Methods of evaluation of grade level

87.5

88.4

S3-Question 4-Which young persons are evaluated to determine grade level

87.5

88.4

S3-Question 5-As part of the discharge process, are any young persons evaluated to
determine their educational grade levels and educational needs

87.9

88.7

Description

Page 114 of 144

2012
response
rate

2014
response
rate

2016
response
rate

S3-Question 6-Which young persons are evaluated to determine grade level and
educational needs when being discharged

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 7a-Do any young persons receive teacher instructions at a location either
inside or outside this facility

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 7b-Which young persons attend school or receive teacher instructions

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 8-Which of the following educational services are provided

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 9a.i-How many hours a week do young persons attend school or receive
teacher instruction

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 9a.o-How many hours a week do young persons attend school or receive
teacher instruction

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 9b.i-How many months per year do young persons attend school or receive
teacher instruction

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 9b.o-How many months per year do young persons attend school or receive
teacher instruction

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 10a-Upon departure, is information regarding their educational status,
services and/or needs communicated to young person's new placement

87.9

88.7

S3-Question 10b-For which young persons is this information shared

87.9

88.7

S4-Question 1a-After arrival, are any young persons evaluated to determine if they have
substance abuse problems

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 1b-Which methods are used to evaluate persons substance abuse problems

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 2-When are young persons first evaluated to determine substance abuse
problems

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 3a-Are all young persons evaluated after arrival in this facility to determine
whether they have substance abuse problems

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 3b-Which young persons are evaluated for substance abuse problems

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 4a-Are any young persons required to provide urine samples

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 4b-Which best describes the circumstances under which urine samples are
provided

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 5-Do any young persons receive substance abuse services inside or outside
this facility

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 6-Which of the following substance abuse services are provided

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 7-Which of the following self-led, self help groups are provided

87.9

88.7

S4-Question 8a-Is ongoing counseling for substance abuse provided

87.9

88.7

S4-Question 8b-Which forms of ongoing counseling for substance abuse are provided
inside or outside facility

87.9

88.7

S4-Question 9a-Is ongoing therapy for substance abuse problems provided to young
persons

88.0

88.7

Description

Page 115 of 144

2012
response
rate

2014
response
rate

2016
response
rate

S4-Question 9b-Which forms of ongoing therapy for substance abuse problems are
provided

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 9c-Which best describes the facility policy on providing ongoing therapy for
substance abuse problems

88.0

88.7

S4-Question 10a-Upon departure, is information regarding their substance abuse status,
services and/or needs communicated with new placement

87.6

88.5

S4-Question 10b-For which young persons is this information shared

87.6

88.5

S5-Question 1-Any unauthorized departures?

89.9

88.1

88.5

S5-Question 2a-Any transported to hospital?

94.5

90.1

91.0

S5-Question 2b-Reason transported to hospital

94.5

90.1

90.9

S5-Question 3-Any restrained with mechanical device?

90.2

87.8

88.6

S5-Question 4-Any locked more than 4 hrs alone?

90.1

87.9

88.7

S5-Question 5a-Physical Health unavailable?

90.2

88.0

88.7

S5-Question 5b-Reasons Physical Health unavailable

90.2

88.0

88.7

S5-Question 6a-Mental Health unavailable?

90.1

87.9

88.6

S5-Question 6b-Reasons Mental Health unavailable

90.1

87.9

88.6

S5-Question 7a-Educational Instructions unavailable?

90.2

87.9

88.7

S5-Question 7b-Reasons Educational instructions unavailable

90.2

87.9

88.7

S5-Question 8a-Sub. Abuse services unavailable?

90.2

88.0

88.7

S5-Question 8b-Substance abuse services unavailable

90.2

88.0

88.7

S6-Question 1-Any persons die while assigned beds inside or outside this facility in past
12 months?

94.9

90.5

91.4

S6-Question 2-How many persons died?

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3a- Cause of death-person 1

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3b-Location of Death of person 1

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3C-Age at death (years) of person 1

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3D-Sex of person 1

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3E-Race of person 1

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3f-Date of admission-MONTH (person 1)

94.8

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3f-Date of admission-DAY (person 1)

94.8

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3f-Date of admission-YEAR (person 1)

94.8

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3g-Date of Death-MONTH

94.9

90.3

91.3

Description

Page 116 of 144

2012
response
rate

2014
response
rate

2016
response
rate

S6-Question 3g-Date of Death-DAY

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3g-Date of Death-YEAR

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3a-Cause of Death-person 2

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3b-Location of Death-(Person 2)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3c-Age at Death- (person 2)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3d-Sex-(person 2)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3e-Race-(person 2)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3f-Date of admission-MONTH - (person 2)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3f-Date of admission-DAY - (person 2)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3f-Date of admission-YEAR - (person 2)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3g-Date of Death-MONTH (person 2)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3g-Date of Death-DAY (person 2)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3g-Date of Death-YEAR (person 2)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3a-Cause of Death- (person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6- Question 3b-Location of Death-(person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3c-Age at Death-(person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-question 3d-Sex- (person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-question 3e-Race-(person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3f-Date of admission-MONTH- (person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3f-Date of admission-DAY- (person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3f-Date of admission-YEAR- (person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3g-Date of Death-MONTH- (person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3g-Date of Death-DAY- (person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S6-Question 3g-Date of Death-YEAR- (person 3)

94.9

90.3

91.3

S7-Question 1a-Other juvenile facilities in same bldg.?

90.5

88.0

88.7

S7-Question 1b-How many other juvenile facilities

90.5

88.0

88.7

S7-Question 2-Shares the following with reported facility

90.5

88.0

88.7

Description

Page 117 of 144

JRFC item response rates by section over time
General
Facility
Information

Mental
Health
Services

Educational
Services

Substance
Abuse
Services

The
Last
Month

The
Last
Year

2016

Sections for Mental Health Services, Educational Services, and Substance Abuse Services were not on 2012 JRFC
Section 7 is General Information

Figure 8. Juvenile Residential Facility Census item response rates by section over time

Page 118 of 144

Questionnaire Items Eligible for Imputation
The following 27 items were eligible for imputation in the 2016 JRFC. See the notes at the end of Table
8 for descriptions of the codes in the imputation method column.

Table 8. Items eligible for imputation
Number

Question

Concept

G_PHY_LAYOUT, G_PHY_LAYOUT_SP

2
3

G_OTH_BLDGS
G_DET_OVERFLOW

G_NUM_ASSIGNED_BEDS

G_NUM_21_OLDER

Physical layout of
facility
Other buildings?
House overflow
population?
Persons assigned to
beds
Adults assigned to
beds

G_NUM_UNDER_21

G_TOTAL_OFFENSE

G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE

G_MENTAL_HLTH through
G_TREATMENT_OTHER_SPECIFY
G_FOSTER_CARE
G_INDEPENDENT_LIVING
G_FAC_DETENTION through
G_FAC_OTHER_SPECIFY

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

G_SEP_HOUSING through
G_SEP_N1_OF_THE_ABV
G_OWN_NON_PROFIT through
G_OWN_NAME
G_OWN_TRIBAL through
G_OWN_OTHER_SPECIFY
G_OPERATOR_NON_PROFIT through
G_OPERATOR_NAME
G_OPERATOR_TRIBAL through
G_OPERATOR_OTHER_SPECIFY
G_LOCKED_ROOM through
G_LOCKED_OTHER_SPECIFY

Juveniles assigned to
beds
Juvenile offenders
assigned to beds
Juvenile
nonoffenders
assigned to beds
On-site residential
treatment?
Provide foster care?
Independent living?
Facility type
Separate sleeping
units?
Facility ownership
Level of government
that owns facility
Who operates
facility
Level of government
that operates facility
Juveniles locked in
rooms?

Imputation
method
A
A
A
B (flag=2)
B (flag=2)
C (flag=21)
D (flag=22)
E (flag=23)
B (flag=2)
C (flag=21)
D (flag=22)
E (flag=23)
C (flag=21)
D (flag=22)
E (flag=23)
A
A
A
See Collapsed
Facility Type
Codes section
A
A
A
A
A
A

Page 119 of 144

Number

Question

Concept

G_SECURE_DOORS through G_SECURE_NONE

20
21

G_OUTSIDE_LOCKED through
G_OUTSIDE_OTHER_SPECIFY
G_STAN_BDS

G_MKSHFT_BDS_TOT

G_NUM_1_PERSN through G_NUM_25_PLS

G_LG_MUSCLE_ACT

G_REQ_LG_MUSCLE

G_REQ_MINUTES

G_REQ_DYS_PER_WK

Confine juveniles in
specific areas?
Outside doors
locked?
Number of standard
beds
Occupied makeshift
beds
Sleeping room
arrangements
Voluntary large
muscle activity
Required large
muscle activity
Minutes per day of
required large
muscle activity
Days per week of
required large
muscle activity

Imputation
method
A
A
F (flag=20)
B (flag=2)
F (flag=20)
E (flag=23)
F (flag=20)
G (flag=24)
F (flag=20)
E (flag=23)
F (flag=20)
H (flag=30)
F (flag=20)
G (flag=24)
B (flag=2)
F (flag=20)
G (flag=24)
B (flag=2)

NOTES: A means pulled forward from prior year if missing; if no prior year available, set to missing.
B means derived from response to other variables (flag=2)
C means imputed using growth rate applied to prior year CJRP data (flag=21)
D means imputed using growth rate applied to prior year JRFC data (flag=22)
E means imputed using median value (flag=23)
F means pulled forward data from prior year JRFC (flag=20)
G means imputed using most commonly reported answer (flag=24)
H means randomly assigned based on reported rates (flag=30)

Page 120 of 144

Imputation Rates
Table 9 shows the item response rates and the total quantity response rates for 2012, 2014, and 2016.
The item response rate is
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤ℎ 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑎 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
× 100.
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓

The item imputation rate is 100 – the item response rate. For the 2016 JRFC, the item imputation rate
ranges from 7.7 to 8.8 percent for the key items.
The total quantity response rate shows how much of the quantity estimate was reported. The total
quantity response rate is
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
× 100.
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏ℎ 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Figure 9 shows that the item response rates for 2016 are similar to what they were for 2014. Figure 10
shows a similar pattern for the total quantity response rates.

Table 9. Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC) item response rates and total quantity
response rates over time
2012 JRFC

Reported
Count
2012

Imputed
Count
2012

Quantity
Estimate
2012

Total
Quantity
Response
Rate
2012

Reported
Records
2012

Imputed
Records
2012

Total
Facilities
2012

Item
Response
Rate
2012

S1-Question 5b-Number
assigned beds

2,216

121

2,337

94.8

67,253

2,559

69,812

96.3

S1-Question 6-Number
assigned beds >21 yrs

2,216

121

2,337

94.8

196

100.0

S1-Question 7b-Number
assigned <21

2,215

122

2,337

94.8

67,001

2,615

69,616

96.2

S1-Question 8b-Number
assigned for offense

2,216

121

2,337

94.8

55,747

1,443

57,190

97.5

S1-Question 9b-Number
assigned for nonoffense

2,216

121

2,337

94.8

11,310

1,116

12,426

91.0

S1-Question 22-Total
number standard beds

2,217

120

2,337

94.9

97,168

3,331

100,499

96.7

S1-Question 23b-How
many makeshift beds
occupied

2,216

121

2,337

94.8

100.0

Variable

Page 121 of 144

2014 JRFC
Reported
Records
2014

Imputed
Records
2014

Total
Facilities
2014

Item
Response
Rate
2014

Reported
Count
2014

Imputed
Count
2014

Quantity
Estimate
2014

Total
Quantity
Response
Rate
2014

S1-Question 5b-Number
assigned beds

2,020

171

2,191

92.2

59,281

3,782

63,063

94.0

S1-Question 6-Number
assigned beds >21 yrs

2,020

171

2,191

92.2

333

100.0

S1-Question 7b-Number
assigned <21

2,020

171

2,191

92.2

58,948

3,782

62,730

94.0

S1-Question 8b-Number
assigned for offense

2,020

171

2,191

92.2

48,324

2,497

50,821

95.1

S1-Question 9b-Number
assigned for nonoffense

2,020

171

2,191

92.2

10,624

1,285

11,909

89.2

S1-Question 22-Total
number standard beds

2,020

171

2,191

92.2

88,676

4,772

93,448

94.9

S1-Question 23b-How
many makeshift beds
occupied

1,974

217

2,191

90.1

147

55.8

Variable

2016 JRFC
Reported
Records
2016

Imputed
Records
2016

Total
Facilities
2016

Item
Response
Rate
2016

Reported
Count
2016

Imputed
Count
2016

Quantity
Estimate
2016

Total
Quantity
Response
Rate
2016

S1-Question 5b-Number
assigned beds

1,964

179

2,143

91.6

54,566

4,483

59,049

92.4

S1-Question 6-Number
assigned beds >21 yrs

1,979

164

2,143

92.3

387

416

93.0

S1-Question 7b-Number
assigned <21

1,964

179

2,143

91.6

54,179

4,454

58,633

92.4

S1-Question 8b-Number
assigned for offense

1,964

179

2,143

91.6

42,843

2,724

45,567

94.0

S1-Question 9b-Number
assigned for nonoffense

1,964

179

2,143

91.6

11,336

1,730

13,066

86.8

S1-Question 22-Total
number standard beds

1,956

187

2,143

91.3

83,939

6,286

90,225

93.0

S1-Question 23b-How
many makeshift beds
occupied

1,955

188

2,143

91.2

152

55.9

Variable

Page 122 of 144

JRFC key item response rates over time
95

Item response rate

90
S1-Question
S1-Question
S1-Question
5b-Number
6-Number
7b-Number
assigned beds assigned beds assigned <21
>21 yrs

S1-Question
8b-Number
assigned for
offense

S1-Question
9b-Number
assigned for
non-offense

S1-Question
S1-Question
22-Total
23b-How many
number
makeshift
standard beds beds occupied

