Information on the number of juveniles taken into custody reveals much about how the Nation responds to the issue of juvenile offending. In many respects, juvenile detention and corrections facilities are a vital part of the juvenile justice system. It is in these residential facilities that juvenile justice agencies attempt to change patterns of behavior in youth so they can become responsible members of society. At the same time, these facilities must maintain a secure environment to protect both the residents and the community at large.

OJJDP has collected information for nearly 30 years on the number of juveniles held in detention and other facilities. Until 1997, these data were gathered through the biennial Census of Public and Private Juvenile Detention, Correctional, and Shelter Facilities, better known as the Children in Custody (CIC) Census. After consulting a variety of experts and determining that CIC was not meeting the needs of the field, OJJDP, with the help of the U.S. Bureau of the Census and a technical advisory board, developed a new survey. This chapter summarizes information from the new biennial Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), first conducted in 1997 and most recently conducted in October 1999. It also includes information about other corrections-related OJJDP activities. CJRP is described in more detail in the Fact Sheet Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement Databook, which is available from the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse.

Juvenile Arrests in 1999

Data from the FBI�s Uniform Crime Reporting Program show that in 1999 (the most recent year for which complete data are available), law enforcement agencies made an estimated 2.5 million arrests of persons younger than 18, a 9-percent drop from 1995. Juvenile arrests for violent crimes in 1999 were at their lowest level since 1988. In 1999, there were an estimated 103,900 arrests of persons younger than 18 for Violent Crime Index offenses (including murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault). Between 1995 and 1999, juvenile arrests for Violent Crime Index offenses dropped 23 percent, while adult arrests for these offenses dropped 12 percent. Over this period, juvenile arrests declined 56 percent for murder, 27 percent for weapons law violations, and 39 percent for robbery. An estimated one-third of 1 percent of juveniles ages 10–17 were arrested for a violent crime in 1999.

While juvenile violent crime arrests were falling, juvenile arrests for certain other types of offenses also declined. Between 1995 and 1999, juvenile arrests dropped 24 percent for all property offenses, 35 percent for motor vehicle theft, and 23 percent for burglary. In some categories, however, juvenile arrests increased: driving under the influence (36 percent), liquor law violations (31 percent), and curfew violations (9 percent). Therefore, while serious juvenile crime dropped substantially in the mid-1990s, more youth had contact with the juvenile justice system for alcohol and other public order crimes. These findings are described in greater detail in the Juvenile Justice Bulletin Juvenile Arrests 1999, which is available from the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse.

In considering data on arrests and custody, it is important to distinguish between persons younger than 18 and persons legally considered juveniles. The former refers solely to the age of a person at a given time; arrest data from law enforcement agencies provide information in this manner. Depending on the law in the State in which an offense was committed, a youth may or may not be legally considered a juvenile subject to the original jurisdiction of the juvenile court. Original juvenile court jurisdiction for delinquent offenses ends at age 17 in 10 States and at age 16 in 3 States. Further, many States have enacted mandatory waiver or transfer legislation that removes particular types of offenses from the jurisdiction of the juvenile court and places them in the criminal court. Thus, some young offenders may be of juvenile age but face criminal court trial and �adult� sanctions.

Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement

As noted above, OJJDP conducted the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP) in 1997 and 1999. The census covers all facilities, secure or nonsecure, that hold juvenile offenders. For the purposes of CJRP, a juvenile offender is defined as a person under 21 years of age who is held in a residential setting because of an offense and as a result of some contact with the justice system. The census, then, encompasses both status offenders and delinquent offenders, whether detained or committed for an offense. In 1997, more than 94 percent of surveyed facilities responded. In 1999, all surveyed facilities provided at least some information.

The 1997 census reported 105,790 juvenile offenders in residential placement. In 1999, that number was 108,964, a 3-percent increase from 1997. In 1997, juvenile offenders were held in 3,431 residential facilities—1,121 public and 2,310 private facilities. In 1999, juveniles were held in 3,711 residential facilities—1,182 public and 2,529 private facilities. Detention centers were the most common type of facility: in 1999, 519 public and 168 private detention centers responded to the census. Public facilities held 71 percent of juvenile offenders in residential placement in 1999; private facilities held the remaining 29 percent.

The table on this page presents an offense profile for juveniles in residential placement in 1999. Of all juveniles in custody, 25 percent were held for serious personal offenses (e.g., aggravated assault, robbery, and sexual assault), and 10 percent were held for less serious person offenses (e.g., simple assault). Serious property offenses (auto theft, arson, and burglary) accounted for 18 percent of all juveniles in custody, and other property offenses (e.g., property damage) accounted for 11 percent. Of all juveniles in custody in 1999, 13 percent were held for probation or parole violations. (In interpreting these statistics, it is important to note that although juveniles in custody often have been adjudicated for multiple offenses, CJRP records only the most serious offense for which each juvenile is currently held.)

Offense Profile of Juveniles in Residential Placement, 1999   Offense Number Percent     Personal crimes   Assault, aggravated   Assault, simple   Kidnaping   Murder, manslaughter   Robbery   Violent sexual assault   Other person offenses Property crimes   Arson   Auto theft   Burglary   Property damage   Theft   Other property Drug crimes   Drug possession   Drug trafficking   Other drug offenses Public order offenses   Driving under the influence   Nonviolent sex offense   Obstruction of justice   Weapons-related offense   Other public order offenses Probation or parole violations Other delinquency offenses Status offenses   Curfew violation   Incorrigibility   Running away   Truancy   Underage alcohol possession or consumption   Other status offenses Total 38,015 9,984 7,452 322 1,514 8,215 7,513 3,015 31,824 1,126 6,227 12,222 1,896 6,947 3,406 9,886 6,021 3,108 757 10,390 328 1,765 1,572 4,023 2,702 14,050 101 4,699 105 1,847 1,083 914 378 372 108,965 34.9 9.2 6.8 0.3 1.4 7.5 6.9 2.8 29.2 1.0 5.7 11.2 1.7 6.4 3.1 9.1 5.5 2.9 0.7 9.5 0.3 1.6 1.4 3.7 2.5 12.9 0.1 4.3 0.1 1.7 1.0 0.8 0.3 0.3 99.9     Note: The percentages do not total 100 percent because of rounding.

Males accounted for the vast majority of juveniles in residential placement in 1999 (87 percent), as in 1997 (86 percent). Of all juveniles in residential placement in 1999, minorities accounted for 62 percent and whites for 38 percent; blacks were by far the largest minority group, accounting for 39 percent of all juveniles in residential placement. The racial/ethnic composition of juveniles in custody was similar in 1997: 62 percent minority (including 40 percent black) and 38 percent white.

In 1999, 24 percent of all juveniles in residential placement were age 16, 22 percent were 17, only 13 percent were 18 or older, and only 4 percent were 12 or younger. The tapering off in custodial population share after age 16 is attributable in part to State variations in the upper age limit for juvenile court jurisdiction. Although 17 is the upper age limit in most States, 15 is the upper limit in Connecticut, New York, and North Carolina. Another factor is the introduction of State provisions for transferring youth from juvenile court jurisdiction to criminal court jurisdiction. Because these provisions, which were enacted in all States over the last decade, mainly affect older youth, the number of 17-year-olds in the juvenile justice system has decreased.

CJRP also collects data on the legal status of juveniles in custody. In 1999, most juveniles (70 percent) were held in the facilities in which they were placed following adjudication. Of the remaining 30 percent, 12 percent were detained while awaiting adjudication and the remaining 18 percent were held for other reasons (diverted from court and awaiting disposition, adjudicated and awaiting placement, or undergoing proceedings in criminal court).

Over the past year, OJJDP has made the information gathered through CJRP more available to interested parties. The Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP) Databook (www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org/ojstatbb/cjrp) is currently available on the World Wide Web for use by those who want to learn more about youth in custody.

