[House Hearing, 106 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
FOSTER CARE INDEPENDENT LIVING
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES
of the
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 13, 1999
__________
Serial 106-22
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
61-229 CC WASHINGTON : 2000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
BILL ARCHER, Texas, Chairman
PHILIP M. CRANE, Illinois CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York
BILL THOMAS, California FORTNEY PETE STARK, California
E. CLAY SHAW, Jr., Florida ROBERT T. MATSUI, California
NANCY L. JOHNSON, Connecticut WILLIAM J. COYNE, Pennsylvania
AMO HOUGHTON, New York SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan
WALLY HERGER, California BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
JIM McCRERY, Louisiana JIM McDERMOTT, Washington
DAVE CAMP, Michigan GERALD D. KLECZKA, Wisconsin
JIM RAMSTAD, Minnesota JOHN LEWIS, Georgia
JIM NUSSLE, Iowa RICHARD E. NEAL, Massachusetts
SAM JOHNSON, Texas MICHAEL R. McNULTY, New York
JENNIFER DUNN, Washington WILLIAM J. JEFFERSON, Louisiana
MAC COLLINS, Georgia JOHN S. TANNER, Tennessee
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio XAVIER BECERRA, California
PHILIP S. ENGLISH, Pennsylvania KAREN L. THURMAN, Florida
WES WATKINS, Oklahoma LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas
J.D. HAYWORTH, Arizona
JERRY WELLER, Illinois
KENNY HULSHOF, Missouri
SCOTT McINNIS, Colorado
RON LEWIS, Kentucky
MARK FOLEY, Florida
A.L. Singleton, Chief of Staff
Janice Mays, Minority Chief Counsel
______
Subcommittee on Human Resources
NANCY L. JOHNSON, Connecticut, Chairman
PHILIP S. ENGLISH, Pennsylvania BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
WES WATKINS, Oklahoma FORTNEY PETE STARK, California
RON LEWIS, Kentucky ROBERT T. MATSUI, California
MARK FOLEY, Florida WILLIAM J. COYNE, Pennsylvania
SCOTT McINNIS, Colorado WILLIAM J. JEFFERSON, Louisiana
JIM McCRERY, Louisiana
DAVE CAMP, Michigan
Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public
hearing records of the Committee on Ways and Means are also published
in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the official
version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare both
printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process of
converting between various electronic formats may introduce
unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the
current publication process and should diminish as the process is
further refined.
C O N T E N T S
__________
Page
Advisory of May 6, 1999, announcing the hearing.................. 2
WITNESSES
U.S. General Accounting Office, Cynthia M. Fagnoni, Director,
Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues, Health,
Education, and Human Services Division......................... 15
______
Casey Family Program, Ruth W. Massinga........................... 6
Courtney, Mark E., University of Wisconsin-Madison............... 23
DeLay, Hon. Tom, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Texas, and House Majority Whip................................. 36
Keys for Life, Sonja Matheny..................................... 50
Lighthouse Youth Services, and Child Welfare League of America,
Inc., Mark Kroner.............................................. 11
Orphan Foundation of America, Eileen McCaffrey................... 43
Our House, Inc., Montrey Bowie................................... 52
People Places of Charlottesville, Kelli Sutton Block............. 46
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Grasso, Kathi L., Baltimore, MD, letter.......................... 56
National Independent Living Association, Jacksonville, FL,
statement and attachment....................................... 58
FOSTER CARE INDEPENDENT LIVING
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 13, 1999
House of Representatives,
Committee on Ways and Means,
Subcommittee on Human Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in
room B-318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Nancy L.
Johnson (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
[The advisory announcing the hearing follows:]
ADVISORY
FROM THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: (202) 225-1025
May 6, 1999
No. HR-6
Shaw Announces Hearing on
Foster Care Independent Living
Congresswoman Nancy L. Johnson (R-CT), Chairman, Subcommittee on
Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means, today announced
that the Subcommittee will hold a hearing on ways to assist States in
strengthening and expanding programs for youth emancipating from foster
care to help them establish independent living. The hearing will take
place on Thursday, May 13, 1999, in room B-318 Rayburn House Office
Building, beginning at 10:00 a.m.
In view of the limited time available to hear witnesses, oral
testimony at this hearing will be from invited witnesses only.
Witnesses will include scholars, program administrators, foundation
executives, and adolescents now participating in programs designed to
help foster children achieve independence through employment or post-
secondary education. However, any individual or organization not
scheduled for an oral appearance may submit a written statement for
consideration by the Committee and for inclusion in the printed record
of the hearing.
BACKGROUND:
The Federal Government now provides States with about $70 million
per year to conduct programs for adolescents leaving foster care that
are designed to help them establish independent living. Research and
numerous reports from States conducting these programs indicate that
adolescents leaving foster care do not fare well. As compared with
other adolescents and young adults their age, they are more likely to
quit school, to be unemployed, to be on welfare, to have mental health
problems, to be parents outside marriage, to be arrested, to be
homeless, and to be the victims of violence and other crimes.
After conducting hearings, talking with program administrators and
adolescents who are in foster care and who have left foster care, and
reviewing research and program information, the Subcommittee is
preparing to consider reform legislation. The central feature of the
legislation now being developed would provide States with both a new
framework and new resources to improve and expand their programs for
adolescents likely to stay in foster care until age 18 and for young
adults who have left foster care and are attempting to further their
education or to work.
In announcing the hearing, Chairman Johnson stated: ``The
legislation we are developing gives States an opportunity to revise and
expand their programs for this group of very needy and often victimized
adolescents. Both research and our hearings have shown that most of
these young people have tremendous potential and inner strength. With
timely and concrete assistance, they can establish themselves as
successful employees, spouses, parents, and citizens. This is a job
that we as a nation can and must do.''
FOCUS OF THE HEARING:
The hearing is being conducted to stimulate public comment on the
Independent Living legislation that Chairman Johnson and Rep. Ben
Cardin (D-MD) are expected to introduce before the hearing. Members of
the Subcommittee are especially interested in comments on whether
States should be required to have programs for youths leaving foster
care that provide services to both adolescents still in school and
young adults who have left school up to age 21; whether the major goals
of State programs should be to prepare adolescents for work or for
post-secondary education or both; whether States should be required to
help these young adults pay for health care; whether penalties should
be imposed on States for violating Federal rules; and the types of
program evaluation that should be used to determine the impacts of
State programs.
DETAILS FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS:
Any person or organization wishing to submit a written statement
for the printed record of the hearing should submit six (6) single-
spaced copies of their statement, along with an IBM compatible 3.5-inch
diskette in WordPerfect 5.1 format, with their name, address, and
hearing date noted on a label, by the close of business, Thursday, May
27, 1999, to A.L. Singleton, Chief of Staff, Committee on Ways and
Means, U.S. House of Representatives, 1102 Longworth House Office
Building, Washington, D.C. 20515. If those filing written statements
wish to have their statements distributed to the press and interested
public at the hearing, they may deliver 200 additional copies for this
purpose to the Subcommittee on Human Resources office, room B-317,
Rayburn House Office Building, by close of business the day before the
hearing.
FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS:
Each statement presented for printing to the Committee by a
witness, any written statement or exhibit submitted for the printed
record or any written comments in response to a request for written
comments must conform to the guidelines listed below. Any statement or
exhibit not in compliance with these guidelines will not be printed,
but will be maintained in the Committee files for review and use by the
Committee.
1. All statements and any accompanying exhibits for printing must
be submitted on an IBM compatible 3.5-inch diskette WordPerfect 5.1
format, typed in single space and may not exceed a total of 10 pages
including attachments. Witnesses are advised that the Committee will
rely on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing
record.
2. Copies of whole documents submitted as exhibit material will not
be accepted for printing. Instead, exhibit material should be
referenced and quoted or paraphrased. All exhibit material not meeting
these specifications will be maintained in the Committee files for
review and use by the Committee.
3. A witness appearing at a public hearing, or submitting a
statement for the record of a public hearing, or submitting written
comments in response to a published request for comments by the
Committee, must include on his statement or submission a list of all
clients, persons, or organizations on whose behalf the witness appears.
4. A supplemental sheet must accompany each statement listing the
name, company, address, telephone and fax numbers where the witness or
the designated representative may be reached. This supplemental sheet
will not be included in the printed record.
The above restrictions and limitations apply only to material being
submitted for printing. Statements and exhibits or supplementary
material submitted solely for distribution to the Members, the press,
and the public during the course of a public hearing may be submitted
in other forms.
Note: All Committee advisories and news releases are available on
the World Wide Web at ``http://www.house.gov/ways__means/''.
The Committee seeks to make its facilities accessible to persons
with disabilities. If you are in need of special accommodations, please
call 202-225-1721 or 202-226-3411 TTD/TTY in advance of the event (four
business days notice is requested). Questions with regard to special
accommodation needs in general (including availability of Committee
materials in alternative formats) may be directed to the Committee as
noted above.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Good morning, everyone.
Mr. Cardin and I have called this hearing to get reactions to
the independent living bill that we introduced this morning. It
is our intention to mark up the bill in Subcommittee next week;
Full Committee the week after, and go to the floor early in
June.
The most fundamental principle in our legislation is that
States must be responsible for designing and implementing
activities to help young people emancipating from foster care
to prepare for and achieve independent living. The Federal
Government will help by establishing a general framework for
State programs by financing the programs, by providing
technical assistance, and by evaluating the programs, but
States must bear primary responsibility for the structure and
design of those programs. If welfare reform is any example,
they are definitely up to the challenge.
The framework established by our bill is that States must
conduct a program with two major parts. The first part helps
children prepare for independence while they are still living
in foster care. The second part maintains contact with young
people once they leave foster care and are struggling to
establish themselves on their own. Our bill also requires
States to prepare children to enroll in postsecondary
education--either trade schools or college--and to move
immediately into jobs after they leave foster care. We are
looking for hard-nosed programs that actually get adolescents
ready for either additional education or a real job on the very
day they leave foster care or a combination thereof.
Within this broad framework, States are expected to
organize their own programs to help as many young people as
possible and to decide how to divide their resources between
young people still in foster care and those who have left
foster care and are trying to achieve independent living. To
this end, our bill doubles, from $70 million to $140 million,
the amount of Federal money Sates receive to conduct these
activities.
Ben Cardin and I want to do everything possible to help
these young people get health insurance. While they remain in
foster care, they are automatically covered by Medicaid, but
once they leave, they are usually on their own. In the bill we
introduced today, States are required to provide Medicaid
coverage to young people who have left foster care and are
under the age of 21. However, CBO has informed us that the cost
of this provision is $400 million over 5 years. Because we
don't have enough money to finance the entire $400 million and
still double the funding for the Independent Living Program, we
will probably be forced to adjust this provision to a State
option on Medicaid. However, even an option will result in
around half of these children getting health coverage. Ben and
I are going to continue to do everything we can to find the
money to fully fund this provision, but at the very least we
want to make them eligible for Medicaid or CHIP, Children's
Health Insurance Program, funding.
Finally, let me emphasize how important it is that the
Congress consider and pass this legislation. Every year, around
20,000 of our Nation's young people are emancipated from foster
care. They must adapt to the demands of becoming an adult,
which is an exceptionally difficult and perilous undertaking in
any society at any time, but in 21st century America, with its
emphasis on education and technology, the transition is even
more difficult, and these young people must face these perils
without the safety net provided by a family. Imagine that--we
do less for children aging out of foster care--young people
aging out of foster care than we do for welfare recipients
moving into the work force; than we do to help disabled people
looking for work. Look at the whole infrastructure of supported
work--the supported work system that we have for disabled
people, and it is simply a crime that we do so little to
prepare and support young people who are going to become
independent at the age of 18 with literally no backing from an
organized adult community.
I am filled with both admiration for how hard most of these
young people try and shame that our society provides so little
assistance to these richly deserving kids. Our bill by no means
solves the problem, but it is a great step in the right
direction and more important, still, is a signal to these young
people that the rest of us recognize their plight, believe in
them, and are willing to help.
Ben.
Mr. Cardin. Well, Madam Chair, let me first thank you and
congratulate you for your strong leadership in this area. You
have made foster children a major focus of this Subcommittee,
and we are going to be able to achieve some, I think, very
commendable results as a result of what you have been able to
do.
Two months ago, we held a hearing on foster children, and
as a result of that hearing we heard firsthand the problems
that foster children are having who age out of foster care;
that we don't do enough as a society to deal with their needs
for independent living. As a result of that hearing, as a
result of your leadership today, we have a bipartisan bill that
I have joined you in filing that provides additional assistance
to children aging out of foster care.
I look forward to marking up that bill shortly and being
able to see the benefits of that legislation. As you point out,
it doubles the amount desperately needed of Federal funds for
the Independent Living Program; it strongly encourages the
States to provide Medicaid coverage to all former foster
children between the ages of 18 and 21, and it gives the States
the flexibility to use a portion of the Independent Living
funds to cover housing needs of children. I think each of those
provisions is extremely important and will have major impact on
having a more successful transition from being a foster child
to an independent living arrangement.
The needs have been documented; you and I have talked about
this at great length; the people who have testified previously
have brought out the reason why we need to move forward with
legislation. I introduced a bill earlier. The bill that we
introduced today doesn't cover everything that was in that
bill, but I am very satisfied that we have reached an agreement
that can make major progress in this area. I should also point
out that the administration in its budget came forward with an
initiative for foster children, and I think our action today is
consistent with the administration.
So, Madam Chair, I really do look forward to the witnesses
today and moving forward on this legislation. Every year,
20,000 children are aging out of foster care, and it is
important that we move forward with this initiative, and I
thank you again for holding this hearing.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Thank you, Ben, and while
the first panel is coming forward, Ruth Massinga from the Casey
Family Program; Mark Kroner, director of the self-sufficiency
division of Lighthouse Youth Services; Cynthia Fagnoni, the
Director of Income Security Issues for the GAO; Mark Courtney,
associate professor of social work at the School of Social Work
and Institute for Research on Poverty at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison, and while you are getting yourselves
assembled, let me just say that it really has been a enormous
pleasure to work with Ben on this. You know, it is wonderful to
have a colleague who has had a long and serious interest in
this area, that comes to it with a lot of background and
dedication, and his first bill was an enormous help. It is also
a pleasure to have the administration both really seriously
interested in dealing with a problem and a realistic partner in
trying to shape the best bill we can within the context of our
current circumstances, so we look forward to your testimony
today.
I am sorry, is it Massinga?
Ms. Massinga. Yes.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF RUTH W. MASSINGA, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CASEY
FAMILY PROGRAM, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
Ms. Massinga. Good morning, Madam Chairman and
Representative Cardin. I really want to thank you for the
opportunity to testify today in support of the bill which you
and Representative Cardin have introduced about the transitions
of young people from foster care to adulthood. This is an issue
that has been a longstanding concern to many in the
organization that I serve.
As I said, I am Ruth Massinga, and I am chief executive
officer for the Casey Family Program, a national operating
foundation headquartered in Seattle serving children and
families in 14 States. Established in 1966 by Jim Casey, the
cofounder of the United Parcel Service, and his family, this
program has been working for more than 32 years with nearly
3,300 individual young people who are or have been in foster
care with the goal to help them achieve self-sufficiency and
become productive adults.
Your strong commitment and diligent efforts to improve the
opportunities for success to the more than 20,000 youths who
emancipate from the Nation's foster care system each year, are
laudable. Too many of them leave with a resume of sustained
child neglect and abuse, repeated losses of primary family
member, emotional immaturity, and uneven development of basic
skills.
Your introduction of this bill is a clear signal that you
are truly committed to helping young people transition out of
foster care and succeed. As a former State secretary of human
resources responsible for child welfare services in Maryland
from 1983 to 1989, as well as from the vantage point of 10
years at the Casey Family Program, I know that these young
people can succeed and know what it takes for that to happen.
Your bill moves us closer to accepting the challenge to match
the complex needs of these youths with the commitment of more
resources to create responsive, reliable support that will help
them address the hazards facing them as they venture out into
the world.
What does practice wisdom and the best of the limited
research available tell us about what works to help these young
people find their way in the world? Of course, it begins with
the primary care givers--the foster parents, the family
members--knowing how and when to unlock each child's potential
for learning and achieving just as it does for your children
and mine. Foster parents need to know how to stimulate and
motivate, enlisting the aid of teachers and nurturers to
systematically determine the skills and potential assets that
can be cultivated in each child as early as possible after they
enter care and certainly earlier than age 16.
Based on that systematic skill assessment, parents and
other professionals can pursue strong educational opportunities
and independent living skills training to meet the specific
needs of the child or youth. Because we know that youth leaving
foster care invariably seek support and direction from birth
family members, there needs to be a special focus on engaging
all of these adult players as part of the young person's
transition. These aspects of best practice are likely to be put
in place under the broad directions of the bill as you are
proposing them, and I would ask that you make these as explicit
as possible.
There are two other areas of the bill that I urge you to
consider strengthening: creating accountability structures
based on child outcome or results and underscoring the need for
promoting the need for systems integration. To know whether or
not the bill that you are introducing is effective, we really
must know what actually happens to these young people.
Therefore, accountability must be based on child outcomes not
just on the services provided.
The child outcome identified in your bill could be
sharpened and strengthened. In measuring the effectiveness of
services, it is important not just to inquire about educational
activities and the number of years in school but rather to
determine whether the young person has graduated or earned a
GED; to verify completion of vocational training, attainment of
employment and at what wage level, and to inquire about stable
housing, for how long, and whether it is subsidized or not.
Now, I know more than most that we have not been diligent
in this field in collecting the data necessary to measure the
outcomes achieved by the young people served by the foster care
system. For us at the Casey Family Program, a private
organization with resources to focus on results, we have come
late to the recognition that we now need outcomes stated
preferably in comparison with cohorts of young people with
similar circumstances. To remedy this data deficit during the
early nineties, the program took the first longitudinal look at
how 106 young adults from our Boise Division fared after
leaving Casey between the years 1974 and 1992. The results
revealed the importance of comparing youths with education and
parenting skills. In 1998, we began to look at our alumni more
systematically and with the collaboration of the University of
Washington, the University of Michigan, and Harvard University,
we started to design a comprehensive outcome study of over 700
youths who left the Casey Program between 1988 and 1998 along
with youths who emancipated from the public child welfare
systems in Washington and Oregon State. We will be happy to
share these data as they become available with the
Subcommittee.
So, as you double Federal outlays for independent living
and at the same time extend the age of eligibility, I believe
it is critical to develop fair and firm ongoing accountability
systems capturing the results associated with the
implementation of the bill.
One place where I can offer you some data is in strong
support to extend eligibility for Medicaid coverage from age 18
to 21. In 1998, the Casey Program served approximately 250
youths with transitional services. Eighteen of our total costs
were spent on health care and 15 percent were spent on mental
health services. In the same time period, we provided
scholarship assistance to students attending 2- and 4-year,
postsecondary education programs. Of these costs, 13 percent
were spent on health care. Absent our support for these
services, these young people would have gone untreated, because
they were ineligible for other publicly funded programs. This,
as you know, is a population at risk for chronic, expensive,
disabling conditions if left untreated.
In addition to tracking results, we need to understand how
these results were achieved and to capture the key factors that
make an appreciable difference in achieving good or bad
outcomes. Equally important to accountability is the need to
promoting systems integration. My bias is that these youth need
systems that bundle services in groups or patterns that are
easy for young people and their foster families or adult
mentors to navigate.
The bill, as drafted, identifies the different services and
resources for young people but doesn't speak to the need for
them to operate in a user-friendly way. I know that you are
acutely aware that, for sometimes good and sometimes
indefensible reasons, professionals from health and disciplines
operate as if we are hermetically sealed from one another. In
truth, to be effective, the child welfare system must talk to
the education system or the skills assessment of the young
adults will be less robust than needed. The job training system
needs to work with the transportation system or young people
can't get to the jobs for which they must be prepared. Housing
services must connect with social services or young people may
not sustain themselves.
We ask that this legislation promote the integration of
service delivery and promote ease of access for these young
people.
