In 2023/24, the average cost of a prison place in England and Wales was ****** British pounds a year, compared with ****** British pounds in the previous reporting year.

This statistic shows the average annual inmate expenditures for federal correctional services in Canada from the fiscal year of 2010 to the fiscal year of 2021. In the fiscal year of 2021, the annual expenditures on federal inmates averaged 150,505 Canadian dollars.

Adult correctional services, operating expenditures for provincial, territorial and federal programs, provinces, territories and federal jurisdiction, five years of data.

The United Kingdom spent approximately 7.41 billion British pounds on its prison system in 2024/25, an increase when compared to the previous year. Between 2011/12 and 2019/20, the UK consistently spent less than it did in 2010/11, mainly due to the austerity policies pursued by the coalition Government of the time. Throughout this time period, expenditure on prisons was lowest in 2014/15 at 3.83 billion pounds and highest in the most recent financial year. Prisoners and prison costs The prisoner population of the United Kingdom was around 97,800 in 2024. Although this was quite a high figure in historical terms, the incarceration rate in England and Wales, and Scotland has fallen slightly since 2008, although it has increased slightly in Northern Ireland. There is, however, evidence that the government is struggling to cope with the size of the prison population. The number of spare prison places in England and Wales fell to a low of just 768 in September 2023. The average cost of a prison place has also increased, rising from 35,182 pounds in 2015/16, to 56,987 in 2023/24. Steep rise in prison violence in the mid-2010s In 2018, there were almost 33,000 assault incidents in England and Wales, with the annual number of assaults increasing rapidly from 2013 onwards. There has also been a rise in self-harm incidents at prisons, with over 79,000 occurring in 2024, compared with only 19,000 twenty-years earlier. The peak for the number of deaths in prison custody was in 2021, when there were 371, or around 4,7 deaths per 1,000 prisoners. Of these deaths, 89 of those in 2021 were recorded as suicides, with the most suicides occurring in 2016, at 124.

In 2023, the average daily cost per inmate in Italy was around 160 euros. In 2021, the spending reached 164 euros per prisoner, while in 2019 the cost decreased to 131 euros.

The Indian state of Andhra Pradesh had the highest prison spending per inmate of about *** thousand Indian rupees in financial year 2022. By contrast, Uttarakhand had only about *** thousand Indian rupees of per inmate spending that year.

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.

Private prisons, also referred to as for-profit prisons, have become a dominant sector of society in the United States and are now implemented in many states around the country. As of 2022, the state of Florida had the highest number of prisoners held in private prisons in the United States, with a total of ****** prisoners, followed by Texas, Arizona, and Georgia, and Tennessee. ** states did not have any prisoners held in private prisoners in that year. Private prisons in the U.S. The United States is home to the highest prison population per capita of all OECD countries, resulting in a consistent overcrowding of prisons which has negatively affected the criminal justice system for decades. The privatization of prison facilities was initially proposed as a solution to a lack of funding and an increasing demand for more jail space, leading to around *** percent of the U.S. prison population currently behind bars in private prisons. In 2021, ****** prisoners were held in in-state private prison facilities in the United States, compared to ****** prisoners held in out-of-state private prisons. Arguments on private prisons Advocates of private prisons proposed that privatization could lead to cost reductions, suggesting that allowing the private industry to operate prison facilities would save taxpayers money. However, the increasing reliance on private prison facilities has been criticized politically in the U.S. for catering to profit-seeking corporations as well as for the tendency to hold people in immigrant detention in these privately run facilities. In 2021, the highest share of revenue reported by the two largest for-profit prison companies in the U.S. was from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In addition, Republican Senator Marco Rubio from Florida, who is well-known for his positive stance on strengthening border security, was also found to receive the most money from the private prison industry than any other federal politician in the 2022 election cycle.

This dataset contains survey data for the publication "The Invisible Women: The Costs of Prison and the Indirect Effects on Women" (Related publication only available in Spanish). The study seeks to draw attention to the families of people who are detained in the local Mexican prison system. The results of this study are divided into two parts: the first part shows the socio-demographic characteristics of those who visit the Centers for Social Rehabilitation including information about their education, work, and economic status, among others. The second part provides quantitative information on the economic, social and health costs that are imposed by a criminal model that fails to recognize its existence, and by a prison system that frequently fails to comply with the obligation to pay the expenses of those that have been put in seclusion.

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.

In 2014, the San Diego Association of Governments applied for and received funding from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to conduct a process and impact evaluation of the Veterans Moving Forward (VMF) program that was created by the San Diego County Sheriff's Department in partnership with the San Diego Veterans Administration (VA) in 2013. VMF is a veteran-only housing unit for male inmates who have served in the U.S. military. When the grant was written, experts in the field had noted that the population of veterans returning to the U.S. with numerous mental health issues, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injury (TBI), and depression, were increasing and as a result, the number of veterans incarcerated in jails and prisons was also expected to increase. While numerous specialized courts for veterans had been implemented across the country at the time, veteran-specific housing units for those already sentenced to serve time in custody were rarer and no evaluations of these units had been published. Since this evaluation grant was awarded, the number of veteran-only housing units has increased, demonstrating the need for more evaluation information regarding lessons learned. A core goal when creating VMF was to structure an environment for veterans to draw upon the positive aspects of their shared military culture, create a safe place for healing and rehabilitation, and foster positive peer connections. There are several components that separate VMF from traditional housing with the general population that relate to the overall environment, the rehabilitative focus, and initiation of reentry planning as early as possible. These components include the selection of correctional staff with military backgrounds and an emphasis on building on their shared experience and connecting through it; a less restrictive and more welcoming environment that includes murals on the walls and open doors; no segregation of inmates by race/ethnicity; incentives including extended dayroom time and use of a microwave and coffee machine (under supervision); mandatory rehabilitative programming that focuses on criminogenic and other underlying risks and needs or that are quality of life focused, such as yoga, meditation, and art; a VMF Counselor who is located in the unit to provide one-on-one services to clients, as well as provide overall program management on a day-to-day basis; the regular availability of VA staff in the unit, including linkages to staff knowledgeable about benefits and other resources available upon reentry; and the guidance and assistance of a multi-disciplinary team (MDT) to support reentry transition for individuals needing additional assistance. The general criteria for housing in this veteran module includes: (1) not being at a classification level above a four, which requires a maximum level of custody; (2) not having less than 30 days to serve in custody; (3) no state or federal prison holds and/or prison commitments; (4) no fugitive holds; (5) no prior admittance to the psychiatric security unit or a current psychiatric hold; (6) not currently a Post-Release Community Supervision Offender serving a term of flash incarceration; (7) not in custody for a sex-related crime or requirement to register per Penal Code 290; (8) no specialized housing requirements including protective custody, administration segregation, or medical segregation; and (9) no known significant disciplinary incidents.

