Just because vaccines are increasingly available does not mean that the COVID-19 crisis in prisons and jails is over - far from it. Yet new data show more prisons and jails are returning to “business as usual.”

by Emily Widra, June 23, 2021

At the start of the pandemic, public health and medical officials were already warning that incarcerated people would be uniquely vulnerable to the spread of the disease and its most serious medical consequences, due to their close quarters and high rates of preexisting health conditions. But after a year and a half of outbreak after outbreak in prisons and jails, correctional authorities have largely failed to reduce their populations enough to protect the health and lives of those who are incarcerated. The consequences of this failure are serious: According to the UCLA Law COVID-19 Behind Bars Project, more than 412,000 people incarcerated in prisons have had confirmed cases of COVID-19 and over 2,700 people have died from COVID-19 behind bars. And that’s to say nothing of the outbreaks in surrounding communities that have been linked to the crowded, unsanitary conditions of prisons and jails.

Despite the growing availability of vaccines, 17 state prison systems and the Bureau of Prisons had vaccinated less than half of their incarcerated populations by mid-May 2021, and 20 states and the Bureau of Prisons are reporting that less than half of their prison staff had received their first dose of a vaccine by the end of April. With slow uptake of vaccines, the advice from early in the pandemic continues to be the most important: prisons and jails need to keep working to reduce the number of people locked up, by both reducing admissions and ramping up early releases.

Prisons

Even in states where prison populations have dropped, there are still too many people behind bars to accommodate social distancing, effective isolation and quarantine, and increased health care requirements. For example, although California has reduced the state prison population by about 19% in the past 18 months, it has not been enough to prevent large COVID-19 outbreaks in the state’s prisons. In fact, as of June 16th, 2021, California’s prisons were still holding more people than they were designed for, at 107% of their design capacity (and up from 103% in January 2021).

graph showing change in population of 30 state prison systems and the federal prison system from January 2020 to June 2021 Figure 1. Prison population data for 30 states where sufficient population data was readily available from January 2020 to May or June 2021, either directly from the state Departments of Correction, the Vera Institute of Justice, or the federal Bureau of Prisons. The lighter lines in our graph indicate prison systems where the population is actually increasing since early 2021. See our COVID-19 response tracker for more information on many of the most important policy changes that led to these slow reductions in some states. For the population data for these 30 states and the Bureau of Prisons, see Appendix A.
Sharp-eyed readers may wonder if Connecticut and Vermont are showing larger declines than most other states because those two states have “unified” prison and jail systems, which hold both pretrial defendants and people serving sentences, and pretrial populations typically respond to policy changes more quickly than prisons. However, data from both states show that the bulk of their population reduction is coming from within the “sentenced” portion of their populations. (For the Connecticut data, see the Correctional Facility Population Count Report, and for Vermont, see the daily population reports.)

Many states’ prison populations are the lowest they’ve been in decades, but this is not because more people are being released from prisons. The limited data available from six states shows that the number of prison releases did not change significantly between 2019 and 2020, suggesting that most of the population drops that we’ve seen over the past year are due to reduced prison admissions. In addition, we can see that the number of monthly prison releases in five of these states has been decreasing over the past three years. Only one state for which we found data–Alabama–has seen an increasing trend in the number of monthly releases since 2018. Reducing the number of people admitted to correctional facilities is critical to reducing the number of people behind bars, but to quickly decarcerate, states should be releasing far more people, too.

graph showing trends in prison releases and admissions from January 2018 to May 2021 Figure 2. These six states publish monthly release and admission data for 2018, 2019, 2020, and the beginning of 2021. Although we cannot be certain that this analysis is representative of the other 44 state prison systems and the federal Bureau of Prisons, these data do show us a pattern of responses to the COVID-19 pandemic: reducing prison admissions, while maintaining the status quo of prison releases.

graph showing trends in monthly prison releases in 2019, 2020, and 2021 Figure 3. These ten states published monthly release data for 2019, 2020, and the beginning of 2021. While not nationally representative, these ten states show that fewer people have been released from these state prisons in response to COVID-19 in 2020 than in 2019. We’re also seeing that at the start of 2021, prison releases are even lower.

Despite evidence that large-scale releases do not inherently endanger public safety, states have elected to release people from prison on a mostly case-by-case basis, which an October 2020 report from the National Academies described as “procedurally slow and not well suited to crisis situations.”

Thankfully, some states have recognized the inefficiency of case-by-case releases and the necessity of larger-scale releases. For example, in New Jersey, Governor Phil Murphy signed bill S2519 in October 2020, which allowed for the early release of people with less than a year left on their sentences.1 A few weeks after the bill was signed, more than 2,000 people were released from New Jersey state prisons on November 4th.2 In February 2021, North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper announced plans to release 3,500 people in state custody (with 1,500 of those releases to take place within 90 days). The releases were the result of a NAACP lawsuit challenging prison conditions in North Carolina during COVID-19. The state said it would release people using discretionary sentence credits (similar to “good time credits”), home confinement, and post-release supervision. But these are the only two instances we are aware of where large-scale release efforts are actually taking place in state prison systems.

Jails

Jail populations, like prison populations, are lower now than they were pre-pandemic. Initially, many local officials — including sheriffs, prosecutors, and judges — responded quickly to COVID-19 and reduced their jail populations. In a national sample of 388 county jails of varying sizes, most (88%) decreased their populations from March to July of 2020, resulting in an average population reduction of 23% across all 388 jails.3 These population reductions came as the result of various policy changes, including police issuing citations in lieu of arrests, prosecutors declining to charge people for “low-level offenses,” courts reducing cash bail amounts, and jail administrators releasing people detained pretrial or those serving short sentences for “nonviolent” offenses.

But the data tell a different story about the latter part of the pandemic. Between July 2020 and January 2021, the populations of 66% of the jails in our sample increased, reversing course from the earlier months of the pandemic. Since this past January, populations increased again in 61% of the jails in our sample, with an average increase of 10%. Overall, the average population change across these 388 jails since March 2020 has diminished to only a 7% decrease, suggesting that the early reforms instituted to mitigate COVID-19 have largely been abandoned. For example, by mid-April 2020, the Philadelphia city jail population reportedly dropped by more than 17% after city police suspended low-level arrests and judges released “certain nonviolent detainees” jailed for “low-level charges.” But just two weeks later — as the pandemic raged on — the Philadelphia police force announced that they would resume arrests for property crimes, effectively reversing the earlier reduction efforts. Similarly, on July 10th, 2020, the sheriff of Jefferson County (Birmingham), Alabama, announced that the jail would limit admissions to only “violent felons that cannot make bond.”4 That effort was quickly abandoned when the jail resumed normal admission operations just one week later. The increasing jail populations across the country suggest that after the first wave of responses to COVID-19, many local officials have allowed jail admissions to return to business as usual.

graph showing jail population trends from March 2020 to June 2021 Figure 4. Despite the rising national case rate of COVID-19, the number of people held in our sample of 388 county jails across the country has not continued to decrease over the past six months, following initial reductions. This graph contains aggregated data collected and provided by NYU’s Public Safety Lab and updates a graph in our February 3rd briefing. It includes all jails where the Lab was able to report data on March 10th and for at least 75% of the days in our research period, which ended June 17th, 2021. (Data are not available for all facilities for all days.) This graph presents the data as 7-day rolling averages, which smooths out most of the variations caused by individual facilities not reporting population data on particular days. The temporary population drops during the last weeks of May, August, and November 2020 and February 2021 are the result of more facilities than usual not being included in the dataset for various reasons, rather than any known policy changes. To see county level data for all 388 jails included in this analysis, see Appendix B.

Even before COVID-19, prisons and jails were a threat to public health and considered notoriously dangerous places during any sort of viral outbreak. And yet, correctional facilities continue to be a major source of a large number of infections in the U.S. The COVID-19 death rate in prisons is three times higher than among the general U.S. population, even when adjusted for age and sex (as the prison population is disproportionately young and male). Since the early days of the pandemic, public health professionals, corrections officials, and criminal justice reform advocates have agreed that decarceration is necessary to protect incarcerated people and the community at large from COVID-19. Decarceration efforts must include releasing more people from prisons and jails. Despite this knowledge, state, federal, and local authorities have failed to release people from prisons and jails on a scale sufficient to protect incarcerated people’s lives – and by extension, the lives of everyone in the communities where incarcerated people eventually return, and where correctional staff live and work.

 
 

Footnotes

  1. New Jersey is not included in the above graph of state prison population changes because the New Jersey Department of Correction has not published monthly population data for 2020. However, in an October 2020 press release (prior to the November implementation of bill S2519), Governor Phil Murphy claimed the population in state correctional facilities had “decreased by nearly 3,000 people (16%)” since March.  ↩

  2. Unfortunately, this major victory for public health was immediately undercut by the federal Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) agency which quickly arrested 88 people who were released under bill S2519. A spokesperson from ICE claimed that these 88 individuals were “violent offenders or have convictions for serious crimes such as homicide, aggravated assault, drug trafficking and child sexual exploitation.” However, these claims are brought into question when considering that the releases that took place under bill S2519 specifically excluded “people serving time for murder or sexual assault” and those serving time for sexual offenses. Although we did not include ICE facilities in our analysis, there is evidence that ICE detention facilities have a COVID-19 case rate that is up to 13 times higher than that of the general U.S. population.  ↩

  3. Our analysis is based on a subset of the excellent dataset created by the NYU Public Safety Lab Jail Data Initiative which is collecting jail populations for a diverse group of over 1,000 facilities across the country. For each of our analyses of jail and prison populations during the pandemic (including our earlier analyses in May, August, September, and December 2020 and February 2021), we included all jails from this database that had population data available for at least 75% of the days in the period being studied and had data going back to the start of the pandemic on March 10th, 2020. For this June 2021 analysis, we included all 388 jails that had at least 346 days worth of data, representing at least 75% of the days between March 10th, 2020 and June 17th, 2021. Readers may notice that this sample is slightly smaller than in our previous publications, which is due to varying data availability from some jurisdictions.  ↩

  4. The news story from Jefferson County does not make clear whether officials are using “violent” to refer to the crime a person is charged with, crimes of which they have already convicted, a label imposed on them by a risk assessment tool, or something else.  ↩

 
 

Appendix A: State and federal prison populations during COVID‑19

Prison populations for the federal Bureau of Prisons and 30 states where monthly data was readily available for the period from January 2020 to June 2021. When available, we used point-in-time population counts from the last day of the month. If that data point was not available, we then used either the monthly average daily population (ADP) or the point-in-time population count for latest date available in each month.