In sum, I thank your for your efforts and hope that the
development of permanent connections among and between people
in these systems as well as accountability for results end up
with a better system for these young people emancipating from
foster care of which we can all be proud. In that regard, I am
reminded of Jay, a young person who came to us at age 14
following years of trauma and abuse. Not long after, he became
involved with the juvenile justice system, struggled with
drugs, and refused all efforts of help. It would have been easy
for people to write him off, but his foster parents and the
staff stuck with him, and now he is a sous chef and wanting to
give back to other young people. What you propose in this bill
is what we want for Jay and all young people, and I thank you
for your efforts.
[The prepared statement follows:]
Statement of Ruth W. Massinga, Chief Executive Officer, Casey Family
Program, Seattle, Washington
Good morning Madam Chairwoman, Representative Cardin, and
members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify today about the transition of young people from foster
care to adulthood, an issue that has been of long-standing
concern to me and to the organization that I serve.
My name is Ruth W. Massinga and I am Chief Executive
Officer of The Casey Family Program, a national operating
foundation headquartered in Seattle, Washington serving
children and families in 14 states. Established in 1966 by Jim
Casey, co-founder of United Parcel Service (UPS), and his
family, the Program has been working for more than 32 years
with nearly 3,300 individual young people, who are or have been
in been foster care, with the goal of helping them develop into
self-sufficient, productive adults.
I want to begin by thanking Chairwoman Johnson and
Representative Cardin for their strong commitment and diligent
efforts to improve the opportunities for success for the more
than 20,000 youth who emancipate from the nation's foster care
system each year; too many of them leave care with a resume of
sustained child neglect and abuse, repeated losses of primary
family members, emotional immaturity and uneven development of
basic skills.
Your introduction of this bill is a clear signal that you
are truly committed to helping young people transitioning out
of foster care to succeed. As former State Secretary of Human
Resources responsible for child welfare services in Maryland
from 1983 to 1989, as well as from the vantage point of ten
years at The Casey Family Program, I know that these young
people can succeed, and know what it takes for that to happen.
This bill moves us closer to accepting the challenge to match
the complex needs of these youth with the commitment of more
resources to create responsive, reliable supports that will
help them address the hazards facing them as they venture out
into the world.
What does practice wisdom and the best of the limited
research available tell us about what works to help these young
people find their way in the world? Of course, it begins with
primary caregivers knowing how and when to unlock each child's
potential for learning and achieving, just as it does for your
children and mine. Foster parents need to know how to stimulate
and motivate, enlisting the aid of teachers and mentors, to
systematically determine the skills and potential assets that
can be cultivated in each child, as early as possible after
they enter care (certainly earlier than age 16).
Based upon that systematic skills assessment, parents and
other professionals can pursue strong educational opportunities
and independent living skills training to meet the specific
needs of the child or youth. Because we know that youth leaving
foster care invariably seek support and direction from birth
family members and other significant community connections,
there needs to be a special focus on engaging these players as
part of the young persons' ``transition team.''
These aspects of best practice are likely to be put in
place under the broad directions of the bill as proposed,
though I would ask this Committee to make these as explicit as
possible. There are two specific areas of the bill that I urge
you to consider strengthening: (1) creating accountability
structures based on child outcomes, and (2) underscoring the
need for promoting the need for systems integration.
To determine the effectiveness of services and programs, we
must know what actually happens to these young people.
Therefore, accountability must be based on child outcomes, not
just on services provided. The child outcomes identified in the
bill should be sharpened and strengthened. In measuring the
effectiveness of services it is important to not just inquire
about educational activities and number of years of school, but
rather to determine whether the young person has graduated or
earned a GED; to verify completion of vocational training,
attainment of employment and at what wage and to inquire about
stable housing, for how long and whether it is subsidized or
not.
I know more than most that we have not been diligent in
collecting data necessary to measure the outcomes achieved by
the young people served by the foster care system. The Casey
Family Program, a private organization with resources to focus
on results, has come late to the realization that we need
outcomes data, preferably in comparison with other cohorts of
young people in similar circumstances. To remedy this data
deficit, during the early 1990's The Casey Family Program took
the first longitudinal look at how 106 young adults from our
Boise Division fared after leaving Casey between 1974 and 1992.
The results revealed the importance of preparing youth with
educational, employment and parenting skills.
In 1998, we began to look at our alumni more systematically
and, with the collaboration of the University of Washington,
University of Michigan and Harvard University, have started to
design a comprehensive outcomes study of over 700 youth who
left The Casey Family Program between 1988 and 1998, along with
youth who emancipated from the public child welfare systems in
Washington and Oregon states. We will be happy to share these
data when they become available.
As you double federal outlays for independent living, and
at the same time extend the age of eligibility, I believe it is
critical to develop fair and firm ongoing accountability
systems capturing the results associated with implementation of
the bill as well as the broadly defined summative evaluation of
this total effort that is a part of the current language of the
bill. We cannot continue to settle for the significant lack of
data about effective uses of the federal and state funds spent
on independent living programs to date.
One place where I can offer you some data is in strong
support to extend eligibility for Medicaid coverage from age 18
to 21. In 1998, The Casey Family Program served approximately
250 youth with transition services across this age group.
Eighteen percent of our total costs, which were $631,900, were
spent on healthcare and 15 percent were spent on mental health
services. In the same time period we provided scholarship
assistance to students attending 2- and 4-year post-secondary
education programs at an average cost of $10,873. Of those
costs, 13 percent were spent on healthcare. Absent Casey
support for these services, these young people would have gone
untreated because they were ineligible for other publicly-
funded programs. This is the population at-risk for chronic,
expensive disabling conditions if left untreated.
In addition to tracking results we need to understand how
they were achieved and to capture the key factors that make an
appreciable difference in achieving good or bad outcomes. Among
the questions to be pursued by additional research include:
what interventions are most effective for which children, the
duration of their delivery and by whom (the foster parent,
social worker, teacher, etc.), and what service configuration
or program models are most cost-effective.
Equally important to creating accountability structures
based on child outcomes is the need for promoting systems
integration. My bias is that these youth need systems that
bundle services in routes or patterns that are easy for young
people and their foster families or adult mentors to navigate.
Sometimes we use professional jargon, such as systems
integration, to describe this.
The bill as drafted identifies the different services and
resources for young people, but does not speak to the need for
them to operate in a user-friendly way. I know that you are
acutely aware that, for sometimes good and sometimes
indefensible reasons, professionals from helping disciplines
operate as if they are hermetically sealed one from the other.
In truth, to be effective, the child welfare system must talk
to the education system or the skills assessment and
development work will be less robust than is needed. The job
training system needs to work with the transportation system or
young people cannot get to jobs for which they may be prepared.
Housing services must connect with social services or the young
people may not sustain themselves in housing or jobs, or secure
the primary or mental health resources they need. We ask that
this legislation promote the integration of service delivery
and promote ease of access for these young people.
We at Casey have come to learn that to a young person,
permanent connections among and between people in these systems
are the key to success. I am reminded of Jay, a young man who
came to us at age 14, following years of trauma and abuse. Not
long thereafter he became involved with the juvenile justice
system, struggled with drugs, and refused all offers of help.
It would have been easy to write Jay off. Yet his foster mother
and his social worker stayed connected to him and were vital
links for him to the resources in the community that finally
enabled him to kick his habit, establish a work history and to
stick with vocational training. He is now a chef at a highly
respected restaurant in Seattle, married and the committed
father of a small child, dedicated to speaking out for the
young people that follow him in the system.
Thank you for your hard work on behalf of Jay and the
thousands of young people who make that transition from the
foster care system into adulthood each year. What you propose
in this bill is what we all want for our own children--the
opportunities, supports and in the end connections to
significant adults in order to become healthy, productive and
contributing citizens in their communities. I thank you all for
your commitment to these young people.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Thank you very much.
Dr. Kroner.
STATEMENT OF MARK KRONER, DIRECTOR, SELF-SUFFICIENCY SERVICES,
LIGHTHOUSE YOUTH SERVICES, CINCINNATI, OHIO, AND CHILD WELFARE
LEAGUE OF AMERICA, INC.
Mr. Kroner. Madam Chair and Members of the Subcommittee,
good morning. My name is Mark Kroner, and I am the director of
self-sufficiency services for Lighthouse, a nonprofit
organization based out of southern Ohio. Since 1986, I have
been running our agency's Independent Living Program, and over
that period of time, we have assisted between 600 and 700 young
adults who are trying to make the difficult transition to life
on their own after the child welfare system, and we have no
doubt that this legislation would greatly increase the chances
of success for these young people and also decrease the
suffering of many youth in the country who leave the foster
care system and can't go back home to their families.
The youth in our program in Cincinnati have mothers who are
mentally ill and are chemically dependent, fathers who are in
jail or nowhere to be found, and these are kids who the local
professional system has fully realized that they cannot go back
to live with their families for any extended period of time.
Many of the youth that we are working with enter the system for
the first time at 16 or 17, and it is often a little too late
to find an adoptive family or a foster home who is willing to
take in an older teenage with a tattoo and an attitude.
A lot of the teens that we work with have made it clear
that if they were placed in a group home or any type of group
situation or even a family foster home, that they would run
away, because they were used to being on their own, fending for
themselves. What they are really asking for is a place free
from their chaotic and abusive natural family households.
Permanency for a lot of the kids in the system I think
means learning to live independently, and I would like to
quickly share some of our agency's observations. We learned
early on, back in the eighties, that if we were really going to
prepare these kids quickly for life on their own that they
would need to learn from the direct experience of living
independently while still in the custody of caring adults, and,
as Mrs. Johnson said, using the hard-nosed approach, we began
placing kids in their own apartments as young as 16, 17, and 18
back in the early eighties, and we immediately saw that they
were, indeed, learning something, and they were being caringly
coerced into taking on adult responsibilities. We have had any
number of 16- to 17-year-olds who have done very well in this
situation.
The teens that have come through the program over the years
have shown us what they need to do and learn in order to become
more self-sufficient, and a lot of times what that means is
putting them out on their own and allowing them to make dozens
of crazy mistakes and foolish choices. For example, going for a
day without food, because they spent the food allowance on a
new CD or make-up--or coming at night and standing out in the
snow, because they can't find out what they did with their key.
We have kids that have gotten evicted from their apartments,
because they couldn't control their noisy friends of family
members, and we have had kids who have actually had their
entire savings stolen by mothers who came to visit them who
were addicted to crack. What I am trying to say is we want
these kids to make these mistakes while they are still in the
custody of an agency that can help them process what happened;
and go over the situation.
This bill's provision of funding for housing is exactly
what the field of independent living needs to get to the next
level of effectiveness. Our State has amended licensing rules
to allow for the living arrangement options, and we have many
landlords here willing to give our kids a chance. We also have
a local service system that has finally gotten to the point
where we focus more on what kids need to do and learn rather
than on all the possible things that can go wrong.
We have also learned that no one living arrangement works
for all the youth that are sent to us, and over the last decade
and a half we have developed a continuum of housing options
that include individual scattered-site apartments, shared homes
in which three or four youths live in a house with a live-in
adult, host homes in which we find an adult or two that will
allow a youth to move in with them if they have a spare room.
We use boarding homes, all different types of roommates
situations, and temporary shelters for youth who need to be
removed from their apartments or any of these other places,
sometimes on very short notice.
Extending the period of care to 21 is also a no-brainer for
us in Cincinnati, especially for youth with developmental
disabilities. We are seeing probably a third of our caseload
that had diagnosable developmental disabilities, and these kids
are functioning at a 12- to 15-year-old level by the time they
reach 18. They probably will not be able to graduate from high
school until they are in their twenties or even later than
that.
In sum, what we are trying to do in Cincinnati is design a
system that somewhat resembles that of a healthy family who is
trying to help one of their own kids move out for the first
time. I think this legislation is going to help make the system
get more in touch with modern realities. Virtually no American
teenagers are expected to be totally self-sufficient at 18. I
noticed the other day that most of the college seniors that are
doing their field placements with our agency right now still
live at home with mom and dad.
It is obvious to us that foster youth in our country need
what all teens need--time to grow up, ongoing support from
caring adults, financial support for a reasonable amount of
time, health insurance covered by mom and dad or us until they
can afford it, an affordable place to live when cut off from
adult support and second chances when they fail, and I think
that this proposed legislation wisely addresses all of these
points.
We can never do enough for our own kids or the kids in the
system, but we certainly can do better than what we are doing
now. There is no magic in this legislation or what we are doing
in Cincinnati, just the common sense that says we cannot expect
kids in the foster care system to do what any normal teen
cannot do without years of financial and emotional support.
We appreciate your efforts.
[The prepared statement follows:]
Statement of Mark Kroner, Director, Self-Sufficiency Services,
Lighthouse Youth Services, Cincinnati, Ohio, and Child Welfare League
of America, Inc.
Good morning Madam Chairwoman and Members of the
Subcommittee. My name is Mark Kroner and I am the Director of
Self-Sufficiency Services for Lighthouse Youth Services--a
private nonprofit organization based in Southern Ohio since
1969. Lighthouse Youth Services is one of over 450 member
agencies of the Child Welfare League of America that provides
independent living services to youths leaving foster care.
I have been involved in training and consulting with dozens
of organizations nationwide that are trying to develop
independent living programs. Since 1986 I have been running our
agency's independent living program in Cincinnati. Over that
period of time we have assisted nearly 700 youths who are
trying to make the difficult transition from foster care to
living on their own.
We are greatly encouraged by this Subcommittee's interest
in providing supports to youths exiting foster care. The Foster
Care Independence Act will provide much needed support and
flexibility to the states so they can provide better services
to kids making the transition from foster care to independence.
Many of the youths in our program at Lighthouse have
mothers who are mentally ill or chemically dependent, or have
fathers who are in jail or nowhere to be found. These youth
were abused, neglected or abandonedto the point where caring
professionals realized that they would never be able to count
on living with their families of origin for any extended period
of time. We have to focus our energies on helping youth build
workable futures for themselves.
Many of the young people in our county entered the child
welfare system for the first time when they were 16 or 17--
often too late to find an adoptive family or a foster home
willing to take in an older teenager with a tattoo and an
attitude. Many of the teens referred to us made it clear that
they would run from a foster or group home if placed there.
They were used to being on their own and fending for
themselves. They just wanted a place free from the abuse and
chaos of their natural family households.
Up to a third of the teens we serve have a diagnosable
developmental disability. Many of these youth are functioning
at a 12-14 year old level at age 18. They are usually several
years behind in school and are not ready to graduate from high
school until they are 20 or 21. They will in no way be able to
become totally self-sufficient at age 18.
Permanency for many of these youths means learning to live
independently. Even if they do spend time with family members,
their chances for success are improved if they learn to count
on themselves to solve their daily problemsand have the
knowledge, experience and skills to do so.
These foster youth receive a ``double-whammy'' when they
reach 18. First, they learn emphatically that their families of
origin are not going to help them. Then, they learn that the
services and supports they had received in the child welfare
system abruptly end.
The Foster Care Independence Act recognizes that these
youths need additional help. This legislation provides new and
expanded opportunities for us to help these young people. The
services supported by this bill would greatly increase the
chances of success for these youths who need to venture out on
their ownmany years ahead of their peers who often receive full
or partial support from their families until their mid
twenties. The services offered under the existing Title IV-E
Independent Living program have begun to address the needs of
youth leaving foster care, but we need to do much more.
The Foster Care Independence Act addresses three important
areas that will greatly increase the chances of success for
youth aging out of foster care:
Helping young people acquire the skills and knowledge they
need to become self-sufficient.
Providing health care coverage for youth up to age 21.
Increasing housing options for youths who have left foster
care.
I know you have heard testimony from many others that will
give you a clear national picture of the situation and relevant
statistics. I would like to give you more of a perspective from
the front line and share some of our agency's observations.
We learned early on that the best preparation for
independence that the youth in our program could have was the
direct experience of living on their own while still in the
custody of caring adults. We learned that independent living
services without housing was like driver's training without the
car. Life skills training without the actual experience of
living alone and using those life skills was not enough--young
people need real-life practice in order to really learn.
At Lighthouse Youth Services, we started placing foster
youth in their own apartments a number of years ago so that
they could have the experience of learning to live on their
own. Despite a lot of gray hairs and after-hours pages, we saw
that these kids were indeed learning, and could be
``constructively coerced'' into taking on adult
responsibilities at 18 or 17. We even have had a number of
young people live on their own and do very well at age 16.
Using Title IV-E Independent Living funds, we began a
countywide self-sufficiency training program for all youth in
out-of-home care. This training has made a noticeable
difference in the ability of youth referred to our apartment
program to make a quick adjustment to living independently.
Allowing youth to participate in this program beginning at age
14, which would be made possible by the Foster Care
Independence Act, would make our efforts even more effective.
The teens coming through our program taught us what they
needed to do and learn in order to become more self-sufficient.
Sometimes it meant letting them makes dozens of crazy mistakes
and foolish choices:
going to school without lunch because they spent
their food allowance on a new nose ring.
getting evicted because they couldn't control
their noisy friends.
losing a job after forgetting to budget for bus
fare.
having their hard earned savings stolen by a
visiting mother, addicted to crack.
receiving a $200 phone bill after allowing
``friends'' free use of the apartment phone.
standing out in the snow at 2 a.m. wondering where
the key went.
But our teens made these mistakes while they were still in
our care--and have our support in going over the events leading
up to the mistake, the consequences, and the ``what to do next
time'' speech.
Over the last decade Lighthouse Youth Services has created
a continuum of housing options that include:
individual scattered-site apartments;
small shared-homes that house 3-4 youth and a
live-in adult;
host homes in which a youth shares a house with
one or two adults;
access to a boarding home for females in the city
center;
roommate situations; and
temporary shelters for youth that can't stay in
their own apartments.
All states need support and flexibility to establish
similar continuums, and to extend services to youth leaving
foster care. The Foster Care Independence Act would allow
states to use up to 30% of Title IV-E Independent Living funds,
which are increased in the Foster Care Independence Act, to be
used for the room and board costs for youths ages 18-21. These
additional funds will foster the creativity that states need to
develop their own housing continuum and related services for
these very vulnerable youth.
Our state has amended licensing rules to make the less-
restrictive and semi-supervised living arrangements possible.
We have found many landlords who are willing to give our kids a
chance. (They tell us our kids are no worse than the general
public.) We have a local system that focuses more on what youth
need rather than on all of the things that could possibly go
wrong. We expect our youth to make a lot of mistakes until they
get it right. What they really need is help acquiring the
skills they need to become self-sufficient.
In short, what we are trying to do in Cincinnati is to
create a system that somewhat resembles the caring but
challenging atmosphere that healthy families try to create when
helping their young adults leave home. Our model might not work
in some of the larger cities where rents are sky high or
apartments are scarcebut some version of it could.
We are fortunate in Cincinnati. We have one of those rare
situations in which the public children's service staff,
juvenile court personnel, and private providers have reached a
general agreement as to what services need to be provided. We
see a lot of successes and even some miracles from time-to-
time. But we also see a larger group of youth leaving us with a
long way to go before they are totally self-sufficient. We know
we're not yet doing enough.
Next month, 18 youths in our Independent Living Program
will graduate from high school or receive their GEDs. It would
be a real shame to hand them their diplomas and then tell them
they are totally on their own.
Extending services and housing assistance to youth until 21
is a no-brainer. It is obviously what is needed to best help
all foster youth, and especially those with developmental
disabilities.
In summary, it is obvious that the foster youths in our
country need what all teens need:
time to grow up;
ongoing support from caring adults;
financial support for a reasonable period of time;
health insurance until they can afford it;
chances to learn from mistakes and direct
experience;
an affordable place to live when cut off from
adult support; and
second chances when they fail.
The Foster Care Independence Act addresses all of these
needs. With this legislation we have a wonderful opportunity to
make a significant positive difference in the lives of one of
the most vulnerable groups of people in our country. We can
never do enough for our own kids or for the kids raised in the
child welfare system but we can do better than what we are
doing now. The existing Independent Living program has done a
lot to help prepare youths leaving foster care for adulthood.
