As of 2022, Black people were more likely than those of other races to be imprisoned in the United States. In that year, the rate of imprisonment for Black men stood at 1,826 per 100,000 of the population. For Black women, this rate stood at 64 per 100,000 of the population.

In 2022, about 1,826 Black men per 100,000 residents were imprisoned in the United States. This rate was much lower for Black women, at 64 per 100,000 residents. The overall imprisonment rate in 2022 stood at 355 per 100,000 Americans.

As of February 2025, El Salvador had the highest prisoner rate worldwide, with over 1,600 prisoners per 100,000 of the national population. Cuba, Rwanda, Turkmenistan, and the United States, rounded out the top five countries with the highest rate of incarceration. Homicides in El Salvador Interestingly, El Salvador, which long had the highest global homicide rates, has dropped out of the top 20 after a high number of gang members have been incarcerated. A high number of the countries with the highest homicide rate are located in Latin America. Prisoners in the United StatesThe United States is home to the largest number of prisoners worldwide. More than 1.8 million people were incarcerated in the U.S. at the beginning of 2025. In China, the estimated prison population totaled 1.69 million people that year. Other nations had far fewer prisoners. The largest share of the U.S. prisoners in federal correctional facilities were of African-American origin. As of 2020, there were 345,500 black, non-Hispanic prisoners, compared to 327,300 white, non-Hispanic inmates. The U.S. states with the largest number of prisoners in 2022 were Texas, California, and Florida. Over 160,000 prisoners in state facilities were sentenced for rape or sexual assault, which was the most common cause of imprisonment. The second most common was murder, followed by aggravated or simple assault.

This statistic shows the share of the United States prison population that was Black in 2014, by state and the length of time inmates have served. In 2014, 58.7 percent of the prison population in Alabama was Black. For those inmates who had served 10 years or more, that figure rose to 67 percent.

Created for the 2023-2025 State of Black Los Angeles County (SBLA) interactive report. To learn more about this effort, please visit the report home page at https://ceo.lacounty.gov/ardi/sbla/. For more information about the purpose of this data, please contact CEO-ARDI. For more information about the configuration of this data, please contact ISD-Enterprise GIS. table name indicator name Universe source race notes timeframe source url

traffic_stops Traffic stops Traffic violation stops; ORI CA019xxxx (LA County Law Enforcement Agencies) CA DOJ Race is perceived by officer; any one race is alone or in combination with another race 2019 Annual Download from LAC Open Data

perceived_neighborhood_safe_2018 Perceived Their Neighborhood to Be Safe from Crime Estimate (%) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey

2018 https://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

jail_pop_per100k_2016jail_pop_per100k_2019jail_pop_per100k_2021 Jail population rate per 100k population Average daily number of people held in jail in a given year; population denominator is ages 15 - 64 Vera Institute

2016 2019 2021 https://github.com/vera-institute/incarceration-trends/blob/master/README.mdhttps://trends.vera.org/state/CA/county/los_angeles_county

prison_pop_per100k_2016 Prison population rate per 100k population Point in time count of people in prison on December 31 of a given year; population denominator is ages 15 - 64 Vera Institute

2016 https://github.com/vera-institute/incarceration-trends/blob/master/README.md

arrests_adult_felony Total Felony Arrests - Adult Los Angeles County Arrests CA DOJ The subjectivity of the classification and labeling process must be considered in the analysis of race/ethnic group data. 2017-2021 https://openjustice.doj.ca.gov/data

arrests_adult_misdemeanor Total Misdemeanor Arrests - Adult Los Angeles County Arrests CA DOJ The subjectivity of the classification and labeling process must be considered in the analysis of race/ethnic group data. 2017-2021 https://openjustice.doj.ca.gov/data

domestic_violencedv_maledv_female Percent of Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) Who Reported Ever Experiencing Physical and/or Sexual Violence by an Intimate Partner.
Adults/td> Los Angeles County Health Survey Overall and broken down by gender 2018 https://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/HA_DATA_TRENDS.htm

Data was collected for each of the 50 states from the year 2019. For each state, the following information is given: total population, total White population, total Black population, total Hispanic population, median household income, total prison population, total parole population, total amount of law enforcement employees, the violent crime rate, and the GDP.

