California Transitions from State-Run Youth Prisons, Embracing Rehabilitation and Uncertain Future

California bids farewell to state-run youth prisons, giving juvenile offenders a chance at rehabilitation instead of punitive sentences. The closure of the last three facilities signifies a shift toward decentralized care, with county probation departments assuming day-to-day operations of juvenile halls. The goal is to break the “school-to-prison pipeline” and provide facilities focused on reformation rather than punishment, but questions remain about the effectiveness of the new approach.

In the past, the state-run youth prison system often reinforced patterns of neglect and violence, exacerbating the issues that led many young offenders astray. Advocates welcome the move away from punitive measures, advocating for settings that prioritize education, mental health care, and other supportive services for children who commit crimes.

However, both supporters and skeptics acknowledge the presence of uncertainties. The state-run system had a troubled history marred by inmate suicides, brawls, and allegations of abuse by staff members. Recent years saw state facilities reserved for the most serious offenders, including those who committed murder, assault, and other grave crimes.

Frankie Guzmán, director of the California Youth Justice Initiative at the National Center for Youth Law and a former youth inmate, highlights concerns about local programs and services’ readiness to handle youths with significant needs and trauma. Guzmán spent six years in California’s youth prisons and understands the system’s limitations in assisting young people struggling with anger issues and untreated trauma.

The California Legislature established the first facility for troubled youth, the San Francisco Industrial School, in 1859 to provide an alternative to housing children alongside adults in state prisons. Over time, the state system grew to encompass 11 lockups housing approximately 10,000 youths. Currently, the remaining state-run facilities hold around 300 youth offenders, with an average age of 19. In 2020, 88% of the population was Black or Latino, reflecting a disproportionate representation.

California counties already handle a significant number of juvenile offenders, with over 35,000 under their care, including more than 3,600 in juvenile halls, camps, and ranches. County probation departments express determination to make the new system work despite the challenges associated with decentralization. However, smaller counties may face difficulties providing care to youth with severe mental health needs, which concerns Karen Pank, the executive director of the Chief Probation Officers of California.

Funding for behavioral health has increased in recent years, but not enough resources are directed toward young people or the county probation departments responsible for the new system. Pank emphasizes the necessity of removing barriers and addressing the counties’ actual needs to ensure successful implementation.

California will allocate approximately $230 million annually to assist counties in covering the costs associated with the new system. County probation officers will strive to balance the rehabilitation focus advocated by reform proponents with the possibility of judges still sentencing older teenagers to adult prisons for the most serious offenses at the prosecutor’s request.

However, some believe that meaningful change will only occur with robust state oversight. Meredith Desautels, a staff attorney at the Youth Law Center, asserts that transformation is an ongoing process requiring continual adjustments. The newly established Office of Youth and Community Restoration, part of the state’s Health and Human Services Agency, will be responsible for overseeing the realigned system instead of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Yet, Frankie Guzmán worries that this new office lacks the necessary authority and teeth to provide the oversight counties need.

Katherine Lucero, director of the Office of Youth and Community Restoration, acknowledges that counties still have work to do. Her office is actively expanding its staff and forging relationships with various partners, including advocates, therapists, and attorneys, to ensure a supportive and safe environment for youths returning to their communities.

Lucero defends her office’s connection with a now-defunct nonprofit established by probation chiefs across California. The County Probation Consortium Partnering for Youth Realignment, which included most of the state’s probation chiefs, provided recommendations on necessary county resources. Critics argued that the consortium introduced unnecessary bureaucracy and lacked transparency, leading to a lawsuit demanding greater openness. The nonprofit recently announced its closure, citing the fulfillment of its critical purpose.

For former youth inmate Jose, who managed to turn his life around during his time in lockup, the hope for the new system lies in a significant staff restructuring and renewed emphasis on health and well-being. Jose envisions a more therapeutic environment, replacing negative behaviors with positive ones and learning to function positively within a community.

The closure of state-run youth prisons marks a significant step for California, but the road ahead is fraught with uncertainties. The success of the new approach depends on the collaboration between counties, adequate funding and resources, and ongoing adjustments to address the needs of young offenders. Only through a comprehensive and well-supported system can meaningful change be achieved and juvenile rehabilitation fostered.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about youth prison reform

More about youth prison reform

• California Ends State-Run Youth Prisons
• California Shuts Down Last 3 Youth Prisons
• California’s Youth Prisons Shut Down for Good
• California’s Move Away from Youth Prisons
• California Overhauls Juvenile Justice System
• Juvenile Justice Reform in California
• California Youth Justice Reform Initiative
• California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
• National Center for Youth Law