Methods
Background
The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP) was administered for the first time in 1997 by the Bureau of the Census for the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). CJRP replaced the Census of Public and Private Juvenile Detention, Correctional, and Shelter Facilities, also known as the Children in Custody (CIC) census, which had been conducted since the early 1970's. The CJRP, which is repeated biennially, provides the Nation with the most detailed picture of youth in residential placement ever produced. The CJRP asks juvenile residential placement facilities in the U.S. to describe each youth assigned a bed in the facility on the census reference date. The census is not sent to adult facilities, or facilities exclusively for drug or mental health treatment, or abused or neglected children.
The CJRP differs fundamentally from the CIC census. CIC collected aggregate data on youth held in each facility (e.g., number of youth in the facility). CJRP, instead, collects an individual record on each youth held in a residential facility, with information on the youth's gender, date of birth, race, placement authority, most serious offense charged, court adjudication status, date of admission, and security status. These data were requested for all youth under 21 years of age who were in the facility after having been charged with or adjudicated for an offense. Facilities also provided information on the housing of overflow detention populations, physical layout of the facility, separation of residents, counts of residents age 21 and older, and the use of locked doors and/or gates.
Data collection methods
The Census Bureau identifies juvenile residential facilities for court-involved youth across the U.S. In late September the Census Bureau mails out a notification letter to all identified facilities indicating that the CJRP forms will soon arrive in the mail. The letter also indicates the reference date for the census and the type of information that will be requested. Respondents are given a contact number with the Census Bureau in case they have questions or problems.
A few weeks prior to the census reference date, the Census Bureau mails CJRP forms (2021 | 2019 | | 2017 | | 2015 | | 2013 | | 2011 | | 2010 | 2007 | 2006 | 2003 | 2001 | 1999 | 1997) to respondents representing nearly 4,000 public and private residential juvenile facilities. Some State and regional agencies provide CJRP data for more than one facility under their jurisdiction.
The CJRP allows for electronic submission of the data by larger facilities and central reporters. As part of this program, Census provides data specifications to participating respondents and a spreadsheet format so that these respondents can also complete the form through common spreadsheet programs such as Lotus© or Microsoft Excel©
Data are to be returned one month after the reference date. Facilities that have not responded within a few months are sent a reminder notice and asked that a completed response be sent in. Census staff begin telephone calls to the facilities that had not responded by that time. Census closes out data collection in mid-July. Processing of the data including error checks, imputation and editing continues until the following September.
Data are received and prepared for analysis at the Bureau of the Census facility in Jeffersonville, Indiana. Respondent questions were fielded by Government Division, Bureau of the Census.
The inclusion criteria for the census are as follows:
- Younger than 21.
- Assigned a bed in a residential facility at the end of the day on the census reference date.
- Charged with an offense or court-adjudicated for an offense.
- In residential placement because of that offense.
These youth are the universe for the data analyses in Easy Access to the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement. Facility residents age 21 or older, and any nonoffenders are not included in Easy Access to the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement.
Facility response rate
The Bureau of the Census (Census) mails out CJRP forms to all identified facilities. Of these facilities, some turn out to be closed on the reference date. A few additional facilities are identified as open on the reference date after the initial mailout (through responses from facilities or other contacts) and are subsequently sent forms. Of the facilities open on the reference date, some may be temporarily out of scope (i.e., they did not hold youth charged with an offense on the reference date). Some facilities may be identified as permanently out of scope (i.e., they were not able to hold youth over night). The remaining facilities are identified as in-scope. Of the in-scope facilities a small number may not send back the census forms nor respond to several phone calls from Census Bureau personnel requesting participation in the census. These facilities are designated non-respondents and the Census Bureau imputes responses for them. Using the number of in-scope facilities as a base, the CJRP facility response rate was 96% in 1997, 100% in 1999, 99% in 2001, 100% in 2003, 100% in 2006, 100% in 2007, 93% in 2010, 95% in 2011, 92% in 2013, 91% in 2015, 84% in 2017, 91% in 2019, and 92% in 2021.
