California Youth Authority

The California Youth Authority or the CYA as it is more commonly known, is an institution which provides a range of education, treatment, and training services for youthful offenders committed by courts. This system has been plagued by multitudes of problems for many years that need to be fixed.

“The California Youth Authority is responsible for the protection of society form the criminal and delinquent behavior of young people(Hill, Legislative Analyst).” This is reached mainly through custodial control of these juveniles and the implementation of vocational, education, health, and mental health treatment services.

As of now, CYA uses large, remote, high-security facilities. They may be called "schools," but with about 400 kids in each one, they are more like warehouses, storing wards until they are ready for release. For decades, experts and officials have dismissed this model as incapable of meeting the juvenile justice system’s goal of rehabilitating youth.

The CYA is clearly not working the way the way that it was designed to run. For instance, three out of four wards who end up in the California Youth Authority are arrested on new criminal charges within three years of their release, which proves the institution's failure to rehabilitate the state's most troubled juvenile offenders. Experts say the high number does not address how much California could gain from approaches used in other states (like Mississippi) such as housing wards in smaller facilities, providing intensive treatment programs, and offering more supervision and assistance after a ward is released. “In smaller, rehabilitation centers, youth would be under the supervision of trained social workers and mental health experts – not prison guards.(LAO Report, pg. 7).” This would allow the offenders to be in closer contact with their families, as well as a variety of services.

The average age of a CYA institution is 43 years old. This means the there are many maintenance and repair needs and, at some point, many buildings will have to be replaced. Also, the population that many of the institutions were designed for 40 or 50 years ago is different than today’s youthful offender. “Finally, the ward population has decreased from a high of over 10,000 in 1996 to its current level of 4,300. This decline has resulted in overcapacity and presents an opportunity to consider closure(Lao Report, pg. 11).” Closing some institutions would save the state money, and enable the state to implement programs to lower recidivism rates.