Skip to main content
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2021 Feb 25;61(1):120–123. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.01.019

COVID-19 Case and Mortality Rates in the Federal Bureau of Prisons

Robin L Toblin 1,, Liesl M Hagan 1
PMCID: PMC7905372  PMID: 33781619

Abstract

Introduction

People living in correctional facilities are at high risk for contracting COVID-19. To characterize the burden of COVID-19 in the Federal Bureau of Prisons, inmate testing, case, and mortality rates are calculated and compared with those of the U.S.

Methods

Federal Bureau of Prisons data were derived from its inmate management system and a Federal Bureau of Prisons COVID-19–specific database. U.S. data were derived from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Census. Data were aggregated from February to September 2020 and accessed in September and November 2020. Testing rates were calculated for both the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Case and infection fatality rates were calculated overall and by institution and compared with those of the U.S. An age- and sex-standardized mortality ratio was calculated.

Results

The Federal Bureau of Prisons tested more than half of its inmates (50.3%); its crude case and mortality rates were 11,710.1 and 77.4 per 100,000, respectively. Compared with the U.S., the case ratio was 4.7, and the standardized mortality ratio was 2.6. The infection fatality rate for both the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. was 0.7%. Among institutions that tested ≥85% of inmates, the combined infection fatality rate was 0.8% and ranged from 0.0% to 3.0%.

Conclusions

The Federal Bureau of Prisons COVID-19 case rates and standard mortality ratio were approximately 5 and 2.5 times those in U.S. adults, respectively, consistent with those of prisons nationwide. High testing rates and standardized death reporting could result in a more accurate infection fatality rate in the Federal Bureau of Prisons than in the U.S. Testing and other mitigation strategies, including reducing the population, have likely prevented further transmission and mortality in the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

INTRODUCTION

People living in correctional facilities are at high risk for contracting the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19),1 , 2 but the risk for federal inmates has not been specifically examined. Before the pandemic, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) managed approximately 146,000 inmates in 122 institutions in 36 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. To characterize the burden of COVID-19 in the BOP (Federal Bureau of Prisons) inmate testing, case, and mortality rates are calculated and compared with those of the U.S. population.

METHODS

Data for the BOP population census, including age and sex distributions, were ascertained from the BOP's inmate management system, SENTRY, as of February 29, 2020, before BOP's first known COVID-19 cases. U.S. population data were ascertained from the U.S. Census.

The COVID-19 case (laboratory confirmed and probable) and testing data in the BOP and U.S. population (inclusive of BOP) were aggregated from February 29 through September 23, 2020 using a COVID-19–specific data set for BOP and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data, respectively. BOP deaths were also aggregated through September 23; CDC mortality data were aggregated through September 26 (the week including September 23).3 , 4 Data were accessed on September 24, 2020 except for U.S. deaths, which were accessed on November 25, 2020. BOP's IRB deemed this study as exempt and reviewed this paper.

BOP and U.S. COVID-19 testing rates were calculated to account for disease burden from asymptomatic cases and provide context for case rates. BOP testing rates were calculated overall and by institution as the proportion of inmates with a returned test. BOP tests inmates with signs and symptoms of COVID-19; tests close contacts of case patients; and tests inmates upon intake, transfer, or release; some institutions have performed mass testing.5 U.S. testing rates include multiple tests for some individuals; thus, the exact number of individuals tested is unknown.

To compare the crude case rates between BOP, which only houses adults, and the U.S., the proportion of case patients aged 0–17 years (8.4%)3 were subtracted from U.S. case patients. The overall BOP infection fatality rate (IFR) was calculated as the number of deaths among patients with COVID-19 and was compared with a meta-analysis of the U.S. IFR that included children.6 To account for BOP's asymptomatic cases,5 the IFR was also calculated collectively and individually for institutions that tested >85% of inmates relative to its February 29, 2020 census.

To account for substantial differences in age and sex distributions in the BOP and U.S adult populations (variables associated with differential COVID-19 mortality), an age- and sex-adjusted standardized mortality ratio (SMR) was calculated by comparing BOP deaths with CDC COVID-19 mortality counts by age and sex4 referenced against U.S. Census counts. Analyses were conducted in Excel 2016.

