Issue Brief

MARCH 2010

Prison Count 2010
State Population Declines for the First Time in 38 Years

For the first time in nearly 40 years, the number of state

the four decades since, the number of prisoners grew by

prisoners in the United States has declined. Survey data

705 percent.4 Adding local jail inmates to state and federal

compiled by the Public Safety Performance Project of

prisoners, the Public Safety Performance Project calculated

the Pew Center on the States, in partnership with the

in 2008 that the overall incarcerated population had

Association of State Correctional Administrators, indicate

reached an all-time high, with 1 in 100 adults in the United

that as of January 1, 2010, there were 1,403,091 persons

States living behind bars.5

under the jurisdiction of state prison authorities, 5,739 (0.4

FIRST STATE DECLINE IN 38 YEARS

percent) fewer than there were on December 31, 2008.1
This marks the first year-to-year drop in the state prison
population since 1972.

The number of state inmates grew 705% between
1972 and 2008 before dropping in 2009.
1.5 million

In this period, however, the nation’s total prison population
increased by 1,099 people because of a jump in the
number of inmates under the jurisdiction of the Federal
Bureau of Prisons. The federal count rose by 6,838 prisoners,
or 3.4 percent in 2009, to an all-time high of 208,118.
Prior to 1972, the number of prisoners had grown

1.2
0.9
0.6

national prison statistics were officially collected) and
1972, the number of state prisoners increased from
85,239 to 174,379.2

85,239 prisoners

0

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

NOTE: Annual figures prior to 1977 reflect the total number of sentenced prisoners in state
custody. Beginning in 1977, all figures reflect the state jurisdictional population as reported
in the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ “Prisoners” series. Data for both sentenced prisoners in
custody and the jurisdictional population are reported for 1977 to illustrate the transition.

+3%

imprisonment rates began to rise precipitously. This

+2

change was fueled by stiffer sentencing and release laws

+1

and decisions by courts and parole boards, which sent
more offenders to prison and kept them there for longer
terms. In the nearly five decades between 1925 and
3

1972, the prison population increased by 105 percent; in

p. 2	State Trends
Vary Widely

1930

Annual percent change in state prison populations

Starting in 1973, however, the prison population and

In this
Brief:

1972:
174,379 prisoners
–1.5%

0.3 1925:

at a steady rate that closely tracked growth rates in
the general population. Between 1925 (the first year

Jan. 1, 2010:
1,403,091 prisoners
–0.4%

p. 3	 What Is Driving
the Decline?

0
–1

–0.4%
2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics; Pew Center on the States,
Public Safety Performance Project

p. 5	Federal Growth
Continues

p. 5	 Will the Decline
Continue?

2009

State Trends Vary Widely

In absolute numbers, California’s state inmate count fell

While the overall state prison population has declined,

This follows a decline of 612 prisoners in 2008. Five other

the Pew survey revealed great variation among the

states experienced total reductions of more than 1,000

states. In 27 states, the population dropped, with some

prisoners in 2009: Michigan (3,260), New York (1,699),

posting substantial reductions. Meanwhile, the number

Maryland (1,315), Texas (1,257) and Mississippi (1,233).

the most, with the state shedding 4,257 prisoners in 2009.

of prisoners continued to grow in the other 23 states,
Among those states where the prison population

several with significant increases.

increased, Indiana led the nation in proportional terms,
In proportional terms, the steepest decline occurred

growing by 5.3 percent. Other states with significant

in Rhode Island, where the prison population tumbled

increases were West Virginia (5.1 percent), Vermont

9.2 percent. Other states with substantial declines

(5 percent), Pennsylvania (4.3 percent) and Alaska

included Michigan (6.7 percent), New Hampshire

(3.8 percent). In the 23 states where the state prison

(6.0 percent), Maryland (5.6 percent) and Mississippi

population grew, more than half of the increase occurred

(5.4 percent). Michigan’s contraction follows a three

in just five states: Pennsylvania (2,122), Florida (1,527),

percent drop during 2008.

Indiana (1,496), Louisiana (1,399) and Alabama (1,053).