Since that program began operating in 1987, the number of teens
in the foster care has increased dramatically. We also now
recognize that these youths leaving care need a broader range
of supports and serivces than are available within existing
programs.
There is no magic in what we are doing in Cincinnati or in
what this bill proposesonly the common sense that says we can't
expect foster youth to do what any normal youth couldn't do
without years of sustained help and financial support. Our
foster youth need the additional supports provided by the
Foster Care Independence Act.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Thank you very much.
Ms. Fagnoni.
STATEMENT OF CYNTHIA M. FAGNONI, DIRECTOR, EDUCATION,
WORKFORCE, AND INCOME SECURITY ISSUES, HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION, U.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE
Ms. Fagnoni. Thank you, Madam Chair and Members of the
Subcommittee. I am pleased to be here today to discuss the
Independent Living Program and the needs of youth leaving the
foster care system. I would like to focus my remarks on the
problems faced by foster care youth once they leave care; what
is currently known about the extent of services provided by the
ILP, and what is known about the effectiveness of the ILP. My
testimony is based on ongoing work for the Subcommittee,
including a visit to locations in California, Maryland, New
York, and Texas and a preliminary review of about one-third of
the 1998 annual ILP reports that States provide to HHS.
Research has shown that many former foster care youth face
difficulties in making the transition from foster care to self-
sufficiency. Many of these youths have serious educational
deficiencies, rely on public assistance, and often find
themselves lacking adequate housing. At the same time, research
has also shown that addressing these deficiencies can have a
positive effect on former foster care youth. For example,
completing high school prior to leaving foster care was
positively related to stable employment, not being a cost to
the community, and overall self-sufficiency.
To better enable youth to make the transition from foster
care to self-sufficiency, State ILPs provide a wide array of
services. These include helping youth complete high school or
get a GED, prepare for postsecondary or vocational education,
and prepare for employment. To cite just one example, youths in
Baltimore receive employment-related training that covers
topics, such as writing resumes, preparing for interviews,
conflict resolution, and job retention.
However, in some of the sites we visited, we find that the
ILPs could not fully provide services that matched the
employment potential of foster care youth to appropriate
employment pathways. For example, officials in three of the
sites we visited cited a lack of vocational opportunities that
could be appropriate for youths.
Many States also help youths develop daily living skills,
such as money management, health, safety, and hygiene, self-
esteem, parenting, cooking, and problem-solving. For example,
youths in Contra Costa County, California attend a series of
workshops that cover money management, health and hygiene,
parenting and sexual responsibility, and effective
communication skills among others.
However, we also found that important hands-on activities
designed to provide youth with practice and daily life tests
and experience were limited in some of the sites we visited.
Issues such as safety regulations in group homes inhibit or
prevent certain activities from occurring, such as practicing
cooking.
States also offer a variety of additional services to
further help youth transition to living on their own. These
include supervised practice living arrangements, such as
transitional housing programs, and after-care services for
youth who have just left the foster care system. In Baltimore,
for example, the Challengers Independent Living Program
provides youth with apartments for 18 to 24 months that are
furnished and supervised by service providers. Program staff
offer educational, vocational, clinical, and home life support,
including additional independent living skills training.
However, the transitional housing programs we visited have
a limited number of spaces available--from 6 to 12 spaces. One
transitional housing provider in Texas told us that while the
program has space for 6 youths, the provider had identified an
additional 80 to 100 youths who could benefit from this type of
housing program. Both current and former foster care youth in
California and Texas also told us of the need for additional
transitional housing arrangements.
Youth who have left the foster care system often encounter
hardships and need aftercare services from time to time once
they are living on their own. Although all of the sites we
visited provide aftercare services for youth who have left the
foster care system, officials noted that the services offered
are not extensive. For example, Texas officials noted that
aftercare services are only available for 6 months after the
youth exits care.
Given the significant challenges that foster care youth
face in moving from foster care to adulthood, it is important
to understand how effective ILPs are in moving these children
and ensuring positive outcomes. However, few data are available
to help in understanding what outcomes are achieved through
these programs.
We found three studies from Baltimore County, Maryland,
Harris County (Houston, Texas), and New York City which linked
participation in the ILP with improved education, housing, and
other outcomes. In the Maryland study, youth who received ILP
services were more likely to complete high school, have an
employment history, and be employed when they left foster care.
In Texas, graduates of the State's ILP achieved full-time
employment earlier and were more likely to complete high school
or a GED at a younger age than youth that did not receive
independent living services. In New York City, studies showed
that 75 percent of the youth in one program had completed high
school; 72 percent had full-time employment when they left the
care, and 65 percent had savings accounts.
While information on program outcomes is limited, State and
local officials we spoke with indicated that determining
outcomes for former foster care youths is important, and two
locations have begun to design strategies to capture this much
needed information. Contra Costa County, for example, has
funded a 2-year study geared toward measuring outcomes.
Similarly, the Maryland Association of Resources for Families
and Youth, an association of private service providers,
recently began a project to collect key data on youth in foster
care, upon exit from care, and at various intervals after
leaving care. In our ongoing work, we plan to explore
innovative practices States are using to provide services to
foster care youth and also to examine HHS's role in developing
and implementing performance measures.
Madam Chair, this completes my statement. I would be happy
to answer any questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement follows:]
Statement of Cynthia M. Fagnoni, Director, Education, Workforce, and
Income Security Issues, Health, Education, and Human Services Division,
U.S. General Accounting Office
Madam Chair and Members of the Subcommittee:
I am pleased to be here today to discuss the Department of
Health and Human Services' (HHS) Independent Living Program
(ILP) and the needs of youths leaving the foster care system.
While some foster care youths may be adopted or reunited with
their families, each year approximately 20,000 exit the foster
care system with the expectation that they will be self-
sufficient. Yet many of these youths face serious problems,
including homelessness, lack of employment stability,
incarceration, and pregnancy at an early age. Recently, the
Congress has raised concerns that ILP, designed to help foster
care youths transition to living independently, does not
provide the necessary life skills to complete basic education,
find and maintain employment, or to otherwise live self-
sufficiently after leaving care.
Today, I would like to focus my remarks on (1) the problems
faced by foster care youths once they leave care, (2) what is
currently known about the extent of services provided by ILP,
and (3) what is known about the effectiveness of ILP. My
testimony is based on our ongoing work for this subcommittee,
including our visits to locations in California, Maryland, New
York, and Texas and a preliminary review of about one-third of
the 1997 annual ILP reports submitted by states to HHS.
In summary, the few available studies that track youths who
have exited foster care reveal that many have a difficult time
making the transition to living on their own. The studies found
that a substantial portion of these youths have not attained
basic education goals, such as completing high school, and are
dependent on public assistance. In addition, many experience
periods of homelessness after leaving care and have other
difficulties that impede their progress toward self-
sufficiency, such as being unemployed. In an effort to help
foster care youths become self-sufficient, state ILPs offer a
wide array of independent living services, including education
and employment assistance; training in daily living skills,
such as managing money, housekeeping, and personal hygiene; and
additional transitional services, such as supervised practice
living. However, program administrators acknowledge that
independent living services fall short in key areas. These
administrators report that developing appropriate employment
opportunities for foster care youths, providing supervised
transitional housing arrangements, and developing program
activities that provide opportunities to practice the skills
learned or enhance youths' self-esteem has been difficult.
Moreover, there are few evaluations that link program
objectives to outcomes, leaving questions concerning the
effectiveness of the current array of independent living
services.
BACKGROUND
ILP was initially authorized by P.L. 99-272 and
reauthorized indefinitely as part of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-66). The act authorized
federal funding of $70 million per year for states to establish
and implement services to assist youths aged 16 and over make
the transition to independent living from foster care. Services
are provided for a short period of time, and states have the
flexibility to design services to meet a wide range of
individual needs. A portion of the federal funds--$45 million--
are distributed to states as an entitlement based on each
state's proportion of all youths receiving federal foster care
payments in federal fiscal year 1984 across the United
States.\1\ States are eligible to receive an additional share
of the remaining $25 million in federal funds if they provide
funds to match the federal dollars received. Recently, the
Congress and the Administration proposed new initiatives
designed to further help adolescents move from foster care to
adulthood, including increased program funding, medical care
coverage, and housing supports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Under title IV-E of the Social Security Act, federal matching
funds based on the state's Medicaid matching rate are provided to
states for foster care maintenance costs to cover a portion of the
food, housing, and incidental expenses for foster care children from
families eligible for benefits under the former Aid to Families With
Dependent Children program using 1995 eligibility criteria. States
incur all foster care costs for children not eligible for federal
support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS issued instructions to states in December 1993
outlining allowable ILP services. These services include
education and employment assistance; instruction in daily
living skills; and transitional support services, such as
supervised practice living. In addition, states must provide
youths written transitional independent living plans based on
an assessment of their needs and may establish outreach
programs to attract individuals eligible to participate to the
program. Further, ILPs may include counseling and other similar
assistance related to education and vocational training,
preparing for a general equivalency diploma (GED) or higher
education, and counseling and training to enhance basic living
skills and interpersonal and social skills. Eligible
participants for independent living services include all youths
aged 16 and over for whom federal foster care payments are
being made.\2\ At their option, states may also serve foster
care youths not receiving federal assistance and former foster
care youths who were in foster care after the age of 16.
Likewise, states may provide services to any of these youths
until the age of 21. Youth participation in ILP services is
voluntary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ States can receive federal foster care maintenance payments for
eligible children while in foster care family homes, private for profit
or nonprofit child care facilities, or public child care institutions.
Youths become ineligible for federal foster care maintenance payments
at age 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESEARCH SUGGESTS THAT FOSTER CARE YOUTHS STRUGGLE TO REACH SELF-
SUFFICIENCY
Many foster youths have a difficult time making the
transition from the foster care system to self-sufficiency.
While there are few available studies tracking youths who have
exited foster care, our review of these studies reveals some
consistent findings. Research has shown that many former foster
care youths have serious education deficiencies and rely on
public assistance. For example, a 1991 Westat study of foster
care youths interviewed 2.5 to 4 years after they left care
found that 46 percent of these youths had not finished high
school.\3\ Additionally, almost 40 percent were determined to
be a cost to the community, such as being dependent on some
form of public assistance or Medicaid. Other research shows
similar results. A 1990 study of former foster care youths in
the San Francisco Bay Area who had been out of care at least 1
year but no more than 10, showed that 55 percent left foster
care without graduating from high school and that 38 percent
still had not graduated at the time of the study.\4\ Similarly,
the University of Wisconsin recently studied youths who had
been out of care between 12 and 18 months and found that 37
percent had not finished high school and 32 percent were
receiving public assistance.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Westat, Inc., A National Evaluation of Title IV-E Foster Care
Independent Living Programs for Youth (Washington, D.C.: HHS, 1991).
\4\ Richard P. Barth, ``On Their Own: The Experiences of Youth
After Foster Care,'' Child and Adolescent Social Work, Vol. 7, No. 5
(Oct. 1990).
\5\ Mark E. Courtney and Irving Piliavin, Foster Youth Transitions
to Adulthood: Outcomes 12 to 18 Months After Leaving Out-of-Home Care
(Madison, Wisc.: University of Wisconsin, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, former foster care youths often find
themselves lacking adequate housing. The Westat study reported
that 25 percent of the youths were homeless at least 1 night.
Likewise, the University of Wisconsin study found that, since
leaving care, 14 percent of the males and 10 percent of the
females had been homeless at least once and 22 percent had
lived in four or more places in the previous 12 to 18 months.
The connection between homelessness and prior episodes of
foster care can also be seen in a 1997 study of 400 homeless
individuals.\6\ This study found that 20 percent had lived in
foster care as children and 20 percent had one or more children
currently in foster care.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Homes for the Homeless, Homelessness: The Foster Care
Connection (updated Apr. 1997), http://www.opendoor.com/hfh/
fostercare.html (cited Dec. 9, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional difficulties may further impede former foster
care youths' ability to become self-sufficient. For example,
the Westat study found that 51 percent of the youths were
unemployed and 42 percent had given birth or fathered a child.
Similarly, the University of Wisconsin found that 39 percent of
the youths were unemployed and that 27 percent of the males and
10 percent of the females were incarcerated at least once.
At the same time, research has shown that addressing these
deficiencies can have a positive effect on former foster care
youth. The Westat study found a connection between certain
variables and the youths' ability to live independently. For
example, the study showed that completing high school prior to
leaving foster care was related to stable employment, not being
a cost to the community, and overall self-sufficiency. Further,
youths who held at least one job during their stay in foster
care were more likely to maintain a job after care.
Findings from the three studies we reviewed are summarized
in table 1.
Table 1: Outcome Information on Former Foster Care Youths Reported in
Three Recent Studies
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Study and samples on which percentages are Outcome information on
based former foster care youth
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Westat (1991) study of 810 former foster Education:
care youths in eight states at 2.5 to 4 --46 percent had not
years after leaving care. completed high school.
Employment:--51 percent
were unemployed.
--62 percent had not
maintained a job for at
least 1 year. Other:--40
percent were a cost to the
community.
--25 percent were homeless
at least 1 night.
--42 percent had birthed or
fathered a child.
Courtney and Piliavin (1998) study of 113 Education:
former foster care youths in Wisconsin at --37 percent had not
12 to 18 months after leaving care. completed high school.
Employment:
--39 percent were
unemployed.
--19 percent had not held a
job since leaving care.
Other:--32 percent received
some kind of public
assistance.
--12 percent were homeless
at least once (14 percent
males and 10 percent
females).
--22 percent had lived in
four or more places.
--44 percent reported
problems with acquiring
needed medical care.
--27 percent of males and 10
percent of females were
incarcerated at least once.
Barth (1990) study of 55 former foster Education:
care youths in the San Francisco Bay Area --38 percent had not
at least 1 year and no more than 10 years completed high school.
after leaving care. Employment:
--25 percent were
unemployed.
Other:
--53 percent reported
serious financial
hardships.
--47 percent received some
form of public assistance
or had problems paying for
food or housing.
--35 percent were homeless
or moved frequently.
--38 percent did not have
health or medical
coverage.--13 percent
reported hospitalization
for an emotional problem.
--40 percent of females
reported a pregnancy.
--35 percent had been
arrested or spent time in
jail or prison.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MULTIPLE SERVICES ASSIST YOUTHS IN ACHIEVING INDEPENDENCE BUT FALL
SHORT IN KEY AREAS
To better ensure foster care youths are prepared to live as
self-sufficient adults, state ILPs provide an array of
services, including assistance with completing education and
finding employment; developing the basic skills needed to live
independently, such as money management, hygiene, housekeeping,
and nutrition; and transitional services, such as supervised
practice living arrangements. However, state and local
administrators acknowledge that their current ILPs fall short
in key areas. For example, some programs do not sufficiently
seek out employment opportunities in the community and offer
few opportunities for youths to participate in real-life
practice opportunities or esteem-building experiences.
Moreover, some programs could not provide adequate housing or
other transitional assistance for youths still in care and
those who have left care.
Education and Employment Assistance
Our review of annual state reports and our visits to four
locations show that states provide services to help youths (1)
complete high school or a GED, (2) prepare for post-secondary
or vocational education, and (3) prepare for employment. For
example, in Contra Costa County, California, an education
specialist meets with youths to discuss education goals, review
grades, and assess education needs. If a youth is behind
academically, tutoring services are provided. The specialist
also sets up tours at local colleges and vocational programs
and assists youths in completing financial aid applications. A
job development specialist assists difficult to employ youths
find self-supporting employment through such means as coaching,
counseling, and on-site job development training. The
specialist also coordinates career fairs. Youths in Baltimore
receive employment-related training that covers topics such as
writing resumes, preparing for interviews, conflict resolution,
and job retention.
However, in the locations we visited, we found that the
ILPs could not fully provide services that matched the
employment potential of foster care youths to appropriate
employment pathways. For example, officials in three of the
locations we visited cited a lack of vocational opportunities
appropriate for youths. State and local coordinators in Texas
indicated that few apprenticeship positions are available,
while officials in Baltimore and New York City reported a lack
of affordable vocational programs or funds to pay for such
programs. Baltimore officials also reported that culinary arts
and technology-related programs--two programs popular with
foster youths--are very expensive. Of the four locations we
visited, only Texas offers statewide tuition waivers for all
state-supported vocational, technical, and post-secondary
schools.
We also found that connections between ILP and potential
employers are not thoroughly developed. For example, ILP
coordinators in one location said they did not have time to
establish relationships with many employers and that employment
development efforts in their location were informal. State
officials in California and Maryland indicated that they
recognize more public-private partnerships to provide youths
with employment opportunities are needed. In addition, New York
City officials reported that they are just beginning to devise
ways to link with employers to enhance youth job prospects,
such as developing internship opportunities. Several officials
also pointed out that more staff need to be assigned to
accomplishing this task.
Assistance in Learning Daily Living Skills
Our review of annual state reports shows that many states
help youths develop daily living skills. Each location we
visited conducts independent-living skills classes to teach
youths tasks that are necessary to live self-sufficiently. For
example, youths in Contra Costa County, California, attend a
series of workshops that cover life skills such as money
management, health and hygiene, parenting and sexual
responsibility, and effective communication skills. Money
management covers topics such as how to prepare a budget and
how to open and use a checking account. In the San Antonio,
Texas, area, life-skills classes meet for 8 weeks and cover
core areas, including personal and interpersonal skills, health
and safety, money management, and planning for the future. In
New York City, life-skills classes provide similar instruction
as well as instruction on housekeeping, health care,
interpersonal skills, food management, transportation, and
family planning.
However, important hands-on activities to practice daily
life tasks and experiences to develop self-esteem were limited
in some of the locations we visited. Some state and local
program officials acknowledged the importance of allowing
youths to attempt (and perhaps initially fail) daily tasks--
including cooking, cleaning, doing laundry, and comparison
shopping--until they become proficient at these tasks. Program
officials in two locations and foster care youths in three
locations reported that issues, such as safety regulations for
group homes, inhibit or prevent certain activities, such as
practicing cooking. In some group homes, laundry products and
cooking utensils may be locked away from youths. In addition,
esteem-building experiences are often limited to a small number
of youths. For example, local officials in Texas reported that
opportunities for foster care youths to participate in post-
secondary school conferences or extended outdoor activities
were limited. In addition, programs offering adult mentors--in
an attempt to build positive and lasting relationships--serve a
small number of youths. For example, a foster care service
provider in Texas--contracted by the state specifically to
develop mentor programs--reported difficulties finding mentors.
However, officials in all locations saw some type of mentor
program as one method to provide youths with a vocational role
model and opportunities to practice other independent living
skills they have learned.
Housing and Other Transitional Support Services
Based on our review of annual state reports and site
visits, states offer a variety of additional services to
further help youths transition to living on their own. These
include supervised practice living arrangements--such as
transitional housing programs--and aftercare services for
youths who have left the foster care system. Transitional
housing programs--while designed slightly differently in each
location--provide an opportunity for youths to experience
living independently while still receiving supervision and
financial support. In Baltimore County, Maryland, for example,
the Challengers Independent Living program seeks to provide
youths who have previously lived a dependent lifestyle with
different or improved means to cope with present and
forthcoming independence once they leave foster care. Foster
care youths can reside for 18 to 24 months in apartments
furnished and supervised by the service provider and receive a
weekly stipend to purchase clothing, food, and household
supplies. They also are responsible for cleaning their
apartments and doing their laundry. Each youth's foster care
payment covers the cost of rent, utilities, and administration
of the program. Program staff also offer educational,
vocational, clinical, and home-life support, including
additional independent-living skills training.
Officials in the four locations we visited reported that
the number of supervised transitional housing sites is very
limited and that they could not provide adequate housing
assistance for both youths in care and those who have left the
system. The programs we visited have a restricted number of
spaces available--from 6 to 12 spaces. One transitional housing
provider in Texas indicated that while the program has spaces
for 6 youth, an additional 80 to 100 youths with no housing
upon exiting foster care could benefit from this type of
housing program. A transitional housing provider in a second
location explained that program staff carefully screen youths
for readiness and accept only the most promising teens into the
program. Current foster care youths in Texas and former foster
care youths in California also emphasized the need for
additional transitional housing arrangements.
