The information provided by the 44 responding States shows the diversity of juvenile correctional systems. At the uppermost level, States varied in terms of the position of the juvenile justice agency within the larger State government. Furthermore, the States differed considerably in terms of the jurisdiction under which juvenile institutions are operated and administered. The dispersion of facilities across State, local, and private domains has clear implications for the interpretation of data that focus exclusively on juveniles in State custody. This organizational diversity means there is little consistency across States in the type of offender deemed "appropriate" for placement in a State facility. The picture of juvenile offenders becomes increasingly complex as States apply a variety of special legal statuses to determine sentencing and custody practices for particular groups of offenders. Also, many States have adopted exceptions to the specified legal age limits at all levels of the juvenile justice system (e.g., court, custody, aftercare). These individual statuses and practices may account for many of the differences that are evident in existing data on juveniles taken into custody. Other factors that influence custody data include the legal statuses that are permissible for custody in a juvenile commitment facility, the practice of transferring youth between commitment facilities, and the ability to transfer youth to the adult system. Release and transfer decisions are often influenced by factors unique to the youth and the State system. These unique forces further complicate the ability to understand the differing custody practices and lengths of stay that are apparent in existing custody data. With planned improvements, subsequent surveys will permit clearer categorization and greater understanding of the similarities and differences in the organization of juvenile corrections agencies and the impact those dynamics have on State custody data. 6 tables, 2 notes, and 2 references