RESULTS

Most BOP inmates were male (92.5%), U.S. citizens (87.5%), and young (3.7% were aged ≥65 years relative to 17.0% in the U.S.) with a greater proportion of racial/ethnic minorities compared with the U.S. population (Table 1 ). As of September 23, 2020, in total, 50.3% of BOP inmates and 32.5% of the U.S. population (assuming 1 test per person) had been tested for COVID-19. The crude case rates for BOP and U.S. adults were 11,710.1 and 2,484.4 cases per 100,000 people, respectively, a ratio of 4.7. The crude mortality rates were 77.4 and 80.5 per 100,000 people, a ratio of 1.0 (Appendix Table 1, available online). The crude IFR for both the BOP and U.S.6 was 0.7%. Deaths occurred in 23.8% of BOP institutions. Appendix Table 2 (available online) displays institution-specific COVID-19 cases and deaths for the 25 institutions that tested ≥85% of inmates relative to their February 29 census. These institutions represented 19.9% of the overall BOP population and had a case rate of 33,189.8 per 100,000 people, 2.8 times that of the overall BOP. For these institutions, the combined IFR was 0.8% (range=0.0%–3.0%, median=0.3%, IQR=0.0%–1.0%).

Table 1.

Demographic Characteristics of BOP and the U.S.

Characteristicsa BOP, % U.S.,b %
U.S. citizenship 87.5 92.2c
Male sex 92.5 48.7
Aged ≥65 years 3.5 17.0
Race/ethnicityd
 Hispanic 26.1 18.3
 Non-Hispanic Asian American 1.5 5.6
 Non-Hispanic Black 38.9 12.3
 Non-Hispanic American Indian, Alaska Native, Hawaiian Native or Pacific Islander 2.5 0.9
 Non-Hispanic White 31.1 60.2
a

BOP data were from February 29, 2020 before any COVID-19 cases or related inmate releases; U.S. data were from the U.S. Census 2018 American Community Survey.

b

Among adults only to compare with BOP, which only houses adults; U.S. race/ethnicity data were only available for all ages.

c

Derived by dividing the total number of citizens aged 18 years and over population table by the total number in the 18 years and over section within the age- and sex-stratified tables of the total U.S. population.

d

Census data included an option for ≥2 races, whereas BOP did not, so the U.S. data do not total to 100%.

BOP, Federal Bureau of Prisons.

Table 2 shows the age- and sex-specific SMRs for the BOP. BOP inmates were 2.6 times as likely to die from COVID-19 as U.S. adults (male SMR=2.5, female SMR=4.6).

Table 2.

Age- and Sex-Adjusted BOP Standardized Mortality Ratio Relative to That of the U.S. for COVID-19 Deaths

Age group, years U.S. COVID-19 deathsa U.S. age distributionb BOP age distributionc Expected BOP COVID-19 deaths Observed BOP COVID-19 deathsa Standardized mortality ratio
Male
 18–24 227 15,546,666 5,891 0.1 0 0.0
 25–34 1,071 23,162,842 37,116 1.7 0 0.0
 35–44 2,850 20,554,443 46,367 6.4 6 0.9
 45–54 7,474 20,514,573 28,092 10.2 14 1.4
 55–64 16,990 20,377,611 12,251 10.2 39 3.8
 65–74 27,077 14,225,362 4,672 8.9 26 2.9
 ≥75 54,689 9,055,733 689 4.2 21 5.0
 Total 110,378 123,437,230 135,078 41.7 106 2.5
Female
 18–24 139 14,826,812 625 0.0 0 0.0
 25–34 556 22,447,268 3,232 0.1 1 12.5
 35–44 1,342 20,659,031 3,608 0.2 2 8.5
 45–54 3,524 21,063,133 2,186 0.3 1 2.7
 55–64 9,250 21,846,638 977 0.4 2 4.8
 65–74 17,104 16,223,821 311 0.3 1 3.0
 ≥75 61,680 12,864,423 19 0.1 0 0.0
 Total 93,595 129,931,126 10,958 1.4 7 4.6
All sexes
 Total 203,973 253,368,356 146,036 43.3 113 2.6
a

BOP deaths were through September 23, 2020; U.S. data were through the closest weekly update, which was posted on September 23, 2020 and ended on September 26, 2020.

b

U.S. Census data were from July 1, 2018, the same date CDC uses for population estimates.

c

BOP data were from February 29, 2020 before any BOP COVID-19 cases or related inmate releases.

BOP, Federal Bureau of Prisons; CDC, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

DISCUSSION

These findings update and augment an earlier study that presented aggregated COVID-19 cases and deaths in state and federal prisons2; this study uses more recent federal data and includes testing data, IFRs, and institution-specific information. The high BOP case rate relative to that of U.S. adults may be attributed to close contact within congregate living environments, combined with numerous opportunities for COVID-19 introduction from staff with community-acquired infections, new intakes from other jurisdictions, and inmates with hospital-acquired infections.1 BOP's high testing rate (>50%) may also contribute to the high case rate.5 Testing as a mitigation strategy has allowed BOP to identify and isolate cases and quarantine their close contacts as recommended by CDC,7 likely preventing further transmission and mortality.