The December 2021 Mandate Letter tasked the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada with the development of Canada’s Black Justice Strategy (the Strategy) to address the overrepresentation of Black people in the criminal justice system, including as victims of crime. An external Steering Group composed of nine experts and leaders from Black communities across Canada was established in February 2023 to provide advice to the Minister of Justice on the development of the Strategy. From March 2023 to February 2024, Steering Group discussions centered around five key issues, or pillars, that inform Black people’s experiences with the criminal justice system: Pillar 1 - Social Determinants of Justice (Employment and Income; Housing; Education; Health and Mental Health; Child Welfare; and Immigration and Settlement); Pillar 2 - Policing; Pillar 3 - Courts and Legislation ; Pillar 4 - Corrections; and Pillar 5 - Parole, Re-entry and Reintegration. In Fall 2023, 12 Black-led community-based organizations (CBOs) used the Framework developed by the Steering Group to guide community consultations, to lead engagements and consultations with Black communities in nine provinces and territories. The CBOs provided reports to the Steering Group detailing the outcomes of the consultations and engagement. Justice Canada also provided the Steering Group with the outcome of the online survey, which was developed to gather insight from community members who were unable to participate in CBO-led consultations and engagement. The report of the external Steering Group (the Report) builds on the Framework and is informed by the Steering Group discussions as well as the outcomes of community engagements and consultations. The Report identifies five principles to guide practical actions and policies in achieving justice for Black communities in Canada: Sankofa, Africentrism, the Principle of Restraint, Evidence-based Decision Making, and Reparative Justice. Five priority areas that inform the recommendations are as follows: Decarceration, Legislative Change, Targeted Resourcing, Structural Change, and Collaboration with Provinces, Territories and Municipalities. In relation to decarceration, the Report recommends reducing the incarceration rate of Black and Indigenous people by 50% of the current rate by 2034. The Report identifies eight overarching structural and accountability recommendations, described as actions that do not fit within only one specific pillar but that are intended to drive systemic change. In addition to the overarching recommendations, there are 106 recommendations under the five pillars, organized as short, medium, or long-term.

Association between examined potential predictors and incarceration among Black/ African American and Hispanic/Latino mSTUDY participants.

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, local jail incarceration rates fell across the board in the United States. In June 2019, the local jail incarceration rate for Black inmates was 600 per 100,000 residents. This decreased the following year, where the jail incarceration rate was at 465 per 100,000 residents.

