Carceral settings are particularly harmful for youth development and substantially impede their ability to pursue postsecondary education, a key determinant of health and protective factor against future legal system involvement. This article provides a review of innovative legislation that eliminated California’s state-level Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) and incentivizes county-based, less restrictive programs (LRPs). In addition to discussing the national and state context for the policy changes, our community-research partnership identifies strengths and opportunities for the LRP model to support community reintegration and a pathway to success with postsecondary education for incarcerated youth.
AntojadoD., BuddJ., DoyleC., & BartelsL. (2024). Criminal justice, representation and the lived experience scholar. Incarceration, 5, 26326663241275807. 10.1177/26326663241275807
2.
BarnertE. S., DudovitzR., NelsonB. B., CokerT. R., BielyC., LiN., & ChungP. J. (2017). How does incarcerating young people affect their adult health outcomes? Pediatrics, 139(2), e20162624. 10.1542/peds.2016-2624
3.
CA. Assembly Bill 118. (2025). Chapter 7, Statutes of 2025.
ChristianD. (2022). Education behind bars: A review of educational services in juvenile correctional facilities. Safety and Emergency Services Journal.
DonaldsonV. M., & VieraC. (2021). College After Prison: A Review of the Literature on Barriers and Supports to Postsecondary Education for Formerly Incarcerated College Students. John Jay College Institute for Justice and Opportunity.
10.
Gupta-KaganJ. (2021). Beyond “children are different”: The revolution in juvenile intake and sentencing. Washington Law Review, 96(2), 425–492.
11.
HildenbrandD. B. P., KirkD. S., & SampsonR. J. (2025). The great leveler? Juvenile arrest, college attainment, and the future of American inequality. Sociology of Education, 99(1), 1–19.
KazemianL. “Pathways to Desistance From Crime Among Juveniles and Adults: Applications to Criminal Justice Policy and Practice,” NCJ 301503, in Desistance from Crime: Implications for Research, Policy, and Practice NCJ 301497, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC, 2021. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/301503.pdf
15.
LevacL., CattapanA., HaleyT. L., PinL., TungohanE., & WiebeS. M. (2022). Transforming public policy with engaged scholarship: Better together. Policy & Politics, 50(3), 403–424. 10.1332/030557321X16485722290035
16.
LipseyM. W., & CullenF. T. (2007). The effectiveness of correctional rehabilitation: A review of systematic reviews. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 3(1), 297–320. 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.3.081806.112833
MallettC. A. (2016). The school-to-prison pipeline: A critical review of the punitive paradigm shift. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 33(1), 15–24. 10.1007/s10560-015-0397-1
19.
MendelR. A. (2011). No Place for Kids: The Case for Reducing Juvenile Incarceration. Annie E Foundation.
WashburnM. (2020). State Spending Soars to Historic Levels Amid Reorganization of California’s Youth Correctional System. Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, San Francisco.
27.
YoungB., & TuranovicJ. J. (2022). What about the kids? Examining the visitation-recidivism relationship among incarcerated juveniles. Youth & Society, 54(7), 1126–1149. 10.1177/0044118X211036724