Imputation
Some facilities were not able to provide all the information requested for all youth meeting CJRP inclusion criteria. In these instances, imputation is used to solve missing/unreported individual level information (i.e., date of birth, sex, race, offense, and placement status). Imputation levels vary considerably by state and data year. Nationally, about 1 in 4 records had data imputed for one or more of these variables in 2021 because information was missing. Imputation rates vary by state and data year; in some years, imputation rates for certain states can far exceed the national average. Therefore, reported CJRP estimates regarding the characteristics of youth in residential placement may differ from their actual characteristics. As a result, we strongly discourage using these data to rank states. More detail on the imputation procedures is available upon request.
The table below summarizes the proportion of records imputed for variables commonly used in this application and data presented in the Juveniles in Corrections section of the Statistical Briefing Book.
Imputation rates by State of Offense, 2021 |
| State of offense | Age | Sex | Race | Placement status | Most serious offense |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 11.8% | 11.3% | 13.3% | 21.8% | 17.6% |
| Alabama | 6.5% | 6.5% | 6.5% | 10.2% | 6.8% |
| Alaska | 1.3% | 0.0% | 1.3% | 4.5% | 2.5% |
| Arizona | 0.0% | 0.0% | 39.4% | 39.4% | 39.1% |
| Arkansas | 0.0% | 0.0% | 9.4% | 15.4% | 14.1% |
| California | 24.9% | 24.7% | 26.3% | 31.8% | 30.9% |
| Colorado | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 68.4% | 24.9% |
| Connecticut | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Delaware | 0.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.7% | 3.7% |
| District of Columbia | 56.4% | 56.4% | 93.6% | 93.6% | 94.9% |
| Florida | 10.0% | 7.4% | 10.8% | 28.0% | 31.2% |
| Georgia | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| Hawaii | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.8% | 7.7% |
| Idaho | 0.8% | 0.0% | 0.8% | 4.5% | 4.5% |
| Illinois | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.4% | 7.0% | 1.0% |
| Indiana | 11.8% | 10.6% | 15.4% | 24.7% | 14.2% |
| Iowa | 8.3% | 0.0% | 8.3% | 4.5% | 8.6% |
| Kansas | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 5.1% | 1.1% |
| Kentucky | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 13.1% | 1.3% |
| Louisiana | 4.5% | 0.0% | 4.5% | 10.6% | 1.0% |
| Maine | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Maryland | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.5% | 41.1% |
| Massachusetts | 2.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 9.3% | 8.3% |
| Michigan | 0.0% | 0.3% | 3.5% | 22.3% | 1.9% |
| Minnesota | 12.2% | 11.7% | 12.2% | 19.6% | 23.9% |
| Mississippi | 12.8% | 12.8% | 12.8% | 29.9% | 26.7% |
| Missouri | 11.5% | 9.2% | 13.4% | 14.1% | 16.0% |
| Montana | 1.0% | 0.0% | 1.0% | 5.1% | 2.0% |
| Nebraska | 0.5% | 0.0% | 1.0% | 7.8% | 6.3% |
| Nevada | 3.2% | 0.0% | 3.2% | 7.3% | 3.2% |
| New Hampshire | 0.0% | 0.0% | 9.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| New Jersey | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.4% |
| New Mexico | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 6.1% | 2.0% |
| New York | 0.4% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 24.3% | 7.8% |
| North Carolina | 0.0% | 7.3% | 7.3% | 12.7% | 7.6% |
| North Dakota | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 7.9% | 7.9% |
| Ohio | 3.7% | 3.7% | 4.5% | 6.7% | 4.3% |
| Oklahoma | 5.7% | 5.7% | 5.7% | 10.7% | 14.9% |
| Oregon | 10.7% | 10.7% | 11.7% | 14.7% | 11.2% |
| Pennsylvania | 19.8% | 19.7% | 19.8% | 22.3% | 22.4% |
| Rhode Island | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 16.9% | 0.0% |
| South Carolina | 64.7% | 64.7% | 64.7% | 67.6% | 68.8% |
| South Dakota | 8.0% | 0.0% | 8.0% | 8.0% | 10.0% |
| Tennessee | 0.3% | 0.0% | 1.3% | 17.3% | 0.7% |
| Texas | 3.8% | 2.4% | 4.1% | 8.2% | 7.3% |
| Utah | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 12.5% | 1.2% |
| Vermont | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| Virginia | 4.3% | 3.9% | 4.3% | 5.0% | 5.4% |
| Washington | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3% | 1.3% | 0.5% |
| West Virginia | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 7.8% | 0.9% |
| Wisconsin | 8.6% | 8.4% | 8.4% | 41.2% | 13.9% |
| Wyoming | 3.5% | 2.9% | 3.5% | 19.3% | 4.1% |
One-day counts versus population flow data
CJRP provides 1-day population counts of youth in residential placement facilities. One-day counts give a picture of the standing population in facilities. One-day counts are substantially different from annual admission and release data, which give a measure of facility population flow.