Jurisdiction January 2020 February 2020 March 2020 April 2020 May 2020 June 2020 July 2020 August 2020 September 2020 October 2020 November 2020 December 2020 January 2021 February 2021 March 2021 April 2021 May 2021 June 2021 Population Data Source
Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date Prison population Date
Alabama 27,325 1/22/20 27,544 2/26/20 27,520 3/28/20 27,321 4/19/20 26,898 5/27/20 26,427 6/26/20 26,235 7/10/20 25,869 8/14/20 25,512 9/29/20 25,343 10/31/20 25,273 11/24/20 24,902 12/31/20 24,731 1/22/21 24,552 2/26/21 24,460 3/21/21 24,675 4/25/21 24,652 6/14/21 Alabama Department of Corrections’ Inmate Search
Arizona 42,422 1/31/20 42,282 2/29/20 41,984 3/31/20 41,449 4/20/20 41,005 5/31/20 40,151 6/30/20 39,339 7/31/20 39,125 8/21/20 38,865 9/27/20 38,495 10/31/20 38,141 11/30/20 37,731 12/31/20 37,473 1/21/21 37,037 2/27/21 36,768 3/29/21 36,540 4/30/21 36,407 5/23/21 36,130 6/14/21 Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, & Reentry Institutional Capacity & Committed Population Report; COVID-19 Dashboard
California 117,314 1/22/20 117,344 2/29/20 116,886 3/31/20 112,573 4/30/20 111,072 5/31/20 108,393 6/30/20 101,523 7/31/20 97,266 8/31/20 94,628 9/30/20 94,270 10/31/21 94,146 11/30/20 92,116 12/31/20 91,353 1/20/21 91,310 2/24/21 91,903 3/31/21 92,646 4/28/21 94,052 5/26/21 94,554 6/9/21 California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s Weekly Total Population Reports
Colorado 19,668 1/31/20 19,568 2/29/20 19,357 3/31/20 18,419 4/30/20 17,808 5/31/20 17,441 6/30/20 17,157 7/31/20 16,908 8/31/20 16,673 9/30/20 16,527 10/31/20 16,365 11/31/20 16,090 12/31/20 15,993 1/31/21 15,828 2/28/21 15,670 3/31/21 15,490 4/30/21 15,481 5/31/21 Colorado Department of Corrections’ End-of-Month Inmate Population
Connecticut 12,405 1/31/20 12,409 2/29/20 11,885 3/31/20 11,024 4/30/20 10,441 5/31/20 9,963 6/30/20 9,669 7/31/20 9,534 8/31/20 9,391 9/30/20 9,348 10/31/20 9,233 11/30/20 9,111 12/31/20 9,053 1/31/21 9,043 2/28/21 8,961 3/31/21 8,957 4/30/21 8,957 5/31/21 8,984 6/14/21 Connecticut Department of Correction’s Total Population Counts Report
Federal 164,284 1/9/20 163,635 2/20/20 163,940 3/26/20 159,153 4/30/20 155,696 5/14/20 151,066 6/4/20 143,410 7/30/20 141,381 8/27/20 140,634 9/24/20 139,786 10/29/20 139,273 11/19/20 137,556 12/31/20 137,008 1/21/21 137,192 2/25/21 135,898 3/25/21 137,713 4/29/21 138,272 5/27/21 138,394 6/10/21 Federal Bureau of Prisons’ Population Statistics
Georgia 53,685 1/31/20 53,523 2/28/20 53,247 3/27/20 51,618 4/24/20 50,681 5/29/20 49,575 6/26/20 48,691 7/31/20 48,274 8/21/20 46,814 9/25/20 46,649 10/30/20 45,471 11/27/20 46,219 12/25/20 45,309 1/15/21 44,032 2/26/21 44,287 3/26/21 43,113 4/30/21 44,202 5/28/21 44,083 6/11/21 Gerogia Department of Corrections’ Friday Report
Hawaii 5,008 1/31/20 5,050 2/29/20 4,631 3/31/20 4,176 4/30/20 4,236 5/31/20 4,386 6/30/20 4,444 7/31/20 4,092 8/31/20 4,074 9/30/20 4,118 10/31/20 4,123 11/30/20 4,113 12/31/20 4,142 1/18/21 4,094 2/28/21 4,059 3/31/21 4,023 4/30/21 4,071 5/31/21 4,081 6/7/21 Hawaii Department of Public Safety, Corrections Division’s Population Reports
Indiana 26,952 1/1/20 26,875 2/1/20 26,891 3/1/20 26,936 4/1/20 26,418 5/1/20 25,876 6/1/20 25,385 7/1/20 25,023 8/1/20 24,513 9/1/20 24,203 10/1/20 24,203 11/1/20 23,978 12/1/20 23,726 1/1/21 23,745 2/1/21 23,745 3/1/21 23,769 4/1/21 23,554 5/1/21 23,510 6/1/21 Indiana Department of Correction’s Offender Population Report
Iowa 9,282 1/1/20 8,480 2/13/20 8,515 3/30/20 8,377 4/18/20 7,680 5/26/20 7,596 6/19/20 7,538 7/27/20 7,420 8/26/20 7,410 9/17/20 7,415 10/31/20 7,433 11/19/20 7,444 12/2/20 7,495 1/29/21 7,595 3/24/21 7,673 4/30/21 7,682 5/30/21 7,677 6/14/21 Vera’s People in Prison, 2019; Iowa Department of Corrections’ Daily Statistics
Kansas 10,003 1/31/20 10,009 2/28/20 10,031 3/31/20 9,758 4/30/20 9,449 5/30/20 8,938 7/31/20 8,813 8/21/20 8,682 9/30/20 8,607 10/31/20 8,597 11/30/20 8,642 12/31/21 8,693 1/20/21 8,735 2/26/21 8,749 3/31/21 8,686 4/30/21 8,654 5/28/21 8,615 6/11/21 Kansas Department of Corrections’ Daily Adult Population Report
Kentucky 23,503 1/31/20 23,492 2/28/20 23,057 3/31/20 21,384 4/30/20 20,686 5/29/30 20,299 6/30/21 20,104 7/30/30 19,604 8/31/20 19,080 9/30/20 19,091 10/30/20 19,150 11/30/20 18,806 12/30/20 18,749 1/29/21 18,592 2/26/21 18,686 3/31/21 18,504 4/30/21 18,512 5/28/21 18,220 6/14/21 Kentucky Department of Corrections’ Daily Count Sheet
Maine 2,176 January 2020 ADP 2,170 February 2020 ADP 2,138 March 2020 ADP 2,024 April 2020 ADP 1,922 May 2020 ADP 1,834 June 2020 ADP 1,794 July 2020 ADP 1,785 August 2020 ADP 1,784 September 2020 ADP 1,775 October 2020 ADP 1,732 November 2020 ADP 1,717 December 2020 ADP 1,695 January 2021 ADP 1,668 February 2021 ADP 1,667 March 2021 ADP 1,632 April 2021 ADP 1,600 May 2021 ADP Vera’s People in Prison, 2019; Maine Department of Corrections’ Population Report
Massachusetts 8,336 1/27/20 8,324 2/24/20 8,201 3/30/20 7,778 4/27/20 7,560 5/25/20 7,332 6/29/20 7,312 7/27/20 7,260 8/31/20 7,168 9/28/20 7,107 10/26/20 7,003 11/30/20 6,886 12/28/20 6,766 1/25/21 6,711 2/22/21 6,664 3/29/21 6,669 4/26/21 6,602 5/3/21 6,588 6/1/21 Massachusetts’ Department of Correction’s Weekly Inmate Count 2020 and 2021
Minnesota 9,381 1/1/20 8,841 3/30/20 8,466 4/30/20 8,182 5/28/20 7,958 6/29/20 7,738 7/30/20 7,576 8/31/20 7,536 9/28/20 7,543 10/29/20 7,402 11/30/20 7,328 12/31/20 7,208 1/28/21 7,214 2/25/21 7,220 3/29/21 Minnesota Department of Corrections’ Adult Prison Population Summary; Minnesota Department of Corrections’ COVID-19 Updates
Mississippi 19,033 1/31/20 18,898 2/29/20 18,669 3/31/20 17,260 4/30/20 17,609 5/31/20 17,463 6/30/20 17,395 7/31/20 17,310 8/31/20 17,288 9/30/20 17,225 10/31/20 17,093 11/30/20 17,140 12/31/20 17,050 1/31/21 17,099 3/1/21 17,211 3/31/21 17,272 4/30/21 17,269 5/31/21 17,302 6/9/21 Mississippi Department of Correction’s Daily Inmate Population
Montana 2,759 1/1/20 2,777 3/1/20 2,494 5/30/20 2,545 6/30/20 2,522 7/31/20 2,536 8/31/20 2,523 9/30/20 2,475 10/30/20 2,434 11/30/20 2,421 12/31/20 2,457 1/31/21 2,499 2/28/21 2,477 3/31/21 2,479 4/30/21 2,494 5/31/21 2,510 6/13/21 Montana Department of Corrections’ Daily Population Report
Nevada 12,379 1/26/20 12,403 2/1/29 12,384 3/8/20 11,937 5/31/20 11,847 6/28/20 11,696 7/26/20 11,553 8/23/20 11,354 9/27/20 11,273 10/25/20 11,222 11/29/20 11,134 12/27/21 11,007 1/31/21 10,943 2/22/21 10,841 3/29/21 10,777 4/26/21 10,676 5/24/21 10,589 6/7/21 Nevada Department of Correction’s Weekly Fact Sheets
New Hampshire 2,464 1/1/20 2,472 2/1/20 2,472 3/1/20 2,433 4/1/20 2,359 5/1/20 2,283 6/1/20 2,256 7/1/20 2,228 8/1/20 2,209 9/1/20 2,203 10/1/20 2,184 11/1/20 2,155 12/1/20 2,136 1/1/21 2,107 2/1/21 2,071 3/1/21 2,053 4/1/21 2,030 5/1/21 2,016 6/1/21 New Hampshire Department of Corrections’ Monthly Facility Population Summary Report
North Carolina 35,119 1/30/20 34,919 2/16/20 34,968 3/23/30 33,786 4/26/20 32,143 5/25/20 31,929 6/30/20 32,033 7/27/20 31,704 8/24/20 30,970 9/30/20 30,867 10/23/20 30,267 11/30/20 30,210 12/28/20 28,928 1/29/21 28,812 4/25/21 28,682 5/12/21 28,776 6/14/21 North Carolina Department of Public Safety Statistics: Offender Population
North Dakota 1,794 1/1/20 1,748 2/1/20 1,731 3/1/20 1,530 4/1/20 1,461 5/1/20 1,313 6/1/20 1,318 7/1/20 1,332 8/1/20 1,300 9/1/20 1,316 10/1/20 1,350 11/1/20 1,372 12/1/20 1,378 1/1/21 1,436 2/1/21 1,472 3/1/21 1,522 4/1/21 1,559 5/1/21 1,577 6/14/21 Vera’s People in Prison, 2019; North Daktoa Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation’s Operational Capacity Daily Count
Ohio 48,601 1/28/20 48,762 2/25/20 49,045 3/31/20 47,850 4/28/20 43,181 5/26/20 45,940 6/30/20 45,113 7/28/20 44,677 8/25/20 44,567 9/29/20 44,665 10/27/20 44,245 11/25/20 43,824 12/29/21 43,518 1/20/21 43,338 2/23/21 43,040 3/30/21 43,097 4/27/21 43,085 5/25/21 43,009 6/10/21 Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction’s Weekly Population Count Reports
Oklahoma 25,045 1/27/20 24,994 2/24/20 24,696 3/30/20 24,042 4/27/20 23,307 5/26/21 22,656 6/29/20 22,346 7/27/20 21,991 8/31/20 21,779 9/28/20 21,647 10/26/20 21,721 11/30/20 21,720 12/28/20 21,709 1/25/21 21,681 2/22/21 21,742 3/29/21 21,747 4/26/21 21,710 5/24/21 21,628 6/7/21 Oklahoma Department of Corrections Weekly Count
Pennsylvania 45,863 1/31/20 45,650 2/29/20 45,115 3/31/20 43,220 4/30/20 42,408 5/31/20 41,427 6/30/20 40,911 7/31/20 40,545 8/31/20 39,911 9/30/20 39,329 10/31/20 39,085 11/30/20 38,645 12/31/20 38,206 1/31/21 37,766 2/28/21 37,457 3/31/21 37,267 4/30/21 37,123 5/28/21 37,054 6/11/21 Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Monthly Population Reports
South Carolina 18,106 1/1/20 18,074 2/1/20 18,028 3/1/20 18,229 4/1/20 17,417 5/23/21 17,232 6/30/20 16,766 7/27/20 16,215 8/24/20 15,971 9/30/20 15,804 10/31/20 15,957 11/19/20 15,896 12/31/20 15,728 1/22/21 15,720 2/1/21 15,557 3/31/21 15,492 4/30/21 15,419 5/31/21 15,274 6/14/21 South Carolina Department of Corrections’ Inmate and Bed Counts
South Dakota 3,774 January 2020 ADP 3,809 February 2020 ADP 3,753 March 2020 ADP 3,706 April 2020 ADP 3,596 May 2020 ADP 3,506 June 2020 ADP 3,427 July 2020 ADP 3,373 August 2020 ADP 3,350 September 2020 ADP 3,305 October 2020 ADP 3,291 November 2020 ADP 3,240 December 2020 ADP 3,205 January 2021 ADP 3,218 February 2021 ADP 3,227 March 2021 ADP 3,232 April 2021 ADP 3,249 May 2021 ADP South Dakota Department of Corrections’ FY 2020 Adult Dashboard; Adult Corrections Monthly Population Reports
Tennessee 21,791 January 2020 ADP 21,813 February 2020 ADP 21,724 March 2020 ADP 21,247 April 2020 ADP 20,690 May 2020 ADP 20,159 June 2020 ADP 19,645 July 2020 ADP 19,499 August 2020 ADP 19,327 September 2020 ADP 19,506 October 2020 ADP 19,741 November 2020 ADP 19,715 December 2020 ADP 19,537 January 2021 ADP 19,474 February 2021 ADP 19,560 March 2021 ADP 20,017 April 2021 ADP 20,503 May 2021 ADP Tennessee Department of Correction’s Monthly Bed Space and Capacity Reports
Vermont 1,608 1/1/20 1,639 3/13/20 1,385 4/27/20 1,387 5/28/20 1,409 6/25/20 1,407 7/27/20 1,410 8/21/20 1,413 9/30/20 1,369 10/31/20 1,369 11/18/20 1,292 12/31/20 1,281 1/21/21 1,272 2/26/21 1,238 3/31/21 1,228 4/30/21 1,261 5/28/21 1,276 6/14/21 Vera’s People in Prison, 2019; Vermont Department of Corrections’ Past Daily Population Data
Virginia 29,233 January 2020 ADP 29,208 February 2020 ADP 29,136 March 2020 ADP 28,595 April 2020 ADP 27,871 May 2020 ADP 27,294 June 2020 ADP 26,749 July 2020 ADP 26,190 August 2020 ADP 25,659 September 2020 ADP 25,156 October 2020 ADP 24,731 November 2020 ADP 24,235 December 2020 ADP 23,811 January 2021 ADP 23,644 February 2021 ADP 23,796 March 2021 ADP 23,897 April 2021 ADP Virginia Department of Corrections’ Monthly Offender Population Reports
Washington 18,998 January 2020 ADP 19,151 February 2020 ADP 18,797 March 2020 ADP 17,587 April 2020 ADP 16,906 May 2020 ADP 16,703 June 2020 ADP 16,464 July 2020 ADP 16,381 August 2020 ADP 16,183 September 2020 ADP 16,081 October 2020 ADP 15,968 November 2020 ADP 15,644 December 2020 ADP January 2021 ADP February 2021 ADP 15,067 March 2021 ADP Washington Department of Corrections’ Average Daily Population Fiscal Year 2020 and 2021
Wisconsin 23,629 1/31/20 23,471 2/28/20 23,288 3/27/20 22,506 4/24/20 21,819 5/29/20 21,444 6/26/20 21,390 7/24/20 21,337 8/21/20 21,098 9/25/20 20,867 10/30/20 20,693 11/13/20 20,155 12/25/20 19,976 1/15/21 19,607 2/26/21 19,480 3/26/21 19,433 4/30/21 19,400 5/28/21 19,413 6/11/21 Wisconsin Department of Corrections’ Weekly Population Reports

Appendix B: County jail populations during COVID-19

This table shows the jail populations for 388 county jails where data was available where data was available for March 10th (the day the pandemic was declared) and for 75% of the days between March 10th, 2020 and June 17th, 2021. (This table is a subset of the population data available for over 1,000 local jails from the NYU Public Safety Lab Jail Data Initiative.)