In 1980, the National Institute of Justice awarded a grant to the Cornell University College of Human Ecology for the establishment of the Center for the Study of Race, Crime, and Social Policy in Oakland, California. This center mounted a long-term research project that sought to explain the wide variation in crime statistics by race and ethnicity. Using information from eight ethnic communities in Oakland, California, representing working- and middle-class Black, White, Chinese, and Hispanic groups, as well as additional data from Oakland's justice systems and local organizations, the center conducted empirical research to describe the criminalization process and to explore the relationship between race and crime. The differences in observed patterns and levels of crime were analyzed in terms of: (1) the abilities of local ethnic communities to contribute to, resist, neutralize, or otherwise affect the criminalization of its members, (2) the impacts of criminal justice policies on ethnic communities and their members, and (3) the cumulative impacts of criminal justice agency decisions on the processing of individuals in the system. Administrative records data were gathered from two sources, the Alameda County Criminal Oriented Records Production System (CORPUS) (Part 1) and the Oakland District Attorney Legal Information System (DALITE) (Part 2). In addition to collecting administrative data, the researchers also surveyed residents (Part 3), police officers (Part 4), and public defenders and district attorneys (Part 5). The eight study areas included a middle- and low-income pair of census tracts for each of the four racial/ethnic groups: white, Black, Hispanic, and Asian. Part 1, Criminal Oriented Records Production System (CORPUS) Data, contains information on offenders' most serious felony and misdemeanor arrests, dispositions, offense codes, bail arrangements, fines, jail terms, and pleas for both current and prior arrests in Alameda County. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, and marital status. Variables in Part 2, District Attorney Legal Information System (DALITE) Data, include current and prior charges, days from offense to charge, disposition, and arrest, plea agreement conditions, final results from both municipal court and superior court, sentence outcomes, date and outcome of arraignment, disposition, and sentence, number and type of enhancements, numbers of convictions, mistrials, acquittals, insanity pleas, and dismissals, and factors that determined the prison term. For Part 3, Oakland Community Crime Survey Data, researchers interviewed 1,930 Oakland residents from eight communities. Information was gathered from community residents on the quality of schools, shopping, and transportation in their neighborhoods, the neighborhood's racial composition, neighborhood problems, such as noise, abandoned buildings, and drugs, level of crime in the neighborhood, chances of being victimized, how respondents would describe certain types of criminals in terms of age, race, education, and work history, community involvement, crime prevention measures, the performance of the police, judges, and attorneys, victimization experiences, and fear of certain types of crimes. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, and family status. For Part 4, Oakland Police Department Survey Data, Oakland County police officers were asked about why they joined the police force, how they perceived their role, aspects of a good and a bad police officer, why they believed crime was down, and how they would describe certain beats in terms of drug availability, crime rates, socioeconomic status, number of juveniles, potential for violence, residential versus commercial, and degree of danger. Officers were also asked about problems particular neighborhoods were experiencing, strategies for reducing crime, difficulties in doing police work well, and work conditions. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, marital status, level of education, and years on the force. In Part 5, Public Defender/District Attorney Survey Data, public defenders and district attorneys were queried regarding which offenses were increasing most rapidly in Oakland, and they were asked to rank certain offenses in terms of seriousness. Respondents were also asked about the public's influence on criminal justice agencies and on the performance of certain criminal justice agencies. Respondents were presented with a list of crimes and asked how typical these offenses were and what factors influenced their decisions about such cases (e.g., intent, motive, evidence, behavior, prior history, injury or loss, substance abuse, emotional trauma). Other variables measured how often and under what circumstances the public defender and client and the public defender and the district attorney agreed on the case, defendant characteristics in terms of who should not be put on the stand, the effects of Proposition 8, public defender and district attorney plea guidelines, attorney discretion, and advantageous and disadvantageous characteristics of a defendant. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, marital status, religion, years of experience, and area of responsibility.

How does a criminal record shape interactions with the State and society? We present evidence from a nationwide field experiment in the United States, showing that prospective applicants with criminal records are about five percentage points less likely to receive information from college admission offices. However, we demonstrate that bias does not extend to race. There is no difference in response rates to Black and White applicants. We further show that bias is all but absent in public bureaucracies, as discrimination against formerly incarcerated applicants is driven by private schools. Examining why bias is stronger for private colleges, we demonstrate that the private-public difference persists even after accounting for college selectivity, socio-economic composition and school finances. Moving beyond the measurement of bias, we evaluate an intervention aimed at reducing discrimination: whether an email from an advocate mitigates bias associated with a criminal record. However, we find no evidence that advocate endorsements decrease bureaucratic bias.