Youth may be committed to a facility as part of a court-ordered disposition or they may be detained prior to adjudication or after adjudication while awaiting disposition or placement elsewhere. In addition, a small proportion of youth may be voluntarily admitted in lieu of adjudication as part of a diversion.
Because detention stays tend to be short compared with commitment placements, detained youth represent a much larger share of population flow data than of 1-day count data.
State placement counts and tables
The information presented in the "U.S. & State Profiles" and "State Comparisons" sections is based on the state in which the offense was committed, but the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP) supports two ways to present state level information: state of offense and state of facility. The first represents where the offense occurred, the latter refers to the state where the facility holding the youth is located. More often than not, these two values are the same. Nationally, in 2021 more than 90% of all youth were in residential placement in the same state in which they committed their offense.
There are instances, however, where state of offense is unknown for some youth in a facility or not reported for any youth in a facility. The proportion of youth for whom state of offense is unknown reached a high of 9.7% in 2017; as shown in the table below, the state of offense was unknown for 5.1% of all youth held in residential placement in 2021 (but the proportion varies by state). Data tables organized by "state of offense" - such as those in the "U.S. & State Profiles" and "State Comparison" sections - cannot properly account for these youth as there is no way to determine where they committed their offense. Specifically, the state level data presented in these sections attenuates counts/rates for certain states, i.e., those states with a relatively high number of youth for whom state of offense is not reported. As these instances are not evenly distributed across states, users should exercise caution when examining state-level trends or comparing states.
It is worth noting that, across years, all youth for whom state of offense was unknown were held in private facilities, and most of these youth were being held as the result of a court-ordered commitment. For example, in 2021, nearly 80% of youth in private facilities for whom state of offense was unknown were held as a result of a court-ordered commitment.
Percent of youth for whom state of offense is unknown
(Click on a state name for additional detail)
| State of facility | 1997 | 1999 | 2001 | 2003 | 2006 | 2007 | 2010 | 2011 | 2013 | 2015 | 2017 | 2019 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 3.2% | 2.5% | 2.3% | 1.4% | 1.6% | 2.0% | 3.6% | 3.8% | 4.9% | 3.3% | 9.7% | 5.2% | 5.1% |
| Alabama | 1.6% | 2.7% | 1.8% | 2.0% | 0.0% | 0.9% | 3.6% | 1.1% | 1.2% | 6.0% | 18.0% | 4.1% | 9.8% |
| Alaska | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.0% |
| Arizona | 9.8% | 0.9% | 6.8% | 0.0% | 3.9% | 1.1% | 17.1% | 23.7% | 29.9% | 0.9% | 25.3% | 7.0% | 18.9% |
| Arkansas | 1.0% | 0.0% | 6.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.2% | 0.1% | 3.4% | 8.2% | 15.8% | 13.6% | 2.9% | 5.7% |
| California | 0.8% | 0.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.4% | 2.6% | 1.1% | 0.4% | 3.0% | 3.9% | 3.2% | 1.7% |
| Colorado | 2.9% | 1.6% | 3.2% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 2.9% | 1.3% | 4.0% | 11.9% | 5.3% | 9.5% | 2.1% | 0.0% |
| Connecticut | 8.1% | 5.5% | 10.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.7% | 0.0% | 8.5% | 23.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Delaware | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 15.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| District of Columbia | 3.8% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 13.4% | 9.3% | 20.1% | 25.0% | 37.0% | 3.5% | 0.0% |
| Florida | 2.6% | 1.1% | 1.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 6.3% | 0.0% | 6.4% | 4.7% | 5.9% | 14.9% |
| Georgia | 1.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 2.8% | 2.4% | 0.0% |