Youths who have exited foster care face a number of
obstacles in finding housing, according to officials in the
locations we visited. For example, many landlords are reluctant
to rent apartments to a youth without work experience or credit
history. In addition, foster care youths who live in urban
areas often do not earn a sufficient income to pay the rents
found in large cities and may find it difficult to save enough
money to pay for a security deposit. Officials in Baltimore
reported that the local social services department often writes
a letter to the landlord on behalf of youths to help them
obtain housing.
Finally, officials at the locations agree that youths who
have left the system often encounter hardships and need
aftercare services from time to time. Although all of the
locations we visited provide such services, some officials
noted that their aftercare services are not extensive. For
example, in Texas, aftercare services are only available for 6
months after the youth exits care. The services consist mainly
of referrals to other service agencies, visits to colleges, and
a small stipend for 4 months. Aftercare services in Baltimore
County and New York City are limited to referring the youths to
other agencies who can assist them. However, at both of these
locations, youths have the opportunity to remain in foster care
until age 21 under certain circumstances. Contra Costa County,
California, previously offered aftercare to youths up to age 19
on a case-by-case basis; new state legislation mandates that
ILP now serve youths to age 21.
INFORMATION ON PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS IS LIMITED
Given the significant challenges that foster care youths
face in moving from foster care to adulthood, it is important
to understand how effective ILPs are in better ensuring
positive outcomes. However, few data are available to help in
understanding what outcomes are achieved through these
programs. States are required to report to HHS participant
achievement 90 days after program completion, such as the
number of youths who are employed, have completed high school
or a GED, are attending college, and are living independent of
public assistance. However, state and local officials reported
much difficulty in finding youths to determine their living
status once they leave care. These officials indicated they
either do not follow up with youths after leaving foster care
or have little success finding youths. For example, a Maryland
official stated that response to follow-up contact in the past
was very limited and that only 15 percent of youths returned
follow-up letters. Local officials in Texas estimated that
about 30 to 35 percent of youths disappear during the initial
90-day period and that some can only be located through word-
of-mouth or sibling contacts. They noted that following up with
youths who received a stipend as part of aftercare is less
difficult.
In addition, few formal studies have been conducted that
measure ILP effectiveness. We found three studies--from
Baltimore County, Harris County (Houston, Texas), and New York
City--that linked participation in ILP with improved education,
housing, and other outcomes. In the Baltimore County study,
youths who received ILP services were more likely to complete
high school, have an employment history, and be employed when
they left foster care.\7\ In the Harris County study, the
authors found that graduates of the Texas ILP achieved full-
time employment earlier and were more likely to complete high
school or a GED at a younger age than youths who did not
receive independent living services.\8\ The New York City study
of independent living services provided by Green Chimneys
Children's Services showed 75 percent of the youths had
completed high school or a GED, 72 percent had full-time
employment when they left care, and 65 percent had savings
accounts.\9\ Another study linked certain foster care
placements with greater attainment of practical living
skills.\10\ This study found that foster care youths placed in
apartment-type transitional housing scored higher on life-
skills knowledge assessment. Finally, the Westat study found
that youths who received training in money management,
obtaining a credit card, and buying a car, as well as help in
how to find a job and appropriate education opportunities were
more likely to maintain a job for at least a year. However, in
some instances, ILP did not have the desired effects. For
example, in the Westat study, researchers found that receiving
independent living services did not significantly reduce the
probability of early parenthood. In addition, the Harris County
study found that program participants younger than 21 were more
likely to be dependent on different forms of public
assistance--specifically subsidized housing and food stamps--
than the group of nonprogram participants under age 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Maria Scannapieco and others, ``Independent Living Programs: Do
They Make A Difference?'' Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal,
Vol. 12, No. 5 (Oct. 1995).
\8\ Jane T. Simmons, ``PAL Evaluation Final Report,'' unpublished
report submitted to Harris County (Texas) Children's Protective
Services (Mar. 6, 1990).
\9\ Gerald P. Mallon, ``After Care, Then Where? Outcomes of an
Independent Living Program,'' Child Welfare, Vol. 77 (Jan./Feb. 1998).
\10\ Edmund V. Mech and others, ``Life-Skills Knowledge: A Survey
of Foster Adolescents in Three Placement Settings,'' Children and Youth
Services Review, Vol. 16, Nos. 3/4 (1994), pp. 181-200.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
State and local officials indicate, however, that
determining outcomes for former foster care youths is
important, and two locations have begun to design strategies to
capture this much needed information. Contra Costa County,
California, for example, has funded a 2-year study geared
toward measuring outcomes. The study will determine the status
of youths at the time they enter ILP--such as foster care
placement stability, academic performance, and living-skills
assessment--and measure youth outcomes after ILP services are
given. One goal is to use the information to develop better
aftercare programs. Similarly, the Maryland Association of
Resources for Families and Youth--an association of private
service providers--recently began a project to provide the
answers to three questions: Whom do we serve? What services do
we provide them? and What are the outcomes of those services?
The project requires data collection while the youths are still
in care; upon exit from care; and at 6-, 12-, and 18-month
intervals after leaving care.
In our continuing analysis of ILPs, we plan to explore in
greater detail many of these issues, including any innovative
strategies being implemented in the states. We also plan to
look at HHS' role in ensuring that performance measures are
identified and implemented. This information will be presented
in our final report to the Subcommittee.
Madam Chair, this concludes my prepared statement. At this
time, I will be happy to answer any questions you or the other
Members of the Subcommittee may have.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Thank you very much.
It is a pleasure to welcome Mark Courtney from Wisconsin.
We are glad your plane got you here in time, and we are looking
forward to hearing what you have to say.
STATEMENT OF MARK E. COURTNEY, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, SCHOOL OF
SOCIAL WORK AND INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON POVERTY, UNIVERSITY
OF WISCONSIN-MADISON
Mr. Courtney. It is a pleasure to be here; thanks for
inviting me. Today, I am going to share with you the results of
a study that I have been conducting with Irving Piliavin and
Andrew Grogan-Kaylor in Wisconsin of youth that have aged out
of the foster care system in Wisconsin during 1995 and 1996. I
am also going to share with you my observations regarding the
Foster Care Independence Act of 1999.
Our study is following foster youth from before they left
the system until 3 years after they exited. Thus far, we have
interviewed 141 youths while they were in care, and we have
been able to follow about 80 percent of them, or 113, for about
12 to 18 months after they have left the system. All of them
have been in care at least 18 months and on an average over 5
years. So, from our perspective, we believe the system had a
clear responsibility to prepare them for independence.
We asked a number of questions about whether they had been
trained in areas specified in law and regulations, and we found
that on average about three-quarters of them claimed that they
had been trained in any given area. However, far fewer had
actually been provided concrete assistance in carrying out
essential tasks associated with independent living. For
example, fewer than one-fifth have received any job training;
participated in a mock job interview; been told how to apply
for public assistance; received help finding a job or help
obtaining housing, personal health records or health insurance.
Not surprisingly, then, over one-quarter of the foster youth
felt either not at all or not very well prepared in a number of
important areas, including getting a job, managing money,
obtaining housing, knowledge of community resources, parenting,
and living on one's own.
Almost a third of the youths were at or below an eighth-
grade reading level when we first contacted them near the time
when they should have been graduating from high school. Not
surprisingly, given their educational deficits, by 12 to 18
months past discharge, 37 percent of the young adults had not
completed high school; 55 percent had completed high school or
an equivalent, and only 9 percent had entered college.
The former foster youths had significant unmet health and
mental health needs. Forty-four percent of them reported having
trouble obtaining medical care most or all of the time since
leaving the system. Of these, 90 percent reported that this was
due to a lack of health insurance coverage or care simply
costing too much. Nearly half of our respondents had received
mental health services in the year prior to our interview with
them while they were in the system, yet only one-fifth had
received any mental health services since leaving the system in
spite of no change in their overall, relatively poor mental
health.
The bottom line is that achieving self-sufficiency is
difficult, to put it mildly, for a large percentage of the
former foster youth. Fewer than half had at least $250 when
they left the system. Only three-fifths were working when we
interviewed them postdischarge, and even those employed, on
average, earn less than someone working full-time in a minimum
wage job. All told, 44 percent of the group had either been
homeless, incarcerated, or received public assistance since
leaving the care of the State.
These findings give pause. At the same time, they provide
support for the provisions of the Foster Care Independence Act
of 1999. The proposed legislation recognizes the considerable
unmet health and mental health needs of youth aging out of
foster care. From our perspective, common sense calls for
extension of Medicaid eligibility for this population through
the age of 21. The act would also make available substantial,
additional funding for support for youth making the transition
to independence both before and after they leave the protection
of the formal foster care system.
Currently, most services focus on educating foster youth
about independent living skills through training programs prior
to their discharge from the system, while providing limited, if
any, hands-on experience for youth. What is most sorely lacking
are adequate opportunities for former foster youth to return to
the system for help when that help is most needed and
appreciated after they are on their own. As an aside, we found
that three-quarters to four-fifths of them expected that they
would be able to do that, and that was one of the most
troubling findings, that they actually believed they could go
back to the system and get help.
In addition to providing a much needed increase in basic
funding for independent living programs, the Foster Care
Independence Act would allow States the flexibility to use
Federal funds for much needed concrete assistance in dealing
with obstacles to self-sufficiency, particularly noteworthy,
given the level of homelessness and housing instability of this
population, both in our study and others, the provision of
allowing a portion of the funds to be used for housing
assistance for former foster youth under the age of 21.
Last, the legislation would ensure that independent living
programs would be subjected to much more thorough outcome
evaluation than in the past. our Nation has spent over $1
billion on these programs in the past decade while learning
almost nothing about what works for whom.
In summary, available evidence suggests that many if not
most foster youth who age out of foster care, our children,
have a very difficult time landing on their feet when they are
pushed out of the door of this system. The Foster Care
Independence Act would give States the funds and flexibility to
better support these youth in achieving self-sufficiency as
well as hold States accountable for demonstrating the
effectiveness of their efforts. That completes my remarks.
[The prepared statement follows:]
Statement of Mark E. Courtney, Assistant Professor, School of Social
Work and Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin-
Madison
Today I am going to share with you some results from a
study conducted by myself, Irving Piliavin, and Andrew Grogan-
Kaylor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison of the
experiences of foster youths who aged out of the Wisconsin
foster care system in 1995 and 1996. I will also share with you
my observations regarding the Foster Care Independence Act of
1999.
Our study is following foster youth from before they left
the system until three years after they exited. Thus far we
have interviewed 141 of them while they were in care and 113 of
those, or about 80 percent, 12 to 18 months after they were
discharged from the system. The youths had been in care at
least 18 months, an average of over five years, and therefore
we believe that the system had a clear responsibility to
prepare them for independence.
We asked whether they had been ``trained'' in a number of
areas specified in law and regulations. The average percentage
of sample members reporting that they had been trained in a
given area was 76 percent. However, far fewer had actually been
provided concrete assistance in carrying out essential tasks
associated with independent living. For example, fewer than one
fifth had received any job training, participated in a mock job
interview, been told how to apply for public assistance,
received help finding a job, or help obtaining housing,
personal health records, or health insurance. Not surprisingly,
over one-quarter of the former foster youth felt either not at
all, or not very well prepared in a number of important areas
including getting a job, managing money, obtaining housing,
knowledge of community resources, parenting, and living on
one's own.
Almost a third of the youths were at or below an eighth
grade reading level when we first contacted them. Not
surprisingly, given their educational deficits, by 12 to 18
months past discharge 37 percent of the young adults had not
yet completed high school, 55 percent had completed high school
or an equivalent, and only 9 percent had entered college.
The former foster youths had significant unmet health and
mental health needs. Forty-four percent of them reported having
trouble obtaining medical care most or all of the time. Of
these, 90 percent reported that this was due to a lack of
health insurance coverage or care costing too much. Nearly half
of our respondents had received mental health services in the
year prior to our interview with them while they were in out-
of-home care. Yet, only about one-fifth had received any mental
health services since leaving care in spite of no change in
their overall relatively poor mental health status.
The bottom line is that achieving self sufficiency was
difficult for a large percentage of the former foster youth.
Fewer than half had at least $250 when they were discharged
from the system. Only three-fifths were working when we
interviewed them 12 to 18 months after discharge. Even those
employed earned on average slightly less than a full-time
minimum wage worker. All told, 44 percent of the group had
either been homeless, incarcerated, or received public
assistance since leaving the care of the state.
These findings give pause, but at the same time they
provide support for the provisions of the Foster Care
Independence Act of 1999. The proposed legislation recognizes
the considerable unmet health and mental health needs of youth
aging out of foster care. Common sense calls for extension of
Medicaid eligibility to these youth through the age of twenty-
one. The Act would also make available substantial additional
funding for support to youth making the transition to
independence both before and after they leave the protection of
the formal foster care system. Currently, most services focus
on educating foster youth about independent living skills prior
to their discharge from the system, while providing limited if
any ``hands-on'' experiences for youth. What is most sorely
lacking are adequate opportunities for former foster youth to
return to the system for help when that help is most needed and
appreciated, after they are on their own. In addition to
providing a much needed increase in basic funding for
independent living programs, The Foster Care Independence Act
would allow states the flexibility to use federal funds for
much-needed concrete assistance in dealing with obstacles to
self sufficiency. Particularly noteworthy, given the level of
homelessness and housing instability of this population, is the
provision allowing up to 30% of funds to be used for housing
assistance to former foster youth under the age of 21. Lastly,
the legislation would ensure that current and future
independent living programs would be subjected to much more
thorough outcome evaluation than in the past. Our nation has
spent over one billion dollars on these programs over the past
decade while learning almost nothing about what works for whom.
In summary, available evidence suggests that many if not most
youth who age out of foster care, our children, have a very
difficult time landing on their feet when they are pushed out
the door of the system. The Foster Care Independence Act of
1999 would give states the funds and flexibility to better
support these youth in achieving self sufficiency as well as
hold states accountable for demonstrating the effectiveness of
their efforts.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. All right. I thank the
panel for their testimony, and I thank you, Mark, for this
report on some concrete research. Unfortunately, we haven't
been doing this kind of research very long and don't know a lot
more about what we are doing. So, we do appreciate your
research and look forward to actual follow up on children, of
young people.
I want to ask you--you have all commented on the lack of
data and the need to really look at outcomes and what that
tells us. I assume most of you are familiar with the AFCARS,
Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System, which
we put a lot of money into, a lot of time, and a lot of years
to establish. There is resistance, naturally, to altering the
AFCARS system, and there is some concern about how much we can
alter it and not cause some really big problems. So, I am not
intimately acquainted with the AFCARS system; I am merely
spouting this information. I theoretically know it, but I don't
practically. For those of you who have a lot more practical
understanding of the system than I do, do you think we--are
there specific modest changes that we could make that you think
wouldn't be too difficult for the system to absorb but would
give us better information?
Ms. Massinga.
Ms. Massinga. Thank you. I suggested some measures like
knowing whether or not kids have graduated from high school;
like knowing whether or not kids drop-out and how long they
have been a drop-out. I appreciate the difficulty for States to
make adjustments, because as you say we are just raising the
level of data gathering, and I know that those are difficult
decisions, but it seems if we really pressed for results-
oriented data as well as information on how kids progress;
results that are key--like ``Are kids well? Are they receiving
health services?''--and so forth. I think it might be very
useful.
Mr. Kroner. I think that one of the hardest things to do in
the field of independent living is to keep track of kids once
they leave the system. One study we were involved with actually
hired a team of researchers to call kids every 3 months to make
sure they knew where they lived and saw how they did, and it
showed a lot of positive success for independent living
programs, but if you don't have a group of people assigned to
do that, these teens are like every other teen in America--they
tend to move around a lot. One move and they are out of your
research pool. So, we have to find some way to keep track of
these kids; give them some kind of card that they can call in
every now and again to report on what they are doing and give
them some type of financial incentive for calling back in. But,
other than that, it is really tough to keep track of them.
Ms. Fagnoni. I should point out, as we note in our
testimony, HHS does require States to provide annual reports on
the independent living programs, but the one measure that tries
to track to what happens to youth after they leave the foster
care system asks for information on what has happened to them
90 days after they leave the system. And there are two issues
with that. One is, even with the 90 days, which is a fairly
short period of time, we were told by officials that they had
difficulty locating the youth even within that short period of
time, but the issue is they will also note that 3 months is not
a long enough period of time to really know youth are faring
once they leave the system.
Mr. Courtney. I think if the primary concern--and I believe
the primary concern should be what is happening after they have
left the system--that AFCARS isn't really the best mechanism
for doing that for a number of reasons. I believe that the
Federal Government should, through the States, periodically do
the kind of assessment that we are doing on a sample of
children who are leaving the system, so we periodically have a
sense, generally, how these folks are doing after they leave
the system. And combine that with some systematic assessments
of different approaches to doing independent living services,
because there are myriad approaches to try and prepare people
and then support them after they are on their own, and we
haven't done rigorous evaluation really of any of those. I
think doing both of those things would, one, give us the sense
of generally how folks are doing, and then, two, give us a
sense of what works for whom.
It is very difficult to follow them. We think we are pretty
good at this. We have the highest response rate of any study we
know of, and we spent between $250 and $300 per interview to
find these folks after they left the system.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Since we are, for the
first time, giving them real money for the program after age 18
to 21, we certainly do have to require something other than
that one interview that was really related to an old foster
care program. It really doesn't reflect the kind of program
that we are setting up. So, one of the reasons you just got the
draft this morning are that there are a lot of things that have
been discussed and negotiated around this kind of issue, and so
I do look forward to your input in the next week as to what you
think we should do in that area; also, as to what you think of
the sections of the bill that say ``These are the kinds of
services you can provide or these are goals,'' because it is
not easy to describe in spite of the fact that you have
probably Members in this Subcommittee who are more interested
in these kids than often is the case in the Congress and know
more about it. I find it hard to find a way to talk about the
issue of personal maturity in the legislative language, and
since in the end that is what this is all about, we do need to
be able to do that.
I have a couple of other questions, but I am going to come
back to those if we have time. We do have another panel, so we
want to be sure to get as much testimony in the record before
one of our key Members has to leave.
Ben.
Mr. Cardin. Thank you, Madam Chair. Of course, it is a
pleasure to have Ruth Massinga with us today. She was secretary
of our human resources agency when I was in the State
legislature. We worked very closely together, and she brought a
lot of creative solutions to problems that we have in Maryland.
It was our loss when you moved on, but it is nice to have you
here today, so, welcome.
I did appreciate your testimony as to trying to get better
information on outcomes. Following on what Mrs. Johnson has
said, it is important that we have adequate information to be
able to evaluate how programs are working and whether
additional resources will be needed, and we do look forward to
working with all of you in developing that. We have language in
our bill that requires HHS and the States to establish and
track outcomes, so it is part of our interest, and we think it
is very important.
I am curious as to how you would rank the different
obstacles that face young foster children who are aging out of
foster care? Is it the lack of education? Lack of independent
skills? Is it the lack of health insurance? Is it lack of job
training? Lack of housing? I mean, I know all of these are
factors, but could help us rank where you think the highest
priorities of needs are for those children aging out of foster
care? Who wants to take a crack?
Mr. Kroner. I will jump right in on that. I think the
number one thing that all these kids need is real life
experience. They need to get out there and feel what it means
to live on their own and to have that daily real life
experience hit them on the head--budgeting their money,
managing their time, controlling their friends, dealing with
their family members, dealing with a real life landlord, real
life tenants, and things like that. The second thing is I think
we need to start a lot earlier. There is a provision in the
bill to start at 14, and I think that makes total sense.