At the beginning of 2025, the United States had the highest number of incarcerated individuals worldwide, with around 1.8 million people in prison. China followed with around 100,000 fewer prisoners. Brazil followed in third. The incarceration problem in the U.S. The United States has an incredibly high number of incarcerated individuals. Therefore, the incarceration problem has become a widely contested issue, because it impacts disadvantaged people and minorities the most. Additionally, the prison system has become capitalized by outside corporations that fund prisons, but there is still a high cost to taxpayers. Furthermore, there has been an increase in the amount of private prisons that have been created. For-profit prison companies have come under scrutiny because of their lack of satisfactory staff and widespread lobbying. Violent offenses are the most common type of offense among prisoners in the U.S. Incarceration rates worldwide El Salvador had the highest rate of incarceration worldwide, at 1,659 prisoners per 100,000 residents as of February 2025. Cuba followed in second with 794 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants. The incarceration rate is a better measure to use when comparing countries than the total prison populations, which will naturally have the most populous countries topping the list.

This dataset tracks annual black student percentage from 2013 to 2023 for Augusta Regional Youth Detention Center vs. Georgia and Department Of Juvenile Justice School District

This dataset lists inmates incarcerated at Cockatoo Island prison in Sydney (Australia) between 1847-1869. It offers insights into how the colonial criminal justice system operated after New South Wales’ transition from a penal colony to a ‘free’ colony when transportation ceased in 1840. It is a useful tool for genealogists tracing the lives of their criminal ancestors and for historians of crime and punishment researching nineteenth-century Australia. The dataset includes prisoners' names and aliases, their ship of arrival, place of origin, details of their colonial conviction(s) (trial place, court, offence, sentence), date(s) admitted to Cockatoo Island, and when and how they were discharged from Cockatoo Island. In some cases, it also includes prisoners' place of origin, occupation, biometric information (height, eye/hair colour, complexion, scars, tattoos), 'condition upon arrival' (convict or free), and (for convicts) details of their original conviction in Britain or Ireland. As a UNESCO World Heritage 'Convict Site' Cockatoo Island is best known as a site of secondary punishment for recidivist convicts, especially those transferred from Norfolk Island. This dataset demonstrates the diversity of the prison population: including nominally free convicts (ticket-of-leave holders), migrants from Britain, China and other Australian colonies drawn in by the gold rush, exiles from Port Phillip, Aboriginal Australians convicted during frontier warfare, colonial-born white Australians (including bushrangers), and black, Indian and American sailors visiting Sydney.

Significant attention has been paid to the more than 160,000 British and Irish convicts who were transported Australia as colonists between 1787 and 1868. Much less has been said about those punished within the criminal justice system that arose in the wake of New South Wales' transition from 'penal' to 'free' colony (Finnane, 1997: x-xi). Cockatoo Island prison opened in 1839, a year before convict transportation to New South Wales ceased, and was intended to punish the most recidivist and violent of the transported convicts. This archetype has prevailed in historical discourses, and they have been described as 'criminal lunatics... [and] criminals incapable of reform' (Parker, 1977: 61); 'the most desperate and abandoned characters' (O'Carrigan, 1994: 64); and people of 'doubtful character' (NSW Government Architect's Office, 2009: 29). Yet, this was far from the truth. My analysis of 1666 prisoners arriving between 1839-52 show they were overwhelming non-violent offenders, tried for minor property crimes at lower courts. They were also far more diverse population than commonly recognised, including Indigenous Australian, Chinese and black convicts alongside majority British and Irish men (Harman, 2012). This project will make publicly available extremely detailed records relating to Cockatoo Island's prisoners to show people firsthand exactly who made up the inmate population. The digital version of the original registers will include information on convicts' criminal record, but also their job, whether they were married or had children, and even what they looked like. It will also be a name-searchable database so family historians can search for their ancestors, who may have been incarcerated on the island. As it stands, they will be able find information online about ancestors who were transported as long as they remained in the 'convict system', but they may seem to disappear as soon as they are awarded their ticket-of-leave and become 'free'. However, many former convicts, and free immigrants, to New South Wales were convicted locally, and these records can give us information about their lives within the colony. The type of data included in these registers will also allow researchers to investigate questions including: (1) were convicts more likely to offend again than free immigrants? (2) Were the children of convicts more likely to offend than others? (3) Did the influx of mostly Chinese migrants during the gold rush actually lead to a crime-wave, as reported in the press? (4) Were laws introduced between 1830 and 1853, actually effective at prosecuting bushrangers (highwaymen)? (5) Was the criminal-judicial system in Australia more rehabilitative, despite developing out of a harsher convict transportation system? Alongside the dataset, the website will include 'life-biographies' of individual convicts to show you how this dataset can be used to piece together a life-story. It also to warns against understanding a real-life person only through the records of their conviction. There many of fascinating stories to tell, including those 'John Perry' ('Black Perry') the prizewinning boxer; the love story of the 'Two Fredericks'; and Tan, the Chinese gold-digger who resisted his incarceration. In addition, there will be teaching resources for secondary school children and undergraduate university students who want to engage directly...

The materials here will replicate all of the tables and figures in "The Impact of Youth Medicaid Eligibility on Adult Incarceration" (Arenberg, Neller, and Stripling, 2022).This paper identifies an important spillover associated with public health insurance: reduced incarceration. In 1990, Congress passed legislation that increased Medicaid eligibility for individuals born after September 30, 1983. We show that Black children born just after the cutoff are 5 percent less likely to be incarcerated by age 28, driven primarily by a decrease in incarcerations connected to financially motivated offenses. Children of other races, who experienced almost no gain in Medicaid coverage as a result of the policy, demonstrate no such decline. We find that reduced incarceration in adulthood substantially offsets the initial costs of expanding eligibility.

The Justice Equity Need Index (JENI), by Advancement Project California, offers a means to map out the disparate burden that criminalization and a detention-first justice model place on specific communities. The index includes the following indicators:System Involvement: The system-involved population by ZIP Code results in direct needs for justice equity, as measured by adult and youth probation. Indicators: Adult Probation (per 1,000 people); Youth Probation (per 1,000 people) Inequity Drivers: Root inequities across communities that contribute to racial and economic disparities as seen in incarceration and policing. Indicators: Black, Latinx, AIAN, and NHPI Percentages of Population (average percentile); Unemployment Rate (%); Population aged 25+ without a High School Diploma (%); Population below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (%); Violent Crime Rate (per 1,000 people) Criminalization Risk: Conditions where the criminal justice system has historically taken a detention-first, prevention-last approach. Indicators: Mental Health Hospitalizations (per 1,000 people); Substance Use-Related Hospitalizations (per 1,000 people); Homelessness Rate (per 1,000 people) Learn more at https://www.catalystcalifornia.org/campaign-tools/maps-and-data/justice-equity-need-index.Supervisorial Districts, SPAs, and CSAs determined by ZIP Code centroid.

Despite making up approximately 10-12 pecent of the total population of the United States in the period between 1933 and 1970, Black people comprised roughly 20-30 percent of arrests made in these years. Today, Black people still have the highest incarceration rates relative to their population, however these rates have been declining in the past two decades.

The global correctional system market is projected to reach a value of $263.2 million by 2033, expanding at a CAGR of 3.2% from 2025 to 2033. The increasing demand for effective and efficient security solutions in correctional facilities is driving the market growth. Additionally, the rising prevalence of crime and the need for improved rehabilitation programs are contributing to the demand for correctional systems. Key market players include Montgomery Technology, Tyler Technologies, Spillman Technologies, ALERT PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS, Encartele, Sun Ridge Systems, Eagle Advantage Solutions, Bio-Metrica, Black Creek, Huber & Associates, and Beacon Software Solutions. The North American region is expected to dominate the global correctional system market throughout the forecast period, followed by Europe and Asia Pacific. The high prevalence of crime and the increasing focus on rehabilitation programs in these regions are driving the market growth. Furthermore, government initiatives to improve the safety and security of correctional facilities are expected to support the adoption of advanced correctional systems in the coming years. However, the market growth may be restrained by budgetary constraints and concerns over the increasing cost of incarceration.