| Hawaii | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 6.9% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 22.4% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Idaho | 24.9% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 9.6% | 9.9% | 8.6% | 0.0% | 3.2% | 1.9% | 0.0% |
| Illinois | 0.7% | 0.3% | 0.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 2.3% | 0.0% | 5.7% | 5.9% | 3.7% |
| Indiana | 2.6% | 1.6% | 0.1% | 0.6% | 0.0% | 2.7% | 3.4% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.6% | 14.1% | 12.3% | 10.6% |
| Iowa | 1.0% | 1.7% | 0.0% | 11.9% | 0.2% | 16.2% | 1.8% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 6.4% | 8.2% | 27.6% |
| Kansas | 1.5% | 1.2% | 10.2% | 0.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.2% | 12.7% | 0.7% | 4.5% | 1.2% | 9.8% | 1.4% |
| Kentucky | 3.0% | 0.5% | 0.0% | 2.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.4% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Louisiana | 5.6% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.7% | 1.4% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.8% | 0.4% |
| Maine | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Maryland | 3.8% | 1.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 4.2% | 5.3% | 0.7% | 3.6% | 12.7% | 3.2% | 8.6% |
| Massachusetts | 0.1% | 5.6% | 6.7% | 5.5% | 4.2% | 4.4% | 8.7% | 3.7% | 21.2% | 10.0% | 30.0% | 8.7% | 6.8% |
| Michigan | 1.6% | 0.0% | 1.0% | 5.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 13.0% | 0.0% | 0.3% | 3.7% | 16.4% | 3.2% | 0.0% |
| Minnesota | 5.2% | 0.1% | 2.1% | 0.8% | 0.0% | 7.8% | 13.2% | 3.8% | 5.0% | 2.1% | 4.5% | 2.0% | 17.6% |
| Mississippi | 0.5% | 0.0% | 4.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Missouri | 1.0% | 13.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.3% | 0.0% |
| Montana | 11.9% | 0.0% | 11.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.1% | 8.1% | 15.6% | 2.6% | 10.5% | 3.1% | 0.0% |
| Nebraska | 0.0% | 0.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.0% | 37.9% | 0.0% | 2.8% | 34.5% | 37.4% |
| Nevada | 27.1% | 1.3% | 24.0% | 0.8% | 17.7% | 0.0% | 21.7% | 21.2% | 10.9% | 0.0% | 0.7% | 1.2% | 0.0% |
| New Hampshire | 0.0% | 7.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 4.9% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 9.5% | 0.0% | 51.7% | 0.0% |
| New Jersey | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.4% | 0.5% |
| New Mexico | 1.0% | 2.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.4% | 0.0% | 1.5% | 9.3% | 10.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| New York | 4.9% | 1.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 4.6% | 1.7% | 6.8% | 1.0% | 29.3% | 13.3% | 4.9% |
| North Carolina | 0.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.7% | 1.9% | 0.6% | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.4% | 13.3% | 17.5% | 0.0% | 11.1% |
| North Dakota | 0.7% | 5.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 2.3% | 0.0% | 10.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Ohio | 3.7% | 0.9% | 0.5% | 2.5% | 1.3% | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 5.3% |
| Oklahoma | 10.2% | 1.5% | 9.0% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 8.3% | 2.0% | 5.6% | 7.5% | 12.8% | 9.1% | 6.1% |
| Oregon | 0.3% | 1.4% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.9% | 0.0% | 1.9% | 0.0% | 1.9% | 7.3% | 4.0% |
| Pennsylvania | 14.8% | 16.0% | 14.7% | 9.6% | 13.4% | 12.4% | 9.0% | 16.2% | 22.0% | 8.8% | 33.3% | 12.0% | 0.5% |
| Rhode Island | 0.7% | 12.1% | 7.2% | 14.3% | 9.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 9.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 11.9% | 0.0% | 17.6% |
| South Carolina | 1.9% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.1% | 0.2% | 4.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 8.1% | 9.3% | 2.5% | 18.4% |
| South Dakota | 12.9% | 11.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 5.1% | 4.8% | 7.8% | 9.8% | 13.9% | 35.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Tennessee | 0.3% | 15.4% | 10.6% | 3.7% | 2.0% | 2.7% | 2.0% | 3.4% | 5.5% | 0.0% | 10.3% | 28.3% | 3.9% |
| Texas | 0.4% | 2.7% | 1.8% | 1.2% | 0.1% | 0.0% | 1.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.7% | 3.6% | 1.4% | 0.4% |
| Utah | 7.6% | 19.2% | 1.8% | 0.0% | 4.8% | 18.4% | 10.8% | 4.9% | 6.3% | 13.7% | 30.2% | 3.2% | 6.3% |
| Vermont | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Virginia | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.0% | 0.5% | 1.9% | 2.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Washington | 0.0% | 1.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.7% | 0.0% | 1.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| West Virginia | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 7.7% | 15.8% | 39.3% | 31.0% | 6.8% | 34.6% | 22.2% | 1.7% |
| Wisconsin | 10.0% | 3.4% | 0.4% | 0.0% | 4.3% | 3.2% | 3.2% | 1.5% | 1.8% | 3.5% | 5.6% | 18.0% | 3.7% |
| Wyoming | 0.0% | 8.6% | 9.7% | 19.2% | 25.5% | 22.8% | 8.2% | 0.0% | 15.9% | 3.6% | 21.6% | 0.0% | 1.7% |
State variations in upper age of juvenile court jurisdiction influence placement rates
Although State residential placement rate statistics control for upper age of original juvenile court jurisdiction, comparisons made among States with different upper ages are problematic. While 16- and 17-year-olds constitute approximately 25% of the youth population ages 10-17, they account for more than 50% of youth in residential placement. If all other factors were equal, one would expect higher residential placement rates in States where older youth are under juvenile court jurisdiction. In addition to upper age of original juvenile court jurisdiction, differences in age limits of extended jurisdiction influence placement rates. States differ in how long they may keep youth in placement beyond the upper age of original juvenile court jurisdiction. Variations in provisions for transferring youth to criminal court also have an impact on residential placement rates. If all other factors were equal, States with broad transfer provisions would be expected to have lower residential placement rates than other States. (See the Juvenile Justice System Structure and Process section of OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book for State upper age, extended age and transfer provision information.) Demographic variations should also be considered when making jurisdictional comparisons. The urbanicity and economics of an area are thought to be related to crime and placement rates. Available bed space also influences placement rates. Bed space is particularly relevant to detention in rural areas.
Confidentiality protections
By statute and regulation, OJJDP must protect the privacy of individuals included in its surveys. In the case of CJRP, OJJDP must assure that no youth can be identified from publicly available data, either tabular or electronic. To comply with this requirement, OJJDP has adopted a policy that requires all published table cells involving State level data be rounded to the nearest multiple of three. The table cells are rounded after the table has been produced from the underlying data. Each cell is rounded independently, without consideration to row or column totals. As a result, in many tables the internal cells will not add to the marginal totals. Rates and percentages presented from CJRP are based on rounded totals as well. More detail on OJJDP's privacy protection policy is available in "Disclosure Control in the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement" prepared by Joseph Moone, OJJDP Program Manager.
Population estimates
The youth population data for 1997 and 1999 are derived from the National Center for Health Statistics' Bridged-race intercensal estimates of the July 1, 1990-July 1, 1999 United States resident population by county, single-year of age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin. [Released 7/26/2004; Retrieved 9/15/2004]. Prepared by the U.S. Census Bureau with support from the National Cancer Institute. Available online from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/index.htm.
Youth population data for 2001, 2003, 2006, and 2007 are derived from the National Center for Health Statistics' Intercensal estimates of the resident population of the United States for July 1, 2000-July 1, 2009, by year, county, single-year of age (0, 1, 2, .., 85 years and over), bridged race, Hispanic origin, and sex. [Released 10/26/2012; Retrieved 10/26/2012]. Prepared under a collaborative arrangement with the U.S. Census Bureau. Available online from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/bridged_race.htm.