STATES MOVE IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS
Percent change in state prison populations, 2008–2009.
WA
–3.7%
OR
+1.7%

NV
–1.6%
CA
–2.5%

Largest increase
Indiana

MT
–0.1%
ID
+1.5%

UT
–0.2%

AZ
+2.4%

ND
+2.3%

WY
–0.4%

NM
+2.8%

WI
–1.2%

SD
+2.8%

KS
+1.2%
OK
+2.1%

TX
–0.7%

AK
+3.8%

IA
–3.2%

MO
+2.0%

KY
–1.3%

AR
+3.1%

AL
MS
–5.4% +3.5%

Public Safety Performance Project | Pew Center on the States

PA
+4.3%

WV
+5.1%

VA
–0.5%

NC +1.0%

TN +0.5%
GA
+1.6%

RI
–9.2%
CT
–4.6%
NJ
–2.3%
DE
–4.2%
MD
–5.6% Largest

decrease
Rhode
Island

SC
–1.0%
Increases

Larger (>3%)
Smaller (0-3%)

LA
+3.7%

NOTE: Percent change is from December 31, 2008 to January 1, 2010 unless otherwise noted in the jurisdictional notes.
SOURCE: Pew Center on the States, Public Safety Performance Project

MI
–6.7%

ME
+1.4%
MA
–2.2%

NY
–2.8%

IL
IN
OH
–0.7% +5.3% –0.2%

HI
–1.1%

2	

VT
+5.0%

MN
+1.6%

NE
–0.7%
CO
–2.1%

NH
–6.0%

FL
+1.5%

Decreases

Smaller (0-3%)
Larger (>3%)

The tremendous variation among growth rates in

that states began to realize they could effectively reduce

the states shines a bright light on the role that state

their prison populations, and save public funds, without

policy plays in determining the size and cost of the

sacrificing public safety. In the past few years, several

prison system.

states, including those with the largest population
declines, have enacted reforms designed to get taxpayers

What Is Driving the Decline?

a better return on their public safety dollars:

As recently as 2006, states were anticipating faster

California. One of the primary reasons for California’s

growth in prison populations. A survey of state

past prison growth has been its high rate of parole

projections that year forecast a five-year increase of

revocations.12 Over the past two years, the state has

162,815 inmates and a jump of 104,515 by year-end

sought to cut the number of low-risk parolees returning

2009.6 However, the actual increase was 40,414 fewer

to prison for technical violations by expanding use of

than projected.7

intermediate sanctions to hold violators accountable
without a costly return to prison.13 Despite the significant

What happened? Conventional wisdom holds that

overall population decline during 2009, California’s

states are facing such large budget deficits that they are

problems with prison overcrowding remain far from

simply shedding inmates in a rush to save money. While

resolved. In August 2009, a federal court ordered the

the fiscal crisis certainly has prompted many states to

state to cut its prison population by more than 40,000

revisit their sentencing and release policies, financial

prisoners, or about 30 percent, in two years.14 The state is

pressures alone do not explain the decline in state

struggling to develop a plan to meet this requirement.

prison populations.
Michigan. In March 2007, Michigan’s prison population
The number of inmates in prison is determined by the

reached an all-time high of 51,554.15 Less than three

flow of admissions and releases. Indeed, total state

years later, the state has reduced its population by

admissions to prison declined in 2007, well before the

more than 6,000 inmates to 45,478. This reduction has

economic collapse, and again in 2008. The admissions

come about largely by reducing the number of inmates

decline was driven exclusively by a reduction in the

who serve more than 100% of their minimum sentence,

number of people sent to prison for new crimes, as the

decreasing parole revocation rates, and enhanced

other type of admission, those for violations of probation

reentry planning and supervision through the Michigan

or parole, increased for the fifth year in a row. On the

Prisoner Reentry Initiative.16

8

9

release side of the equation, the number of inmates
released from state prison grew for the seventh year in

Texas. In January 2007, Texas faced a projected prison

a row in 2008 and reached an all-time high of 683,106.

