Abstract California welfare to work Act, which was enacted in 1997, led to the creation of CYSA (comprehensive youth service act). CYSA was meant to provide “country’s probation departments (CPDs) with federal temporary assistance to the needy families’ (TANF) funds to be used to help in attaining overarching federal TANF goals by providing services to youths and their families” (Turner, Davis, Steinberg & Fain, 2003, p. xi). Therefore, CYSA/TANF program was a statutory program for increasing social welfare for its beneficiaries. This goal is explicitly expressed in the statement of goals of the program. Turner, Davis, Steinberg, and Fain (2003) confirm that the main goal of the program was to “provide a continuum of family-focused and case-specific services in a community-based setting that address the full spectrum of child and family needs, including the services provided in county-operated residential care facilities” (p. xi). The paper presents the projects, which were implemented through the program. It also highlights the services that were provided to the target social groups, the effects of the program from a system approach and individual gains, and the experiences of various counties with the implementation of the program. The aim is to evaluate the programs’ extent of achievement of its noble goals and objectives. Background to CYSA/TANF Program CYSA/TANF program was the creation of the CalWORKs (California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids). The program was enacted in the financial years 1997/1998 (Worrall, 2004). The chief purpose of the program was to offer services to juveniles who were placed on probation. This goal was to be achieved through putting in place measures that would ensure that youths were prevented from involving themselves in repeated crimes. It also put in strategies that would see youths who were placed on probation stop over relying on public aids besides creating avenues for the provision of help to the needy families through the federal temporary assistance program. The aim of providing aid to the needy families was to ensure that the needy parents rely less on the benefits given by the government (Worrall, 2004). This object was to be realized via putting in place mechanisms of ensuring that such parents were prepared to engage in the work environment. The program also endeavored to ensure that incidences of single parent families occurred in lesser magnitudes together with reduction of incidences of children siring while not engaged in marriage (Turner, Davis, Steinberg & Fain, 2003). The implementation process of the program was not fundamentally required by the state of California law to undergo an intensive evaluation process just as it happens normally for programs that are established to deliver public goods. However, the state of California’s probation officer found it vital to conduct an analysis of the process of implementation of the program together with an evaluation of its outcomes (Calderwood, Kitzes & Ivanoff, 2012). After considering and ensuring that the approaches of the bidding process followed the procuring and bidding procedures established within California, the contract to conduct analysis of the program was accorded to an organization referred to as RAND. This organization was m