Youth population data for 2010, 2011, 2013, 2015, 2017, and 2019 are derived from Annual Resident Population Estimates for 6 Race Groups (5 Race Alone Groups and Two or More Races) by Age, Sex, and Hispanic Origin for States and the District of Columbia: April 1, 2010 to July 2019; April 1, 2020, and July 1, 2020 [SC-EST2020-ALLDATA6] downloaded from https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/datasets/2010-2020/state/asrh/.
Youth population data for 2021 derived from Annual State Resident Population Estimates for 6 Race Groups (5 Race Alone Groups and Two or More Races) by Age, Sex, and Hispanic Origin: April 1, 2020 to July 2021 [SC-EST2021-ALLDTA6] downloaded from https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/datasets/2020-2021/state/asrh/.
Placement rates are calculated per 100,000 youth ages 10 through the upper age of original juvenile court jurisdiction in each State. Although in most States, juvenile courts have jurisdiction over the law-violating behavior of children younger than age 10, the number of youth younger than 10 in residential placement is not large enough to warrant the inclusion of younger age groups in the denominator of placement rate calculations.
Other cautions/limitations about CJRP data
Youth held in adult facilities. CJRP does not capture data on youth held in adult prisons or jails; therefore, in the CJRP data, youth placed in juvenile facilities by criminal courts represent an unknown proportion of youth incarcerated by criminal courts.
Youth held in drug treatment or mental health facilities. CJRP does not include facilities exclusively intended for drug or mental health treatment even though such facilities may house some youth charged with committing an offense. There may, however, be numerous youth in residential placement captured by CJRP that were receiving such treatment.
Data revisions
Every effort is made to present the best, most accurate data in this application. From time to time this will result in changes to the data displayed for back years. For example, the rate statistics would change when revised population data are used in the rate calculations. When data were processed prior to the inclusion of 2003 data, errors were discovered in the 1997 and 1999 data files. In order to make the data compatible across all years, 1997 and 1999 data have been revised. The revisions did not have an equal impact on all States, but the result was a drop of about 1% in the total count of youth held in residential placement nationwide. Users who have printed or downloaded tables with 1997 or 1999 data may wish to capture that information with the revised data.
December 2011
With the release of the 2010 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement data, counts of youth held in tribal facilities are not included in Easy Access to the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement. As a result, U.S. totals across all years only include data from publicly and privately operated juvenile facilities and, thus, are reduced by the small number of youth in tribal facilities. There have been approximately 150 youth in tribal facilities on average.
Tribal facility data are not included for several reasons:
- It has become evident that the data were not reported by a complete census of tribal facilities.
- Issues were uncovered that raised concern about the application of imputation procedures to tribal facilities. Applying the "hot deck" approach used in the CJRP imputation procedures to tribal facilities is problematic because each tribal facility is unique and there is not an adequate donor pool.
- U.S. totals should represent a census (with imputation and non-response adjustments).
Thus, the U.S. totals for all years have been restored to include data only from publicly and privately operated facilities.
Additionally it should be noted that for the first time in 2010 CJRP data were also reported by facilities in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. The Territory data present many of the same issues that tribal facility data present. And for these reasons we have chosen not to include them in this release. We appreciate the participation of tribal and Territory facilities and applaud their efforts. We plan to provide both data reported by tribal facilities and facilities in the Territories in the future when we have a better understanding of the data and can present them in a meaningful way.
May 2011
With this release of the 2007 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement data, Easy Access to the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (EZACJRP) and the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement Databook have been merged into one data analysis tool. Going forward, the merged application will continue as "Easy Access to Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement," and it will include the ability to perform custom crosstabs along with the pre-defined tabular displays previously available from the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement Databook. Use the tabs labeled "US & State Profiles" and "State Comparisons" to view the data tables previously available from the CJRP Databook.
Census reference dates
The CJRP reference date is generally the fourth Wednesday in October. However, a set of unforeseen circumstances prevented the 2005 and 2009 mailouts from taking place in October of each year. The census date for these collections took place in the following February. The census reference dates are listed below:
- October 29, 1997
- October 27, 1999
- October 24, 2001
- October 22, 2003
- February 22, 2006
- October 24, 2007
- February 24, 2010
- October 26, 2011
- October 23, 2013
- October 28, 2015
- October 25, 2017
- October 23, 2019
- October 27, 2021