population increase of up to 17,000 inmates in just

Taken together, the rate of state prison growth began to

five years.17 Rather than spend nearly $2 billion on new

slow in 2007, dropping from 2.8 percent in 2006 to 1.5

prison construction and operations to accommodate

percent in 2007, and then to 0.7 percent in 2008 before

this growth, policy makers reinvested a fraction of this

declining 0.4 percent in 2009.11

amount—$241 million—in a network of residential

10

and community-based treatment and diversion
Admissions began to decline and releases started to rise

programs.18 This strategy has greatly expanded

for a variety of reasons, but an important contributor is

sentencing options for new offenses and sanctioning

Prison Count 2010: State Population Declines for the First Time in 38 Years

3

options for probation violators. Texas also increased

In addition to changes in policy and practice at the state

its parole grant rate and shortened probation terms.

level, trends in crime and other demographic changes

As a result, this strong law-and-order state not only

are potential contributing factors to the prison decline. In

prevented the large projected population increase

2008, the index crime rate was 763 serious offenses per

but reduced its prison population over the three years

100,000 persons.26 That figure is 13 percent lower than in

since the reforms were passed.19

1972, the last year in which the state prison population
declined, and 37 percent lower than the historic high of

Mississippi. In 2008, Mississippi rolled back to 25

1990.27 Indeed, the nation’s crime rate has been declining

percent, from 85 percent, the portion of sentences

steadily since the early 1990s, but the prison population

that nonviolent offenders are required to serve prior

has not reflected this trend. If the crime trend was an

to parole eligibility. Between July 2008, when the

explanatory factor for this year’s state prison decline, why

law took effect, and August 2009, Mississippi paroled

were the results not apparent until nearly 20 years after

3,076 inmates a median of 13 months sooner than

the beginning of the crime drop?

20

they would have under the 85 percent law, which
was passed in 1995.21 Through August 2009, only 121

One possible explanation for this delayed effect lies in

of those paroled offenders have been returned to

the expanding population of people on community

custody—116 for technical violations of parole and

supervision. Currently, more than five million offenders

five for nonviolent offenses.22 This initial recidivism

are on probation or parole, an increase of 59 percent

rate of 0.2% (return for a new offense) in the first year

since 1990.28 During the 1990s, admissions to prison

is a fraction of the national rate of 10.4%.23 Officials

for new crimes were growing by less than one percent

attribute the low recidivism rate to the use of a new risk

a year (potentially a reflection of declining crime),

assessment tool, which is helping distinguish between

while admissions for violations of parole rose by four

inmates who can be safely paroled and those who need

percent a year.29 During that decade, parole violations,

to remain behind bars.

as a proportion of all prison admissions, more than
doubled.30 Because parolees and probationers are subject

Nevada. Three years ago, Nevada projected a prison

to revocation to prison for violating the terms of their

population increase of more than 60 percent by 2012

supervision, they are more likely to return to prison than

at an estimated cost to taxpayers of more than $2

people from the general population are likely to enter

billion.24 The 2007 legislature voted nearly unanimously

prison. It may be that the growing parole and probation

to enact several policy measures that increased program

population, and the recycling of these offenders back into

credits awarded for in-prison education, vocational and

prison for violations, kept the prison population increasing

substance abuse treatment; expanded the number of

during a time when crime declined. It is only during

credits people in prison and on community supervision

recent years, as new court commitments (admissions to

can earn for “good time” and compliance with conditions,

prison for new crimes) have decreased and the growth

respectively; and reinstated an advisory commission

in revocations has stabilized, that the number of prison

to review sentencing and corrections policies for

inmates has dropped.

effectiveness and efficiency. The combination of these

4	

measures and other reforms saved Nevada $38 million in

Changes in the general population can also affect the size

operating expenditures by FY 2009 and helped avert $1.2

and make-up of the prison population. Research shows

billion in prison construction costs.25

that criminal offending peaks in late adolescence and then

Public Safety Performance Project | Pew Center on the States

declines throughout adulthood.31 As baby boomers
age and the general population becomes older, crime

PRISON COUNT DROPS IN 27 STATES

rates can be expected to decrease as well.

Absolute change in state prison populations, 2008-2009.

Federal Growth Continues

–4,257

The federal prison population has grown at a far
faster rate than has the state prison population, more
than doubling since 1995.32 Despite the decline in
the state prison population in 2009, the number of
prisoners under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau
of Prisons continued to increase rapidly, rising to
208,118. On balance, the federal system has tougher
sentencing laws, more restrictive supervision polices
and fewer opportunities for diversion of defendants.
All of these factors are likely contributing to the
continued increase in the number of prisoners in the
federal system. More specifically, expanding federal
jurisdiction over certain offenses and increased
prosecutions of immigration offenses help explain the
divergence in trends between most states and the
federal system. Prior to 1994 there were relatively few
immigration cases sentenced in federal courts, but
in 2008 they accounted for 28.2 percent of all federal
sentences, more than 21,000 individuals.33

Will the Decline Continue?
After nearly four decades of uninterrupted growth, an
annual drop in the state prison population is worthy
of note, no matter the scale of decline. However, it
is too soon to say whether the 2009 decline will be
a temporary blip or the beginning of a sustained
downward trend.
It is possible that this narrow decline is simply seasonal
and may adjust upward in the first half of 2010. The
nation’s prison population can experience seasonal
patterns, with growth tending to be clustered in the
first half of the calendar year. The decline in 2009
34

–3,260

–1,699
–1,315
–1,257
–1,233
–945
–655
–602
–479
–371
–313
–300
–290
–281
–268
–252
–235
–204
–195
–173
–80
–64
–30
–11
–9
STATES WITH DECREASES
–2
Maine
STATES WITH INCREASES
North Dakota
South Dakota
Kansas
Vermont
Idaho
Tennessee
Minnesota
New Mexico
Alaska
Oregon
West Virginia
North Carolina
Arkansas
Oklahoma
Missouri
Georgia
Arizona
Alabama
Louisiana
Indiana
Florida
Pennsylvania

California
Michigan
New York
Maryland
Texas
Mississippi
Connecticut
Washington
New Jersey
Colorado
Rhode Island
Illinois
Delaware
Kentucky
Iowa
Wisconsin
Massachusetts
South Carolina
Nevada
Virginia
New Hampshire
Ohio
Hawaii
Nebraska
Utah
Wyoming
Montana
+31
+34
+92
+102
+105
+110
+145
+154
+176
+190
+237
+308
+389
+455
+533
+606
+843
+934
+1,053
+1,399
+1,496
+1,527
+2,122

NOTE: Change is from December 31, 2008 to January 1, 2010 unless
otherwise noted in the jurisdictional notes.
SOURCE: Pew Center on the States, Public Safety Performance Project

Prison Count 2010: State Population Declines for the First Time in 38 Years

5

could be part of a seasonal downward adjustment and

said they preferred “a mandatory intensive treatment

an increase in the first six months of 2010 could eliminate

program as an alternative to prison,” a level of support

the 5,739-person drop. With a decline this narrow, when

that went up to 83 percent when respondents were

the population is measured may affect the outcome.

told the diversion of lower-level offenders could help
avert $1 billion in new prison costs.35

However, there are reasons to suspect that the decline
in 2009 could be a harbinger of a prolonged pattern.

Increasing focus on cost-benefit analysis. Across all

Since the start of the nation’s prison expansion, the

areas of government, policy makers are demanding

landscape of sentencing and corrections policy has

to know what results programs are producing, not

changed dramatically on several fronts:

just what funding levels are or how many people are
being served.

Advances in supervision technology. Global Positioning
System (GPS) monitors, rapid-result drug tests and ATM-

Budget pressure. Corrections costs have quadrupled

like reporting kiosks offer authorities new technologies

in just the past 20 years, and now account for 1 of

to monitor the whereabouts and activities of offenders in

every 15 state general fund discretionary dollars.36

the community. These capabilities are giving lawmakers,

Corrections has been the second fastest-growing

judges and prosecutors greater confidence that they can

category of state budgets, behind only Medicaid,

protect public safety and hold offenders accountable

and nearly 90 percent of that spending has gone to

with sanctions other than prison.

prisons.37

Advances in the science of behavior change. Research

This is a drastically different policy environment than

has identified several strategies that can make significant

the one that existed in the 1970s and 1980s, when

dents in recidivism rates, including cognitive-behavioral

states decided that building more and more prison

therapy, motivational interviewing and the use of swift

cells was the answer to crime, and it helps explain why

and certain but proportional sanctions for violations of

more than half of the states have seen a reduction in

the rules of probation and parole.