At 0.7%, the overall BOP IFR is the same as that in the U.S.6 The IFR among BOP institutions with the highest testing rates (i.e., ≥85%) was 0.8%. BOP's higher testing rate overall, and especially in these institutions, may account for more asymptomatic cases than that seen in U.S. testing, potentially resulting in a more accurate estimate of total infections than in the U.S. In addition, BOP's standardized death reporting system likely results in less under-reporting of COVID-19‒related deaths than the U.S. mortality systems that are not standardized.8 Both factors could result in a higher degree of accuracy in the BOP IFR than in the U.S. IFR.

After adjusting for age and sex differences, the overall BOP SMR of 2.6 is consistent with the findings of a previous study of prisons nationwide.2 All female deaths but one occurred during an outbreak in a single institution housing female inmates with medical comorbidities, potentially contributing to the higher female-specific SMR; the small numbers make interpretation challenging. Higher age- and sex-adjusted mortality from COVID-19 in BOP likely reflects the high rates of underlying health conditions, especially at younger ages,1 which increase the risk of severe illness from COVID-19. One way BOP addressed this was by decreasing its population by 13.4% through reduced intakes and releases to the community, residential re-entry centers, and home confinement to protect inmates at the highest risk for COVID-19 if deemed to be a low risk to public safety.

Limitations

This study has 4 limitations. First, institution-specific testing rates relied on prepandemic censuses, although censuses shifted throughout the pandemic owing to releases and inmate movement to reduce institution density. Second, tests given to inmates in hospitals were excluded. Third, U.S. testing rates and the IFR include children. Taken together, these measurement biases could underestimate BOP testing rates (and overestimate BOP's IFR) and overestimate U.S. adult testing rates (and underestimate the U.S. adult IFR). Fourth, the calculation of BOP's SMR did not control for the high rates of underlying health conditions or racial and ethnic differences in correctional populations relative to those in the U.S. population,1 which are associated with differential COVID-19 mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 case rates and SMR for inmates were approximately 5 and 2.5 times those in U.S. adults, respectively, consistent with those of prisons nationwide.2 Mitigation strategies, including increased testing, cleaning and disinfecting, personal protective equipment and facial coverings, social distancing, reducing the population, and movement of inmates to reduce institution density, have likely prevented further transmission and mortality. Continued enhanced surveillance and adherence to updated infection control and testing guidance specific to correctional populations, vaccine distribution planning, and consideration of other mitigation strategies could further reduce the impact of COVID-19 in the BOP population.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thanks to Erik Faust of the BOP Office of Research and Evaluation for producing BOP–wide and institution-specific census numbers; Charles Dusseau of the BOP Health Services Division for BOP COVID-19‒specific data; and Christopher Bina, Jeffery Allen, Michael Long, and TeCora Ballom, all in the BOP Health Services Division, for their comments on previous drafts.

The research presented in this paper is that of the authors and does not reflect the official policy of the BOP or the Department of Justice. The work was conducted as part of the authors’ duties on temporary duty to BOP.

Author contributions are as follows: RLT was responsible for the conceptualization, methodology, data curation, writing–original draft preparation, writing–reviewing and editing, and LMH was responsible for writing–reviewing and editing of the manuscript.

No financial disclosures were reported by the authors of this paper.

Footnotes

Supplemental materials associated with this article can be found in the online version at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2021.01.019.

Appendix. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

mmc1.pdf (165.9KB, pdf)

REFERENCES

  • 1.Montoya-Barthelemy AG, Lee CD, Cundiff DR, Smith EB. COVID-19 and the correctional environment: the American prison as a focal point for public health. Am J Prev Med. 2020;58(6):888–891. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2020.04.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Saloner B, Parish K, Ward JA, DiLaura G, Dolovich S. COVID-19 cases and deaths in federal and state prisons. JAMA. 2020;324(6):602–603. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.12528. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.COVID data tracker. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/. Updated March 24, 2021. Accessed September 24, 2020.
  • 4.Weekly updates by select demographic and geographic characteristics: provisional death counts for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#AgeAndSex. Updated March 24, 2021. Accessed November 25, 2020.
  • 5.Hagan LM, Williams SP, Spaulding AC. Mass testing for SARS-CoV-2 in 16 prisons and jails - six jurisdictions, United States, April-May 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(33):1139–1143. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6933a3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Meyerowitz-Katz G, Merone L. A systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on COVID-19 infection fatality rates. Int J Infect Dis. 2020;101:138–148. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.09.1464. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Interim guidance on management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in correctional and detention facilities. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/correction-detention/guidance-correctional-detention.html. Updated February 19, 2021. Accessed November 25, 2020.
  • 8.Woolf SH, Chapman DA, Sabo RT, Weinberger DM, Hill L, Taylor DDH. Excess deaths from COVID-19 and other causes, March-July 2020. JAMA. 2020;324(15):1562–1564. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.19545. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

mmc1.pdf (165.9KB, pdf)

Articles from American Journal of Preventive Medicine are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES