While acknowledging that West Virginia has both a low juvenile crime rate and one of the country's lowest juvenile detention rates, this report provides statistics to show that minority youth are overrepresented in the State's juvenile justice system at a rate that exceeds the national rate. This overrepresentation of minority youth stems from decisions made at the system's earliest stages and is often marked by an additive effect at subsequent stages. Although it is clear from the data that racial disparity exists in the State's juvenile justice process, it is not clear that this results from racially biased decision making. The issue of racial discrimination requires an analysis of differing cultural perceptions as well as the social and economic advantages or disadvantages of specific population groups. Factors that bear on minority overrepresentation in the State's juvenile justice system include the differing effects of poverty and wealth, Federal and State government policies, the changing nature of the public will as expressed through changes in policy and law, the availability of public and private funds to serve youth and families, and the role of the media in influencing public perceptions of youth. Gatekeepers at each stage of the juvenile justice process consider a number of variables that uniquely combine and influence the decisions and dispositions in a particular youth's case. Variables such as the availability of appropriate services and the support and stability in a youth's home are influenced in turn by the design of the State's juvenile justice system and its capacity to provide needed programs, as well as by the socioeconomic and cultural characteristics of the larger society. Examining these factors is part of addressing minority overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system and identifying what changes must occur to improve the lives of youth who come in contact with West Virginia's juvenile justice system. Actions that can be taken include the promotion of diversion, alternative sentencing, restorative justice, teen courts, and community services and treatment; staff training in unbiased decision making; and the provision of guidelines, standards, and assessment tools that include mechanisms to help guard against racial bias and assure consistency across jurisdictions when processing youth. Extensive graphic and tabular data and a list of 32 resources