the size of their prison population. No matter what
happens in the short term, with more than 1.6 million

Development of more accurate risk assessments.

people currently in state and federal prisons and more

Analyses of huge volumes of data have helped isolate

than 700,000 additional people in local jails,38 the United

the specific factors that predict criminal behavior,

States will continue to lead the world in incarceration

such as antisocial values and thinking patterns. While

for the foreseeable future.39

no risk assessment tools are foolproof, today’s “third
generation” tools do a good job of distinguishing high-,
medium- and low-risk offenders and of pointing the
way toward case management plans that will cut the
chances of re-offense.

Performance Project seeks to help states

Polls show support for prison alternatives. The public

and practices in sentencing and corrections

is supportive of using community corrections rather

that protect public safety, hold offenders

than prison for nonviolent offenders. In a 2007 voter

accountable and control corrections costs.

poll, for example, 71 percent of Texas respondents

6	

Launched in 2006, The Public Safety

Public Safety Performance Project | Pew Center on the States

advance fiscally sound, data-driven policies

State and Federal Prison Counts
State

Dec. 31,
2008

Jan. 1,
2010

#
Change

%
Change

State

Dec. 31,
2008

Jan. 1,
2010

#
Change

%
Change

12,743

12,539

–204

–1.6%

2,904

2,731

–173

–6.0%

New Jersey

25,953

25,351

–602

–2.3%

+3.1%

New Mexico

6,402

6,578

+176

+2.8%

–4,257

–2.5%

New York

60,347

58,648

–1,699

–2.8%

22,795

–479

–2.1%

North Carolina

39,482

39,871

+389

+1.0%

20,661

19,716

–945

–4.6%

North Dakota

1,452

1,486

+34

+2.3%

7,075

6,775

–300

–4.2%

Ohio

51,686

51,606

–80

–0.2%

Florida

102,388

103,915

+1,527

+1.5%

Oklahoma

25,864

26,397

+533

+2.1%

Georgia

52,719

53,562

+843

+1.6%

Oregon

14,167

14,404

+237

+1.7%

Hawaii

5,955

5,891

–64

–1.1%

Pennsylvania

49,307

51,429

+2,122

+4.3%

Idaho

7,290

7,400

+110

+1.5%

Rhode Island

4,045

3,674

–371

–9.2%

Illinois

45,474

45,161

–313

–0.7%

South Carolina

24,326

24,091

–235

–1.0%

Indiana

28,322

29,818

+1,496

+5.3%

South Dakota

3,342

3,434

+92

+2.8%

Iowa

8,766

8,485

–281

–3.2%

Tennessee

27,228

27,373

+145

+0.5%

Kansas

8,539

8,641

+102

+1.2%

Texas

172,506

171,249

–1,257

–0.7%

Kentucky

21,706

21,416

–290

–1.3%

Utah

6,546

6,535

–11

–0.2%

Louisiana

38,381

39,780

+1,399

+3.7%

Vermont

2,116

2,221

+105

+5.0%

2,195

2,226

+31

+1.4%

Virginia

38,276

38,081

–195

–0.5%

Maryland

23,324

22,009

–1,315

–5.6%

Washington

17,926

17,271

–655

–3.7%

Massachusetts

11,408

11,156

–252

–2.2%

West Virginia

6,059

6,367

+308

+5.1%

Michigan

48,738

45,478

–3,260

–6.7%

Wisconsin

23,380

23,112

–268

–1.2%

Minnesota

9,910

10,064

+154

+1.6%

Wyoming

2,084

2,075

–9

–0.4%

Mississippi

22,754

21,521

–1,233

–5.4%

Missouri

30,186

30,792

+606

+2.0%

1,408,830

1,403,091

–5,739

–0.4%

Montana

3,607

3,605

–2

–0.1%

201,280

208,118

+6,838

+3.4%

Nebraska

4,520

4,490

–30

–0.7%

1,610,110

1,611,209

1,099

+0.07%

Alabama

30,508

31,561

+1,053

+3.5%

Nevada

Alaska

5,014

5,204

+190

+3.8%

New Hampshire

Arizona

39,589

40,523

+934

+2.4%

Arkansas

14,716

15,171

+455

California

173,670

169,413

Colorado

23,274

Connecticut
Delaware

Maine

State total
Federal (BOP)
National total

NOTE: Percent change is from December 31, 2008 to January 1, 2010 unless otherwise noted in the jurisdictional notes at the end of this brief.
SOURCE: December 31, 2008 count is from “Prisoners in 2008,” and reflects Bureau of Justice Statistics jurisdictional count; January 1, 2010 is Public Safety Performance Project jurisdictional count.

