aecf-NoPlaceForKidsFullReport-2011

and fear,” “unsafe conditions for youth andstaff,” “frequent lockdowns,” and “capitulationto gang culture”—and they concluded: “It is notjust reform that is needed. Everything needs tobe fixed.” 23n Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana,Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, South Carolina,and South Dakota have also suffered highprofilejuvenile corrections abuse scandals overthe past 10 to 15 years, and serious problemshave been cited in several other states as well.Of course, abuse and maltreatment are not omnipresentin juvenile correctional facilities. Somefacilities provide humane care for confined youth,offering meaningful rehabilitative treatment in asafe and caring environment. Others fall short ofthis ideal, but still protect youth from severe formsof abuse and maltreatment. Even in the worstfacilities, many staff are highly dedicated with adeep concern for the well-being of their charges.However, the first-ever nationally representativesurvey of youth in correctional care, published in2010, confirms that, while not ubiquitous, abuseand maltreatment remain widespread in America’syouth corrections facilities. Among youth insecure corrections facilities or camp programs,42 percent said they were somewhat or very afraidof being physically attacked. More specifically, 30percent were afraid of attack from another youth,and 27 percent were afraid of attack from a staffmember. (Many were afraid of attack from bothyouth and staff.) In addition, 45 percent of youthconfined in secure correctional facilities and campprograms reported that staff “use force when theydon’t really need to,” and 30 percent said thatstaff place youth into solitary confinement or lockthem up alone as discipline. 24Given the inability of public officials to preventmaltreatment or even to clean up facilities whereinhumane conditions are revealed, it would be difficultto argue that correctional confinement offersa safe venue to rehabilitate delinquent youth.2.Ineffective The outcomes of correctional confinement arepoor. Recidivism rates are almost uniformly high, and incarcerationin juvenile facilities depresses youths’ future success in educationand employment.An extensive Internet search and literature reviewplus limited outreach to state corrections agenciesfor this publication identified recidivism analysesfor youth exiting juvenile correctional placementsin 38 states, plus the District of Columbia.These recidivism studies vary in many importantdimensions, including the populations examinedand the measures employed to track recidivismover different lengths of time. While these variationsmake comparing recidivism outcomes fromone state to another problematic, the overallbody of recidivism evidence indicates plainlythat confinement in youth corrections facilitiesdoesn’t work well as a strategy to steer delinquentyouth away from crime. (See Fig. 3 on p. 10.)9