Question
2012
2012
2014
2016

94.8
92.2
91.6

94.8
92.2
92.3

94.8
92.2
91.6

2014
94.8
92.2
91.6

2016
94.8
92.2
91.6

94.9
92.2
91.3

Figure 9. Juvenile Residential Facility Census key item response rates over time

94.8
90.1
91.2

Page 123 of 144

JRFC total quantity response rates over time

Total quantity response rate

100

S1-Question
5b-Number
assigned
beds

S1-Question
6-Number
assigned
beds >21 yrs

S1-Question
7b-Number
assigned <21

S1-Question
8b-Number
assigned for
offense

S1-Question
9b-Number
assigned for
non-offense

S1-Question
22-Total
number
standard beds

S1-Question
23b-How
many
makeshift
beds occupied

Question
2012
2012
2014
2016

96.3
94.0
92.4

100.0
100.0
93.0

96.2
94.0
92.4

2014
97.5
95.1
94.0

2016
91.0
89.2
86.8

96.7
94.9
93.0

100.0
55.8
55.9

Figure 10. Juvenile Residential Facility Census total quantity response rates over time
[The program JRFC_response_rates_over_time.sas calculates the item response rates and the total
quantity response rates and produces the graphic displays in this section.]

Collapsed Facility Type Codes
For imputation purposes, we assign a collapsed facility type code (COLLAPSED_FACILITY) to every
facility. We only assign COLLAPSED_FACILITY to nontribal facilities in the 50 states and DC in the 2016
JRFC data file, because we did not impute the tribal facilities or the territorial facilities.
COLLAPSED_FACILITY is the same as the cat code on the CJRP data files.
The following procedure assigns the COLLAPSED_FACILITY code:
1. If the agency checks only one facility type box on the 2016 form, we map the checked box to the
appropriate collapsed facility type and COLLAPSED_FACILITY is set. See Table 10. Note that if
the facility checks “other”, we do not assign a collapsed facility type here.

Page 124 of 144

Table 10. Collapsed facility type code when only one box marked
COLLAPSED_FACILITY
Collapsed Facility Type
0
Detention Center
1
Shelter
2
3
5

Reception / Diagnostic Center
Training School
Ranch, Camp, or Farm

Halfway House / Group Home

Check box on 2016 form
G_FAC_DETENTION
G_FAC_RUNAWAY,
G_FAC_OTHER_SHELTER
G_FAC_RECEPTION
G_FAC_TRAINING
G_FAC_BOOTCAMP,
G_FAC_RANCH
G_FAC_HOME,
G_FAC_RESIDENTIAL

2. If the agency checks more than one facility box type on the 2016 form, we determine the
collapsed facility type based on a hierarchy. The collapsed facility type code is determined by
the highest checked box on the list. If an agency checks boxes that indicate that it is both a
reception center and a training school, the assigned code is training school, since the training
school is higher up on the hierarchy than reception center is. Table 11 shows the hierarchy.

Table 11. Hierarchy used when more than one facility type marked in 2016
Juvenile Residential Facility Census
COLLAPSED_FACILITY
3
0
2
5

Collapsed Facility Type
Training School
Detention Center
Reception / Diagnostic Center
Ranch, Camp, or Farm

Shelter

Halfway House / Group Home

Check box on 2016 form
G_FAC_TRAINING
G_FAC_DETENTION
G_FAC_RECEPTION
G_FAC_BOOTCAMP,
G_FAC_RANCH
G_FAC_RUNAWAY,
G_FAC_OTHER_SHELTER
G_FAC_HOME,
G_FAC_RESIDENTIAL

3. If the collapsed facility type is still missing, we use the facility’s cat code from the 2015 CJRP.
The facility’s answers to the facility type question from the 2015 CJRP are pulled forward.
4. If the collapsed facility type is still missing, we base the COLLAPSED_FACILITY on the facility’s
answers in the 2014 JRFC. The facility’s answers in the 2014 JRFC are pulled forward.
5. If the collapsed facility type is still missing, Census analysts research the facility. If needed,
Census staff consults with OJJDP staff who provide the code to assign to the facility.
Table 12 shows the frequency of the methods used to assign collapsed facility type in the 2016 JRFC.

Page 125 of 144

Table 12. Frequency of methods used to assign collapsed facility code
Method of assigning collapsed facility type
Facility checked one facility type box on 2016 JRFC form
Facility checked multiple facility type boxes on 2016 JRFC form
Facility responses from the 2015 CJRP were used
Facility responses from the 2014 JRFC were used
Collapsed facility type based on guidance from OJJDP
Total

Frequency
1,590
323
193
14
23
2,143

[The program assign_collapsed_facility_type_if_missing.sas creates the COLLAPSED_FACILITY variable.]

Pulling Forward Prior Year Data
The imputation process starts by pulling forward prior year data for refusals and critical item facilities
(CheckInStatus codes of 0, 7, 10, 12) and for item nonrespondents.

Table 13. Questions for which we pull forward data from prior year if current year is
missing
Number
1
2
3

Question
G_PHY_LAYOUT, G_PHY_LAYOUT_SP
G_OTH_BLDGS
G_OVERFLOW

4
5
6
7
8
9

G_ONSITE_TREATMENT through
G_TREATMENT_OTHER_SPECIFY
G_FOSTER_CARE
G_INDEPENDENT_LIVING
G_SEP_HOUSING through G_SEP_N1_OF_THE_ABV
G_OWN_NON_PROFIT through G_OWN_NAME
G_OWN_TRIBAL through G_OWN_OTHER_SPECIFY

10
11

G_OPERATOR_NON_PROFIT through G_OPERATOR_NAME
G_OPERATOR_TRIBAL through G_OPERATOR_OTHER_SPECIFY

G_LOCKED_ROOM through G_LOCKED_OTHER_SPECIFY

G_SECURE_DOORS through G_SECURE_NONE

G_OUTSIDE_LOCKED through G_OUTSIDE_OTHER_SPECIFY

Concept
Physical layout of facility
Other buildings?
House overflow
population?
On-site residential
treatment?
Provide foster care?
Independent living?
Separate sleeping units?
Facility ownership
Level of government that
owns facility
Who operates facility
Level of government that
operates facility
Juveniles locked in
rooms?
Confine juveniles in
specific areas?
Outside doors locked?