County facility State March 2020 population July 2020 population January 2021 population Most recent population Percent change from March to July Percent change from July to January Percent change from January to most recent date Net percent change March 2020 date July 2020 date January 2021 date Most recent date
Autauga Ala. 171 169 187 149 -1% 11% -20% -13% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Chilton Ala. 210 184 189 195 -12% 3% 3% -7% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clay Ala. 38 34 34 66 -11% 0% 94% 74% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Cleburne Ala. 84 61 60 55 -27% -2% -8% -35% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Coffee Ala. 127 76 99 130 -40% 30% 31% 2% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Coosa Ala. 27 32 22 33 19% -31% 50% 22% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Dale Ala. 74 69 54 87 -7% -22% 61% 18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
DeKalb Ala. 167 164 173 182 -2% 5% 5% 9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Houston Ala. 393 324 377 413 -18% 16% 16% 10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 4/12/21
Jackson Ala. 177 183 217 214 3% 19% -1% 21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Marion Ala. 131 139 151 162 6% 9% 7% 24% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Morgan Ala. 615 554 574 635 -10% 4% 4% 11% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 5/19/21
Pike Ala. 62 34 56 61 -45% 65% 9% -2% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Randolph Ala. 64 49 66 70 -23% 35% 6% 9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
St. Clair Ala. 219 229 188 231 5% -18% 23% 5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Talladega Ala. 301 224 305 388 -26% 36% 27% 29% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Washington Ala. 58 38 32 69 -34% -16% 116% 19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Baxter Ark. 120 86 120 122 -28% 40% 2% 2% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Crawford Ark. 215 166 232 192 -23% 40% -17% -11% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Franklin Ark. 36 24 86 67 -33% 258% -22% 86% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Howard Ark. 41 15 23 26 -63% 53% 13% -37% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Johnson Ark. 63 37 75 80 -41% 103% 7% 27% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Marion Ark. 42 22 74 72 -48% 236% -3% 71% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Nevada Ark. 55 33 51 55 -40% 55% 8% 0% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Poinsett Ark. 80 49 71 73 -39% 45% 3% -9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Pope Ark. 193 134 163 213 -31% 22% 31% 10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Saline Ark. 233 131 177 204 -44% 35% 15% -12% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Stone Ark. 36 37 33 42 3% -11% 27% 17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Union Ark. 199 137 158 167 -31% 15% 6% -16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Van Buren Ark. 78 29 34 72 -63% 17% 112% -8% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Washington Ark. 678 405 572 567 -40% 41% -1% -16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
White Ark. 277 80 210 235 -71% 163% 12% -15% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Yavapai Ariz. 537 448 468 555 -17% 4% 19% 3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Yuma Ariz. 427 366 460 457 -14% 26% -1% 7% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
El Dorado Calif. 383 324 332 270 -15% 2% -19% -30% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Shasta Calif. 377 472 416 377 25% -12% -9% 0% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Siskiyou Calif. 91 80 69 86 -12% -14% 25% -5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Stanislaus Calif. 1343 1043 1165 1175 -22% 12% 1% -13% 3/10/20 7/13/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Tulare Calif. 1561 1187 1392 1514 -24% 17% 9% -3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Yuba Calif. 383 219 229 206 -43% 5% -10% -46% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Arapahoe Colo. 1123 681 813 779 -39% 19% -4% -31% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Bent Colo. 55 31 63 58 -44% 103% -8% 5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Boulder Colo. 647 410 390 445 -37% -5% 14% -31% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Douglas Colo. 339 216 257 286 -36% 19% 11% -16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jefferson Colo. 1258 642 775 964 -49% 21% 24% -23% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Pueblo Colo. 643 388 409 454 -40% 5% 11% -29% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Alachua Fla. 729 669 806 755 -8% 20% -6% 4% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
DeSoto Fla. 147 161 161 156 10% 0% -3% 6% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Flagler Fla. 203 175 200 201 -14% 14% 14% 0% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Lake Fla. 18 10 26 15 -44% 160% -42% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Monroe Fla. 510 394 460 458 -23% 17% 0% -10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Nassau Fla. 236 172 231 204 -27% 34% -12% -14% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sarasota Fla. 866 779 874 874 -10% 12% 0% 1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
St. Lucie Fla. 1303 1218 1323 1366 -7% 9% 3% 5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Walton Fla. 435 405 442 341 -7% 9% 9% -23% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Bartow Ga. 671 531 589 553 -21% 11% 11% -6% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Berrien Ga. 96 69 80 81 -28% 16% 16% 1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 4/22/21
Brantley Ga. 122 124 104 116 2% -16% -16% 12% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 5/4/21
Bulloch Ga. 343 254 320 369 -26% 26% 15% 8% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Burke Ga. 106 93 111 103 -12% 19% -7% -3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Camden Ga. 112 132 137 145 18% 4% 4% 6% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Carroll Ga. 441 302 383 514 -32% 27% 27% 34% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/16/21
Columbia Ga. 276 182 204 267 -34% 12% 31% -3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Decatur Ga. 116 117 143 124 1% 22% -13% 7% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Dodge Ga. 123 116 121 135 -6% 4% 12% 10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Dougherty Ga. 579 414 528 560 -28% 28% 6% -3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Douglas Ga. 681 344 369 710 -49% 7% 92% 4% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Effingham Ga. 236 142 153 205 -40% 8% 34% -13% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Elbert Ga. 95 48 65 71 -49% 35% 35% 9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/16/21
Fayette Ga. 205 127 190 266 -38% 50% 40% 30% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Floyd Ga. 639 471 525 575 -26% 11% 10% -10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Gordon Ga. 290 239 268 235 -18% 12% -12% -19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Habersham Ga. 162 114 132 110 -30% 16% -17% -32% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Haralson Ga. 184 116 191 176 -37% 65% -8% -4% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jackson Ga. 143 111 186 175 -22% 68% -6% 22% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lamar Ga. 58 38 47 63 -34% 24% 34% 9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Laurens Ga. 337 285 292 283 -15% 2% -3% -16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Liberty Ga. 209 176 198 189 -16% 13% -5% -10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Monroe Ga. 128 102 143 143 -20% 40% 0% 12% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Oconee Ga. 28 23 21 31 -18% -9% 48% 11% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Polk Ga. 179 156 106 181 -13% -32% 71% 1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Rabun Ga. 108 60 71 89 -44% 18% 25% -18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Richmond Ga. 1021 891 973 960 -13% 9% 9% -1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/14/21
Spalding Ga. 386 260 349 353 -33% 34% 1% -9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sumter Ga. 157 129 148 174 -18% 15% 18% 11% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Tattnall Ga. 87 36 76 97 -59% 111% 28% 11% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Tift Ga. 226 217 248 273 -4% 14% 10% 21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Turner Ga. 67 61 48 66 -9% -21% 38% -1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Union Ga. 49 39 49 52 -20% 26% 6% 6% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Upson Ga. 103 59 93 124 -43% 58% 58% 33% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/16/21
Ware Ga. 419 340 442 412 -19% 30% -7% -2% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Washington Ga. 78 76 90 101 -3% 18% 12% 29% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Whitfield Ga. 484 336 424 397 -31% 26% -6% -18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Worth Ga. 69 85 72 96 23% -15% 33% 39% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Buena Vista Iowa 22 7 14 14 -68% 100% 0% -36% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Cerro Gordo Iowa 68 39 48 56 -43% 23% 17% -18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clinton Iowa 59 35 61 49 -41% 74% -20% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Dallas Iowa 27 36 35 41 33% -3% 17% 52% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Dickinson Iowa 13 7 6 4 -46% -14% -33% -69% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Hardin Iowa 84 79 64 63 -6% -19% -2% -25% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Polk Iowa 885 542 726 766 -39% 34% 6% -13% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/5/21 6/17/21
Scott Iowa 448 236 194 210 -47% -18% 8% -53% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Story Iowa 70 25 68 47 -64% 172% -31% -33% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Blaine Idaho 64 50 13 21 -22% -74% 62% -67% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Bonneville Idaho 392 275 244 262 -30% -11% 7% -33% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Canyon Idaho 445 383 355 349 -14% -7% -2% -22% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Nez Perce Idaho 128 79 86 101 -38% 9% 17% -21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Power Idaho 14 13 5 7 -7% -62% 40% -50% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Washington Idaho 40 39 33 44 -3% -15% 33% 10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Kendall Ill. 156 137 146 135 -12% 7% 7% -8% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Macon Ill. 300 261 302 272 -13% 16% 16% -10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Randolph Ill. 25 24 19 36 -4% -21% 89% 44% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Will Ill. 687 580 609 585 -16% 5% 5% -4% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Woodford Ill. 52 56 72 61 8% 29% -15% 17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Dearborn Ind. 233 253 295 270 9% 17% -8% 16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Hamilton Ind. 294 227 291 278 -23% 28% -4% -5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jackson Ind. 249 173 191 222 -31% 10% 16% -11% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Brown Kan. 12 14 18 16 17% 29% -11% 33% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Crawford Kan. 74 49 66 85 -34% 35% 35% 29% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Dickinson Kan. 20 16 4 12 -20% -75% 200% -40% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Doniphan Kan. 9 8 3 7 -11% -63% 133% -22% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Finney Kan. 95 88 58 92 -7% -34% 59% -3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Geary Kan. 100 77 84 90 -23% 9% 7% -10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jackson Kan. 82 55 67 57 -33% 22% -15% -30% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Shawnee Kan. 550 404 477 516 -27% 18% 8% -6% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sherman Kan. 18 27 17 23 50% -37% 35% 28% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sumner Kan. 142 43 101 85 -70% 135% -16% -40% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Wabaunsee Kan. 9 5 5 6 -44% 0% 20% -33% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Allen Ky. 80 43 57 91 -46% 33% 60% 14% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Boone Ky. 453 370 467 466 -18% 26% 0% 3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Christian Ky. 768 522 602 618 -32% 15% 3% -20% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Graves Ky. 182 146 146 173 -20% 0% 18% -5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Muhlenberg Ky. 278 199 233 255 -28% 17% 9% -8% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Rockcastle Ky. 103 58 56 74 -44% -3% 32% -28% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Todd Ky. 135 81 115 133 -40% 42% 16% -1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Allen La. 102 62 58 85 -39% -6% 47% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Assumption La. 101 94 133 127 -7% 41% -5% 26% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Avoyelles La. 424 332 301 333 -22% -9% 11% -21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Beauregard La. 161 137 165 142 -15% 20% -14% -12% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Bogalusa City La. 18 14 15 12 -22% 7% -20% -33% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Caldwell La. 610 502 572 604 -18% 14% 6% -1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Catahoula La. 72 47 52 75 -35% 11% 44% 4% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Claiborne La. 575 465 400 470 -19% -14% 18% -18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
East Feliciana La. 244 215 233 240 -12% 8% 3% -2% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Evangeline La. 74 51 59 60 -31% 16% 2% -19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Franklin La. 815 680 808 825 -17% 19% 2% 1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Hammond City La. 14 11 9 11 -21% -18% 22% -21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Iberville La. 106 111 117 91 5% 5% -22% -14% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jefferson Davis La. 159 70 104 109 -56% 49% 5% -31% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lafayette La. 990 527 537 601 -47% 2% 12% -39% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lafourche La. 458 315 326 504 -31% 3% 55% 10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
LaSalle La. 73 58 80 101 -21% 38% 26% 38% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Morehouse La. 464 504 432 411 9% -14% -5% -11% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Pointe Coupee La. 98 79 78 91 -19% -1% 17% -7% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Rapides La. 877 845 892 913 -4% 6% 2% 4% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Red River La. 64 57 55 54 -11% -4% -2% -16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Richland La. 751 583 678 627 -22% 16% -8% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sabine La. 203 169 185 170 -17% 9% -8% -16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Shreveport La. 63 12 26 44 -81% 117% 117% 69% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/16/21
St. Charles La. 458 417 406 378 -9% -3% -7% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
St. James La. 68 39 55 54 -43% 41% -2% -21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
St. John La. 146 122 74 57 -16% -39% -23% -61% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sulphur La. 11 17 14 19 55% -18% 36% 73% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Tangipahoa La. 572 465 573 561 -19% 23% -2% -2% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Terrebonne La. 645 502 536 560 -22% 7% 4% -13% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Vermilion La. 146 134 160 142 -8% 19% 19% -11% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Vernon La. 131 101 121 106 -23% 20% -12% -19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Ville Platte La. 16 6 12 11 -63% 100% -8% -31% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Washington La. 163 138 175 198 -15% 27% 13% 21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
West Feliciana La. 25 15 116 122 -40% 673% 5% 388% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Worcester Mass. 766 465 515 486 -39% 11% -6% -37% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Allegany Md. 189 141 125 171 -25% -11% 37% -10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Prince Georges Md. 884 749 976 930 -15% 30% -5% 5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Cumberland Maine 349 299 306 267 -14% 2% -13% -23% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Delta Mich. 125 105 88 111 -16% -16% 26% -11% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Wayne Mich. 2086 2157 3041 3022 3% 41% -1% 45% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Beltrami Minn. 113 91 86 73 -19% -5% -15% -35% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Blue Earth Minn. 114 68 65 63 -40% -4% -3% -45% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Brown Minn. 18 16 14 24 -11% -13% 71% 33% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Carlton Minn. 33 14 23 17 -58% 64% -26% -48% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Chisago Minn. 61 25 35 32 -59% 40% -9% -48% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clay Minn. 117 69 92 96 -41% 33% 4% -18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clearwater Minn. 17 12 13 26 -29% 8% 100% 53% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Crow Wing Minn. 155 96 99 115 -38% 3% 16% -26% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Fillmore Minn. 7 10 2 7 43% -80% 250% 0% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Hubbard Minn. 63 40 53 39 -37% 33% -26% -38% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Isanti Minn. 57 31 25 31 -46% -19% 24% -46% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Kanabec Minn. 45 18 14 8 -60% -22% -43% -82% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Kandiyohi Minn. 91 79 46 51 -13% -42% 11% -44% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Le Sueur Minn. 23 12 15 13 -48% 25% -13% -43% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
McLeod Minn. 36 22 24 21 -39% 9% -13% -42% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Mille Lacs Minn. 79 51 36 31 -35% -29% -14% -61% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Morrison Minn. 31 20 24 32 -35% 20% 20% 33% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/16/21