What our county has done is we have a countywide self-
sufficiency program for youth regardless of where they are at--
foster homes, group homes--everybody starts at 16, and the kids
that come from that program into our apartment program, you can
tell that they really kind of understand what they are getting
themselves into, but it is a combination of starting earlier;
doing a lot of life skills training before the kids are placed
out on their own; placing them out on their own; doing life
skills on top of that, and then I think then you will see
things happen.
Ms. Massinga. I think, though, Mark, let us not
underestimate the fact that there is continuity of
relationships, because part of what I think Mrs. Johnson and
you, Mr. Cardin, alluded to is how do you bring it all
together? All those things that you ticked off are needs, but
if kids don't have adults that they trust to help them figure
out, ``OK, I made this mistake, so what am I going to do
tomorrow, because I still have this need around health care; I
still have a need around housing?'' That is where they get in
trouble. So, it is the lack of knitting it all together and
having adults who systematically help them figure it out, just
like your own kids that your program addresses. You know, if
they make a mistake, you have got to have real life
experiences, but you also have to have those experiences under
the tutelage of people who will help you and say ``It is not
fatal. Pick yourself up and move ahead.'' And, frequently, we
give people skills but not human support, and so they fall
apart.
Ms. Fagnoni. In our examination of research, we do note
that the research that has tried to look at outcomes and link
different efforts of outcomes has shown that something really
important is that youth complete high school before they leave
foster care. So, there are some concrete sorts of actions that
are most helpful if they can complete those before they are out
on their own.
Mr. Cardin. Mr. Courtney.
Mr. Courtney. I would really agree with the argument that
real life experience is very important. We found that training
per se was not at all related to any of the important outcomes
we looked at. Now, granted, this is one study in Wisconsin, and
we are looking globally at the State of Wisconsin. We did find
that youth who had engaged in some of the concrete experiences
I talked about (they had their medical records; they had
actually gone out and looked for jobs; they had had to deal
with landlords) fared better in terms of employment and housing
stability, and so forth.
Another thing is I like the part of the bill that provides
flexibility for providing housing, because we find a huge
amount of homelessness and housing and stability in this
population. My partner in this got involved in this kind of
research, because he is a very prominent homelessness
researcher, and he was struck by the high percentage of adults
who are homeless who lived in foster care.
And then, last, social support--sort of another way of
talking about having stable relationships with adults. We find
that social support is actually the best predictor in our study
of favorable outcomes; that they report that they have various
kinds of social support to back them up, the ones who don't
fall through the cracks.
Mr. Cardin. Well, I appreciate all of your testimony
particularly as to specific State studies. Obviously, I was
most impressed with the results from Baltimore County. Ms.
Fagnoni, your conclusion is that those children who had
participated in independent living did better in graduating
from high school and finding employment. Do you know how many
of the children who were aging out of foster care had an
opportunity to participate in the program for independent
skills?
Ms. Fagnoni. I don't have the statistics on that specific
program. I do know that of the 70,000 or so foster care youth
who fall into the category of being in the age group close to
aging out, that, perhaps, half of those receive some sorts of
independent living services but a far smaller percentage
actually receive some of the concrete types of assistance and
are able to be in independent living types of programs and
transitional housing programs that seem to be very helpful.
Mr. Cardin. I would be interested--if you could make that
available, I would be interested in seeing what percentage we
are currently reaching in the jurisdiction I represent.
Ms. Fagnoni. OK.
Mr. Cardin. Thank you.
[The information follows:]
At the independent living hearing on May 13, 1999,
Representative Ben Cardin asked GAO to provide him the percent
of youth served under ILP in his congressional district.
Unfortunately, Maryland does not keep statistics by
congressional district. However, following is information on
Baltimore City and Baltimore County. This information is for
FFY 1998--the most recent year data is available.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Youth Youth
Location Eligible Served by Percent
for ILP ILP Served
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baltimore City................... 878 823 94%
Baltimore County................. 165 135 82%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Mr. English.
Mr. English. Thank you, Madam Chair. This has been a truly
worthwhile public hearing and enormously informative. I can
attest to the fact that I came into this with scant knowledge
of the independent living programs for youth and foster care.
This hearing has been helpful for me to appreciate, for one
thing, how little we in Washington know about what is going on
out there. I think there seems to be consensus on this panel
that there ought to be some form of performance measurement
applied to State programs that we fund. Can you comment--
starting with Mr. Courtney, on how difficult it would be to
develop a worthwhile system of performance measurement, and
what would be your thoughts on what would necessarily be
included at a minimum?
Mr. Courtney. The difficulty would really depend on what it
was you wanted to know.
Mr. English. What should we know?
Mr. Courtney. Well, we should know certainly whether they
graduate from school--that is relatively easy although not
trivial to come up with that information. We should know about
employment stability and housing stability, and we should know
about institutionalization, because we find one-fourth of the
males in our sample who were abused and neglected (they were
not adjudicated delinquents) were incarcerated within a year of
leaving the system. So, those are some basic things.
Institutionalization history, education history, many States
could get that information together. When you look at housing
stability, employment stability, you have got to survey them,
and the problem is they won't all be involved in your program.
This is a problem with a lot of the research. We have research
on people who choose or are able to participate in these
programs, and you have a huge group that are not participating,
and to get that kind of information on everyone would be an
expensive proposition. To do it periodically, so that you have
an idea, a representative idea, of what is happening in every
State, I think is feasible and could be done with the funding
you are talking about.
Mr. English. Ms. Fagnoni, what would you add to that?
Ms. Fagnoni. Well, I would agree that those are some of the
key measures--graduating from high school, employment,
obtaining and retaining employment, housing stability, and
whether or not there are other poor outcomes, such as
institutionalization, but I also agree that the difficulty lies
more in trying to get some of the information than it does in
sort of figuring out what the key things you want to know about
people who are self-sufficient adults.
Mr. English. Mr. Kroner.
Mr. Kroner. Yes, I think most of what I was going to say
has been said. I think that the issue--one of things I wanted
to make a point of is that we have noticed that a lot of young
people that didn't do well right after they left the program
came back a year later and were doing really well, so I think
that there is a problem here in the sense that you are going to
see this roller coaster effect with these kids for a couple of
years. The other fact is there is no control group since we
can't compare this group to a normal group of teens that would
be forced to go out on their own. Even whatever we find is not
really going to give us a clear picture, but I think I would
look at housing stability; I would look at involvement with the
criminal justice system, and I would look at the involvement
with the mental health system and any type of reinvolvement
with the county welfare of State welfare systems.
Mr. English. Is there any way of measuring the safety of
the people that are participating in these programs?
Mr. Kroner. If you could have contact with these kids, you
could get a lot of information about how safe they felt and how
safe they were and things that happened to them. Again, the
issue is trying to find them once they are out of the system.
Mr. English. Ms. Massinga, what do you think?
Ms. Massinga. Well, I think the list that you have heard is
a list that I agree with. To go to the question of how to
gather the data, it seems to me that this is not unlike the
issues that you are looking at as you look at what happens with
people who are leaving public assistance, that the longer we
look at it, if we have relatively decent data, we can start to
make some judgments about what is happening, and you know that
the States are beginning to step up to the challenge, not all
in the same way, but States are beginning to really step up to
the challenge of providing much longer term data about results.
You can't get it all on everybody, as Mark points out--both
Marks--but I think if there is some expectation that there is
rigor associated with the measures--and you have heard about
half a dozen which we all think are important, I think it is
possible to start to develop the mindset in States and
localities that outcomes, the results, are the real things that
matter. So, I think that that is why you are focusing on
accountability structures in that way as you have, as you tried
to look at other systems particularly reform of public welfare
is an important statement and signal for your Subcommittee to
make that it is important to work on this issue of results-
oriented measures.
Mr. English. Ms. Fagnoni, you made a comment during your
testimony that you have discovered that in some cases group
home regulations are an impediment to the implementation of
independent living programs. Could you elaborate on that in my
remaining few seconds?
Ms. Fagnoni. For example, one of the things we found is
that sometimes the utensils one would need to cook with are
locked away, and when I inquired about the reason for that, it
is a safety issue, and among cooking utensils are knives which
could be used by one youth against another, but it clearly
limits their ability to have practical experience in cooking
which is a key element in independent living. So, that is one
example.
Mr. English. Do you run into other examples where State
regulations create a barrier to independent living programs
being successfully carried forward, and is there something we
should ask the States to do in the way of deregulation that
would make it easier to move independent living programs
forward?
Ms. Fagnoni. I think I don't have a great deal of detail on
that. This is an ongoing study we are doing, and we have some
anecdotal examples. That is something we could think about
exploring a little more. I don't know whether people who are in
the field have dealt with that.
Mr. Kroner. Mr. English, yes, I think there are a lot of
States that still do not allow youth to be placed into their
own apartments without 24-hour supervision, and that is the
biggest impediment to making something like this happen. They
are so concerned about liability issues, and I think what a lot
of States are doing is allowing the private nonprofits to take
on that role and assume some of the liability for the
individual placements.
Now, we have a similar situation with a lot of our foster
parents. They will not allow the youth in their homes to go
into the kitchen, because they don't want them to mess the
kitchen up. They won't let the kids use their washers and
driers, so not only are these kids not learning from a regular
family, they are being systematically kept from learning things
that they are going to need to know. So, I think that there are
policies at the program and there are policies at the State
level that are blocking a lot of this from happening except in
Ohio.
Mr. English. Thank you. That is an important qualifier----
[Laughter.]
And I thank the panel. Madam Chairman, I thank you for your
patience.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Mr. Camp.
Mr. Camp. I am not from Ohio; I am from Michigan, but thank
you all for your testimony very much, and obviously the concern
is that kids walk off a cliff after they leave foster care, and
I really don't have any questions for you, but I appreciate the
testimony, and I have read your statements. I may not be here
for all of your verbal testimony, but I think obviously the
idea of trying to have self-sufficiency for kids after they
leave the foster care system is very important and getting the
information to understand what their needs are.
But I--when you hear that many of them are below the
eighth-grade reading level at least in the Wisconsin-Madison
data, I think that is a real concern, and I want to thank the
Chairman for introducing this independent living bill and
having this hearing, and I do want to work with the
Subcommittee also particularly on the issue of health care and
Medicaid, potentially, for some of the young people who need it
transitioning out of what probably was a pretty difficult
situation or they wouldn't have been in foster care in the
first place, and hoping to see them become productive citizens.
I certainly wasn't productive at 18, and I think many people
aren't, and it takes a couple of years to get the skills needed
to be productive. So, I want to pledge my efforts to work with
the Chairman and thank all of you for your testimony. Thank
you.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Mr. Watkins.
Mr. Watkins. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to thank
all of you for your dedication and interest in this
legislation. I would like to share some of my experiences of
having been a foster parent. We adopted a young lady when she
was age 15. My wife and I had a home licensed and available for
young ladies. You have them for a while, and you lose a chunk
of your heart every time they leave. I think for every child
there is a different variable. I think it is just like raising
your own kids; they are all different. We never worry about
messing up the kitchen; there are foster parents that probably
do. I think our biggest problem, Madam Chair, is that we
probably need more and better foster homes. We need more
incentives for families who have been successful, to have
foster children. Let me tell you, there is no one raised
anymore poorer than I was as a kid. We had a hard time working
things out as family, because a lot of the administrative
people in the welfare program and DHS. They thought our family,
because of its economic class, didn't qualify. Instead of
looking at it as, ``Hey, if you have got a family that has been
able to have some success''--and I don't want to be saying it
is that successful, but it is a process to follow. I think,
those children to go through instead of putting them back into
a situation of just a little bit of survivability out there. We
should give them a way that they can see and feel and touch and
be a part of successful families. Families that have--maybe
worked their way through college, maybe worked scrubbing floors
and worked on farms and done all those things, but the children
see that there is a work ethic there, too.
Now, what that experience, Nancy, has done for the Wesley
and Lou Watkins family, we ended up finally adopting a young
lady, 15 years of age, who was going to be thrown back into a
worse situation. We were fortunate enough, she came to us and
said ``Will you adopt me?'' We said we would, and she is now a
professional lady. We put every dollar back into a college
account for her, every single dollar. I think that we need to
look at how to lure more families into having foster children
and possibly even adoption. I think some type of tax credits
that would allow these type of families opportunities would do
that.
We had to try to make sure that the dollars--if I can just
take a moment or two on this--didn't become a tax burden for us
in bringing up that little girl. We wanted to let her become
successful in her right. She didn't know who her father was;
her mother was an alcoholic and a drug person, but now I would
like to say she is a very professional person. She has given us
a granddaughter, a Native American. I just think we have got to
get more successful families in the foster care program and
help them to have a little independence. We must try to figure
out how we get some more solid families involved in trying to
help one-on-one with these families.
Madam Chair, I would like to really work in some direction
along that line how we can lure more successful families into
becoming foster parents. You know, it didn't pertain to
everything, but I think every one of us in this room is
different, and I think every one of these foster children is
different.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Thank you. Thank you,
Congressman Watkins.
It is very frustrating legislating from the Federal level,
because I honestly don't know how prescriptive to be or how
clearly to delineate things, but when you tell me that foster
parents don't want their kids to do the laundry, have they no
understanding at all of what their responsibility is as foster
parents? Wes' comments about he and his wife putting aside the
stipends so these kids would have some savings is really
wonderful. All my kids are asking, ``Could we have a say in how
that money is spent?'' How do we get foster parents to teach
kids if you have $100, go to the store, see what you would
really like, see that you can get maybe one and a half garments
with that significant amount of money, and then go back at the
sales and compare and see how much further the $100 will go?
So, they learn--take them to second-hand clothing shops. My
kids both outfit all of their children at tag sales. It is now
beneath them to pay full price. They won't even let me pay full
price. When I go and talk to single parents about this, they
think that somehow I am demeaning them by suggesting that they
look at these other places. How do we teach this kind of
economy? We all grew up on it, so we have no feelings about
checking out those sources, but we don't teach this.
On health care, most of our foster kids live in cities.
There is not a city in America, big city, that doesn't have a
community health center provided with Federal funds at which
anyone over 18 can get everything but hospital care on a
sliding scale fee. For them it would be free. Even if you pay
the maximum cost for a full physical, it is $27. Why aren't
we--talk about real life experience--walking them over there,
helping them sign up, making sure they see their physician the
first time. When you say hands on, I really see what you mean,
but how do we also get the system to think about all the things
there are you need to do just to run your life hands on and
help them do that.
Now, to get back to something that you brought up, Ms.
Massinga, that really struck me. How are we going to get the
agencies to cooperate and integrate better? And, most
importantly, how are we going to get that larger family--I
thought that was a very interesting point you made, and you
just breezed over it in one sentence--it is absurd that we
don't--just like when a kid now under the Safe Homes Act comes
into the system, we get the larger family involved in thinking
about how do we manage this child and how you get them out, and
we do a lot more on welfare reform with kinship care. In other
parts of the system, we are beginning to look at the larger
family and where the resources are to support this child. We
really do need to build that, and we don't have that yet.
So, I want to just hear any of your comments on how do we
create some continuity of relationships for that child in their
larger community? What should be our responsibility in this
bill to urge the States to have some continuity of relationship
between the individual, the kid, and the system, and the
integration of the resources and getting really some language
about practical education, or how do we talk about that to
ourselves so that the States will really think about that? We
don't have very much longer for this panel, so I am throwing
that out.
I just want to throw out one other thing, then I will give
you a brief comment, but please get back to us on these things.
Once we get done with foster care, there are similar kids who
are not under the State's charge, and they are brave,
courageous kids. They can't live at home; they won't live at
home the circumstances are so bad; they want to stay in high
school; they are sleeping in cars; they are sleeping from one
friend's house to another, because our shelters cannot accept
them.
And one last comment, we do in this bill prohibit the use
of money for housing under 18. That is because that is the way
the old system was. We may need to change that. So, think about
those things, and if you want to make any closing comments and
then get back to us on some of these things, but we need to do
a good job on this, because we have got another group of kids
out there we have got to think about next.
Ms. Massinga. Well, you know, I certainly--and I am sure my
colleagues--welcome the idea to think further about the issues
that you have raised, but I want to say to Mr. Watkins, you are
very right. One of the issues about this bill, I hope, is that
we start to build some continuity over time between foster
parents and extended kin so that the attachment they feel for
these kids will help to create that web of relationships that
help them do well. And if we can--one of the things we have got
to do is figure out how to incentivize foster parents and value
them, because we don't do that well in this country, by and
large, and that is part of why these kids feel and we in the
system act as if 18 is the place when you fall off the cliff
with the relationships, and in real life that really doesn't
work that way. So, I will be happy to think further about other
ways to build on those kinds of----
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. And as you look at the
final draft of the legislation, help us see where it is we need
to say what. Anyone else?
Mr. Kroner. Yes, I think extending the age to 21 is going
to do us a world of wonders for establishing that continuity.
It just gives everybody more time to get to know each other,
and we have kids that are referred to us at 17 that are out--at
17 and a half that are out at 18, and 6 months is nowhere long
enough to get to know somebody much less develop a meaningful
relationship.
I think we also need to recognize the role that foster
parents have played and adoptive parents in some cases in the
lives of these kids and try to keep them involved with the kids
when they move over to independent living; have some kind of
incentive, even if it is financial, for those foster parents to
maintain contact--have those kids over for dinner and things
like that. That would make a big difference to both the
independent living programs as well as the kids that are making
that transition.
Ms. Fagnoni. I think the focus on outcomes can help in the
sense that to the extent that we can see more studies and get a
better understanding of outcomes associated with different
programs and then start to look at what do those programs have
as elements that help achieve certain outcomes, I think that
may help reinforce some of things you have heard today in terms
of the need for the real hands-on experience and the concrete
experience.
So, I think you are right. It is difficult to figure how
much you prescribe in terms of what goes to these kids, but I
think your focus on outcomes can really help over time, at
least, shed some light on what does and doesn't work.
Mr. Courtney. I would like to really second that. I think
it will be very difficult at this point to be very prescriptive
in terms of telling the States, ``These are the things you need
to do.'' However, I can say from Wisconsin that the example of
providing data, concrete data on what has happened to kids has
completely transformed that State's point of view on this
subject. I mean, there was very little attention to it, and, to
their credit, the minute these data came out, the State said,
``Well, we have to do something about this.'' There was a lot
of media attention to it, and now we are putting together a
commission that is going to meet around the State; share this
information; get information from community members, foster
parents, foster kids, and completely revamp the system in
Wisconsin, I expect. That is certainly the intention. So, I
think concrete data periodically on how kids are actually doing
is enormously powerful information to have, and we simply
haven't had that.
Mr. Watkins. Do we have a study, because we should be
measuring outcome, I think--I know I am out of order here,
Madam Chair--but we need to be able to measure it. You know, my
wife and I, we lost--I felt like I was a failure for the first
three or four or five foster children we had, and each time one
of them left, thank God my wife was insistent on the last young
lady, because she is the one that later we ended up adopting,
and we got a wonderful daughter out of it, but you lose part of
it. You just don't want to go through it again after you lose
your heart enough times, but we need some way to have a way to
measure successes, and I think it would breed success. It is
just like, Madam Chair, trying to get families make it more
conducive to get families that have achieved certain success to
bring young people in those so they can witness that. They can
witness success and role models and realize, hey, they can do
it, and I think we can get maybe the outcome up a little higher
and keep raising that on up if we possibly can, but I would
like to look at that and see.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. I thank the panel very
much for your testimony and its conciseness, and I look forward
to any comments you might have on the draft which is still
evolving. Thank you.
And now it is my pleasure to call as a witness our Majority
Whip, Tom DeLay, who comes to this subject with a great deal of
personal experience as a foster father, and thank you, Tom, for
your long interest in this subject and your encouragement and
support.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM DELAY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND HOUSE MAJORITY WHIP
Mr. DeLay. Well, thank you, Madam Chairman. I am really
excited and confident that you are doing this bill and that you
are holding this hearing, and I do appreciate the opportunity
to speak here today on behalf of the Foster Care Independence
Act of 1999, introduced by yourself, Madam Chairman, and the
Ranking Member, Ben Cardin.
It is very difficult to put my experiences down in a short
presentation, and I wanted to touch on a couple of issues, but
having foster children opens your eyes to what is going on in
the world with our children, and I have got a lot of story to
tell, but I will try to keep it as brief as possible.
As you know, this legislation recognizes that youth who are
turning 18 and leaving foster care, they experience serious
problems trying to make it on their own. They are not prepared
by the present system for that terrible word called
``emancipation day.'' We just really need to change that word.
It frightens them when you talk about emancipation. It sort of
implies that they were incarcerated in the foster care system.
Many of those youth have not even graduated from high school;
they are not employable, and they lack the basic skills like
cooking and making a paycheck last through the week. It has
been our experience that children we had gotten from other
foster homes were not even taught how to shop for clothes. They
were issued t-shirts and blue jeans and never had been into a
store and didn't even know the sizes that they wore much less
being turned out on the street to fend for themselves when they
don't even know how to shop for clothes.
When these young people leave foster care, they are not
only leaving the emotional support of foster families, but they
are also forced to leave behind their housing and their
Medicaid. The Johnson-Cardin legislation is vitally important,
because all of these problems are addressed in this proposal
while at the same time you allow the States to design and
conduct their own programs, and I think that is vital and key
to the success that you are trying to reach.
I am also pleased that the Subcommittee has worked so hard
to produce a bill that will be revenue neutral before it leaves
this Subcommittee, yet will effectively address the imminent
needs of our children aging out of the foster care system. I
plan to cosponsor this legislation, but it is not as a
Congressman that I am here today but as a foster parent.
My wife, Christine, and I currently are blessed with two
adolescent foster children, the older of whom will be
emancipated on June 24, and I wanted to share with you several
of the situations that the current system has placed us in. Let
me just say at the outset my concern is not for our family. I
share these examples with you on behalf of other foster
families who may not have the financial means to address some
of these issues. I believe that too many adolescents leave
their foster homes unable to meet their most basic needs for
survival. It is my experience that the current system leaves
children who exit the foster care system without the skills,
the tools they need to live independently.
They also--the system leaves children in deep fear. One of
the most traumatic things that happened to my foster daughter
was the day that we told her that she would have to start
planning for emancipation day. She went back down to her room--
we didn't know this till later--and cried herself to sleep,
because she was scared to death, and she is about to be 18. And
the second traumatic experience for her was meeting with CPS,
Child Protective Services, and making her make decisions and
making her face the fact that on June 24 she was on her own. My
oldest foster child, though, she will attend college starting
in August; she is officially emancipated in June, and of course
we will care for her for the interim 6 weeks, but there are
many foster kids whose foster families can't afford to keep
them after the funding stops. She will also lose her Medicaid
benefits in June, and I just ask the question, what do children
who have medical needs do after emancipation?
I am fortunate enough to be able to care for my foster
daughter's needs after her emancipation, but, again, I am
worried about all those foster children whose foster families
do not have the resources to pay out of pocket for medical
expenses, and an important skill to have as these kids make the
transition to adulthood and independence and attempt to find
jobs or attend college, is the ability to even drive a car. We
recently enrolled our two kids in driver's ed and discovered
that we had to pay $570 for their course out of our pocket;
again, not a problem for us, and we did it willingly, but
circumstances might be very different for another family, and
it is for those families that this bill is so vital.
We are sentencing our kids to failure and chronic
dependency if we do not arm them with the skills and the
resources that they need as they transition out of foster care.
The result time and time again is more of these young adults
are on welfare; more former foster kids are homeless, and more
and more of them are in jail and committing crimes. We must
empower State and local governments to cut bureaucracy with
increased flexibility and enable them to provide the children
in our foster system with a transition system that actually
prepares them to live as independent functioning productive
members of our society, and I thank you, Madam Chair.
[The prepared statement follows:]
Statement of Hon. Tom DeLay, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas, and House Majority Whip
I am Tom DeLay, House Majority Whip from the 22d District
in Texas.
Madam, Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to speak here
today on behalf of the Foster Care Independence Act of 1999
introduced today by yourself and Ranking Member Congressman Ben
Cardin.
This legislation recognized that youth who are turning 18
and leaving foster care experience serious problems trying to
make it on their own. Many of these youth have not graduated
from high school, are not employable and lack basic skills like
cooking and making a paycheck last through the week. When youth
leave foster care they are not only leaving the emotional
support of foster families but are also forced to leave behind
their housing and their medicaid. The Johnson-Cardin
legislation is important because all of these problems are
addressed in this proposal while at the same time allowing the
States to design and conduct their own programs.
I am also pleased that the committee has worked so hard to
produce a bill that will be revenue neutral before it leaves
committee, yet will effectively address the imminent needs of
our children again out of the foster care system.
I plan to co-sponsor this legislation, but it is not as a
Congressman that I am here today, but as a Foster Parent.
My wife and I currently are blessed with two adolescent
foster children, the older of whom will graduate from high
school June 24th.
I want to share with you several of the situations the
current system has placed us in.
Let me say at the outset, my concern is not for our family,
I share these examples with you on behalf of other foster
families who may not have the means to address some of these
issues.
I believe that too many adolescents leave their foster
homes unable to meet their most basic neneds for survival.
It is my experience that the current system leaves children
who exit the foster care system without the skills and the
tools they need to live independently.
My oldest foster child will attend our local community
college starting in August. She is officially ``emancipated''
in June. Of course, we will care for her in the interim 6
weeks; but there are many foster kids whose foster families
cna't afford to keep themn after the funding stops.
She will also lose her medicaid benefits in June.
What do children who have medical needs do after
emancipation?
I am fortunate enough to be able to care for my foster
daughter's needs after her emancipation.
But again, I am worried about the foster children who's
foster families do not have the resources to pay out of pocket
for medical expenses.
An important skill to have as these kids make the
transition to adulthood and independence, and attempt to find
jobs or attend college, is the ability to drive a car.
We recently enrolled the kids in Drivers Ed and discovered
that we had to pay the $570 dollars for their course out of
pocket. Again, not a problem, and we did it willingly.
But circumstances might be different for another family,
and it is for those families that this bill is so vital.
We are sentencing these kids to failure and chronic
dependency if we do not arm them with the skills and the
resources they need as they transition out of care.
The result, time and again, is more of these young adults
on welfare, more former foster kids homeless, and more in jail
and committing crimes.
We must empower state and local governments to cut
bureaucracy with increased flexibility, and enable them to
provide the kids in our foster system with a transition system
that actually prepares them to live as independent,
functioning, productive members of society.
Thank you.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. That is a very interesting
story about even the driver's license. We take that so for
granted.
Mr. DeLay. Yes, my daughter was 17 years old. The other
problem, too, is no one allows them to drive, because your
insurance goes through the roof, and, therefore, none of them
have driver's licenses. And the second is the foster care
agency--this is all before emancipation--doesn't want the
liability of the child being in a wreck. Our foster care agency
had the unfortunate experience of a foster mother allowing her
daughter to drive the car having never driven the car, and she
had a wreck and was killed. They almost were out of business.
So, now they don't want any of their kids to drive. So, when
they turn 18, they can't even drive. Even if they wanted to,
they can't drive.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Mr. Watkins. Excuse me,
Mr. English.
Mr. English. Madam Chair, I don't have any questions, but I
thank Mr. DeLay for coming in and walking us through some of
his personal experiences which I think are very compelling. We
very much appreciate your insight, sir. We hope we are going to
be able to produce legislation that will go the distance. It
has clearly already attracted bipartisan support and with the
leadership of the Chair, hopefully, the House will act on this
legislation this year. So, we thank you for being with us.
Mr. DeLay. Well, I will do my part, Mr. English, to make
sure it is going to the floor.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Mr. Camp.
Mr. Camp. Well, thank you for--I am way down here. I am
still in the room, though; that is all that counts. [Laughter.]
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. This is the arbitrariness
of the Subcommittee's election system. He has actually been on
this Subcommittee longer than most of us.
Mr. Camp. Thank you very much for your testimony and for
what you are doing for your foster children, because your
support of this issue and these concerns will help move this
along in the Congress. You know, it is interesting, because I
have had other foster families tell me about the driving issue,
and it is tough to get on your own without being able to get
some work especially in rural areas in this country where there
isn't any mass transportation.
So, thank you for being here and for your testimony, and I
look forward to working with you on this legislation. Thank
you.
Mr. DeLay. I just might say, I thank you for your comments,
Mr. Camp, but I also say it is very, very tough to have a 17-
year-old boy that wants to drive and telling him he isn't
driving, that creates many problems inside the home.
[Laughter.]
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. That is right. Mr.
Watkins.
Mr. Watkins. Tom, I am interested in what you are doing. It
is a blessing. My wife and I have gone through that as we have
shared and we opened our home for girls. They provide all kinds
of unbelievable experiences, and I guess you try to work
through it.
You know, we are fortunate. Like you say, you were a
businessman before you came here, and you are now in Congress,
and I was a businessman and now Congress, and we are able to do
some things, and thank God that we have been fortunate enough
to do that. But how do we attract more families?
We are a product of our environment, and, believe me, I
grew up in a small community of less than 200; everyone knew
each other; I mean, everybody. However, let me tell you, I do,
though, worry and have laid awake at night over how do you save
inner city kids? They have no chance of having a role model in
many cases, and how do you give them a chance to see the other
side of that mountain, that there is something there?
Fortunately, my wife, Lou, and I--I married a preacher's
daughter, she has a heart. I will be very honest, when we lost
one of our foster children, Debbie--we had her for 11 months,
and she ran away, I refused to have any more foster children. I
told my wife, ``No.'' You know, she called me when I was in the
State senate and says, ``There is a young lady named Sally that
needs a place to stay,'' and I first said, ``No.'' She said to
me, ``So, you mean you will not let Sally come over for
dinner?'' ``No, I didn't say that Lou. Yes, she can come for
dinner.'' Well, she put Sally right across from me. [Laughter.]
All during that night, I had to sit there over dinner and
look at this little, beautiful, young lady that had come to our
house with only a small brown paper sack of clothes; that is
all she had. Well, when we did the dishes, my wife said, ``What
do you think?'' And I said, ``Let her stay.'' She is now our
daughter, fortunately, and has a beautiful granddaughter for
us. We put every dollar back that came to us as foster parents
into a college fund, so she knew that she had a way of getting
a college education. As the daddy, so to speak, I thought she
should have majored in home economics. Right? Most girls
should, right? [Laughter.]
Old-fashioned dad. When she came home from the first month
of college and said, ``Daddy, if you don't let me major in
agriculture, I am going to quit.'' So, I said, ``You go get
your degree in agriculture; I want you to get a degree.'' She
now is a very professional person in farm finance work.
How do we get more successful families involved in doing
foster care and all? Many of our parents--and this is not all
bad, I understand--but many of them are really low-income
people that unfortunately have not ever been able to accomplish
with education and they are needing to use what money comes in
of dollars to exist. So, the day comes when they have to let
them go, because it becomes a burden. They come in your home
and in 6 more weeks on down the road you are going to do it,
because you have to bridge the gap, and it is the best thing
for that child. And I think we were trying to say what is the
best thing for the child even if we had to keep her another
year or 2 years. It doesn't matter, because we put every dollar
back into a college fund for this young lady that we adopted
then as our daughter. We had one heck of a time trying to adopt
her, because of the complications from foster care to being
able to adopt. It was a terrible experience going through that,
but I think if we could give them--and that is why I was
interested in the measurement of success--how do we allow them
to bridge the gap, so they can become successful young people?
There are a lot of them that have got tremendous ability.
Mr. DeLay. Well, Mr. Watkins, first of all, I want to hire
your wife for the Whip organization; maybe that is how I can
get your vote. [Laughter.]
I now know how to get to you. [Laughter.]
Mr. Watkins. You usually get results, too.
Mr. DeLay. Very quickly, I have the same concern. I have a
lot of criticism of the foster care system, not of the
individual people, but the system itself is about to fail,
because I have seen in associating with foster parents, a lot
of foster parents--in fact, it was exhibited in the foster home
that our boy came from--they are doing it for the money, and
they are warehousing the kids; they are sticking them in rooms;
not allowing them to come out; not teaching them a thing, and
just collecting a check, and we have to address that someday,
but the other side, too, is--and it is the reason that I have
started becoming very vocal--my wife and I decided early on
when we got involved with abused children many years ago that
we wouldn't tell anybody, because we didn't want people to
think that we were doing it for politics----
Mr. Watkins. Right, right.
Mr. DeLay [continuing]. And the more we got into it and the
worse we saw, we felt like that I was put here for a purpose
and maybe this is the purpose to raise the visibility of what
is going on with our abused children, and the more and more
that I speak out and have spoken out just in the last few
months, the more people have come to me, people of means that
have come to me and said, ``You know, I have got a big, empty
house, and I could do this. If you can do it, I can do it.''
And they start checking into it, and it helps the local
organizations--in our case, Child Advocates of Fort Wayne
County and others in our foster care system, Houston
Achievement Place--to recruit, because we are giving them names
and those kinds of things, and it is like the old starfish
story--you know that story, right? Where the father and the son
were walking on the beach, and the beach was littered with
starfish, and the father picked up one and threw it back in the
sea, and the son said, ``Well, daddy, what are you doing that
for? You will never be able to pick up all these starfish and
throw them out to sea; it doesn't matter?'' And the daddy
looked down at the son and said, ``It matters to them.'' And if
we do it one kid at a time, one foster home at a time, we can
make a huge impact.
Mr. Watkins. The same reason, though. I didn't go public a
lot earlier, because I thought people would think I was doing
this politically. I probably talked more about it right here on
this Subcommittee the last 2 years than I have any other time.
In fact, I kind of fell in this thing. I didn't really know
this was going to be part of that Subcommittee, and maybe there
is a reason for it. I think there is a lot of additional things
that we all can do to help elevate that and make it--notch it
up a lot more in success, and I appreciate what you and your
family are doing, and maybe we can----
Mr. DeLay. Well, I appreciate that. I will just close with
saying, Madam Chairman, that I feel very, very strongly that
you cannot disconnect the community involvement. There is a
role for government to play in dealing with abused and
neglected children, but the most effective success with these
children come from organizations that raise their own money
from their own communities and connects people to people by
doing that, and people are interested in a young person as that
person and that name and not a number, and we can never ever
discourage that. We should focus on community-based programs,
certainly overseen by government programs, but we should never
ever discourage communities from raising their own money,
getting involved, and running their programs.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Well, I thank you for your
testimony and for your experience and consider it a great asset
to our Subcommittee that Wes has had direct experience and you
have direct experience. Passage of the Adoption and Safe
Families Act 2 years ago is making an enormous difference----
Mr. DeLay. Yes, it is.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut [continuing]. In breaking
down the barriers for foster parents to adopt children, and
actually that is where the growth is in adoptions, and that is
one of the big centers of growth in adoptions. And, also, that
business of the bill requiring a 15-month plan and getting kids
out of homes that are never going to come around for them and
into permanent homes, so we hope that we will reduce the flow
of kids into foster care, and we hope we will deal better
through this bill with older kids who have been in foster care
for a long time, and then there is a way to begin looking at
how we do fund the States so that being a foster parent could
be more like being a day care provider; something that requires
you to provide a certain level of education and actually pays
you more than just the mere stipend that we currently pay and
carries a lot more responsibility with it.
I don't know what the answer is, but I think your point
about community is very important. This business of placing
kids in a community 25 miles or 50 miles from where all their
friends are and ripping them out of one high school where they
are being successful because now they have to move to a home
that is in a different community. It is the most disheartening
thing to talk to kids who have finally stabilized themselves,
and then have the worker appear 1 day to completely throw the
pieces of their lives up in the air again. So, there is a lot
of work to be done on the system itself, but part of the
problem is the rigidity of how we fund it, and we do have to
approach that.
As to your comments on this bill, we certainly will pay for
it, but we are about $130 million short of being able to make
sure that the kids can participate in Medicaid, and I think we
do have to find a way to make sure that when they turn 18 they
don't lose access to health care, because adolescence is such a
very, very important time to learn to take care of yourself
physically and also a critical time to deal with certain mental
health and substance tendencies that really are the difference
between making it as an adult and not making it.
So, thanks for your interest and support. We appreciate it.
Mr. DeLay. Thanks very much.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. The final panel, let me
bring forward Eileen McCaffrey, executive director of the
Orphan Foundation of America; Kelli Sutton Block of the People
Places of Charlottesville, Charlottesville, Virginia; Sonja
Matheny, student at North Carolina Central University, Center
of Keys for Life Program, Maryland, and Montrey Bowie, a high
school student from Ellicott City, Maryland, Our House program:
and my colleague, Mr. Cardin, is due to return any minute. We
are going to start with Eileen McCaffrey from the Orphan
Foundation.
STATEMENT OF EILEEN MCCAFFREY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ORPHAN
FOUNDATION OF AMERICA, VIENNA, VIRGINIA
Ms. McCaffrey. Madam Chair, thank you for having me,
Members of the Subcommittee. I am very, very pleased to be here
today. At this point, nearly every one of my buttons have been
pushed. You have raised issues that I think about, I breathe, I
sleep----
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Not exactly the buttons
you would expect of the Ways and Means Committee unless it is
to set tax policy. [Laughter.]
Ms. McCaffrey. Right. So many of the things that have been
raised here today have answers. They are not easy, but there
are things we can do that will make a difference. In reference
to this bill, you have done a really good job. It is quite
obvious that you have listened to the kids. We hear them
throughout this bill. The fact that you put in specific
language about independent living programs and things they
should cover--hard skills--that is important. You touched on
the issue housing, money, support services for kids till 21,
thank you.
The framework flexibility you have defined with these
issues and goals must be addressed with independent living
programs. The couple of things you asked about as far as
reporting and what is reasonable to expect. We need to involve
the kids. We need to get them to understand that them answering
these surveys, them participating in the program is a way that
they can give back. I have personally known over 1,000 foster
children, and 999 of them want to improve the system. If we
build them into the system, if we ask them to participate as
equals, as stakeholders, they will absolutely help define
outcome, and they will answer those surveys. One of the other
issues brought up was how to make these programs more
effective? Again, involve the children. Involve community
groups, involve adoptive parents.
Right now, programs are defined by people, by program
experts, and they don't necessarily meet the needs of the kids.
A number of years ago, I was at a conference, and a woman from
California was saying they would use their State independent
living money to hire a doctor--it was a girl's program with
gynecologists--to see the girls. So, I politely asked her,
``Where are you?'' assuming they were in rural California. And
she said, ``We are in L.A.'' I couldn't believe it. I couldn't
believe it. And I said to her, ``Well, what about the clinics?
Those girls will have to use these clinics in a couple of
months.'' ``Well, it would be easier,'' and she just kept
telling me it would easier, and I kept saying, ``Easier for
who?'' And that is the point. Programs have to be designed with
the kids in mind.
Much of what was said today was about the different groups
of kids, and, yes, there are absolutely a number of low
functioning foster youth, and there are high functioning foster
youth. One of the concerns I have is that independent living
programs will start creaming the crop. Those kids want to stay
in care, because they have reached a level of understanding
what they can get from the system, and I don't mean that in a
negative sense. They realize they need more support; they will
stay in care. It is the kids who have been let down so often,
who are so angry, and they have not connected with anyone in
the system that will leave. So, I think States--I think the
reporting mechanism is critical; can't stress it enough. I
think they have to be held accountable similar to the ways we
are looking at schools and doing scorecards on those, the
American public deserves to know the billions of dollars are
spent in foster care, and that will only be told with outcome.
So, please--and that is one of the things that has to stay in
this bill.
We would also like to see more innovative programs being
highlighted and used as models; programs that absolutely stress
work and career training. There is a program called Our House
in Maryland that you will hear from. It is built around work,
and by giving the kids an idea of what employment they will go
into, they can effectively do independent living skills; they
can effectively do school, GED work. I think unless we start
talking to these kids about apprentice programs, about all the
different options, we are going to lose too many.
Last, I would like independent living programs to better
train--I think the whole system has to gear everyone involved
in a foster kid's life in the independent living concept.