If the same question appears on the 2015 CJRP, we check the facility’s answers on that first, before
checking the 2014 JRFC. If the question does not appear on the 2015 CJRP, we check the facility’s
answers on the 2014 JRFC. Note that a facility may report some of the items in the current year, so the
program has to check to see if the item is missing in the current year.

Page 126 of 144

If no prior year data exists for the question, we set the value to 8 (refusal). The program also verifies
that we did not overwrite any reported data for those questions.
The 2016 JRFC has the same sections that the 2014 JRFC form had. Many of the questions in Section 1
(General Facility Information) on the 2016 JRFC were also on the 2015 CJRP.
We discussed with OJJDP the possibility of pulling forward the check box answers in the other sections:
Section 2 (Mental Health Services), Section 3 (Educational Services), Section 4 (Substance Abuse
Services), Section 5 (The Last Month), Section 6 (The Last Year), and Section 7 (General Information).
We decided not to pull forward those responses. There were two main reasons: (1) Juvenile residential
facilities have been changing due to juvenile justice reforms; (2) Pulling forward the check box answers
in those sections would also change how OJJDP typically reports information from those sections in their
publications.
[The program pull_forward_general_facility_info.sas does the imputations for the questions listed in
Table 13.]

Creation of Imputation Groups
The next step in the process is to create geographic imputation groups. We create a two-digit state
code from the facility ID (note that these are not ANSI FIPS codes). We use the two-digit state code to
assign a division code to each facility. We then use the division code to assign a region code to each
facility. Each facility receives an imputation group code (IMPGRP), which is 4 characters long. The first
character of IMPGRP is the geographic region code, the second character is the geographic division
code, and the third and fourth characters are the collapsed facility code, formatted with a leading 0.
Table 14 summarizes the imputation variables added to the 2016 JRFC file.

Page 127 of 144

Table 14. Imputation variables added to the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census file
Variable
COLLAPSED_FACILITY

IMPSET
DIVISION

REGION

FACILITY_CODE
IMPGRP

Description
We collapse the facility type answers, following the CJRP methodology. The
values are:
0 – Detention Center
1 – Shelter
2 – Reception / Diagnostic Center
3 – Training School
5 – Ranch, Camp, or Farm
6 – Halfway House/ Group Home
Indicates if the record needed imputation. Value is “needs” when record
needs imputation, “donor” when record was used in growth rate calculations.
Value is blank for records that were not eligible for imputation.
Census division code. The values are:
1 – New England
2 – Middle Atlantic
3 – East North Central
4 – West North Central
5 – South Atlantic
6 – East South Central
7 – West South Central
8 – Mountain
9 – Pacific
See https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/mapsdata/maps/reference/us_regdiv.pdf for more details.
Census region code. The values are:
1 – Northeast
2 – Midwest
3 – South
4 – West
See https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/mapsdata/maps/reference/us_regdiv.pdf for more details.
Collapsed facility code, formatted with a leading 0.
Imputation group code. The imputation group code is 4 characters. The first
character is the region code, the second character is the division code, and
third and fourth characters are FACILITY_CODE. If we need to collapse the
imputation group, we collapse first within the region, and the division code is
set to 0. If we need to collapse further, we collapse to the national level, and
the region code is set to 0.

[The program impute_JRFC_counts.sas creates the variables listed in Table 14.]

Page 128 of 144

Collapsing of Imputation Groups
As mentioned in Table 14, we may need to collapse the imputation group. We require an imputation
group to have at least 15 respondents and at least a 75 percent response rate within the group. If the
group does not meet either criterion, we collapse the imputation group until it meets both criteria or
there are no more options for collapsing. We first collapse within the region, and set the division code
to 0. If we need to collapse further, we collapse to the national level, and the region code is set to 0.
The impset variable divides the records eligible for imputation into two groups: donor records and
records that need imputation. We classify a facility as needs imputation if either of the following
applies:
•
•

Facility is a refusal or critical item facility (CheckInStatus of 0, 7, 10, or 12)
Any of the following counts are missing:
o Number of persons assigned to beds (G_NUM_ASSIGNED_BEDS)
o Adults assigned to beds (G_NUM_21_OLDER)
o Number of juveniles assigned to beds (G_NUM_UNDER_21)
o Number of juvenile offenders assigned to beds (G_TOTAL_OFFENSE)
o Number of juveniles assigned to beds for reasons other than offenses
(G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE)
o Number of standard beds (G_STAN_BDS).

Table 15 shows the imputation groups for the 2016 JRFC with the number of records that need
imputation.

Table 15. 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census imputation groups with records
needing imputation
Imputation
Group

Description

Donors

Records
needing
imputation

Percent
responding

0002

REGION= Nationwide
DIVISION=
Collapsed facility= Reception / Diagnostic Center

68.6

0005

REGION= Nationwide
DIVISION=
Collapsed facility= Ranch, Camp, or Farm

88.6

1003

REGION= Northeast
DIVISION=
Collapsed facility= Training School

88.2

1006

REGION= Northeast
DIVISION=
Collapsed facility= Halfway House / Group Home

203

86.0

Page 129 of 144

Imputation
Group

Description

Donors

Records
needing
imputation

Percent
responding

1100

REGION= Northeast
DIVISION= New England
Collapsed facility= Detention Center

90.9

1200

REGION= Northeast
DIVISION= Middle Atlantic
Collapsed facility= Detention Center

86.3

1201

REGION= Northeast
DIVISION= Middle Atlantic
Collapsed facility= Shelter

96.4

2300

REGION= Midwest
DIVISION= East North Central
Collapsed facility= Detention Center

101

95.3

2301

REGION= Midwest
DIVISION= East North Central
Collapsed facility= Shelter

93.9

2306

REGION= Midwest
DIVISION= East North Central
Collapsed facility= Halfway House / Group Home

142

89.3

2400

REGION= Midwest
DIVISION= West North Central
Collapsed facility= Detention Center