In 2023/24 the average custodial sentence length for sexual offences in England and Wales was 69.5 months, or just over five years, the most of any broad offence type in that year. Other crimes that carried high prison sentences were robbery offences at 45.2 months, and drug offences at 41.4 months. The average length of a prison sentence for all offences in 2024 was 22.5 months, while the offences that carried the shortest sentence lengths were motoring offences. Court backlog a major concern The number of crown court cases awaiting trial in England and Wales reached a high of over 67,573 cases in late 2023, almost double the number of outstanding cases in 2019. Although the number of new crown court cases has actually been declining, the courts have struggled to keep pace by closing existing cases, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a consequence of these pressures, the amount of time between a criminal offence taking place and the conclusion of the case has also risen. In 2014, it took an average of 412 days for an offence to reach a conclusion in the courts, with this rising to 697 days by 2021. The UK prison system The prison population of the United Kingdom was estimated to number approximately 97,800 people, as of 2024, the vast majority of which were in England and Wales. In 2023/24, the average cost of a prison place in England and Wales was estimated at 56,987 British pounds, compared with 51,724 pounds in the previous financial year. Of the various prisons across UK jurisdictions, the largest one in terms of capacity was HMS Oakwood in the West Midlands, which had a prison population of 2,121 in 2025. Despite the construction of relatively new prisons such as Oakwood, prison overcrowding has increased recently. In September 2023, for example, there were just 768 spare prison places in England and Wales compared with almost 2,600 in April 2022.

In 1986, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) funded a demonstration project of intensive supervision programs (ISPs), alternatives to control sanctions that involve community sanctions and emphasize stringent conditions and close monitoring of convicted offenders. The primary intent of the demonstration project was to determine the effects of participation in an ISP program on the subsequent behavior of offenders and to test the feasibility of the ISP's stated objectives: (1) to reduce recidivism by providing a seemingly cost-effective alternative to imprisonment, and (2) to provide an intermediate punishment between incarceration and regular probation that allows the punishment to fit the crime. Fourteen sites in nine states participated in the project and each of the selected sites was funded for 18 to 24 months. Individual agencies in each site tailored their ISP programs to their local needs, resources, and contexts, developed their own eligibility criteria, and determined whether probationers met those criteria. While the individual ISP projects differed, each site was required to follow identical procedures regarding random assignment, data collection, and overall program evaluation. Data collection instruments that differed in the amount of drug-related questions asked were used for the six- and twelve-month reviews. The "non-drug" data collection instrument, used in Contra Costa, Ventura, and Los Angeles counties, CA, Marion County, OR, and Milwaukee, WI, gathered drug data only on the number of monthly drug and alcohol tests given to offenders. The "drug" data collection instrument was distributed in Atlanta, Macon, and Waycross, GA, Seattle, WA, Santa Fe, NM, Des Moines, IA, and Winchester, VA. Variables regarding drug use included the number of drug tests ordered, the number of drug tests taken, and the number of positives for alcohol, cocaine, heroin, uppers, downers, quaaludes, LSD/hallucinogens, PCP, marijuana/hashish, and "other". The drug questions on the instrument used in Dallas and Houston, TX, were the same as those asked at the drug sites. Once a site determined that an offender was eligible for inclusion, RAND staff randomly assigned the offender to either the experimental ISP program (prison diversion, enhanced probation, or enhanced parole) or to a control sanction (prison, routine probation, or parole). Assignment periods began in January 1987 and some sites continued to accept cases through January 1990. Each offender was followed for a period of one year, beginning on the day of assignment to the experimental or control program. The six-month and twelve-month review data contain identical variables: the current status of the offender (prison, ISP, or terminated), record of each arrest and/or technical violation, its disposition, and sentence or sanction. Information was also recorded for each month during the follow-up regarding face-to-face contacts, phone and collateral contacts, monitoring and record checks, community service hours, days on electronic surveillance (if applicable), contacts between client and community sponsor, number and type of counseling sessions and training, days in paid employment and earnings, number of drug and alcohol tests taken, and amount of restitution, fines, court costs, and probation fees paid. Background variables include sex, race, age at assignment, prior criminal history, drug use and treatment history, type of current offense, sentence characteristics, conditions imposed, and various items relating to risk of recidivism and need for treatment. For the two Texas sites, information on each arrest and/or technical violation, its disposition, and sentence or sanction was recorded in separate recidivism files (Parts 10 and 17). Dates were converted by RAND to time-lapse variables for the public release files that comprise this data collection.