Foster parents need to be trained as group home workers who are
often very low paid and underskilled. You have to understand
the concept of independent living, and they themselves many
need some training. They may not have made some good choices
along the way or fulfilled their process. It is not reasonable
to expect them to help the kids do it unless we train them.
Additionally, there are--this country is founded on
volunteerism. People call my organization every day saying,
``How can I help?'' There really needs to be mechanisms for
volunteers and mentoring. More than anything, that is what
these kids need. They need relationships with people, and then
they will come back to the system, and they will tell them
their outcome.
As we talked about--as Mr. Watkins talked about recruiting
foster parents, I have some strong ideas on that. We can do
that; we can do better, but the system has to be opened up. We
have to take it away from child welfare experts and make it
more community based. Let those experts share their expertise,
but let us learn from parents who have successfully raised
children. Let us take from existing resources--nonprofits that
are in the community, church groups, business associations.
There are so many resources in this rich country that to think
our foster children are going without is a tragedy.
Most of what needs to be said has been said already, and I
do just want to reiterate that these children are assets, but
they are falling through the cracks, and we all lose, and I
think we could work together. I think that States need the
flexibility, but they need to be held accountable, and they
need to better incorporate existing resources into their
programs rather than constantly creating new. Thank you.
[The prepared statement follows:]
Statement of Eileen McCaffrey, Executive Director, Orphan Foundation of
America, Vienna, Virginia
I would like to begin by thanking you Madam Chairman and
Rep. Cardin for your work on this bill and say it will increase
much needed services for a nearly forgotten group of American
teenagers. We as a country must begin to value the potential of
foster youth and see them as an asset. This will require
increased monetary investment and emotionally supporting their
dreams by nurturing and guiding them through the array of
choices they face as young adults.
As Members of this esteemed committee each of you are well
aware that too many of our nation's former wards of the state
end up as grim statistics. When these kids lose, we all lose.
Whether you are look at the bottom line and see annual loss of
productivity or believe there is a moral obligation to provide
quality services, the fact is we have a vested interest in the
25,000 children that annually age out of foster care.
The $140,000,000 expenditure proposed in this bill will
support states' initiatives to better serve foster youth ages
16 to 21. You have wisely provided concrete guidelines after
hearing foster youth's frustration at being ill prepared for
the work world and post secondary education and training.
Additionally, you realize foster teens have not been given
enough emotional and financial support as they take those first
steps toward independence and adulthood.
The bill gives states the flexibility they need to design
and implement successful and innovative programs. Yet, within
the framework of flexibility you have clearly defined the
issues and goals that must be addressed by independent living
programs nationwide. The Orphan Foundation of America supports
the specific language included in section 477. We applaud the
emphasis on hard skills such as budgeting, substance abuse
prevention, career and goal planning, and post secondary
preparation for youth ages 16 -18. Moreover, thank you for
recognizing the need to provide financial, housing, counseling
and other support services to youth until they turn 21.
This bill directs social services to develop programs that
meet the needs of the whole child, including emotional and
social needs. Every foster youth should have the opportunity to
develop relationships within their community that will provide
them with personal and emotional support. Children aging out of
foster care desperately need friendship that will not end when
their case is closed. Successful Independent Living Programs
are have a multitude of community partners and devote resources
to recruiting and training mentors, life skills trainers,
employment and internship sponsors.
I also believe this bill does due diligence with the
American tax payers money by allocating $1,500,000 for review
and reporting. The detailed data you request is not cumbersome
or overwhelming. Complete data collection will help all
interested parties identify trends, spot weaknesses and
deficiencies that can be corrected, and recognize efficacy.
Given the total expenditures on the foster care system it is
incumbent upon social service agencies to make this information
public record.
This is a good bill that provides a much-needed infusion of
money into programs that are critical to the success of our
nation's foster teens. The three recommendations I would make
to the committee are:
1) Do not lessen the reporting requirements. Consider it an
annual health care checkup, some states will leave with a clean
bill of health while others work with the Department of Human
Services to find treatment and remedies for their shortcomings.
The U.S. taxpayer deserves to know the outcome of foster youth.
2) Allocate pilot project funding for innovative training,
work and intern programs that address the needs of lower
functioning foster youth. States could use this money to
support partnerships with businesses and existing nonprofits
that train youth for careers before discharge. The Maryland
based OUR HOUSE Youth program trains young men to be
carpenters; this model could be replicated. Programs should
help youth begin apprenticeships in culinary arts, welding,
etc.
3) Direct states to incorporate independent living
education into training for foster parents, group home workers
and case managers. Everyone involved in foster care must begin
to realize they are a youth resource in this ongoing process
that begins the day the youth enters care.
Members of this Subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity
to share my opinions with you. On behalf of the many foster
teens and volunteers who work with these youth through the
Orphan Foundation of America thank you for developing and
supporting this bill.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Thank you very much.
Ms. Block, from the People Places of Charlottesville--
beautiful city, beautiful town.
STATEMENT OF KELLI SUTTON BLOCK, PEOPLE PLACES OF
CHARLOTTESVILLE, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA
Ms. Sutton Block. Yes, thank you. Jenny was gang raped at
12 and never told anyone, and her mother kicked her out of the
house, because she was failing school and acting out sexually.
She is now 19; was in independent living for a year, and her
case was closed a year ago when she couldn't stay in school.
Lance was home schooled by his father until he was 11 and
beaten when he didn't know the right answer, while his blind
mother sat in the next room. He just turned 18 and lives in an
independent living program.
John's mother has been in and out of jail for drugs his
whole life. He has never met his father, and he saw his sister
murdered in his home when he was 10 years old. He is now 15 and
will begin independent living services next year.
My name is Kelli Sutton Block, and these are some of the
children with whom I have met on a weekly basis. I work for
People Places which is one of the oldest therapeutic foster
care programs in the Nation. Today, I will tell you what we at
People Places see as the essentials to any successful
independent living program, and I will tell you briefly about
the program we have developed to meet these needs.
The primary goal of an independent living program is to
prepare adolescents in foster care to lead healthy, productive
lives. In order to do this, we have identified three critical
elements of successful independent living programs. Those
elements are that the program must be individualized to the
foster adolescent; they must be based in reality, and they must
be therapeutic.
To be successful, an independent living program must be
individualized. Adolescents in foster care span a vast range of
skills and abilities. What works for one child will not
necessarily work for another. Jenny, for example, with an IQ of
80 and a fear of open spaces will have very different needs
from Lance, with an IQ of 120 and a history of aggression.
These children need to be worked with individually. Each
adolescent should have a customized, independent living plan
with specific treatment goals to emphasize the child's skills
and account for his or her deficits. This, of course, calls for
small caseloads for independent living workers.
Second, if we are truly expecting to improve the lives of
these adolescents, we must develop programs that are based in
reality and are not just built to ease our collective
conscience.
Three aspects of independent living programs require
practical and realistic solutions. First, monthly stipends must
be sufficient. Jenny, living on a stipend from the State, had
$160 a month after paying her rent and utilities; that is $5.30
a day to pay for all of her food, transportation, and personal
items. To create an expectation that a child should become
independent and to not give him or her enough money to do so,
is to create disdain and distrust for the system and for the
people who work within it.
Second, independent living programs must support older
adolescents as they learn to get and keep a job. As noted,
children from foster care come from a variety of backgrounds.
There are many children for whom postsecondary education is
completely unrealistic. For these children to simply hold a
decent job for the rest of their lives would be an
unprecedented victory in their families. We must support them
as they learn to do this.
Third, all independent living adolescents must have health
care coverage. Learning to take responsibility for oneself is a
critical part of becoming independent as you mentioned. We must
give these children the means to do so. Two weeks ago, John
broke his ankle. If he were not covered by Medicaid, something
as simple as this would have quickly put him into debt adding
to his already considerable stresses.
Independent living programs must be therapeutic. They must
address the social and psychological needs of adolescents in
foster care as well as their practical needs. As we all know,
many foster children come from tragic childhoods of abuse and
neglect. Teaching a child budgeting skills is a total waste of
time if he cannot effectively express himself; cannot endure
stressful situations, or cannot summon the courage to get out
of bed in the morning.
Jenny stopped by the other day and intimated that she is
finally ready to talk to someone about when she was raped 7
years ago. Her case was closed last year, however, and she no
longer receives Medicaid or any health care services. She makes
6 dollars an hour as a chambermaid in a hotel.
If these children are ever expected to participate in
society, they must have access to mental health services until
they are at least 21. As young adults not even old enough to
drink alcohol, these children cannot be expected to pay for
psychotherapy. Indeed, they won't be able to afford it, and
society will pay the price one way or the other.
At People Places, we have developed a transitional
independent living program called the Guide Program for foster
adolescents who are not quite ready to live on their own. In
the Guide Program, a teenager in foster care rents a spare room
from a responsible, trained adult. This adult functions as a
mentor, a friend, a sounding board, and safety net for the
teen. The 18 months they spend together is a way for the teen
to learn experientially what it takes to live on one's own. In
addition, each teen has a case manager who helps them set
weekly goals in the domains of home, education or work, self,
and community. Their weekly allowance is determined by their
progress on these stated goals.
Over time, these teens take on increased responsibility and
meet with their case manager less frequently. They also meet in
peer, skill-building groups to learn practical independent
living skills and to process their learning experiences. The
long-term goals are for the teen to gain competence, personal
accountability, integration into the community, and a strong
confidence in themselves.
In conclusion, to prepare foster adolescents to make their
way in our society is a complex task. These are children who
come into care with many different needs, many painful
histories, and many different ideas of what they want from
life. Independent living programs operate within the small but
critical, stressful stage of late adolescence. To best serve
these children, programs need to be individualized, based in
reality, and to be therapeutic. In order to build such programs
sufficient funds and services are desperately needed. This
legislation is certainly a step in the right direction.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement follows:]
Statement of Kelli Sutton Block, People Places of Charlottesville,
Charlottesville, Virginia
Introduction
Jenny was gang-raped at twelve, never told anyone, and her
mother kicked her out of the house because she was failing
school and acting out sexually. She is now 19, and her case was
closed a year ago. Lance was home-schooled by his father until
he was eleven, and beaten when he didn't know the right answer,
while his blind mother sat in the next room. He just turned 18,
and is in an independent living program. John's mother has been
in and out of jail for drugs his whole life, he has never met
his father, and he saw his sister murdered in his home when he
was ten years old. He is now 15, and will begin independent
living services next year.
My name is Kelli Sutton Block, and these are some of the
children with whom I have met on a weekly basis. I work for
People Places, which is one of the oldest therapeutic foster
care programs in the nation. Today I will tell you what we, at
People Places, see as the essentials to any successful
independent living program, and I will tell you briefly about
the program we have developed to meet these needs.
The primary goal of an independent living program is to
prepare adolescents in foster care to lead healthy, productive
lives. In order to do this, we have identified three critical
elements of successful independent living programs. These
elements are that the programs must be individualized to the
foster adolescent, they must be based in reality, and they must
be therapeutic.
Individualized
To be successful, an independent living program must be
individualized. Adolescents in foster care span a vast range of
skills and abilities. What works for one child will not
necessarily work for another. Jenny, for example, with an I.Q.
of 80 and a fear of open spaces will have very different needs
from Lance, with an I.Q. of 120 and a history of aggression.
These children need to be worked with individually. Each
adolescent should have a customized independent living plan
with specific treatment goals that emphasize that child's
skills and account for his/her deficits.
Practical and Realistic
If we are truly expecting to improve the lives of these
adolescents, we must develop programs that are based in
reality, and are not just built to ease our collective
conscience. Three aspects of independent living programs
require practical and realistic solutions.
First, monthly stipends must be sufficient. Jenny, living
on a stipend from the state, had $160. a month after paying her
rent and utilities. That's $5.30 a day to pay for all of her
food, transportation, and personal items. To create the
expectation that a child should become independent, and to not
give him/her enough money to do so, is to create disdain and
distrust for the system and for the people who work within it.
Second, independent living programs must support older
adolescents as they learn to get and keep a job. As noted,
children in foster care come from a variety of backgrounds.
There are many children for whom post-secondary education is
completely unrealistic. For these children, to simply hold a
decent job for the rest of their lives would be an
unprecedented victory in their families. We must support them
as they learn to do this.
Third, all independent living adolescents must have health
care coverage. Learning to take responsibility for oneself is a
critical part of becoming independent. We must give these
children the means to do so. Two weeks ago, John broke his
ankle. If he were not covered by Medicaid, these unexpected
medical bills would have quickly put him into debt, adding to
his already considerable stresses.
Therapeutic
Independent living programs must address the social and
psychological needs of adolescents in foster care, as well as
their practical needs. As we all know, many foster children
come from tragic childhoods of abuse and neglect. Teaching a
child budgeting skills is a total waste of time if he cannot
effectively express himself, cannot endure stressful
situations, or cannot summon the courage to get out of bed in
the morning.
Jenny stopped by the other day, and intimated that she is
finally ready to talk to someone about when she was raped seven
years ago. Her case was closed last year, however, and she no
longer receives Medicaid, or any health care services. She
makes $6.00 an hour as a chambermaid in a hotel.
If these children are ever expected to participate in
society, they must have access to mental health services until
they are at least 21. As young adults, not even old enough to
drink alcohol, these children cannot be expected to pay for
psychotherapy. Indeed, they won't be able to afford it, and
society will pay the price, one way or the other.
One Example
At People Places, we have developed an transitional
independent living program called the Guide Program for foster
adolescents who are not quite ready to live on their own. In
the Guide Program, a teenager in foster care lives with a
responsible, trained adult. This adult functions as a mentor, a
sounding board, and a safety net for the teen. The 18 months
they spend together is a way for the teen to learn,
experientially, what it takes to live on one's own.
In addition, each teen has a case manager who helps them
set weekly goals in the domains of home, education/work, self,
and community. Their weekly allowance is determined by their
progress on these stated goals. Over time, the teens take on
increased responsibility and meet with their case manager less
frequently. The long-term goals are for the teen to gain
competence, personal accountability, integration into the
community, and a strong confidence in themselves.
Conclusion
In conclusion, to prepare foster adolescents to make their
way in our society is a complex task. These are children who
come into care with many different needs, many painful
histories, and many different ideas of what they want from
life. Independent living programs operate within the small but
critical, stressful stage of late adolescence. To best serve
these children, programs should be individualized, based in
reality, and therapeutic. In order to build such programs,
sufficient funds and services are desperately needed. This
legislation is a step in the right direction. Thank you.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Thank you very much.
Ms. Matheny.
STATEMENT OF SONJA MATHENY, STUDENT, NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL
UNIVERSITY, KEYS FOR LIFE
Ms. Matheny. Good morning. My name is Sonja Matheny. It is
a great honor to speak on behalf of older foster youth. I am 19
years old. I attend North Carolina Central University where I
am a third-year business administration major. I have been a
ward of the court since I was 2 years old--the DC court,
District of Columbia. Being in foster care in the foster care
system is difficult for most children. At a young age, we will
know that we will come--the day will come when we will lose our
financial and emotional support. We have to work twice as hard
and quickly to be prepared to take care of ourselves at a young
age.
When we turn 18, most of us are terminated from the child
care system. A few lucky ones, like me, receive support until
they turn 21. In my case I have been luckier than many of my
peers. At 16, I became part of the Keys for Life Independent
Living Program located here in Washington, DC. This program has
encouraged me to strive for success. While I was in high
school, it offered me tutoring, life skills training, SAT
preparation, college preparation, and internship opportunities.
In preparation for college, the program sent me to local
and out-of-state college tours; paid for some of my college
application fees, and helped me find financial aid. Keys for
Life was there to assist me with each step of the college
enrollment process. I do not know if I could have done all the
necessary things to prepare for college without them. It is
difficult for a 17- or an 18-year-old to keep track of all the
details and deadlines especially when your life may be chaotic.
Many foster teens live in group homes that are noisy and have
lots of people coming in and out. They have no private space to
keep their important papers, and the adults in the home may not
encourage them or support their goals.
Keys would like to help guide me through the financial aid
process, and they introduced me to the Orphan Foundation of
America. The Orphan Foundation provides scholarships to young
people in foster care. Their staff consists of volunteers, and
their funding comes from the direct contributions of people
concerned about young people in foster care.
This year, I will receive $5,000 from the Orphan
Foundation, but they cannot afford to help everyone who wants
to go to college. I will be using the money to pay for my room
and board. When a foster youth has goals, they need to be
helped by many different groups of people like the Orphan
Foundation. Unfortunately, my brother who is also on foster
care has not benefited from the independent living program. It
is important that people understand when the system lets kids
down too many times, they will stop having faith in it. This
happens too often. Kids just want out of the system, and they
realize too late that the time they had with the independent
living program could have helped them.
Although my brother has worked hard pursuing his college
degree, he has to pay for everything by himself. He was
terminated from the system without any transition and had to
move from the foster home before he had the opportunity to
finish school. Overnight, became fully responsible for all of
his expenses. He is now 24 years old and still striving to
fulfill his dream of finishing college.
I would like to recommend three improvements that need to
be made within the independent living program. The first one,
the program should be available for any foster teen who is 14
or a freshman in high school. If students became part of the
program in ninth grade, they will have--if they become part of
the program in ninth grade, they will have a better chance of
realizing that staying in school and getting good grades is the
key to having the opportunities as an adult. I hear many people
in the program say that they could have done much better in
school had they started the independent living program sooner.
From age 16 to 21 is not enough time to fully prepare someone
for a successful life.
Second, there should be a transitioning support plan for
every foster youth before they age out. This transitional plan
would help young adults put in place the stable living
conditions necessary to finish college and training school or
get a job.
And, last, for the youth who are in college, independent
living money should be available to pay for room and board.
Living on campus provides students with a stable environment so
the students can focus more on their studies. Thank you.
[The prepared statement follows:]
Statement of Sonja Matheny, Student, North Carolina Central University,
Keys for Life
Good Morning, my name is Sonja Matheny and it is a great
honor to speak on behalf of older foster youth. I am nineteen
years old and I attend North Carolina Central University, where
I am a third year Business Administration major. I have been a
ward of the District of Columbia since I was two years old.
Being in the foster care system is difficult for most
children. At a young age, we know the day will come when we
lose all of our financial and emotional support. We have to
work twice as hard and quickly to be prepared to take care of
ourselves at a very young age. When we turn eighteen most of us
are terminated from the foster care system; a few lucky ones
like me receive some support until they turn twenty-one.
Most of us are terminated before we are ready. Throughout
our years in care, there has been inadequate support from
foster families, group homes, social workers, and people around
us do not understand how hard it is not having a family and
home of your own. Many of my peers lose confidence in the
system and do not believe that programs like independent living
can help them get ready to be on their own. Growing up is a
daily process and short term programs like Independent Living
can't make up for the years of not having any guidance towards
adulthood.
In my case, I have been luckier than many of my peers. At
sixteen I became part of the Keys for Life Independent Living
Program located here in Washington D.C. This program has
encouraged me to strive for success. While I was in high
school, it offered me tutoring, life skills training, S.A.T
preparation, college preparation, and internship opportunities.
In preparation for college, the program sent me on local and
out-of-state college tours, paid for some of my college
application fees, and helped me find financial aid.
Keys for Life was there to assist me with each step of the
college enrollment process. I do not know if I could have done
all the things necessary to go to college without them. It is
difficult for a 17 or 18 year old to keep track of all the
details and deadlines, especially when your life might chaotic.
Many foster teens live in group homes that are noisy and have
lots of people coming and going, they have no private space to
keep important papers and the adults in the home may not
encourage or support their goals.
Keys for Life helped guide me through the federal financial
aid process and they introduced me to the Orphan Foundation of
America. The Orphan Foundation provides scholarships to young
people in foster-care. Their staff consists of volunteers and
their funding comes from the direct contributions of people
concerned about young people in foster care. This year I will
receive a $5,000 from the Orphan Foundation but they can not
afford to help everyone who wants to go to college. I will be
using their money to pay for room and board. When a foster
youth has goals they need to be helped by many different groups
of people like the Orphan Foundation.