95.0

2401

REGION= Midwest
DIVISION= West North Central
Collapsed facility= Shelter

96.2

2406

REGION= Midwest
DIVISION= West North Central
Collapsed facility= Halfway House / Group Home

142

92.8

3006

REGION= South
DIVISION=
Collapsed facility= Halfway House / Group Home

248

81.8

3500

REGION= South
DIVISION= South Atlantic
Collapsed facility= Detention Center

96.0

3501

REGION= South
DIVISION= South Atlantic
Collapsed facility= Shelter

94.6

Page 130 of 144

Imputation
Group

Description

Donors

Records
needing
imputation

Percent
responding

3503

REGION= South
DIVISION= South Atlantic
Collapsed facility= Training School

93.9

3600

REGION= South
DIVISION= East South Central
Collapsed facility= Detention Center

91.8

3700

REGION= South
DIVISION= West South Central
Collapsed facility= Detention Center

92.4

3701

REGION= South
DIVISION= West South Central
Collapsed facility= Shelter

91.2

3703

REGION= South
DIVISION= West South Central
Collapsed facility= Training School

95.8

4001

REGION= West
DIVISION=
Collapsed facility= Shelter

83.3

4800

REGION= West
DIVISION= Mountain
Collapsed facility= Detention Center

84.7

4803

REGION= West
DIVISION= Mountain
Collapsed facility= Training School

78.3

4806

REGION= West
DIVISION= Mountain
Collapsed facility= Halfway House / Group Home

75.0

4900

REGION= West
DIVISION= Pacific
Collapsed facility= Detention Center

93.3

4906

REGION= West
DIVISION= Pacific
Collapsed facility= Halfway House / Group Home

109

87.2

243

Note that the collapsed imputation group for Reception / Diagnostic Center does not meet the 75
percent threshold. There are 35 facilities in the records eligible for imputation that have a collapsed

Page 131 of 144

facility type of Reception / Diagnostic Center. The number of facilities with collapsed facility type of
Reception / Diagnostic Center has been less than 40 since the 2010 CJRP. The number of facilities with
the collapsed facility type of Ranch, Camp, or Farm has declined from 77 in the 2010 CJRP to 35 in the
2016 JRFC.
The collapsed facility types were created for the 1997 CJRP and may no longer be totally relevant. For
example, the collapsed facility types of Reception / Diagnostic Center and Ranch, Camp, or Farm may
not be big enough for imputation purposes in the future. Table 16 shows collapsed facility type counts
for selected years, while Figure 11 is a graphical display of those counts.
[We collapse the imputation groups in the impute_JRFC_counts.sas program.]

Table 16. Collapsed facility type counts for selected years
CJRP
2003

CJRP
2010

JRFC
2012

JRFC
2014

JRFC
2016

2016/2012
Count (%)

Detention Center

712

676

657

625

614

86.2

Shelter

329

198

190

184

190

57.8

60.3

Training School

258

214

187

177

189

73.3

Ranch, Camp, or Farm

149

23.5

1,972

1,453

1,217

1,134

1,080

54.8

3,478

2,650

2,337

2,191

2,143

61.6

COLLAPSED_FACILITY

Reception / Diagnostic Center

Halfway House / Group Home

Page 132 of 144

Reception / Diagnostic Center and Ranch, Camp, or Farm collapsed facility
types have decreased over time
2,000

Detention Center

1,500
1,000

712

676

657

500

614

625

0
2,000

Shelter

1,500
1,000
500

329

198

0
2,000

190

184

Reception / Diagnostic Center

1,500
1,000
500
0
2,000

Training School

1,500
1,000
500

258

214

187

0
2,000

177

189

Ranch, Camp, or Farm

1,500
1,000
500

149

0
2,000

1,972
1,453

1,500

Halfway House / Group Home
1,217

1,134

1,080

JRFC 2012

JRFC 2014

JRFC 2016

1,000
500
0
CJRP 2003

CJRP 2010

Figure 11. Reception / Diagnostic Center and Ranch, Camp, or Farm collapsed facility
types have decreased over time

Page 133 of 144

Calculations within Imputation Groups
Once we have formed imputation groups, we calculate the following growth rates for the donors in each
imputation group:
•
•
•

Adults assigned to beds (G_NUM_21_OLDER)
Number of juvenile offenders assigned to beds (G_TOTAL_OFFENSE)
Number of juveniles assigned beds for reasons other than offenses (G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE).

Since these counts are on both the CJRP and JRFC prior year files, we can calculate growth rates from
either prior year file. We use PROC UNIVARIATE in SAS to calculate trimmed means within each
imputation group, where the trimmed mean removes two observations from each imputation group.
We calculate the ratio of standard beds (G_STAN_BDS) to people assigned to beds
(G_NUM_ASSIGNED_BEDS) for each donor facility in each imputation group.
We calculate the following median values for donors in each imputation group:
•
•

Occupied makeshift beds (G_MKSHFT_BDS_TOT)
Voluntary large muscle activity (G_LG_MUSCLE_ACT).

We calculate the following most commonly reported answers for donors in each imputation group:
•
•
•

Sleeping room arrangements (G_NUM_1_PERSN through G_NUM_25_PLS)
Minutes per day of required large muscle activity (G_REQ_MINUTES)
Days per week of required large muscle activity (G_REQ_DYS_PER_WK).

We calculate the required exercise rate for donor records within each imputation group. The required
exercise rate is the number of facilities that answered Yes to G_REQ_LG_MUSCLE divided by the number
of facilities that answered G_REQ_LG_MUSCLE.
Table 17, Table 18, Table 19, and Table 20 show the calculations by imputation group for the 2016 JRFC.

Page 134 of 144

Table 17. Trimmed mean growth rates for prior year population counts for 2016 Juvenile
Residential Facility Census imputation
Growth rate from prior CJRP
IMPGRP

