W w w. H a m I l t o n p r o j e c t. O r g acknowledgements

The Hamilton Project  •  Brookings   15

 Juvenile incarceration can have lasting impacts 

on a young person’s future.

10.

In addition to these direct costs, juvenile detention is believed to 

have significant effects on a youth’s future since it jeopardizes his or 

her accumulation of human and social capital during an important 

developmental stage. Studies have found it difficult to estimate 

this effect, given that incarcerated juveniles differ across many 

dimensions from those who are not incarcerated. Aizer and Doyle 

(2013) overcome this difficulty by using randomly assigned judges 

to estimate the difference in adult outcomes between youths sent to 

juvenile detention and youths who were charged with a similar crime, 

but who were not sent to juvenile detention. The authors find that 

sending a youth to juvenile detention has a significant negative impact 

on that youth’s adult outcomes. As illustrated in figure 10, juvenile 

incarceration is estimated to decrease the likelihood of high school 

graduation by 13 percentage points and increase the likelihood of 

incarceration as an adult by 22 percentage points. In particular, those 

who are incarcerated as juveniles are 15 percentage points more likely 

to be incarcerated as adults for violent crimes or 14 percentage points 

more likely to be incarcerated as adults for property crimes.

After increasing steadily between 1975 and 1999, the rate of youth 

confinement began declining in 2000, with the decline accelerating 

in recent years (Annie E. Casey Foundation 2013). In 2011, there 

were 64,423 detained youths, a rate of roughly 2 out of every 1,000 

juveniles ages ten and older (Sickmund et al. 2013). Detained juveniles 

include those placed in a facility as part of a court-ordered disposition 

(68 percent); juveniles awaiting a court hearing, adjudication, 

disposition, or placement elsewhere (31 percent); and juveniles who 

were voluntarily admitted to a facility in lieu of adjudication as part of 

a diversion agreement (1 percent) (ibid.).

Youths are incarcerated for a variety of crimes. In 2011, 22,964 

juveniles (37 percent of juvenile detainees) were detained for a violent 

offense, and 14,705 (24 percent) were detained for a property offense. 

More than 70 percent of youth offenders are detained in public 

facilities, for which the cost is estimated to be approximately $240 per 

person each day, or around $88,000 per person each year (Petteruti, 

Walsh, and Velazquez 2009).

Chapter 3: The Economic and Social Costs of Crime and Incarceration

FIGURE 10.

Effect of Juvenile Incarceration on Likelihood of High School Graduation and Adult 

Imprisonment

Juvenile incarceration reduces the likelihood of high school graduation by more than 13 percentage points, and increases the probability 

of returning to prison as an adult by over 22 percentage points, as compared to nondetained juvenile offenders.

Source: Aizer and Doyle 2013.

Note: Bars show statistically significant regression estimates of the causal effect of juvenile incarceration on high school completion and on 

adult recidivism. For more details, see the technical appendix.

Per

cen

tage poin

t change in lik

elihood

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Graduated high school

Violent crime

Property crime

Entered adult prison by age 25, by crime type

Any criminal offense

---

16   Ten Economic Facts about Crime and Incarceration in the United States

1. Crime rates have steadily declined over the past 

twenty-five years.

Figure 1. Crime Rate in the United States, 1960–2012

Sources: DOJ 2010b; authors’ calculations.

Note: The U.S. crime rate is the sum of the violent crime 

rates (i.e., aggravated assault, forcible rape, murder and 

nonnegligent manslaughter, and robbery) and property crime 

rates (i.e., burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft) 

from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program. This 

program includes crime statistics gathered by the FBI from 

law enforcement agencies across the United States.

2. Low-income individuals are more likely than 

higher-income individuals to be victims of crime.

Figure 2. Victimization Rates for Persons Age 12 or Older, 

by Type of Crime and Annual Family Income, 2008

Sources: DOJ 2010a; authors’ calculations.

Note: Victimization data come from the FBI’s National Crime 

Victimization Survey. The victimization rate is defined as 

the number of individuals who were victims of crime over a 

six-month period per every 1,000 persons age twelve or older. 

Persons whose family income level was not ascertained are 

excluded from this figure. Income brackets are combined 

using population data for each income range.

3. The majority of criminal offenders are younger 

than age thirty.

Figure 3. Number of Offenders in the United States, by Age 

and Offense Category, 2012

Sources: DOJ 2012; authors’ calculations.

Note: The FBI defines crimes against persons as crimes 

whose victims are always individuals (e.g., assault, murder, 

and rape). Crimes against property are those with the goal 

of obtaining money, property, or some other benefit (e.g., 

bribery, burglary, and robbery). Crimes against society are 

those that represent society’s prohibition against engaging in 

certain types of activity (e.g., drug violations, gambling, and 

prostitution) (DOJ 2011).

Offender data come from the FBI’s National Incident-Based 

Reporting System. This includes characteristics (e.g., age, 

sex, and race) of each offender involved in a crime incident 

whether or not an arrest was made. The data, which aim 

to capture any information known to law enforcement 

concerning the offenders even though they may not have 

been identified, are reported by law enforcement agencies. 

An additional 1,741,162 incidents had unknown offenders, 

meaning there is no known information about the offender. 

Offenders with unknown ages are excluded from this 

figure. (This paragraph is based on the authors’ email 

correspondence with the Criminal Justice Information Series 

at the FBI, March 2014.)

4. Disadvantaged youths engage in riskier criminal 

behavior.

Figure 4. Adolescent Risk Behaviors by Family Income Level

Source: Kent 2009.

Note: Original data are derived from the 1997 National 

Longitudinal Survey of Youth, which followed a sample of 

adolescents in 1997 into young adulthood and recorded 

their behavior and outcomes through annual interviews. 

Adolescent risk behaviors are measured up to age eighteen, 

with the exception of marijuana use, which is measured up to 

age sixteen. Low-income families are defined as those whose 

incomes are at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty 

level (FPL). Middle-income families are defined as those 

with incomes between 201 and 400 percent of the FPL, and 

high-income families are defined as those with incomes at or 

above 401 percent of the FPL.

5. Federal and state policies have driven up the 

incarceration rate over the past thirty years.

Figure 5. Incarceration Rate in the United States, 1960–2012

Sources: Austin et al. 2000; Cahalan 1986; personal 

communication with E. Ann Carson, Bureau of Justice 

Statistics, January 24, 2014; Census Bureau 2001; Glaze 2010, 

2011; Glaze and Herberman 2013; Raphael and Stoll 2013; 

Sabol, Couture, and Harrison 2007; Sabol, West, and Cooper 

2010; authors’ calculations.

Note: The incarceration rate refers to the total number of 

inmates in custody of local jails, state or federal prisons, 

and privately operated facilities within the year per 100,000 

U.S. residents. Incarceration rates for 1960 and 1970 come 

from Cahalan (1986). Incarceration rates for 1980 to 1999 

are calculated by dividing the total incarcerated population 

Technical Appendix

---