Nicollet Minn. 26 12 11 13 -54% -8% 18% -50% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Pipestone Minn. 14 10 9 8 -29% -10% -11% -43% 3/10/20 6/23/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Redwood Minn. 12 13 16 10 8% 23% -38% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Renville Minn. 39 15 19 32 -62% 27% 68% -18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Roseau Minn. 21 10 9 11 -52% -10% 22% -48% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Scott Minn. 140 57 96 114 -59% 68% 19% -19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sherburne Minn. 307 259 228 279 -16% -12% 22% -9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sibley Minn. 9 4 8 9 -56% 100% 13% 0% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Swift Minn. 4 4 4 5 0% 0% 25% 25% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Wilkin Minn. 9 8 7 7 -11% -13% 0% -22% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Winona Minn. 30 22 20 17 -27% -9% -15% -43% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Wright Minn. 182 91 151 146 -50% 66% -3% -20% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Yellow Medicine Minn. 15 13 9 12 -13% -31% 33% -20% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Barry Mo. 45 44 57 57 -2% 30% 0% 27% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Bates Mo. 31 20 19 17 -35% -5% -11% -45% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Benton Mo. 35 20 30 20 -43% 50% -33% -43% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Boone Mo. 252 202 254 250 -20% 26% -2% -1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Buchanan Mo. 217 165 202 188 -24% 22% -7% -13% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Cape Girardeau Mo. 148 151 203 205 2% 34% 1% 39% 3/10/20 6/11/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clay Mo. 300 215 197 238 -28% -8% 21% -21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jackson Mo. 839 697 770 759 -17% 10% -1% -10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Johnson Mo. 202 86 120 168 -57% 40% 40% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Joplin Mo. 56 28 45 31 -50% 61% -31% -45% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lewis Mo. 8 7 13 14 -13% 86% 8% 75% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
McDonald Mo. 34 39 36 41 15% -8% 14% 21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Saline Mo. 57 41 51 46 -28% 24% -10% -19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Stone Mo. 65 69 39 48 6% -43% 23% -26% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Adams Miss. 76 78 72 90 3% -8% 25% 18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clay Miss. 68 51 69 76 -25% 35% 10% 12% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jackson Miss. 338 370 359 336 9% -3% -6% -1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jasper Miss. 30 24 21 24 -20% -13% 14% -20% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lee Miss. 194 201 250 227 4% 24% -9% 17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Tunica Miss. 27 23 22 29 -15% -4% 32% 7% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Big Horn Mont. 38 42 29 24 11% -31% -17% -37% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lewis and Clark Mont. 102 109 104 98 7% -5% -6% -4% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Ravalli Mont. 41 47 50 53 15% 6% 6% 29% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Valley Mont. 40 28 21 24 -30% -25% 14% -40% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Alamance N.C. 361 217 239 231 -40% 10% -3% -36% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Burke N.C. 133 118 112 117 -11% -5% 4% -12% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Cabarrus N.C. 323 195 195 225 -40% 0% 15% -30% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Carteret N.C. 165 109 200 100 -34% 83% -50% -39% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Catawba N.C. 302 216 215 251 -28% 0% 17% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Cleveland N.C. 324 184 218 269 -43% 18% 23% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Davidson N.C. 340 207 229 273 -39% 11% 19% -20% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Gaston N.C. 585 444 516 551 -24% 16% 7% -6% 3/10/20 6/28/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Guilford N.C. 1051 780 719 740 -26% -8% -8% 3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/16/21
Lee N.C. 119 93 109 129 -22% 17% 18% 8% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lincoln N.C. 148 69 102 117 -53% 48% 15% -21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Moore N.C. 138 105 142 138 -24% 35% 35% -3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/16/21
New Hanover N.C. 444 358 402 403 -19% 12% 0% -9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Pender N.C. 88 71 79 84 -19% 11% 6% -5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Randolph N.C. 255 201 213 250 -21% 6% 17% -2% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Richmond N.C. 114 77 77 92 -32% 0% 19% -19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Rowan N.C. 341 236 245 323 -31% 4% 32% -5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sampson N.C. 253 165 176 216 -35% 7% 23% -15% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Stanly N.C. 156 96 132 124 -38% 38% -6% -21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Transylvania N.C. 77 44 35 44 -43% -20% 26% -43% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Wake N.C. 1246 1054 1141 1147 -15% 8% 1% -8% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Washington N.C. 459 308 285 341 -33% -7% 20% -26% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Stutsman N.D. 47 35 42 38 -26% 20% -10% -19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Williams N.D. 90 115 108 64 28% -6% -41% -29% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Hall Neb. 275 206 193 236 -25% -6% 22% -14% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lancaster Neb. 625 467 592 569 -25% 27% -4% -9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lincoln Neb. 117 108 105 141 -8% -3% 34% 21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Bergen N.J. 618 290 358 393 -53% 23% 10% -36% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Cumberland N.J. 337 251 285 307 -26% 14% 8% -9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Ocean N.J. 326 253 287 301 -22% 13% 13% 5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/8/21
Salem N.J. 302 270 323 332 -11% 20% 3% 10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sussex N.J. 75 42 59 55 -44% 40% 40% -7% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 5/21/21
Curry N.M. 183 158 155 176 -14% -2% 14% -4% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Hobbs N.M. 11 21 18 6 91% -14% -67% -45% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lea N.M. 234 132 139 173 -44% 5% 24% -26% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
San Juan N.M. 508 318 442 506 -37% 39% 39% 14% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Monroe N.Y. 766 596 735 749 -22% 23% 2% -2% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Adams Ohio 42 40 21 42 -5% -48% 100% 0% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clermont Ohio 376 310 341 314 -18% 10% -8% -16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clinton Ohio 80 55 41 66 -31% -25% 61% -18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Delaware Ohio 233 164 130 152 -30% -21% 17% -35% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Erie Ohio 129 79 86 107 -39% 9% 9% 24% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/15/21
Franklin Ohio 2002 1527 1638 1692 -24% 7% 3% -15% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Guernsey Ohio 105 89 80 114 -15% -10% 43% 9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Hamilton Ohio 1499 1124 1349 1276 -25% 20% -5% -15% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Morrow Ohio 104 59 52 126 -43% -12% 142% 21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Ottawa Ohio 92 61 54 68 -34% -11% 26% -26% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Pickaway Ohio 119 116 85 94 -3% -27% 11% -21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Wood Ohio 169 98 140 125 -42% 43% 43% -11% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 4/28/21
Carter Okla. 35 9 19 18 -74% 111% -5% -49% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Comanche Okla. 357 273 303 355 -24% 11% 17% -1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Garvin Okla. 67 57 67 69 -15% 18% 3% 3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Pottawatomie Okla. 203 191 215 196 -6% 13% -9% -3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Baker Ore. 32 14 22 22 -56% 57% 0% -31% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clackamas Ore. 427 186 232 208 -56% 25% -10% -51% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clatsop Ore. 56 43 52 56 -23% 21% 8% 0% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Douglas Ore. 200 123 127 169 -39% 3% 33% -16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Harney Ore. 8 3 7 8 -63% 133% 14% 0% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jackson Ore. 321 260 258 259 -19% -1% 0% -19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Josephine Ore. 185 154 100 177 -17% -35% 77% -4% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Klamath Ore. 136 68 78 112 -50% 15% 44% -18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lincoln Ore. 161 77 99 104 -52% 29% 5% -35% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Linn Ore. 207 122 119 121 -41% -2% 2% -42% 3/10/20 6/29/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Marion Ore. 420 277 311 293 -34% 12% -6% -30% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Marion Work Center Ore. 90 39 42 59 -57% 8% 40% -34% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Multnomah Ore. 1118 659 803 784 -41% 22% -2% -30% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Polk Ore. 109 63 66 89 -42% 5% 35% -18% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Tillamook Ore. 65 36 28 27 -45% -22% -4% -58% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/13/21 6/17/21
Wasco Ore. 132 65 74 83 -51% 14% 12% -37% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Washington Ore. 874 540 462 533 -38% -14% 15% -39% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Yamhill Ore. 166 62 94 93 -63% 52% -1% -44% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clinton Pa. 46 83 167 172 80% 101% 3% 274% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Cumberland Pa. 409 230 236 263 -44% 3% 11% -36% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Dauphin Pa. 1110 867 1003 978 -22% 16% -2% -12% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lancaster Pa. 786 674 620 739 -14% -8% 19% -6% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Aiken S.C. 460 474 457 314 3% -4% -31% -32% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Anderson City S.C. 95 84 101 111 -12% 20% 10% 17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Berkeley S.C. 438 297 396 413 -32% 33% 4% -6% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Cherokee S.C. 357 265 319 329 -26% 20% 3% -8% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Darlington S.C. 161 128 177 184 -20% 38% 4% 14% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Kershaw S.C. 80 86 94 99 8% 9% 5% 24% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Laurens S.C. 226 162 183 195 -28% 13% 7% -14% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lexington S.C. 498 312 444 466 -37% 42% 5% -6% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Marion S.C. 66 55 87 82 -17% 58% -6% 24% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Pickens S.C. 302 226 221 237 -25% -2% 7% -22% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sumter S.C. 309 266 287 296 -14% 8% 3% -4% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clay S.D. 12 14 19 15 17% 36% -21% 25% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Blount Tenn. 534 472 468 458 -12% -1% -2% -14% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Macon Tenn. 300 262 302 272 -13% 15% 15% -10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Polk Tenn. 181 154 159 143 -15% 3% -10% -21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Shelby Tenn. 1807 1398 1225 1052 -23% -12% -14% -42% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Wayne Tenn. 151 122 128 122 -19% 5% -5% -19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Archer Texas 26 30 24 30 15% -20% 25% 15% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Bell Texas 859 772 1041 1180 -10% 35% 13% 37% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Brown Texas 161 152 162 176 -6% 7% 7% 9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 4/29/21
Calhoun Texas 76 88 88 85 16% 0% -3% 12% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Coleman Texas 33 30 38 25 -9% 27% 27% -34% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Cooke Texas 163 153 161 147 -6% 5% -9% -10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
DeWitt Texas 81 87 77 88 7% -11% 14% 9% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Ellis Texas 375 301 372 452 -20% 24% 24% 22% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/16/21
Erath Texas 79 64 68 69 -19% 6% 6% 1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 5/3/21
Galveston Texas 991 845 983 963 -15% 16% -2% -3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Hopkins Texas 159 185 166 177 16% -10% -10% 7% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Hunt Texas 233 237 406 196 2% 71% -52% -16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jim Wells Texas 61 56 55 52 -8% -2% -5% -15% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lavaca Texas 25 20 11 18 -20% -45% -45% 64% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/15/21
Lubbock Texas 1242 1279 1218 1314 3% -5% -5% 8% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/16/21
Parmer Texas 28 22 21 17 -21% -5% -19% -39% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Polk Texas 184 160 205 183 -13% 28% -11% -1% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Randall Texas 413 381 390 402 -8% 2% 3% -3% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Rockwall Texas 220 221 185 219 0% -16% 18% 0% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Terry Texas 83 89 92 96 7% 3% 4% 16% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Titus Texas 133 94 76 87 -29% -19% -19% 14% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/16/21
Tom Green Texas 392 420 441 485 7% 5% 10% 24% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Wharton Texas 145 103 103 116 -29% 0% 13% -20% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Salt Lake Utah 2138 1186 1439 1597 -45% 21% 11% -25% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Chesapeake Va. 1031 907 1012 984 -12% 12% -3% -5% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Danville Va. 363 320 312 271 -12% -3% -13% -25% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Middle Peninsula Va. 169 162 160 145 -4% -1% -9% -14% 3/10/20 7/25/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Middle River Va. 900 729 852 695 -19% 17% -18% -23% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Norfolk Va. 935 684 981 993 -27% 43% 1% 6% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Riverside Va. 1360 1144 1242 1180 -16% 9% -5% -13% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Roanoke Va. 173 146 172 208 -16% 18% 21% 20% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Virginia Beach Va. 1509 1142 1306 1192 -24% 14% -9% -21% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/13/21 6/17/21
Virginia Peninsula Va. 377 316 352 371 -16% 11% 5% -2% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/15/21
Western Virginia Va. 944 746 806 809 -21% 8% 0% -14% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Chelan Wash. 190 156 154 126 -18% -1% -18% -34% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clallam Forks Wash. 17 10 11 9 -41% 10% -18% -47% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Clark Wash. 655 422 428 407 -36% 1% -5% -38% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Grays Harbor Wash. 177 140 125 113 -21% -11% -10% -36% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Grays Harbor Aberdeen Wash. 20 14 6 10 -30% -57% 67% -50% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Grays Harbor Hoquiam Wash. 31 27 19 15 -13% -30% -21% -52% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Island Wash. 68 44 48 44 -35% 9% -8% -35% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Jefferson Wash. 28 22 17 21 -21% -23% 24% -25% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
King Issaquah Wash. 56 33 29 30 -41% -12% 3% -46% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Kitsap Wash. 379 233 277 246 -39% 19% -11% -35% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Klickitat Wash. 39 32 39 40 -18% 22% 3% 3% 3/10/20 6/25/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Lewis Wash. 191 168 153 143 -12% -9% -7% -25% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Okanogan Wash. 159 90 99 97 -43% 10% -2% -39% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Skagit Wash. 275 154 170 177 -44% 10% 4% -36% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Skamania Wash. 24 22 12 20 -8% -45% 67% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 12/29/20 6/17/21
Snohomish Wash. 743 440 454 409 -41% 3% 3% -10% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Snohomish Lynnwood Wash. 49 9 15 19 -82% 67% 67% 27% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Snohomish Marysville Wash. 35 10 5 12 -71% -50% -50% 140% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/10/21
Thurston Olympia Wash. 22 13 10 7 -41% -23% -30% -68% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Walla Walla Wash. 83 74 75 52 -11% 1% -31% -37% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Whatcom Wash. 292 205 223 213 -30% 9% -4% -27% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Whitman Wash. 31 18 33 29 -42% 83% -12% -6% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Yakima Wash. 871 444 585 587 -49% 32% 0% -33% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Brown Wis. 699 586 692 597 -16% 18% -14% -15% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Eau Claire Wis. 273 190 197 176 -30% 4% -11% -36% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
La Crosse Wis. 151 96 96 99 -36% 0% 3% -34% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lincoln Wis. 104 77 90 67 -26% 17% -26% -36% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Manitowoc Wis. 204 178 146 152 -13% -18% 4% -25% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Sawyer Wis. 114 87 82 92 -24% -6% 12% -19% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Big Horn Wyo. 70 64 61 52 -9% -5% -15% -26% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Lincoln Wyo. 43 38 29 24 -12% -24% -17% -44% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21
Park Wyo. 42 33 34 35 -21% 3% 3% -17% 3/10/20 7/6/20 1/20/21 6/17/21

