Youth Detention and Incarceration Facilities in the United States (2010 to February 2023): Mapping Closure Intents and Implementation.

IF 9.6 1区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Emily J Johnson, Hunter Pluckebaum, Karin D Martin, Benjamin Danielson, Brenda Majercin, Sheila Ater Capestany, Vivian H Lyons
{"title":"Youth Detention and Incarceration Facilities in the United States (2010 to February 2023): Mapping Closure Intents and Implementation.","authors":"Emily J Johnson, Hunter Pluckebaum, Karin D Martin, Benjamin Danielson, Brenda Majercin, Sheila Ater Capestany, Vivian H Lyons","doi":"10.2105/AJPH.2025.308118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives.</b> To characterize youth detention and incarceration facility closure attempts in the United States from 2010 to February 2023 and inform ongoing attempts for facility closure. <b>Methods.</b> We conducted a landscape analysis of youth facilities with stated intent to close during our study period. For each facility, we coded for jurisdiction (state vs local), year of attempt, stated reasons for closure, outcome of the facility (closed, remained open, or other), facility size, and what happened to youths after the facility closed. <b>Results.</b> We identified a total of 118 facilities in 33 states that had committed to closure in our study period. The most cited reasons for the intention to close were cost (69% of facilities), declining numbers (46%), operational and facilities issues (36%), reform (33%), and conditions of confinement and abuse (30%). Sixty-two percent of identified facilities closed (n = 73). <b>Conclusions.</b> Most facilities that had announced closures did close. For facilities that closed, the most commonly cited reasons were cost and decreasing numbers. Reform as a reason was more common in facilities that remained open than closed. (<i>Am J Public Health</i>. Published online ahead of print June 12, 2025:e1-e9. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2025.308118).</p>","PeriodicalId":7647,"journal":{"name":"American journal of public health","volume":" ","pages":"e1-e9"},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of public health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2025.308118","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives. To characterize youth detention and incarceration facility closure attempts in the United States from 2010 to February 2023 and inform ongoing attempts for facility closure. Methods. We conducted a landscape analysis of youth facilities with stated intent to close during our study period. For each facility, we coded for jurisdiction (state vs local), year of attempt, stated reasons for closure, outcome of the facility (closed, remained open, or other), facility size, and what happened to youths after the facility closed. Results. We identified a total of 118 facilities in 33 states that had committed to closure in our study period. The most cited reasons for the intention to close were cost (69% of facilities), declining numbers (46%), operational and facilities issues (36%), reform (33%), and conditions of confinement and abuse (30%). Sixty-two percent of identified facilities closed (n = 73). Conclusions. Most facilities that had announced closures did close. For facilities that closed, the most commonly cited reasons were cost and decreasing numbers. Reform as a reason was more common in facilities that remained open than closed. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print June 12, 2025:e1-e9. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2025.308118).

美国青少年拘留和监禁设施(2010年至2023年2月):绘制关闭意图和实施。
目标。描述2010年至2023年2月期间美国青少年拘留和监禁设施关闭尝试的特征,并为正在进行的设施关闭尝试提供信息。方法。我们对在研究期间有意关闭的青少年设施进行了景观分析。对于每个设施,我们对管辖权(州与地方)、尝试年份、说明的关闭原因、设施的结果(关闭、继续开放或其他)、设施规模以及设施关闭后青少年的情况进行了编码。结果。在我们的研究期间,我们确定了33个州的118个设施已经承诺关闭。被提及最多的关闭原因是成本(69%)、数量下降(46%)、运营和设施问题(36%)、改革(33%)以及监禁和虐待条件(30%)。62%已确定的设施关闭(n = 73)。结论。大多数宣布关闭的设施都关闭了。对于关闭的设施,最常见的原因是成本和数量减少。改革作为一个理由,在保持开放的设施中比关闭的设施更常见。公共卫生。2025年6月12日在线出版:e1-e9。https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2025.308118)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American journal of public health
American journal of public health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
3.90%
发文量
1109
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Public Health (AJPH) is dedicated to publishing original work in research, research methods, and program evaluation within the field of public health. The journal's mission is to advance public health research, policy, practice, and education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信