Juvenile Residential Facility Census

With the end of the CIC Census, there was no longer a mechanism for collecting detailed data on juvenile residential facility operations. CJRP, described above, was designed solely to collect indepth information on the juvenile population in custody as of the census date; the only facility-level information collected by CJRP is the total population and some description of the facility type. To fill the resulting gap in information, OJJDP developed the new Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC).

JRFC will routinely collect information on how facilities operate. The census includes detailed questions on facility security, crowding, deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. It also asks about specific services for mental and physical health care, substance abuse, and education. JRFC was first conducted on October 25, 2000, and was to be completed by approximately 3,500 facilities. Results will be available in late 2001.

OJJDP will administer JRFC every 2 years. CJRP and JRFC, which will be administered in alternating years, will complement each other: CJRP will provide detailed information on the juveniles in the facilities and JRFC will provide detailed information on the facilities themselves. JRFC is described in more detail in the Fact Sheet Innovative Information on Juvenile Residential Facilities, which is available from the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse.

Deaths in Custody

The death of a juvenile in custody is relatively rare. In 1994 (the last year for which CIC data on deaths in custody are available), 45 juveniles died while in the legal custody of a juvenile facility. In 1992, 40 juveniles died while in custody. The majority of deaths in both years resulted from suicide.

OJJDP realizes these data on deaths in custody are outdated and has inserted several questions about deaths of juveniles in custody into the new JRFC, described above. The data on deaths in custody collected in 2000 by JRFC will be comparable to data collected previously in the CIC Census, allowing OJJDP to provide trend data in future annual reports.

OJJDP also is supporting a field-initiated research project that is examining juvenile suicide in confinement by surveying residential facilities nationwide. Funded in FY 1999, the research is being conducted by the National Center on Institutions and Alternatives of Alexandria, VA.

Upcoming Surveys

OJJDP has designed a statistical system that will enable local, State, and Federal policymakers and practitioners to monitor juvenile detention and corrections populations and practices. In addition to the important information being collected through CJRP and JRFC, OJJDP also recognizes the value of interviewing youth in juvenile justice system facilities. Such interviews can provide a wealth of information on past offending behavior, pathways to delinquency, family and social environments, and experiences in custody. Using Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grants (JAIBG) funds, OJJDP awarded a cooperative agreement in 1998 to Westat, Inc., of Rockville, MD, to develop a new Survey of Youth in Residential Placement (SYRP).

The new SYRP will complement other OJJDP research concerning delinquent careers and offending behavior and also will monitor the range of residential placements used for juvenile offenders. SYRP supports the goals of the JAIBG program, which include holding juveniles accountable for their delinquent acts. SYRP will provide data for monitoring such placements by tracking the number and types of offenses committed by juveniles in placement and the types of sanctions they received for previous offenses. The first SYRP will be conducted in 2002.

Beyond routine data collection, OJJDP has a strong interest in and responsibility to research specific policy-related aspects of juvenile detention and corrections. For example, in FY 1998, OJJDP funded the Cost-Benefit Analysis of Juvenile Justice Programs. This initiative is examining in detail the costs associated with juvenile corrections and probation and will compare the costs with the benefits (both tangible and intangible) of each sanction. Data from this study will enable OJJDP to compare the cost-benefit structure of custody with that of probation. Although the study will not provide national information, it will provide significant insight into how such analyses can be accomplished in other jurisdictions. The University of Texas at Dallas and the Dallas County Juvenile Department are conducting the analysis.

To help determine the number of juveniles under some form of community supervision, OJJDP is funding the Survey of Juvenile Probation, which will estimate the number of juveniles on probation nationally at a specific time, the nature of their offenses, and the conditions of their probation. In a certain sense, the numbers and types of juveniles in residential placement depend on the availability of alternative sanctions. Although some juveniles clearly need residential placement to ensure their own safety and/or the safety of the community, others can be handled more appropriately within the community. This survey will routinely gather sufficient information about juveniles on probation to permit comparisons between these youth and juveniles in custody. OJJDP expects to field test the survey in 2001.