New data show record high deaths of people locked up in jail, as jail populations have shifted toward smaller, rural jails and growing numbers of women. A lack of accountability and acknowledgement of women’s unique disadvantages all but ensures more deaths to come.

by Leah Wang, June 23, 2021

In so many communities nationwide, jails act as reception centers for those experiencing poverty, mental health crises, or substance use disorders. Just a few days ago, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez referred to jails as “garbage bins for human beings.” This statement tracks with new data that show that even before the COVID-19 pandemic, deaths in jail had reached record high numbers, because they continue to be unregulated, under-resourced places where disadvantaged people are sent to languish.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) recently came out with the 2018 mortality data for local jails. Nationwide, there were 1,120 deaths reported, or a rate of 154 deaths per 100,000 people in jail, the highest levels since BJS’ first report on this topic in 2000. The jail population has grown since 2000, of course, but jail deaths have grown more. These deaths spared no demographic, and almost no state; more jurisdictions than ever reported one or more deaths in 2018.

 

Dying in jail often happens within days or weeks

As in past years, suicide was the single leading cause of death for people in jails, accounting for almost 30% of deaths. Someone in jail is more than three times as likely to die from suicide as someone in the general U.S. population (and still twice as likely when the population is adjusted for age, sex and race/ethnicity to match jail populations).

a chart showing the rate of suicide in jails exceeds the national suicide rate

Suicide in jail tends to happen quickly: half of all those who died by suicide between 2000 and 2018 had been in jail for 9 days or less – compared to a median stay of 17 days for all causes of death. A short stay in jail can be extremely harmful, a fact that even our nation’s top officials acknowledge, noting that “certain features of the jail environment enhance suicidal behavior.”1 For suicide and deaths linked to drugs or alcohol, it’s those first few days in jail that are deadliest.

A chart showing more than half of jail deaths occur within a month of admission

Millions of people are booked into jails each year with alcohol or drug use disorders, and the number who died of reported intoxication while locked up reached record highs in 2018. Since 2000, these deaths are up 381 percent, and over the entire 18 years of data collection, the median time served before a drug or alcohol intoxication death was just 1 day. One Texas woman, for example, was jailed for unpaid traffic tickets and died after 3 days from complications of withdrawal after begging for medical care, and instead, being asked to clean up her own vomit. With 18 years of data showing that jailing people with substance use disorders for low-level offenses so often leads to death, why are we still using jails as de facto detox facilities?

 

More women are entering – and dying in – jail

a chart showing women’s jail populations have grown, while men’s shrank

Women made up one-sixth of all jail deaths in 2018, slightly more than their share of the total jail population. Women also had a 7% higher mortality rate than men in jails; this isn’t the first year that was true, but because women are a key driver of jail population growth, the rise in their mortality rate should send correctional leaders and policymakers running toward solutions aimed at keeping women out of confinement.2

Previous research offers solid clues as to where to begin addressing the over-incarceration and preventable deaths of women. Between 2000 and 2018, women in jail died of drug and alcohol intoxication at twice the rate of men. (In state prisons, women died this way at half the rate of men.)3 Women are also more likely than men to enter jail with drugs in their system, with a medical problem or chronic condition, or with a serious mental illness.

a chart showing women in jail died of drug and alcohol intoxication at nearly twice the rate of men in 2018 As we’ve reported before, arrests of women, often for low-level drug offenses like possession, have increased (while men’s arrests have decreased) over the past 35 years. In general, those arrested and put in jail more frequently (a population that is disproportionately Black, too) face other major disadvantages: they’re much more likely to lack health insurance, education, and employment, and to have serious health needs. That’s not to mention the high probability of jail separating a mother from children or the estimated 55,000+ women who enter jail while pregnant and face abysmal nutrition and prenatal care. These statistics paint a bleak picture of what it’s like to be a woman in contact with the criminal justice system, but they also form a clear wishlist of social services that could exist to meet women’s needs outside of jail.

 

Rural jails, a growing force, had the highest death rates in 2018

Small jails – particularly those with an average daily population of 49 or fewer people – reported the highest mortality rates again in 2018. A long-standing reality, the mortality rate in these smallest jails has actually been more than double the overall jail mortality rate in some years. By absolute numbers, these deaths make up a small portion of all jail deaths each year, but rural areas have become major players in jail incarceration.4

And yes, women and rural jails are growing together. Between 2004 and 2014, the number of women in jail increased 43 percent in rural counties, while declining 6 percent in urban counties. For decades, jails in non-urban jurisdictions have quietly proliferated, fueled by increases in pretrial detention. Additionally, researchers have found that women entering rural jails are significantly more likely to have co-occurring serious mental illness and substance use disorder, despite being severely under-identified by their jails as having such needs.

Chart showing women's jail incarceration rates are highest in rural and other smaller counties'Chart showing pretrial detention rates are climbing fastest in rural counties despite dropping slightly in urban counties

 

Jail healthcare is sketchy at best, and deadly at worst

But what does the growth of women’s jail populations across America have to do with mortality? In 2020, Reuters published an unsparing 3-part investigation of jail healthcare systems, deaths, and the increasing presence of women entering and dying there. Reporters established a devastating pipeline of women being arrested, locked up, and left to detox, give birth, or go without necessary psychiatric care in jail cells.

According to the report, on average, deaths were higher in those jails with privately contracted healthcare services, and rural jails are likely to go the private healthcare route.5 These companies’ profit motives shine through in haunting examples of neglect. At a Georgia jail managed by Corizon – a major private correctional healthcare company – senior leadership routinely overrode the recommendations of medical staff; patient names or prescription orders were simply removed from lists to avoid the bad optics of providing untimely care. But when counties move to end their healthcare contracts, there are few real competitors.

The idea that jails are falling short in their care sometimes fuels short-sighted arguments for expanding or building new facilities. One county in Texas was considering a new women’s facility in order to provide “gender-specific” and “trauma-informed” services to this population; fortunately, county commissioners recently postponed the vote to approve its construction at the suggestion of local activists and the county judge. These myopic projects are expensive and do not help communities – in fact, research shows that jail incarceration drives deaths within those counties.

Jails are shameful replacements for key social and medical services, and too often low-level offenses are used to justify locking people up, out of sight, when they simply need help. For women, “gender-responsivestrategies for diversion and treatment do exist, but policymakers should exercise caution in implementing those that are simply new forms of supervision; these programs will only increase the footprint of the criminal justice system. Decriminalization and the provision of gold-standard medical care, followed by a halt to jail construction, should be top of mind when addressing record mortality in jails; our mass incarceration crisis is troubling enough when people survive.

 
 

Footnotes

  1. The Bureau of Justice Statistics plans to publish detailed data on suicide in U.S. correctional facilities in August 2021; the most recent version of this report is from 2002.  ↩

  2. Not only has the number of incarcerated women increased 14-fold from 1970 to 2014, but women are now found in jails in nearly every county in the US, whereas they were only found in about one-fourth of jails back then. This trend is so troubling, we made a Whole Pie focused on women’s mass incarceration.  ↩

  3. The Reuters investigation obtained jail mortality data through 2019, one year beyond what BJS published, and found that drug and alcohol-related deaths among women in jails has not subsided. From 2017 to 2019, about one-fourth of female deaths were linked to drugs or alcohol, compared to just one-eighth of deaths from 2008 to 2016. Still, both of these percentages were double those of men’s drug- and alcohol-related deaths.  ↩

  4. In one sense, rural jails and deaths receive lots of attention in local news and cultural commentary. In another, policy and research have largely focused on large urban jails and overlooked the complex needs of rural jails. General issues faced by rural jails and their surrounding communities include: an insufficient tax base to support adequate medical or social services, a serious shortage of lawyers and public defenders, and a dearth of general criminal justice system administration, from court hours of operation, to machinery, to investigators.  ↩

  5. Jails are not held to any national standard of healthcare, private or public, but can seek optional accreditation. The National Commission on Correctional Health Care offers accreditation to jails, prisons and other detention centers, but does not publish a full list of accredited facilities “by policy.”  ↩


Proposal would make an already bad situation worse by removing nearly all First-Class mail from airplanes and putting it on trucks, no matter how far it has to travel.

by Stephen Raher, June 16, 2021

On the heels of a sharp price increase, the United States Postal Service is now proposing to slow down the speed at which letters are delivered, a change that would hit incarcerated people particularly hard. As we’ve noted before, incarcerated people are uniquely dependent on sending and receiving letters through the mail, and the USPS isn’t doing a good job of serving this population. The new proposal would make an already bad situation worse by removing nearly all First-Class mail1 from airplanes and putting it on trucks, no matter how far it has to travel.

Despite the USPS’s disingenuous claim that most mail won’t be impacted by this proposal, the opposite appears to be true. Because states in the west and northeast currently rely more heavily on air transport for mail, postal customers in those states (including those in prison or jail) will be most penalized by the current proposal.

Comments from the Prison Policy Initiative opposing the USPS changes

Incarcerated postal customers deserve better. In many situations (like filing a tax return or court document), incarcerated people have no alternative to the mail. In other situations (like maintaining family connections), alternative channels such as phone and electronic messaging might be available, but they are often expensive and/or plagued with problems. The price of a stamp represents a substantial expense for the average incarcerated person, and that stamp should purchase prompt and reliable delivery.
Our detailed argument is set forth in comments that we filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission opposing the USPS proposal. If you want to make your voice heard, contact your congressional representatives today and tell them to prevent the USPS’s proposed changes to First-Class Mail service standards.

 
 

Footnotes

  1. Specifically, the USPS proposal would cover First-Class letters within the continental United States. Mail traveling to or from Alaska and Hawaii could still be transported by plane.  ↩


A new order from the Federal Communications Commission lowers existing caps on rates and fees in the prison and jail telephone industry.

by Andrea Fenster, June 10, 2021

On May 24, the Federal Communications Commission released a historic order lowering existing caps on rates and fees in the prison and jail telephone industry. The same document also signals the FCC’s intent to further lower rates in the future, and create additional rules governing this industry. The public is invited to comment on a wide range of topics.

The FCC’s newest order applies only to out-of-state calls, where the caller and called person are physically in different states, but not to in-state calls, where the caller and called person are physically in the same state. Importantly, the FCC says that companies must charge the out-of-state rate unless they know where the parties are physically located. Previously, many companies calculated rates based on area codes, which will no longer be allowed. (This means some third-party services that offer different phone numbers with a different area code to obtain better calling rates will no longer be effective).

These newly lowered caps go into effect October 26, 2021. Here is what families with incarcerated loved ones can expect to be charged:

Rate caps:

  • For prisons: With one exception, out-of-state calls will not cost more than 14¢ per minute. Previously, rates were capped at either 21¢ or 25¢ depending on whether the call was collect or debit. The exception is that the FCC is allowing companies to charge higher rates if a mandatory state statute or regulation requires a commission payment to the facility, however, “in no event…can the total rate cap exceed $0.21 per minute.” (FCC Order at fn309).1
  • For jails with an average daily population of 1,000 or more: With one exception, out-of-state calls will not cost more than $0.16 per minute. Previously, rates were capped at either 21¢ or 25¢ depending on whether the call was collect or debit. The exception is that the FCC is allowing companies to charge higher rates if a mandatory state statute or regulation requires a commission payment to the facility, however, “in no event…can the total rate cap exceed $0.21 per minute.” (FCC Order at fn309).2
  • For all other jails: Out-of-state calls can cost no more than 21¢ per minute. Currently, collect calls can cost up to 25¢ per minute at these jails, but when the new regulations take effect, collect calls and debit calls will both be capped at 21¢.

International rate caps:

  • International calls from both prisons and jails will now be capped at the out-of-state rate that applies (above), plus the amount that the provider pays to an underlying wholesale carrier for the cost of the call. Prior to these rules, international calls were not subject to price caps. The exact caps will be hard to predict because the “underlying wholesale” cost is not widely known. But for context, calls from the United States to Mexico via one wholesaler, Twilio, cost between $0.013 and $0.045 per minute depending on the location within Mexico and whether it is to a cell phone. The prices for other countries vary and other wholesalers may have different prices, but the FCC’s intent is clearly to restrict price gouging by the providers.

Single calls:

  • From both prisons and jails, single call products, like Text2Connect™ and PayNow™, will now be capped at $6.95 per call, plus the applicable per-minute rate. We have previously found that companies were charging $9.99-14.99 for a single telephone call.

Third-party financial transaction fees:

  • In both prisons and jails, third-party financial transaction fees, like fees associated with Western Union and MoneyGram payments, will be capped at $6.95 per transaction. Currently, these fees can be as high as $9.99.

 

Footnotes

  1. We note that calls in some states are already less than 14¢ per minute, and while many states still choose to collect a commission, most states do not appear to do so under a “mandatory” structure that would allow them to increase the cost of a call beyond 14¢ per minute.  ↩

  2. We note that calls in some county jails are already less than 16¢ per minute, and while many county jails still choose to collect a commission, most county jails do not appear to do so under a “mandatory” state structure that would allow them to increase the cost of a call beyond 16¢ per minute.  ↩


New data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics shows that state prisons are seeing alarming rises in suicide, homicide, and drug and alcohol-related deaths.

by Leah Wang and Wendy Sawyer, June 8, 2021

The latest data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) on mortality in state and federal prisons is a reminder that prisons are in fact “death-making institutions,” in the words of activist Mariame Kaba. The new data is from 2018, not 2020, thanks to ongoing delays in publication, and while it would be nice to see how COVID-19 may have impacted deaths (beyond the obvious), the report indicates that prisons are becoming increasingly dangerous – a finding that should not be ignored. The new numbers show some of the same trends we’ve seen before – that thousands die in custody, largely from a major or unnamed illness – but also reveal that an increasing share of deaths are from discrete unnatural causes, like suicide, homicide, and drug and alcohol intoxication.

a chart showing deaths by suicide, homicide, and intoxication are on the rise in state prisons

State prisons, intended for people sentenced to at least one year, are supposed to be set up for long-term custody, with ongoing programming, treatment and education. According to one formerly incarcerated person, “if you have the choice between jail and prison, prison is usually a much better place to be.”

Deaths in jail receive considerable attention in popular news, and here on our website – which they should, given the deplorable conditions that lead to tragedy among primarily unconvicted people. State prisons, on the other hand, are regarded as more stable places, where life is slightly more predictable for already-sentenced people. Why, then, are suicides up 22 percent from the previous mortality report, just two years prior? Why are deaths by drug and alcohol intoxication up a staggering 139 percent from the previous mortality report, just two years prior?

The answer isn’t just because there are more incarcerated people. The very slight net change in the state prison population since 2001 pales in comparison to the increase in overall deaths occurring in these facilities. (Prison populations have actually decreased since peaking in 2009, but they’re still larger in 2018 compared to 2001.) Prisons have been, and continue to be, dangerous places, exposing incarcerated people to unbearable physical and mental conditions. State prison systems must greatly improve medical and mental healthcare, address the relationship between correctional officers and the health of their populations, and work with parole boards to accelerate release processes. Then, maybe, a state prison sentence would not become a death sentence for so many.

 

Record-setting deaths in almost all categories

a chart showing the rise in prison deaths has greatly outpaced the growth of the prison population since 2002

In 2018, state prisons reported 4,135 deaths (not including the 25 people executed in state prisons); this is the highest number on record since BJS began collecting mortality data in 2001. Between 2016 and 2018, the prison mortality rate jumped from 303 to a record 344 per 100,000 people, a shameful superlative. It may seem like a foregone conclusion that more people, serving decades or lifetimes, will die in prison. But for at least 935 people, a sentence for a nonviolent property, drug, or public order offense became a death sentence in 2018.1

BJS slices mortality data in many ways, one of which is “natural” versus “unnatural” death; “natural” deaths are those attributed to illness, while “unnatural” deaths are those caused by suicide, homicide, accident, and drug or alcohol intoxication. Any death pending investigation or otherwise missing a distinct cause gets filed away as “other,” or “missing/unknown.” Other than accident deaths, every cause of death had its worst year yet in 2018.

Taking BJS’ definitions of “natural” and “unnatural” deaths at face value2, the data shows that, like in past years, most (77%) of all prison deaths in 2018 were “natural.” However, “unnatural” or preventable deaths make up an increasing share of overall mortality: In 2018, more than 1 in 6 state prison deaths (17%) were “unnatural,” compared to less than 1 in 10 (9%) in 2001.3 Clearly, prisons are doing poorly at keeping people in their care safe. We must remember that being locked up is the punishment itself; inhumane conditions are not supposed to be part of a prison sentence.

 

Suicide rates in prison are higher than ever

Incarceration is not only difficult for someone who comes in with mental health needs, but it creates and exacerbates disconnection, despair, and overall psychological distress. Prison is basically a mental health crisis in and of itself, and too many incarcerated people contemplate and/or complete suicide.

In 2018, state prisons saw the highest number of suicides (340) since BJS began collecting this data 20 years ago. Compared to the 1% net growth of state prison populations since 2001, suicides have increased by a shocking 85 percent. Suicide is an affliction for the general U.S. population, but the mortality rate from suicide in state prisons has always been higher.

a chart showing suicide rates have always been higher inside prisons, and the gap is widening

The BJS data does not allow us to compare death rates by sentence length, but it’s hard to ignore the possibility that longer sentences are contributing to a sense of hopelessness and forcing incarcerated people into harmful situations. Other data collected by BJS shows that between 2001 and 2015, the number of people admitted annually to state prison with a sentence of 5 years or longer grew by nearly 12,000 people, accounting for almost all of the growth in new prison admissions over that time period.4

At the end of 2015, 1 in 6 people in state prisons had already served over 10 years. To add insult to injury, between 2016 and 2018, the average state prison sentence grew by about four months.

Not only does a longer incarceration increase the sheer probability of having a mental health crisis inside, but it also creates the conditions for this to happen. With longer periods of separation from loved ones, and a rapidly changing outside world, people serving long sentences are isolated and deprived of purpose.

When someone in prison is clearly in crisis, correctional officers are supposed to act swiftly to prevent suicide and self-harm. Not only do officers routinely fail to recognize mental health warning signs, but they’ve been found allowing and even encouraging self-harm, a disturbing reality. And on an institutional level, prison systems avoid making the necessary changes to protect people in dangerous conditions: In response to a Department of Justice investigation finding that the Massachusetts Department of Correction “exposes [people experiencing a mental health crisis] to conditions that harm them,” the DOC is piloting Fitbit-like bracelets for its population to track changes in vital signs related to mental health distress. Instead of rolling back harsh solitary confinement practices and improving how correctional officers respond to crises, the DOC is increasing surveillance and allowing another private company to profit off of prisons.

 

Who is committing homicide in prison?

The number of homicides in state prisons reached a record high of 120 deaths in 2018, a reminder that while prisons are secure, they are largely unsafe. Violence in prison is commonplace, tied to trauma prior to incarceration as well as mental health stressors inside. The rate of homicide in state prison is 2.5 times greater than in the U.S. population when adjusted for age, sex, and race/ethnicity.

The age of those who died in prison seems most relevant when talking about illness, but older people were actually more at risk of homicide and all other causes of death, except for accidents. By absolute numbers, more homicide deaths affected people in their 20s, 30s and 40s, but the homicide rate was highest for incarcerated people aged 55 and older. They were twice as likely to die by homicide as anyone aged 25 to 44.

What about who is actually behind the deaths that are ruled homicides? The BJS data does not separate homicide committed by incarcerated people from death “incidental to the use of force by staff,” or even “resulting from injuries sustained prior to incarceration.” While correctional officials might go right to “prison gangs” or otherwise blame incarcerated people for these deaths, it’s a bit more complicated than that. In this terrible instance, a correctional officer heeded a request to close a cell door remotely, allowing someone to fatally wound a 72-year-old man in total privacy. The nuance of who is responsible for prison homicides points to huge gaps in security and staffing, but also a clear indifference to people’s lives and unaddressed anger and trauma.

 

How can drug and alcohol intoxication deaths be so high, when prison security is so strict?

As we look back to the beginning of mortality data collection in 2001, no manner of death has spiked more than drug overdoses and alcohol intoxications. (Unfortunately, the BJS data does not distinguish between the two.)

a bar chart showing deaths from drug and alcohol intoxication since 2001 has dramatically outpaced the rise in deaths from any other cause

With such coarse data, it’s difficult to pinpoint an explanation for this trend with certainty. However, no conversation about illicit substances inside prisons would be complete without mention of contraband, particularly drugs brought in by correctional staff.

In the name of preventing contraband from entering prisons, many state prison systems have cracked down on incoming mail and visitation, two major lifelines for incarcerated people. However, there’s evidence to suggest that the majority of drugs, as well as sought-after items like cell phones and cigarettes, are brought in directly by prison staff. In 2018, we conducted a survey of local news coverage that revealed a dozen instances in that year alone where staff were fired, arrested, or sentenced with smuggling drugs and other items into correctional facilities.

A recent Twitter poll doubles down on the premise that prison security staff are the major players in contraband movement. Initiated by Worth Rises director Bianca Tylek, the poll and resulting thread brought formerly incarcerated voices into what could be the most revealing look to date at how correctional officers in particular are wound up in contraband dealings.

a twitter poll indicating most contraband is brough int by staff of prison a response to a twitter poll indicating an incarcerated person said drugs are brought into prison by guards

With so many people in state prisons lacking proper treatment for substance use disorders, it’s no wonder corrections staff will use their access to the outside and charge exorbitantly for drugs like Suboxone or potent synthetic cannabinoids. Instead of improving the quality of healthcare and treatment for drug addiction, prisons are imposing costly restrictions on mail and visitation and incentivizing their own staff to carry out illegal activity.

Mortality data for 2020 won’t be released for another two years or so, but we don’t have to wait to see whether drug contraband was drastically reduced when state prisons banned in-person visitation due to the pandemic: it wasn’t. In Virginia, for example, the Department of Corrections found that drugs did not become more scarce; positive drug tests actually increased after pandemic restrictions went into effect. Texas prisons also saw an uptick in drug contraband and related disciplinary reports in 2020, even as prison populations declined and visits were limited or cut off entirely.

Can we relate the thriving drug market in prisons to increasing drug-related deaths? Not directly. Clearly, though, the people working in prisons, who already turn a blind eye to violence and suffering, are responsible for introducing some of the dangerous substances that killed 249 people in 2018.

 

Illness is still the most common cause of death, but how natural is illness in prison?

Even though most prison deaths each year are attributed to illness, and are therefore “natural,” being sick or old in prison is not quite what it is on the outside. Incarceration can add 10 or 15 years to someone’s physiology, and take two years off of their life expectancy per year served, alarming statistics when considered alongside longer sentences and high costs of healthcare for older people.

The systemic neglect of illness and aging in prison populations isn’t natural at all. Every summer, we hear about prisons in hot climates that lack air conditioning, exposing incarcerated people to consistent temperatures of over 100 degrees. We’ve previously reported on these extreme heat conditions that exacerbate chronic diseases, counteract medications, and increase the risk of dehydration and heat stroke among even the healthiest people. In Texas, for example, when summer incarceration is described as unconstitutional, deadly, and a practice in reckless indifference, how natural are some deaths due to “illness”?

Again, consider the mortality data that will eventually come out for 2020, when prisons and jails played host to the COVID-19 pandemic and over 2,600 incarcerated people (and over 200 staff) died as a result. We know how badly every state handled this situation; it will be important not to brush these deaths aside as simply succumbing to illness – nor the deaths caused by other illnesses that went untreated in understaffed, overwhelmed prison health systems. These thousands of people were failed by state criminal justice systems, and deserved care and precaution while in custody.

 

State criminal justice systems can improve prison healthcare and loosen their grip on parole processes

We are supposed to trust prison systems to keep people alive and safe, so they can serve their sentences and be released back to their communities. The significant increase in overall “unnatural” deaths, like suicide, homicide, and drug intoxication tells us that state prisons are failing to provide humane conditions for incarcerated people, and it’s killing them. There are many ways that state prisons and related agencies can reduce the risk of death.