Prison Count 2010: State Population Declines for the First Time in 38 Years

7

Endnotes
1 2010 figures compiled by the Pew Center on the States in
partnership with the Association of State Correctional Administrators.
2008 figures are from the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of
Justice Statistics. See “Jurisdictional Notes” for details.
2 Patrick A. Langan, John V. Fundis and Lawrence A. Greenfeld,
“Historical Statistics on Prisoners in State and Federal Institutions,
Yearend 1925-86,” U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, (1988), 15.
3 Alfred Blumstein and Allen J. Beck, “Reentry as a Transient State
Between Liberty and Recomittment,” In Jeremy Travis and Christy
Visher (Eds.), Prisoner Reentry and Crime in America (Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press, 2005), 50–79.
4 Langan, Fundis and Greenfeld, “Historical Statistics on Prisoners in
State and Federal Institutions, Yearend 1925-86;” U.S. Department of
Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
5 Public Safety Performance Project, One in 100: Behind Bars In America
2008, Pew Center on the States, The Pew Charitable Trusts (2008),
http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/8015PCTS_
Prison08_FINAL_2-1-1_FORWEB.pdf.
6 State projections were reported in Public Safety, Public Spending:
Forecasting America’s Prison Population, 2007–2011, Public Safety
Performance Project, Pew Center on the States, The Pew Charitable
Trusts (2007), http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/
Public%20Safety%20Public%20Spending.pdf.
7 Ibid.
8 William J. Sabol, Heather C. West and Matthew Cooper, “Prisoners in
2008,” U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (2009), 16,
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p08.pdf.

22 Ibid.
23 Langan, Dr. Patrick A., and Dr. David J. Levin, “Recidivism of
Prisoners Released in 1994,” U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of
Justice Statistics (2002), http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/
rpr94.pdf.
24 Public Safety Performance Project. “Work in the States: Nevada,”
Pew Center on the States, The Pew Charitable Trusts (2008). http://
www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/Nevada(1).pdf.
25 Council of State Governments, Nevada Justice Reinvestment Brief,
[forthcoming].
26 Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics Online, http://www.albany.
edu/sourcebook/pdf/t422008.pdf.
27 Ibid.
28 Lauren E. Glaze and Thomas P. Bonczar, “Probation and Parole in
the United States, 2008,” U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics (2009), http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/ppus08.pdf.
Public Safety Performance Project, One in 31: The Long Reach of
American Corrections, Pew Center on the States, The Pew Charitable
Trusts (2009), http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/
PSPP_1in31_report_FINAL_WEB_3-26-09.pdf.

9 Ibid.

29 Timothy A. Hughes, Doris James Wilson and Allen J. Beck, “Trends in
State Parole, 1990-2000,” U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics (2001), 13, http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/tsp00.
pdf.

10 Ibid.

30 Ibid.

11 U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics
12 Joan Petersilia, “Research Supports the Parole Violation Decision
Making Instrument,”http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/PVDMI/support_4_PVDMI.
html.

31 Alex R. Piquero, David P. Farrington and Alfred Blumstein, Key Issues
in Criminal Career Research: New Analyses of the Cambridge Study in
Delinquent Development (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,
2007), 143–149.

13 California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, “Why
CDCR developed a Parole Violation Decision Making Instrument
(PVDMI),” http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/PVDMI/.

32 Christopher J. Mumola and Allen J. Beck, “Prisoners in 1996,” U.S.
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (1997), 3, http://bjs.
ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p96.pdf.

14 Coleman v. Schwarzenegger, 2009 WL 2430820 (N.D. Cal and E.D. Cal.
August 4, 2009).

33 United States Sentencing Commission, 2008 Sourcebook of Federal
Sentencing Statistics (2009), http://www.ussc.gov/ANNRPT/2008/FigA.
pdf.