G NUM
21 OLDER

G TOTAL
OFFENSE

Growth rate from prior JRFC

G TOTAL
NONOFFENSE

G NUM 21
OLDER

G TOTAL
OFFENSE

G TOTAL
NONOFFENSE

0002

1.000000

0.934031

1.409269

1.000000

1.109687

1.043339

0005

0.988095

0.873331

1.000000

0.993789

0.773885

1.000000

1003

1.000000

0.894293

1.000000

0.810035

1.000000

1006

0.997126

0.900576

1.066002

0.981589

0.937328

1.026502

1100

1.000000

0.950764

1.000000

0.838926

1.000000

1200

1.000000

0.962691

1.006349

1.000000

0.826969

1.000000

1201

1.000000

0.717066

1.010985

1.000000

0.654731

1.387227

2300

1.000000

1.051954

0.985281

1.000000

0.988546

0.979747

2301

1.000000

0.920364

1.203378

1.000000

0.672549

1.136275

2306

1.000000

0.967669

0.999477

1.000000

0.824655

1.158791

2400

1.000000

0.922596

0.997934

1.000000

0.883876

0.990909

2401

1.000000

0.859897

1.051688

1.000000

0.943333

1.078348

2406

1.000000

0.842343

1.085138

1.000000

0.874803

1.129609

3006

1.000000

1.065711

0.966501

1.000000

0.884201

1.023937

3500

1.000000

1.153289

0.995798

1.000000

1.045655

0.987952

3501

1.000000

1.023316

1.084939

1.000000

0.863889

1.447879

3503

1.000000

1.217232

1.000000

0.971197

1.000000

3600

1.000000

1.043190

1.000000

1.139877

0.950000

3700

1.000000

0.980151

0.969231

1.000000

0.921433

0.969231

3701

1.000000

0.869324

0.829017

1.000000

0.852699

0.908565

3703

1.000000

0.976684

1.000000

0.975918

1.000000

4001

1.000000

1.134615

1.054238

1.000000

0.988889

1.038889

4800

1.000000

0.998207

1.000000

0.909935

1.000000

4803

1.000000

0.956073

1.000000

0.987321

1.000000

4806

1.000000

0.943708

1.007875

1.000000

0.865232

1.062419

4900

1.000000

1.013500

0.974026

1.000000

0.917125

0.931624

4906

0.996528

0.875405

0.994041

1.000000

0.943207

0.995533

Page 135 of 144

Table 18. Selected medians for 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census imputation
Medians based on 2016 JRFC
IMPGRP

G NUM
21 OLDER

G TOTAL
OFFENSE

G TOTAL
NONOFFENSE

(G STAN BDS /
G NUM ASSIGNED BEDS)

G MKSHFT
BDS TOT

0002

8.0

1.257895

0005

21.0

1.700000

1003

35.0

1.857143

1006

8.0

1.200000

1100

12.5

1.700000

1200

9.5

1.889483

1201

1.0

1.666667

2300

21.0

1.571429

2301

0.0

1.545455

2306

6.0

1.297887

2400

9.0

2.105263

2401

1.0

1.333333

2406

6.0

1.171569

3006

7.0

1.200000

3500

28.0

1.481481

3501

4.0

1.071429

3503

38.5

1.035760

3600

15.0

2.130435

3700

18.0

1.657143

3701

0.0

1.636364

3703

58.0

1.254054

4001

1.0

1.666667

4800

11.0

2.085859

4803

61.0

1.316023

4806

4.0

4.5

1.240385

4900

21.0

2.222222

4906

6.0

1.200000

9.5

Page 136 of 144

Table 19. Most commonly reported answers for sleeping room arrangements for 2016
Juvenile Residential Facility Census imputation
Most common G NUM
IMPGRP
0002

1 PERSN

2 PERSN

3 PERSN

4 PERSN

5 10 PERSN

11 25 PERSN

25 PLS

0005

1003

1006

1100

1200

1201

2300

2301

2306

2400

2401

2406

3006

3500

3501

3503

3600

3700

3701

3703

4001

4800

4803

4806

4900

4906

Page 137 of 144

Table 20. Median or most commonly reported answers for large muscle activity
questions for 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census imputation
Most common
IMPGRP

G LG MUSCLE
ACT median

Required exercise rate

G REQ MINUTES

G REQ DYS PER WK

0002

0.208333

0005

0.677419

1003

0.533333

1006

0.339901

1100

0.600000

1200

0.454545

1201

0.185185

2300

0.801980

2301

0.225806

2306

0.288732

2400

0.473684

2401

0.200000

2406

0.542254

3006

0.375000

3500

0.642105

3501

0.142857

3503

0.282609

3600

0.511111

3700

0.643836

3701

0.387097

3703

0.869565

4001

0.250000

4800

0.560000

4803

0.777778

4806

0.358974

4900

0.602410

4906

0.256881

Page 138 of 144

Imputing Population Counts
Once we have finished the calculations within imputation groups, we can impute the population counts
on the file. We start by deriving the counts when facilities report only some of the counts.
If the number of juvenile offenders (G_TOTAL_OFFENSE) is greater than 0 and the number of juveniles
assigned beds for reasons other than offenses (G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE) is greater than 0 but the
number of juveniles assigned to beds (G_NUM_UNDER_21) is not reported, we add G_TOTAL_OFFENSE
and G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE to derive G_NUM_UNDER_21 and set the flag for G_NUM_UNDER_21 to
derived.
If the number of persons assigned to beds (G_NUM_ASSIGNED_BEDS) is the same as the number of
juveniles assigned to beds (G_NUM_UNDER_21) but adults assigned to beds (G_NUM_21_OLDER) is
missing, we set G_NUM_21_OLDER to 0 and set the flag to derived.
If adults assigned to beds (G_NUM_21_OLDER) is still missing, we impute a value based on one of the
following methods:
•
•
•

If prior year CJRP data are available, we apply the CJRP G_NUM_21_OLDER growth rate to the
prior year value.
If no prior year CJRP data are available but prior year JRFC data are available, we apply the JRFC
G_NUM_21_OLDER growth rate to the prior year value.
If neither prior year CJRP nor prior year JRFC data are available, we use the rounded
G_NUM_21_OLDER median value.

If the number of juvenile offenders (G_TOTAL_OFFENSE) is still missing, we impute a value based on one
of the following methods:
•
•
•

If prior year CJRP data are available, we apply the G_TOTAL_OFFENSE growth rate to the prior
year value.
If no prior CJRP data are available, but prior year JRFC data are available, we apply the JRFC
G_TOTAL_OFFENSE growth rate to the prior year value.
If neither prior year CJRP nor prior year JRFC data are available, we use the rounded
G_TOTAL_OFFENSE median value.

If the number of juveniles assigned to beds for reasons other than offenses (G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE) is
still missing, we imputed a value based on one of the following methods:
•
•
•

If prior year CJRP data are available, we apply the CJRP G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE growth rate to
the prior year value.
If no prior year CJRP data are available, but prior year JRFC data are available, we apply the JRFC
G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE growth rate to the prior year value.
If neither prior year CJRP data nor prior year JRFC data are available, we use the rounded
G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE median value.

If the number of juveniles assigned to beds (G_NUM_UNDER_21) is still missing, we add
G_TOTAL_OFFENSE and G_TOTAL_NONOFFENSE and set the flag for G_NUM_UNDER_21 to derived.