  • A surefire way to reduce risk is to reduce prison populations, and parole boards are a natural bottleneck to this end. Parole hearings and approval rates must increase in order to move large numbers of incarcerated people back into their communities, despite many states failing to do this in 2020 when it was clearly a matter of life and death. Compassionate release should be ramped up, and no one should be ordered to return to prison after recovering from illness. Burdensome in-person check-ins should also be eliminated to reduce the incidence of low-level technical violations of parole and probation.
  • States can also consider major sentencing policy changes to address the scourge of long prison sentences that only worsen physical health, mental health, and preparation for reentry. Dozens of state legislatures are considering “second-look” policies to review cases for those currently serving excessive, costly sentences.
  • As one of the most basic services guaranteed to people in custody, healthcare must be improved. And if it feels like prison healthcare spending is already outrageous, releasing people – especially older, sicker people – would certainly mitigate those costs. Medical care aside, correctional officers must respond swiftly to sick calls and emergencies.
  • Providing high-quality treatment for substance use disorders would prevent incarcerated people from turning to desperate and dangerous solutions. State correctional agencies must acknowledge the scale of drug smuggling facilitated by correctional staff. Instead of banning in-person visitation and meaningful resources like books, prison staff should be subject to stricter security measures and enduring consequences.
  • Improving prison conditions can also prevent many “natural” deaths in prison; for example, there should be universal standards for indoor temperatures where extreme heat can be deadly. In a decently climate-controlled space, medications will work as intended, and people can remain focused on education, employment, and connection with loved ones, and deadly viruses might not spread so easily. And as we have learned through the pandemic, improving ventilation, access to healthcare, coordination with public health departments, and reducing population density by releasing more people from prison can prevent countless deaths when infectious diseases enter prisons.

Under pressure, change does happen, and we have been tracking state-level changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Some changes were only temporary or did not go far enough to slow the spread of the deadly virus. Had states taken these actions years ago to reduce other dangers in prisons, we might not have seen record mortality in 2018 – or for that matter, in 2020.

 
 

Footnotes

  1. This calculation, based on Table 4 in Time Served in State Prisons, 2018, excludes state prison deaths among people convicted of any violent offense, many of whom may also have been serving relatively short sentences. Also, this data set is not perfectly consistent with the Mortality data set; data in the Time Served report was not available from 8 states and D.C.  ↩

  2. It’s reasonable to be skeptical of the natural/unnatural distinction put forth by BJS: Missing/unknown deaths happen to be up almost 700% from 2016, but are conveniently left out of this binary.  ↩

  3. Federal prison deaths (including private facilities) were only reported as an aggregate count until 2015, with limited details about cause of death. In 2015, “unnatural” deaths made up 11% of federal prison deaths. In 2018, they accounted for just over 14% of all federal prison deaths.  ↩

  4. According to data from the National Corrections Reporting Program, 127,060 people (36% of all new court commitments) were admitted to state prisons in 2001 with a new sentence of 5 years or longer. In 2015, that number had grown to 138,975 (38% of all new court commitments), an increase of 11,915 admissions. Over the same time period, the total number of new court commitments to state prisons – of any sentence length – grew by 12,029.  ↩


Welcome to Research Analyst, Leah Wang.

by Jenny Landon, May 19, 2021

Leah Wang

We’re excited to introduce Prison Policy Initiative Research Analyst, Leah Wang! Leah holds a M.S in Sustainability Science from the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and a B.A in Economics and Environmental Studies from Bowdoin College. Prior to joining the Prison Policy Initiative, Leah was an analyst at the Massachusetts Department of Correction, and has worked in agriculture, local food systems, and outdoor education. Leah has spent several years teaching and working with prison and jail education programs, like Petey Greene and The New Garden Society.

Welcome to the team, Leah!


Most states did not prioritize incarcerated people in their vaccination plans. As a result, seven months since the first vaccines were distributed, just 55% of people in prison have been vaccinated, leaving them vulnerable to infection.

by Tiana Herring and Emily Widra, May 18, 2021

Throughout the pandemic, prisons have been a hotspot for COVID-19, with case rates in prisons between four to five times higher than in the general population. Despite being disproportionately impacted by the pandemic, however, most states did not prioritize incarcerated people in their vaccination plans. As a result, seven months since the first vaccines were distributed, just 55% of people in prison have been vaccinated,1 leaving them vulnerable to infection.

Using data from the UCLA Law COVID-19 Behind Bars Data Project, The Marshall Project/AP, and other state-specific sources,2 we calculated the current rate of vaccinations among incarcerated people in 48 state prison systems and the federal Bureau of Prisons.3 For our measure of vaccination, we counted anyone who had received at least one dose of a vaccine as of May 14, 2021.4 Our findings are disheartening:

  • In 17 state prison systems and the Bureau of Prisons, less than half of incarcerated people have received a vaccine.
  • Vaccination rates are the worst in Utah, South Carolina, and Alabama where 20% or less of the prison population has received the first dose of a vaccine.
  • And two states – Florida and Wyoming – have not released any vaccination information at all. Their lack of transparency makes it impossible to hold these Departments of Corrections accountable and ensure they are doing all they can to limit the spread of the virus.

As we recently reported, many states prioritized correctional staff for early vaccine access, under the misguided assumption that a fully-vaccinated staff would act as a preventative “barrier” between incarcerated people and the communities surrounding prisons. With many correctional staff refusing to be vaccinated, the median staff vaccination rate across the country was still just 48% at last count. To meaningfully protect people in prison, incarcerated people need to be vaccinated at much higher rates than we’re seeing thus far.

A map showing about half of people in state and federal prisons are vaccinated.
Figure 1. Data compiled from the UCLA Law COVID-19 Behind Bars Data Project, The Marshall Project, and several state-specific data sources (see footnote 1). See the appendix to this article for a table with details about all 48 prison systems for which we gathered data.

Only ten states have vaccinated more than 70% of people incarcerated in their prison systems. Some of these states – Massachusetts, Oregon, and California – included incarcerated people in the early phases of their vaccination schedules. Had more states prioritized vaccinating people in prisons, vaccination rates would be higher across the board.

Vaccinating incarcerated people may be one of the only fast and effective mitigation strategies available to prevent the spread of the virus and save lives: The inability to socially distance in prisons combined with the higher rates of chronic health issues among incarcerated people has led to prison mortality rates two to three times higher than that of the general population.

Since vaccinations started in the U.S., there have been too many avoidable deaths. In Nevada, for example, one-third of COVID deaths in prisons occurred this year (after vaccines became available). Similarly, New Hampshire’s first COVID prison death didn’t occur until December 30, 2020, and there have since been two more deaths in 2021. In Oklahoma, incarcerated people became eligible to receive the vaccine late last year, but vaccinations did not start until March; and since January, at least 11 people may have died from COVID-19. Although the number of new cases each day has gone down in the United States since January, incarcerated people are still unprotected and dying, even when we have effective vaccines available.

The dark history of the prison medical system could be a huge barrier to vaccine uptake in prisons. Many incarcerated people are wary of the prison medical system, and for good reason: prison medical systems have long been notorious for unethical experimentation and inadequate medical care. According to the results of a survey published by The Marshall Project in February, more than half of incarcerated respondents did not believe the prison was acting in their best interest by making the vaccine available, and very few respondents believed medical staff would provide accurate information about the vaccine.

To address these concerns, public health experts have been clear: education is crucial to vaccine acceptance behind bars. There are educational resources designed specifically for COVID-19 vaccine education for people in prisons that can be used to address common questions and concerns. The reality is that vaccine education needs to be more than just handing out flyers and hanging up posters: to combat distrust in the prison system, prisons should bring in outside experts and trusted community members to discuss the vaccines with incarcerated people. Correctional staff – who have shown widespread reluctance to take the vaccine themselves – should not be relied up on to deliver accurate information about vaccines.

Nearly 397,000 people in prisons have tested positive for COVID-19 since March 2020, and the virus will only continue to spread without widespread vaccinations behind bars. For more than a year, incarcerated people have dealt with devastating consequences of the virus, ranging from the inability to see their loved ones, to the unnecessary use of solitary confinement, to death. Lack of visitation and the use of solitary confinement, as well as discontinued programming and limited access to health care are all incredibly dangerous, in addition to the dangers of COVID-19. States need to start investing in and accelerating vaccine education and administration for people in prisons.

 
 

Appendix

Prison System Number of incarcerated people who have received at least one dose Total prison population Percentage of incarcerated people who have received at least one dose Source for vaccination counts in prisons Source for total prison population Notes/Clarifications
Alabama 3,508 17,454 20% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Alaska 3,137 4,523 69% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Arizona 27,654 37,396 74% COVID Prison Project The Marshall Project/AP
Arkansas 7,438 47% The Associated Press n/a We’ve opted to use the vaccination numbers reported by the Associated Press on 5/9/21 because the Arkansas Department of Corrections hasn’t provided The Marshall Project with updated data since 4/20/21. The article provides the number of doses and the percentage of people who have recieved the vaccine, but not the total population.
California 68,445 91,341 75% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Colorado 9,877 13,558 73% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Connecticut 4,600 9,053 51% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Delaware 2,020 4,677 43% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Federal 61,335 143,416 43% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Georgia 21,901 47,027 47% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Hawaii 1,380 4,200 33% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP does not include the number of people who have received the one dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine; we’ve added these vaccinations, however, for accuracy and consistency with the UCLA data.
Idaho 2,613 7,025 37% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Illinois 18,895 29,151 65% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP This number reflects the total number of completed vaccinations, not just the number of first doses.
Indiana 10,265 23,745 43% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP
Iowa 4,192 7,489 56% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP Vaccine data was last updated on 5/12/21. The Marshall Project/AP doesn’t include the number of people who have received the one dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine; we’ve added these vaccinations, however, for accuracy and consistency with the UCLA data.
Kansas 6,380 8,665 74% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Kentucky 6,602 69% The secretary of the Gov. Andy Beshear’s executive cabinet as reported by WDRB.com n/a This article from 4/12/21 reports the number of vaccines distributed and the percentage of people who have recevied the vaccine, but not the total number of incarcerated people.
Louisiana 8,877 14,134 63% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP
Maine 727 1,679 43% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Maryland 8,616 18,426 47% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Massachusetts 4,647 6,524 71% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Michigan 20,171 33,370 60% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Minnesota 4,379 7,315 60% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Mississippi 10,844 15,294 71% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP Vaccine data was last updated on 5/12/21.
Missouri 12,216 23,037 53% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Montana 1,584 3,686 43% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP Vaccine data was last updated on 5/5/21.
Nebraska 2,000 5,265 38% Lincoln Journal Star The Marshall Project/AP This article from 5/16 reports that almost 2,000 incarcerated people have been vaccinated.
Nevada 5,754 11,007 52% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP
New Hampshire 1,409 2,107 67% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
New Jersey 8,551 12,800 67% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
New Mexico 2,920 5,817 50% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP
New York 9,044 33,376 27% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP doesn’t include the number of people who have received the one dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine; we’ve added these vaccinations, however, for accuracy and consistency with the UCLA data.
North Carolina 16,327 29,321 56% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
North Dakota 1,100 1,211 91% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Ohio 23,443 43,665 54% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Oklahoma 11,801 21,665 54% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP Vaccine data was last updated on 5/6/21. This number reflects the total number of completed vaccinations, not just the number of first doses.
Oregon 9,156 12,753 72% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP First dose vaccine data was last updated on 4/6/21.
Pennsylvania 26,630 40,088 66% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Rhode Island 1,670 2,118 79% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP Vaccine data was last updated on 4/16/21. The Marshall Project/AP doesn’t include the number of people who have received the one dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine; we’ve added these vaccinations, however, for accuracy and consistency with the UCLA data.
South Carolina 2,442 15,700 16% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP Vaccine data was last updated on 5/4/21.
South Dakota 2,164 3,145 69% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP
Tennessee 13,279 19,510 68% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Texas 58,893 120,873 49% Email exchange with TDCJ on 5/14. The Marshall Project/AP This number reflects the total number of vaccines distributed, not just the first dose.
Utah 377 5,485 7% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP Vaccine data was last updated on 5/5/21.
Vermont 737 1,281 58% The Marshall Project/AP The Marshall Project/AP Vaccine data was last updated on 4/20/21.
Virginia 17,495 23,811 73% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Washington 6,636 14,660 45% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
West Virginia 1,345 3,987 34% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Wisconsin 11,191 19,783 57% UCLA Law Covid-19 Behind Bars Data Project The Marshall Project/AP
Total (all jurisdictions with available data) 566,667 1,021,613 55%

 
 

Footnotes

  1. It’s important to note that states do not report vaccination data consistently, so we made every effort to avoid double-counting people and overestimating vaccination rates. Specifically, we typically defined people receiving “at least one dose” of a vaccine as those who were reported as “partially” vaccinated, or having “initiated” vaccination or “received first dose.” This is because many states record vaccinated people twice – once when a two-dose vaccine schedule is started and once when it’s completed; those receiving the one-shot Johnson & Johnson vaccine may be included in both categories as well (as a “first dose” and as “completed”). In states where the available data suggested a different definition, we have noted those differences in “notes/clarifications” in the appendix table.  ↩

  2. Source notes: In addition to the data from UCLA and The Marshall Project/AP, we sought vaccination data for people in prison from state Department of Corrections websites and news articles. Our vaccination rates are calculated based on prison populations reported in The Marshall Project/AP dataset. Data from UCLA, The Marshall Project/AP, and state Department of Corrections websites were accessed on May 17, 2021.  ↩

  3. Readers who want to conduct their own analysis can access data from previous weeks and months from both UCLA and The Marshall Project/AP.  ↩

  4. For Texas and the states with vaccinations counts from UCLA’s dataset, the data are as of May 14. For most states with vaccination counts from The Marshall Project/AP dataset, the data are as of May 11. In the appendix table, we noted the date of the data for states that have vaccination counts for only earlier than May 11.  ↩


Incarceration can trigger and worsen symptoms of mental illness — and those effects can last long after someone leaves the prison gates.

by Katie Rose Quandt and Alexi Jones, May 13, 2021

We often talk about the disturbingly high numbers of people with mental health disorders locked up in prisons and jails. But less attention is paid to the ways in which incarceration itself perpetuates this problem by creating and worsening symptoms of mental illness. Research shows that, while it varies from person to person, incarceration is linked to mood disorders including major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder.

The carceral environment can be inherently damaging to mental health by removing people from society and eliminating meaning and purpose from their lives. On top of that, the appalling conditions common in prisons and jails — such as overcrowding, solitary confinement, and routine exposure to violence — can have further negative effects. Researchers have even theorized that incarceration can lead to “Post-Incarceration Syndrome,” a syndrome similar to PTSD, meaning that even after serving their official sentences, many people continue to suffer the mental effects.

Incarceration itself is inherently harmful to people’s health

Many of the defining features of incarceration are linked to negative mental health outcomes, including disconnection from family, loss of autonomy, boredom and lack of purpose, and unpredictability of surroundings. Prof. Craig Haney, an expert on the psychological effects of imprisonment and prison isolation, explains, “At the very least, prison is painful, and incarcerated persons often suffer long-term consequences from having been subjected to pain, deprivation, and extremely atypical patterns and norms of living and interacting with others.” And as Dr. Seymour L. Halleck has observed, “The prison environment is almost diabolically conceived to force the offender to experience the pangs of what many psychiatrists would describe as mental illness.”

Family disconnection

By its very nature, incarceration separates people from their social networks and loved ones. In 2018, when researchers at the University of Georgia analyzed the relationship between prison conditions and mental health in 214 state prisons, they found that people incarcerated more than 50 miles from home were more likely to experience depression. This isn’t surprising: Psychologists have long known that people with social support and positive family relationships tend to have better psychological wellbeing.

Similarly, in a 2015 review of the research on the impact of prisons on mental health, separation from family and friends emerged as a major stressor for incarcerated people; it was also associated with psychological distress. In fact, many people described this separation as the most challenging aspect of their incarceration. Goomany and Dickinson, who authored the review, found that even when incarcerated people receive visits from family members, the prison environment makes it harder for them to connect. Correctional facilities are built and operate around the goal of security, and these “regulations and security measures inevitably impact on the relationships between prisoners, their families, and children.”

Separation from children can be especially distressing for incarcerated women. As one 1998 article in Behavioral Sciences & the Law noted, “Separation from children is one of the most stressful conditions of incarceration for women and is associated with feelings of guilt, anxiety, and fear of losing mother-child attachment.” A 2005 study found that “most mothers described an intense focus on feelings of distress, depression, or guilt.” One mother in that study explained her feelings: “All I’d do was cry. It is horrible being away from your kids, especially when they the only people who care for you.” Another said, “I was very hurt, depressed, crying constantly, and worried.” The study noted that 6 percent of the mothers interviewed described themselves as suicidal early in their incarceration; as their separation from their children continued, 22% “continued to focus intensely on their distress.”

Loss of autonomy & lack of purpose

Incarcerated people have virtually no control over their day-to-day lives, including when they wake up, what they eat, what their jobs are, and when they have access to recreation. This can lead to feelings of dependence and helplessness. The three main studies included in Goomany and Dickinson’s review all concluded that this loss of autonomy harms mental health. Once again, this makes sense; we know people feel better and have better mental health outcomes when they have control over their surroundings.

Similarly, incarceration is often characterized by boredom, monotony, and lack of stimulation. Many incarcerated people have limited access to education, job training, and other programming that can fill their time and become a meaningful part of their lives. In a 2003 study of incarcerated people in England, participants reported that lack of activity and mental stimulation leads to extreme stress, anger, and frustration. Some reported using unhealthy coping mechanisms to manage boredom, including substance abuse. The 2018 University of Georgia study mentioned earlier also found that people in prisons with limited access to work assignments experienced higher levels of depression. Once again, this fits with psychological research that shows meaninglessness and a lack of purpose can lead to symptoms of anxiety, depression, and hopelessness.

Unpredictability

These feelings of anxiety and depression can be exacerbated by the unpredictable nature of the carceral environment. As the Behavioral Sciences & the Law article mentioned above explains, there are numerous rules in prisons and jails that do not exist in the free world — many of which are ambiguous and only enforced erratically. The authors note that “institutional rules are enforced selectively, depending on factors such as inmate-staff relationships, staff member’s mood, the severity of the rule violation, and the convenience of rule enforcement.” This lack of clarity and predictability can contribute to feelings of uncertainty and stress.

Cruel conditions make a negative environment worse

Even a relatively “humane” prison or jail can contribute to negative mental health outcomes for the reasons outlined above. But the reality is that poor conditions in prisons and jails cause significant additional suffering and trauma. As the World Health Organization explains, “There are factors in many prisons that have negative effects on mental health, including: overcrowding, various forms of violence, enforced solitude or conversely, lack of privacy, lack of meaningful activity, isolation from social networks, insecurity about future prospects (work, relationships, etc.), and inadequate health services, especially mental health services.” This list of mentally damaging conditions accurately describes most U.S. jails and prisons.

Overcrowding & punitiveness

Many jails and prisons throughout the country are overcrowded, which makes the inherently negative carceral environment even worse. Overcrowding often means more time in cell, less privacy, less access to mental and physical healthcare, and fewer opportunities to participate in programming and work assignments. Correctional administrators may respond to overcrowding by forgoing screening and monitoring of vulnerable people. A 2005 study found that overcrowding is highly correlated with prison suicide.

The 2018 study from the University of Georgia similarly found that overcrowding and punitiveness are correlated with depression and hostility. The researchers noted that punitive environments “likely set inmates on edge, making them overly hostile or even depressed.”

Solitary confinement

Being put in solitary confinement, which is a common practice in many prisons and jails, is especially harmful to mental health. As we discussed in a briefing last year, the stress caused by spending time in solitary confinement can lead to permanent changes to people’s brains and personalities. Depriving humans — who are naturally social beings — of the ability to interact with others can cause ‘social pain,’ which affects the brain in the same way as physical pain. A 2000 study found that people were significantly more likely to develop psychiatric disorders while in solitary confinement than while housed in non-solitary units.

Trauma from experiencing and witnessing violence

Prisons and jails are extremely violent places. People often experience traumatic verbal or physical assaults and dehumanization at the hands of correctional officers. And the various stressors in a carceral environment also increase the chances of violence between incarcerated people. Researchers in a 2009 study found that experiencing violence during incarceration was significantly related to “aggressive and antisocial behavioral tendencies as well as emotional distress.”

In fact, even witnessing violence behind bars can be traumatizing, as we have discussed previously. Exposure to violence in prisons and jails can exacerbate existing mental health disorders or even lead to the development of post-traumatic stress symptoms like anxiety, depression, avoidance, hypersensitivity, hypervigilance, suicidality, flashbacks, and difficulty with emotional regulation.

Lasting effects

Some researchers suggest that the trauma people experience behind bars can lead to Post-Incarceration Syndrome, a syndrome that shares characteristics with PTSD. A 2013 study of 25 released lifers found that participants experienced a specific cluster of mental health symptoms, including institutionalized personality traits (like distrusting others, difficulty maintaining relationships, and problems making decisions), social-sensory disorientation (issues with spatial reasoning and difficulty with social interactions), and social and temporal alienation (the feeling of not belonging in social settings).

Similarly, a 2019 literature review found that incarcerated people experience high rates of Potentially Traumatic Events, often shortened to PTEs. The review further revealed that experiencing PTEs behind bars was strongly correlated with rates of PTSD upon release.

We often think of incarceration as something people live through and from which they can ultimately be released. But the reality is that time spent in prisons and jails can create a host of collateral consequences that haunt individuals even after release. As the research shows, incarceration can trigger and worsen symptoms of mental illness — and those effects can last long after someone leaves the prison gates.


Please join us to welcome Emile DeWeaver, the Prison Policy Initiative Senior Strategist in Advocacy.

by Jenny Landon, May 7, 2021

Emile DeWeaver

We’re excited to welcome Emile DeWeaver, who will serve as the first ever Prison Policy Initiative Senior Strategist in Advocacy. Emile is a community organizer, journalist, and literary writer who co-founded Prison Renaissance while serving a life sentence in prison. While incarcerated in California, Emile successfully organized for the passage of Senate Bills 260, 261, and 394 which together create a second chance for people who were given extreme sentences for crimes committed before they turned 26. His writing has been featured by the Brennan Center, Mercury News, SF Chronicle, SF Bay View, Colorlines, and TruthOut. Prior to his work with the Prison Policy Initiative, Emile worked as a consultant for social justice organizations like the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights and Prison Law Office.

Welcome, Emile!


The most important statistics about the incarceration of mothers and pregnant women.

by Wanda Bertram and Wendy Sawyer, May 5, 2021

This Mother’s Day — as the COVID-19 pandemic continues to put people behind bars at serious risk — nearly 150,000 incarcerated mothers will spend the day apart from their children.1 Over half (58%) of all women in U.S. prisons are mothers, as are 80% of women in jails, including many who are incarcerated awaiting trial simply because they can’t afford bail.

Most of these women are incarcerated for non-violent offenses. Most are also the primary caretakers of their children, meaning that punishing them with incarceration tears their children away from a vital source of support. And these numbers don’t cover the many women who will become mothers while locked up this year: An estimated 58,000 people every year are pregnant when they enter local jails or prisons.2

Most incarcerated mothers are locked up in local jails

Women incarcerated in the U.S. are disproportionately in jails rather than prisons. As we’ve written before, even a short jail stay can be devastating, especially when it separates a mother from children who depend on her.

Graph showing number of women jailed each year and percentage who are mothers.Estimates have been rounded for this graphic. Sources: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime Data Explorer (2019 table “Female Arrests by Age”) and Vera Institute of Justice, Overlooked: Women in Jails in an Era of Reform.

80% of the women who will go to jail this year are mothers — including 55,000 women who are pregnant when they are admitted. Beyond having to leave their children in someone else’s care, these women will be impacted by the brutal side effects of going to jail: Aggravation of mental health problems, a greater risk of suicide, and a much higher likelihood of ending up homeless or deprived of essential financial benefits.

How incarceration — and life after incarceration — hurts mothers and their children

Women who are pregnant when they are locked up have to contend with a healthcare system that frequently neglects and abuses patients. In a 50-state survey of state prison systems’ healthcare policies, we found that many states fail to meet even basic standards of care for expectant mothers, like providing screening and treatment for high-risk pregnancies. In local jails, where tens of thousands of pregnant women will spend time this year, healthcare is often even worse (across the board) than in state or federal prisons.

More challenges await incarcerated mothers and pregnant women when they are released from jail or prison. Formerly incarcerated women experience extremely high rates of food insecurity, according to a 2019 study. And as we previously reported, the 1.9 million women released from prisons and jails every year have high rates of poverty, unemployment, and homelessness, confirming what many advocates already knew: that there is a shortage of agencies and organizations able and willing to help formerly incarcerated women restart their lives.

It’s time we recognized that when we put women in jail, we inflict potentially irreparable damage to their families. Most women who are incarcerated would be better served though alternatives in their communities.

So would their kids. Keeping parents out of jail and prison is critical to protect children from the known harms of parental incarceration, including:

Incarceration punishes more than just individuals; entire families suffer the effects long after a sentence ends. Mother’s Day reminds us again that people behind bars are not nameless “offenders,” but beloved family members and friends whose presence — and absence — matters.

 
 

Footnotes

  1. Based on the most recent (2016) Survey of Prison Inmates, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) estimates 57,700 women in state and federal prisons are parents of minor children. We calculated approximately 88,400 pregnant women in local jails based on the Vera Institute of Justice report’s estimate that 80% of women in jail are mothers, and the BJS reports 110,500 women in local jails at mid-year 2019 (80% of 110,500 is 88,400). While jail populations dropped quite dramatically in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, we opted to use the more typical 2019 jail population for our estimate because other data sources show that jail populations have largely rebounded since mid-year 2020.  ↩

  2. These estimates are based on the following percentages, reported in the linked sources: 4% of women admitted to state and federal prisons annually, and 3% of women admitted to local jails, are pregnant at the time of admission. The estimated 55,000 women admitted to jails while pregnant each year is based on the number of women over age 18 arrested in 2017 (over 1.7 million women), as reported in the original source. The estimated number of pregnant women admitted to state and federal prisons in a year is based on the total number of female admissions in 2019 (73,586) as reported by the Bureau of Justice Statistics CSAT — Prisoners tool. The one-day prevalence of pregnancy at year-end 2016 (as opposed to the share of annual admissions) was 0.6% in prisons and 3.5% in local jails.  ↩









Stay Informed


Get the latest updates:



Tweet this page Donate