15 Michigan Department of Corrections, “FY 2011 Budget Proposal
and Updated Prison Bed Space Projections Trends in Key Indicators
and Impact from Proposed Legislative Changes” (presentation to the
Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Judiciary & Corrections,
February 16, 2010, Lansing, Michigan.
16 Ibid.
17 Council of State Governments, “Justice Reinvestment in Texas:
Assessing the Impact of the 2007 Justice Reinvestment Initiative”
(2009), http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/TX_
Impact_Assessment_April_2009(4).pdf.
18 Ibid.
19 U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics; Public
Safety Performance Project, Pew Center on the States, The Pew
Charitable Trusts.
20 Miss. Code Ann. §§ 47-7-3, 47-5-138 and § 47-5-139 (June 30, 1995)
and Miss. Code Ann. § 47-7-3 (April 7, 2008).

8	

21 JFA Institute, “Reforming Mississippi’s Prison System,” Public Safety
Performance Project, Pew Center on the States, The Pew Charitable
Trusts (2009), http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/
wwwpewcenteronthestatesorg/Initiatives/PSPP/MDOCPaper.
pdf?n=8407.

Public Safety Performance Project | Pew Center on the States

34 William J. Sabol and Heather Couture, “Prison Inmates at Midyear
2007,” U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (2008),
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/pim07.pdf.
35 Baselice & Associates, Texas Voter survey #07090, April 1–4,
2007 (1,000 registered Texas voters, margin of error +-3.1%, level of
confidence 95%).
Texas Center for Public Policy Research, 80th Legislative Session
Survey, April 5–10, 2007(602 registered Texas voters, margin of error
+-3.99%, level of confidence 95%).
36 Public Safety Performance Project, One in 31.
37 Ibid.
38 Ibid.
39 International Centre for Prison Studies, “World Prison Brief,” Kings
College, London, http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/
worldbrief/wpb_stats.php?area=all&category=wb_poptotal.

Jurisdictional Notes
Unless noted below, the state prisoner counts used in this brief for January 1, 2010 were reported to the Association
of State Correctional Administrators (ASCA) by each state’s Department of Corrections (DOC) in a survey conducted
for the Public Safety Performance Project (PSPP) of the Pew Center on the States. Prisoner counts reflect the total
standing population under the jurisdiction of the DOC. Unless otherwise noted, state prisoner counts for December
31, 2008 were taken from Appendix Table 2 of the Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) “Prisoners in
2008” report. Additional follow-up confirmed that the ASCA/PSPP count for January 1, 2010 was made using the same
methods as the BJS year-end 2008 count.

Jurisdiction

Notes

Federal (BOP)

1/1/2010 count is from December 2009.

Georgia

Prisoner counts reflect custody population.

Hawaii

1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.

Kansas

1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.

Idaho

Prisoner counts include out-of-state inmates held in Idaho.

Indiana

Prisoner counts include juvenile populations.

Maryland

1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.

Massachusetts

1/1/2010 prisoner count excludes out-of-state, federal, and U.S. Marshall inmates.

Minnesota

1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 7/1/2009. 12/31/2008 count was adjusted, per DOC instruction,
due to improper counting methods.

Nebraska

Prisoner counts reflect custody population.

Nevada

1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 1/5/2010.

North Dakota

1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009. Prisoner counts exclude out-of-state and federal inmates.

Oklahoma

1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009. Prisoner counts do not include inmates in early
release programs.

Pennsylvania

12/31/2008 prisoner count was adjusted, per DOC instruction, because inmates held in private facilities,
local jails, federal facilities, and other states were erroneously double counted.

Rhode Island

1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.

Texas

1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.

Virginia

1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 1/6/2010.

Prison Count 2010: State Population Declines for the First Time in 38 Years

9

The Pew Center on the States is a division of The Pew Charitable Trusts that
identifies and advances effective solutions to critical issues facing states.
Pew is a nonprofit organization that applies a rigorous, analytical approach
to improve public policy, inform the public and stimulate civic life.
www.pewcenteronthestates.org