Page 139 of 144

If the number of persons assigned to beds (G_NUM_ASSIGNED_BEDS) is still missing, we add
G_NUM_UNDER_21 and G_NUM_21_OLDER and set the flag for G_NUM_ASSIGNED_BEDS to derived.
If the number of total standard beds (G_STAN_BDS) is still missing, we pull forward the prior year JRFC
data if it was reported in the prior year; otherwise we apply the median beds to people ratio to the
number of persons assigned to beds (G_NUM_ASSIGNED_BEDS) and set the flag for G_STAN_BDS
appropriately. This is a change from the 2014 JRFC imputation methodology. A facility with a missing
value for total standard beds in the 2016 JRFC may have last reported total standard beds 4 or more
years ago and the preference is to use more current information when available.
If the number of occupied makeshift beds (G_MKSHFT_BDS_TOT) is still missing, we pull forward the
prior year JRFC data if available. If no prior year data are available from JRFC, we use the median value
for G_MKSHFT_BDS_TOT and set the flag for G_MKSHFT_BDS_TOT appropriately.

Imputing the Rest of the Values for the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility
Census
If the answer to the question about young persons having opportunities for voluntary participation in
large muscle activity (G_LG_MUSCLE_ACT) is missing, we pull forward the answer from the prior year
JRFC if available. If the prior year JRFC data are unavailable, we use the median value within the
imputation group.
If the answers to the sleeping room arrangement question (G_NUM_1_PERSN through G_NUM_21_PLS)
are missing, we pull forward the prior year JRFC data if available. If no prior year JRFC data are available,
we use the most commonly reported answer in the imputation group and set G_FLG_NUM_PERSN
appropriately.
If the answers to the required participation in large muscle activity questions (G_REQ_LG_MUSCLE,
G_REQ_MINUTES, G_REQ_DYS_PER_WK) are missing, we pull forward the data from the prior year JRFC.
If no prior year data are available, we randomly assign an answer to G_REQ_LG_MUSCLE based on the
required_exercise_rate in the imputation group. If the answer to G_REQ_MUSCLE is Yes and the
answers to G_REQ_MINUTES and G_REQ_DYS_PER_WK are still missing, we use the most commonly
reported answers for G_REQ_MINUTES and G_REQ_DYS_PER_WK and set the flags appropriately. If the
answer to G_REQ_LG_MUSCLE is No and the answers to G_REQ_MINUTES and G_REQ_DYS_PER_WK
are still missing, we set both G_REQ_MINUTES and G_REQ_DYS_PER_WK to 0 and set the flags for
G_REQ_MINUTES and G_REQ_DYS_PER_WK to derived.
[The program impute_JRFC_counts.sas does the calculations within imputation groups and then
completes the imputations.]

Quality Checks Performed During and After Imputation
The program that assigns COLLAPSED_FACILITY checks that all records eligible for imputation have
collapsed facility type assigned. If there are records for which collapsed facility type is missing, we
generate a report for analyst review.
The program verify_JRFC_imputations_complete.sas runs after imputation of the missing values, to
check that all the flags are properly set and that all imputed fields have valid values.

Page 140 of 144

The program check_2016_JRFC_logical_edits_AFTER_IMPUTATION.sas performs a variety of checks on
the imputed data. It looks for mismatches between the screener questions and the follow-up questions.
It checks the facility counts: total persons assigned to beds is the sum of adults and juveniles, the sum
of juvenile offenders and juvenile nonoffenders is equal to the number of juveniles.

Description of the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census Imputed File
For ease of use, OJJDP requested an Excel spreadsheet for the 2016 imputed file, in addition to the ASCII
file. Note that the Excel spreadsheet is sorted by facility ID. Use the status_flag_2016 and
occupied_flag_2016 to group the records for analysis.

Notes on the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility Census Imputation
System
We used SAS 9.4M4 in the Census Bureau’s vDesk virtual desktop environment to do the imputation
processing.
We edited a copy of the record layout provided by CJB so that the imputation system could read it
directly into SAS. Using the metadata directly from the modified record layout allows us to minimize
hardcoding values in the SAS programs. We used the record layout metadata to:
•
•
•
•
•

put the variables in the proper record layout order,
recode items where 0 is not a valid answer,
rename variables on the prior year files to match the new variable naming conventions,
provide explanatory text in the table of response rates by item,
dynamically create the put statement used to create the ASCII final imputed file.

See Dilorio and Abolafia (2004) and Dilorio and Abolafia (2006) for good background papers on using
metadata in SAS programming. Other examples by this author are available online at
http://www.sascommunity.org/wiki/Presentations:Dorinski_Papers_and_Presentations.
The imputation system consists of a driver program written in SAS that calls all the other programs in
turn. We redirect the SAS log to a file, which we automatically convert into PDF. We use a date stamp
on the output files, so that we can rerun the system if needed without overwriting earlier results.
The author participated in the Census laptop as a primary device pilot, and has SAS 9.4M3 installed on
her laptop. When using the lightweight model laptop and connecting from home with VPN, the
imputation system takes 21 minutes to run. When using the vDesk environment, the imputation system
takes 7 minutes to run.
We use the Output Delivery System (ODS) Excel destination and the ODS PDF destination to produce
reports for analyst review. The imputation processing is an iterative process, with the analysts
researching unusual values in the edited file before the production imputation system run. The analysts
also provide guidance in assigning collapsed facility type, when the facility has not answered the facility
type question in the current year and no prior year data exist.
We generate Rich Text Format (RTF) files for the tables that are included in this document. We generate
Enhanced Metafile Format (EMF) files using PROC SGPLOT for the graphics in this document. We use

Page 141 of 144

PROC EXPORT to create the Excel spreadsheet version of the final imputed file. We use PROC REPORT
and the PDF destination to produce the more than 150 tables that accompany the final imputed file.

Data Quality Issues for Standard Beds and Makeshift Beds
As mentioned in the 2014 JRFC imputation methodology documentation, the occupied makeshift beds
question was a compromise when trying to measure the capacity of a juvenile residential facility.
Research in the late 1990s showed that juvenile facilities have difficulty reporting their capacity.
Research also revealed the difficulty in defining a statistical reporting unit for a juvenile facility.
Facilities may house two or more programs, and keep juveniles separate by program. There may be
occupied makeshift beds in one area of the facility, while other areas of the facility have empty standard
beds. We assume that juveniles are using makeshift beds because the facility has run out of standard
beds, and so the number of persons assigned to beds should be the sum of standard beds plus occupied
makeshift beds. However, our assumptions may be flawed. We should investigate clarifications on this
assumption so we can decide if changes are required in the future.

Recommendations for Future Collections
Evaluate the collapsed facility types
The collapsed facility types were set up 20 years ago. Recent data snapshots produced by OJJDP have
noted the changes over time: Data Reflect Changing Nature of Facility Populations, Characteristics, and
Practices, released August 2016, and The Number of Juveniles in Residential Placement Reached a New
Low in 2015, released July 2017. The collapsed facility types of Reception / Diagnostic Center and
Ranch, Camp, or Farm may be too small in the future to use to form imputation groups.

Track response rates by collapsed facility type
If we continue using collapsed facility types that have fewer than 100 facilities, we should track the
response rates by collapsed facility type during data collection and nonresponse follow-up. When
response rates within an imputation group are too low, we have to collapse the imputation groups. We
have limited solutions when we discover during imputation that groups collapsing to the national level
fail to meet the criteria.

Analyze the “other specify” responses, add check box options as appropriate
The 2016 JRFC had 50 questions with an “other specify” box that allowed respondents to write in an
answer. Respondents provided answers for 45 of the 50 “other specify” fields. For example, 245
respondents wrote in answers for other types of on-site residential treatment provided in the facility.
Answers included anger management, behavior modification, crisis support, and trauma. Many more
facilities may be providing this type of treatment, but not mentioning it in the other specify field.
The 5 questions with an “other specify” that did not have any write-in answers were for other race for
death of first young person, and cause of death or other race for second or third young person death in
the facility in the last year.

Consider changing the order the of the population count questions
The order of the population count questions (persons assigned to beds, adults, juveniles, juvenile
offenders, and juvenile nonoffenders) may be confusing to the respondents. A few facilities that used

Page 142 of 144

online reporting and submitted counts that did not add up properly reported the same number for
juvenile offenders, juvenile nonoffenders, and juveniles. It may be less confusing if we ask for the
counts in the following order: juvenile offenders, juvenile nonoffenders, juveniles, adults, persons
assigned to beds. There may also be some other alternatives to research with cognitive testing methods
to improve on the questionnaire, given appropriate resources.

Do research on reporting unit definition
There isn’t a definition for facility reporting unit in the juvenile residential facility data collections. Since
we leave it up to the facilities to decide how to report, some of our edits and assumptions are not
working. For example, we assume that makeshift beds are occupied in the facility if all the standard
beds are full. However, facilities report that they keep some offenders separate based on gender,
seriousness of offense, or other factors, so standard beds may be empty in one part of the facility while
makeshift beds are occupied in another area of the facility. Meanwhile, some agencies report facilities
on a building basis, or program basis.

Add screener questions at beginning of form
The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement and the Juvenile Residential Facility Census share the
same universe. Adult facilities, facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment (regardless of
the age of the residents), and facilities for abused or neglected children are not included in either
census. Facilities that work with juveniles but do not house them overnight are not included in either
census. If we add screener questions for these situations at the beginning of the form, it may be easier
to track out-of-scope facilities over time, and keep track of the reason why the facilities are out-ofscope.
Census Bureau staff have been analyzing the compliance files from OJJDP in an attempt to provide
better coverage of juvenile residential facilities. Sometimes facilities are added from the compliance
files but it turns out they do not meet the definition of juvenile residential facilities. Adding screener
questions may reduce burden on facilities that are out-of-scope for the data collections.

Give more prominence to definition of juvenile residential facility on form
Figure 12 shows the instruction box above the first question on the 2016 Juvenile Residential Facility
Census questionnaire. The first sentence in the second paragraph mentions two important criteria for a
juvenile residential facility: (1) the facility deals with young persons who have committed offenses, and
(2) it houses those young persons overnight. Respondents might not notice those important criteria,
because that box of instructions is one of three boxes of important instructions on that page.

Page 143 of 144

Figure 12. Description of juvenile residential facility

References
Dilorio, Frank and Abolafia, Jeff. 2004. “Dictionary Tables and Views: Essential Tools for Serious
Applications”, Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual SAS® Users Group International Conference,
available online at http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi29/237-29.pdf.
Dilorio, Frank and Abolafia, Jeff. 2006. “The Design and Use of Metadata: Part Fine Art, Part Black Art”,
Proceedings of the Thirty-first Annual SAS® Users Group International Conference, available online at
http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi31/104-31.pdf.
Dorinski, S., West, H. 2014. What Paradata Can Tell Us About the Annual Survey of Jails. In JSM
Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.

Page 144 of 144

3154–3168. Available online at
http://ww2.amstat.org/sections/srms/Proceedings/y2014/Files/312871_90135.pdf.
Dorinski, Suzanne. “Documentation of the Imputation Methodology for the 2012 Juvenile Residential
Facility Census”, memo dated March 13, 2014.
Dorinski, Suzanne M. “Documentation of the Imputation Methodology for the 2013 Census of Juveniles
in Residential Placement”, memo dated June 26, 2015.
Dorinski, Suzanne. “Documentation of the Imputation Methodology for the 2014 Juvenile Residential
Facility Census”, memo dated November 12, 2015.
Dorinski, Suzanne. 2016. What Paradata Can Tell Us About Online Data Reporting by Juvenile
Residential Facilities. In JSM Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section. Alexandria, VA: American
Statistical Association. 549 – 563. Available online at
http://ww2.amstat.org/sections/srms/Proceedings/y2016/files/389530.pdf.
Dorinski, Suzanne M. “Documentation of the Imputation Methodology for the 2015 Census of Juveniles
in Residential Placement”, memo dated January 25, 2017.
Other examples by Dorinski of SAS programming using metadata are online at
http://www.sascommunity.org/wiki/Presentations:Dorinski_Papers_and_Presentations.
Horwitz, Sari . “From Broken Homes to a Broken System”, published in the Washington Post on
November 28, 2014, and accessible online at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2014/11/28/from-broken-homes-to-a-broken-system/.
Moone, Joseph. 2000. Innovative Information on Juvenile Residential Facilities. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, NCJ# 188862. Available
online at https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/fs200011.pdf.
Moone, J. 2000. Conceptualization and Measurement Issues for Surveys of Juvenile Facilities: Concepts,
Constructs, and the Impact of Empirical Research. In International Conference on Establishment Surveys
Proceedings. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association, 1226 – 1231. Available online at
https://www.amstat.org/meetings/ices/2000/proceedings/S16.pdf.
Wilson, Reid. “Juvenile prison populations fall as states’ changes take effect”, published February 1, 2015
in the Washington Post, available online at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/01/29/states-see-marked-drop-in-juvenileprison-populations-as-reforms-take-hold/.

File Type	application/pdf
Author	Adams, Benjamin
File Modified	2019-07-17
File Created	2019-05-23