Unfortunately, my brother who was also in foster care has
not benefited from an Independent Living Program. It is
important people understand that when the system lets kids down
too many times they stop having faith in it. This happen often,
kids just want out of the system and some realize too late that
they do need the help of a independent living program. But
unlike my friends at college who have families that take them
back--foster kids can=t return.
Although my brother has worked hard pursing his college
degree, he has to pay for everything himself. He was terminated
from the system without any transition plan and had to move
from the foster home before he had the opportunity to finish
school. Overnight he became fully responsible for all of his
expenses. He is now twenty-four years old and still trying to
fulfill his dream of finishing college.
Although Independent Living Programs definitely provide
many benefits, I would like to recommend five improvements that
need to be made.
1) The programs should be available to any foster teen who
is 14 or a freshman in high school. If students become part of
the program in ninth grade, they will have a better chance of
realizing that staying in school and getting good grades is the
key to having options as an adult. I hear a lot of people in
the program say they could have done much better in school if
they had started the independent living program sooner. From
age sixteen to twenty-one, is not enough time to fully prepare
someone for a successful life.
2) There should be a transitional support plan for every
foster youth before they age out. This transitional plan would
help young adults put in place the stable living conditions
necessary to finish college or training school or get a job.
3) For the foster youth who are in college, independent
living money should be available to pay room and board at
school. Living on campus provides students with a stable
environment so the student can focus more on their studies.
4) All foster youth should have health care coverage until
they complete school or job training. Part of the transitional
plan should include being able to join a health insurance plan
when Medicaid expires.
5) Lastly, more civic organizations and businesses should
be encouraged to become involved with foster youth. All
children should have relationships with people outside of the
foster care system that help them feel like they belong to
society.
In conclusion, I want to thank you for increasing the
funding for independent living programs to $140,000,000 and ask
you to make sure that states spend the money in ways that will
truly help more foster youth gain independence and live
prosperous lives.
Thank you.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. Excellent. Thank you very
much.
Mr. Bowie.
STATEMENT OF MONTREY BOWIE, HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT, OUR HOUSE,
INC., ELLICOTT CITY, MARYLAND
Mr. Bowie. Hi. My name is Montrey Bowie, and I am 17 years
old. I was born in Frederick, Maryland. I completed the ninth
grade when I was in school. I had a tough time when I was
young. I had grown-ups who did not care about me, did not spend
much time with me. I began to get in trouble when I was 9 years
old and still growing up so my life could not take care of me.
When I was 13, the State pulled me out of my home, and I went
from group home to group home 4 times total until I was 15
years old. I did not learn anything about how to live or how to
take care of myself. Then the State put me in a foster home
with six other foster kids. The seven of us had to share two
bedrooms, and the lady was not kind to me. Again, I was very
much alone and had no growing up support.
Finally, after a year in this home, I ran away. I survived
by getting into trouble, but soon I was caught and placed in
another foster home, and this home also did not address my
needs. I took a job at McDonald's, but I realized that I was
not going to have much of a future there. I wanted to be a
carpenter and own my own construction business. I heard about
Our House Youth Home, and I went for an interview. It is
located between Washington and Baltimore. I got accepted there
a year ago, and I am still currently enrolled there.
At Our House, we do three things. We learn carpentry during
the day; we have our high school classes at night, and we do
community service work every Saturday. We won the top county
award in 1997 and the top State award in 1998 for all of the
hours of volunteer work that we do to help other people. I will
be taking the high school diploma next month. I will be
graduating from Our House this summer.
I will turn 18 at the end of the summer. I do not have a
home to go to, and I will be on my own soon. I have to find a
place to live and start paying a security deposit to even have
a phone installed. This is very scary for me. For the first
time in my life, I will be completely on my own.
I will have a job with a carpentry union in Frederick,
Maryland, because Our House Youth Home taught me carpentry and
guaranteed all of its graduates a job in construction field,
but I must have transportation to belong to a union, because
there are carpenter's jobs all over the different construction
sites. I might get a car that has been donated to Our House,
but auto insurance costs a lot of money, and insurance
companies won't donate even 1 month's premium.
Despite the uncertainty of my whole life in front of me, I
still feel lucky. At Our House, I have gained self-respect, a
work ethic, and a carpentry trade, and a high school degree. I
have social workers to give me weekly counseling sessions and
to talk with me if I ever need someone to listen to me.
They have been preparing me for adult life. I have weekly
life skills training, group counseling, CPR certification, and
even a 2-month public speaking course. I have had volunteer GED
students who have taught me how to study. I feel Our House has
given me a lot of tools that will help me, but they need help.
They need an after-care program. They need a place for guys
like me who are just 18. You see, at 18, most kids have to
leave their programs, because 18-year-olds are considered
adults. I am still going to need an adult to talk with me who
cares about me. I am still going to need a grown-up who I can
trust to help me make decisions. I might even need some
counseling before I go out completely on my own.
However, many of my friends from foster care have only a
high school degree and no job skills. They will have to work at
minimum wage, but when we are on our own, we all will have to
purchase sheets, towels, dishes and pans, food, and clothes as
well as worrying about our transportation to and from our job.
I don't understand why there can't be more Our House homes to
help them get ready.
I have five following recommendations: first, kids who have
no parents to help them or to give them guidance need a
jumpstart on life to make them successful and taxpaying
citizens; second, we need mentors who we can call on when
things get us down; third, we need help in putting a security
deposit on our first month apartment, on our phone, our auto
insurance, our first month's rent, our linen, cookware, our
furniture, and transportation; fourth, we need more youth homes
like Our House--every kid needs this kind of training; fifth,
we need Congress to look over the State spending of funds for
us, because I don't believe the State of Maryland did such a
good job with me. They never seem to have enough money to take
care of us properly.
And the last I want to say is I am going to be a good
citizen, and I am going to give back to this country. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement follows:]
Statement of Montrey Bowie, High School Student, Our House, Inc.,
Ellicott City, Maryland
My name is Montrey Bowie, and I'm 17 years old. I was born
in Frederick, MD. I completed the 9th grade when I was in
school.
I had a tough time when I was young. I had adults who did
not care about me, who did not spend much time with me. I began
to get in trouble when I was 9 years old, and still the adults
in my life could not take care of me.
When I was 13, the state pulled me out of my home, and I
bounced from group home to group home--4 in all until I was 15.
I did not learn anything about how to live, or how to take care
of myself.
Then the state put me in a foster home with 6 other foster
kids. The 7 of us had to share two bedrooms, and the lady was
not kind to me. Again, I was very much alone and had no adult
support. Finally, after a year in this home, I ran away.
And I survived by getting in trouble. But soon I was
caught, placed in another foster home, and this home also did
not address my needs. I took a job at McDonalds, but I realized
that I was not going to have much of a future there. I wanted
to be a carpenter, and own my own construction business.
I heard about Our House Youth Home, and I went for an
interview. It is located between Washington & Baltimore. I got
accepted there about a year ago, and I am still currently
enrolled there. At Our House, we do 3 things: we learn
carpentry during the day, have our high school classes at
night, and do community service work every Saturday. We won the
top county award in '97 & the top state award in '98 for all
the hours of volunteering that we do to help other people.
I will be taking the high school diploma exam next month,
and I will be graduating from Our House this summer. I will
turn 18 at the end of the summer.
I do not have a home to go to, and I will be on my own. I
have to find a place to live, and start paying security
deposits to even have a phone installed. This is very scary for
me. For the 1st time in my life, I will be completely on my
own.
I will have a job with the carpenter's union in Frederick,
MD, because Our House Youth Home taught me carpentry, and
guarantees all its graduates a job in the construction field.
But I must have transportation to belong to the union,
because its carpenters drive all over to different construction
sites. I might get a car that's been donated to Our House, but
auto insurance costs a lot of money, and insurance companies
won't donate even one months's premium.
Despite the uncertainty of my whole life in front of me, I
still feel lucky. At Our House, I have gained self-respect, a
work ethic, a carpentry trade, & a high school degree. I had
social workers to give me weekly counseling sessions, and to
talk with me if I ever needed someone to listen to.
They have been preparing me for adult life. I have weekly
life skills training, group counseling, CPR certification, and
even a two month public speaking course: Toastmasters. I have
had volunteer GED tutors who have taught me how to study. I
feel Our House is giving me a lot of tools that will help me.
But they need help: they need an aftercare program. They
need a place for guys like me who are just 18. You see, at 18,
most kids have to leave their programs because 18 year olds are
considered adults. I am still going to need an adult to talk to
who cares about me. I am still going to need an adult who I can
trust to help me make decisions. I might even need some
counseling, before I go out completely on my own.
However, many of my friends from foster care have only a
high school degree, and no job skills. They will have to work
at minimum wage. But when we are on our own, we all will have
to purchase sheets, towels, dishes & pans, food, and clothes,
as well as worrying about our transportation to and from our
jobs. I don't understand why there can't be more Our House
Youth Homes to help them get ready.
I have the following 5 recommendations:
1st--Kids who have no parents to help them or to give them
guidance, need a jump start on life to make them successful &
tax paying citizens.
2nd--We need mentors who we can call on when things get us
down.
3rd--We need help in putting a security deposit on our 1st
apartment, on our phone, our auto insurance, our 1st month's
rent, our linens & cookware, our furniture, and transportation.
4th--We need more youth homes like Our House. Every kid
needs this kind of training.
5th--We need congress to look over the state's spending of
funds for us, because I don't believe the state of Maryland did
such a good job with me. They never seemed to have enough money
to take care of us properly.
And the last thing I want to say is, I am going to be a
good citizen, and I am going to give back.
Chairman Johnson of Connecticut. I thank the panel for
their testimony, and I particularly congratulate the two of you
on the extraordinary intelligence of your testimony and the
professionalism with which you delivered it.
It is really a testament that you have been able to use the
resources that did come to you, though late on, with such very
good effect, and it is very encouraging to hear that clearly
your friends in those programs also have been able to benefit.
But you are absolutely right, it is really scandalous that
we should be telling children--one of the earlier people--
maybe, perhaps, it was you, Ms. McCaffrey, who testified about
the fear--or Tom DeLay--and we do hope to make very significant
change in this program.
It is frustrating, because we hear all the people testify
and say what good programs, and so you want to say, ``Listen,
State, you are going to have to do this program.'' But every
child is different, and every community is different, and so
communities do have to tailor and develop their programs. We
can do a much better job of sharing successful programs
throughout the States. We don't do a good job of that. In many
ways, the whole foster care system has been a sort of little
secret off to the side that we don't talk about, and the more--
you may have heard the earlier panels talk about how once you
have the data everybody says ``Wow.''
We had testimony about 2 weeks ago on the Adoption and Safe
Families Act, and person after person said, ``Once we had to
focus on this issue, we did a much better job.'' So, we are
hoping through this legislation to get States to focus; to give
them more resources; to have them look at what actually happens
as a result of the efforts they make. I mean, look at all the
money that was, frankly, wasted on you when you were young,
because it was not helping you do the right thing, but it was
costly. So, as we get each piece moving along a little better,
we hope to figure out how to get the whole system to be,
frankly, more child-centered but also more realistic and more
practical.
One of the things that--as you write this legislation, you
want to say, ``These kids should be number one on the work
study programs in the high schools.'' Well, you can't
necessarily mandate that, but we certainly will in the report
language try to cite that kind of issue. First of all, if you
do that here, it gets referred to another Committee, and you
might never get it back. So, you do have to be careful telling
people how you think they can do it best, because you are the
results of really caring people thinking about how can we do
this best, and, clearly, there is a way to do this best.
So, we hope that we will put some money out there and
create a different framework within which people cannot only
think about these things and can use the money more flexibly
but will be held more accountable, and it will be more visible
of what did happen and why did it happen? The testimony that we
had both at our initial hearing and along the way as to the
lack of any support for kids in getting education--both of you
got education. Montrey, you got a trade that pays well, and
you, Sonja, are in college, and those things open up
opportunity, and so much of the money that we spend in the
system doesn't open up opportunity.
So, we do hope that we will make big change, and I thank
you for your very specific recommendations. I appreciate that.
I appreciate the thoughtfulness and straightforwardness of your
testimony. I very much appreciate the fact that you have been
able to put aside feeling sorry for yourselves and ``how come I
haven't got a better break in life?'' and make the breaks for
yourself now; I admire that.
Thank you all for your testimony. The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[Submissions for the record follow:]
Kathi L. Grasso, Esq.
Baltimore, Maryland 21218
May 26, 1999
The Honorable Nancy L. Johnson, Chair
& Subcommittee Members
Subcommittee on Human Resources
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
Rayburn House Office Building, Room B-317
Washington, DC 20515-6216
RE: Statement of Kathi L. Grasso, Esq., on H.R. 1802
Dear Chairwoman Johnson and Subcommittee Members:
I am submitting these comments on the ``Foster Care Independence
Act of 1999,'' H.R. 1802, as a private citizen, not on behalf of my
current employer. Having been court-appointed counsel for hundreds of
youth in child abuse cases while employed at Maryland's Legal Aid
Bureau and the Maryland Disability Law Center, I was moved to write
because many of my former clients would have greatly benefited from the
provision of services envisioned by H.R. 1802. As you are aware, too
many adults who have been in foster care as children experience
homelessness, imprisonment, violence, poor health outcomes, and the
devastating effects of poverty.
I commend the Chairwoman's sponsorship of this bill that has the
potential to enhance opportunities for foster care youth to participate
in much needed independent living programs, as well as facilitate their
access to appropriate health care. I support increased funding for
these services and Medicaid expansion, but wish to address issues,
including the juvenile court's role in monitoring the provision of
services, that if addressed could further enable youth transitioning
from foster care to receive meaningful independent living services.
From my work as an attorney for youth and now with the American Bar
Association Center on Children and the Law, I have come to learn that
too many teens in foster care, especially those with developmental and
mental disabilities, are denied access to services necessary to enable
them to make the transition to young adulthood and self-sufficiency.
Reasons include:
Limits on the jurisdiction of some state courts to preside
over cases of youth over eighteen years of age;
Lack of or inadequate independent living programs and
services;
Limited financial resources for these programs;
Some states not opting to pay for foster care and/or
independent living programs/services for youth older than 18;
Rigid standards for admittance into existing programs;
Variance in case worker competence (e.g., some may be
ignorant of adolescent development and needs; lack rapport or ability
to communicate with teens); and
Lack of uniformity in how programs are administered or
operated.
The Court's Role in Monitoring the Provision of Independent Living
Services
In accordance with federal law, this nation's juvenile and
family courts play an instrumental role in monitoring the
provision of permanency planning services to abused and
neglected children, including independent living services. I
know from personal experience that many of my older clients
aged eighteen to twenty-one would have been denied transitional
living services if the court had not maintained jurisdiction
over their cases after their eighteenth birthdays, and if they
had not had access to their own legal counsel to advocate for
services.
In some states, such as Maryland, courts have the authority
to review cases of youth in foster care until the person turns
twenty-one years of age and can ensure that these young people
are not inappropriately denied foster care and transitional
living services. In other states, court jurisdiction is
terminated once the youth turns age eighteen and as such, there
may be no independent judicial oversight.
For example, in L.Y. and Melody v. Department of Health and
Rehabilitation Services, 696 So.2d 430 (Fla. App. 1997), Judge
Pariente, in a concurring special opinion, voiced frustration
with Florida's statute terminating court jurisdiction over
children in foster care at age eighteen stating that juvenile
court jurisdiction should be co-extensive with the obligation
of the Department to provide services to individuals who have
been previously placed in foster care. Id., at 432. He
acknowledged the trial judge's concern that there will be no
effective oversight to ensure that the Department provides the
services that it is obligated to provide. Id., at 433.
Concerned about diminished funding for children's services, he
adds:
With these budgetary cuts in mind, are the children over eighteen,
regardless of how well they may or may not be doing, the next targets?
This Court fears that they are, and that a large number of children are
going to be cut loose with no resources other than to resort to public
assistance, crime, prostitution, and other degrading acts in order to
survive. Did the people who may be cutting them loose adequately
fulfill their responsibility to prepare these people for independence?
Id., at 434. The court goes on to encourage ``HRS in Tallahassee,
the Guardian [Ad Litem] program and all responsible child advocates
[to] band together to advocate amending the law in order to allow some
independent oversight of the manner in which there is review for
children who choose to remain in extended foster care beyond their
eighteenth birthdays.'' Id., at 435.
To ensure that courts are involved in the implementation of the
proposed legislation, I recommend that the bill incorporate additional
provisions under Section 477(b)(2) and (b)(3), respectively, to require
that states in their state plans and certification process detail how
they will coordinate with their courts to promote judicial involvement
in supporting youth who are transitioning from the child welfare system
through their twenty-first birthdays. This coordination could include
educating judges and lawyers on transitional living issues and
encouraging states, when necessary, to extend their courts' child
welfare jurisdiction to allow juvenile judges to preside over the cases
of dependent youth eighteen to twenty-one years of age.
Ensuring That All Dependent Youth 18-21 Have Access to Foster Care and
Independent Living Services
In addition to the court's role in monitoring services, I
am concerned that the proposed legislation may have the
unintentional effect of pushing youth upon their eighteenth
birthdays out of stable foster care placements. The bill's
purpose section, as well as other language, appears to indicate
that the bill is only addressing the needs of youth who are
former foster care recipients. Some examples include the
following:
Sec. 477 (a)(1), ``to identify children who are
likely to remain in foster care until 18 years of age....'';
Sec. 477 (a)(2), (a)(3), ``to help children who
are likely to remain in foster care until 18 years of
age....'';
Sec. 477 (a)(5), ``to provide...services to former
foster care recipients....'';
Sec. 477 (b)(3)(A), ``that the State will provide
assistance and services to children who have left foster
care....''; and
Sec. 477 (b)(4)(C), ``all children in the State
who have left foster care....''
Would this legislation allow independent living funds to be
appropriated for transitional living services to youth who
still reside in foster care placements after age eighteen and
until age twenty-one? Many youth will benefit from the
stability of being in a family foster home after age eighteen
and at the same time will be in need of services to enable them
to transition to self-sufficient adulthood. For instance, what
about the nineteen or twenty year old youth who lives with a
foster family and attends a local college? If states wanted to
take advantage of increased independent living funding, would
some youth be unnecessarily removed from their stable foster
home environments and forced to live on their own?
We should work to ensure that youth in foster care are
afforded the same opportunities for family life as non-foster
care youth. I would therefore recommend that the bill be
amended to extend foster care maintenance payments to dependent
youth up to age twenty-one and ensure that youth, aged eighteen
to twenty-one, in foster care can also be recipients of
independent or transitional living services.
Ensuring That All Dependent Youth 18-21 Have Access to Appropriate
Health Care
Studies indicate that a significant number of children and
youth coming under the auspices of juvenile, dependency and
family courts have disabling, chronic, and life threatening
conditions that are not always identified and treated.\1\
Expanding Medicaid coverage to youth transitioning from foster
care aged eighteen through twenty-one is essential if we are to
increase the chances of this at-risk population of youth being
physically and mentally healthy as adults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ United States General Accounting Office, Report to the Ranking
Minority Member, Subcommittee on Human Resources, Committee on Ways and
Means, House of Representatives, Foster Care: Health Needs of Many
Young Children Are Unknown and Unmet, GAO/HEHS-95-114 (May 1995);
Chernoff, R, Combs-Orme, T, Risley-Curtiss, C, Heisler, A, Assessing
the health status of children entering foster care, Pediatrics, 93(4):
594-601 (April 1994); Horwitz, SM, Simms, MD, Farrington, R, Impact of
developmental problems on young children's exits from foster care,
Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 15(2):105-110 (April 1994);
Halfon, N, Berkowitz, G, Klee, L, Mental health service utilization by
children in foster care in California, Pediatrics, 89(6): 1238-1244
(June 1992); and McIntyre, A, Keesler, T, Psychological disorders among
foster children, Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 15(4), 297-303
(1986).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I appreciate the opportunity to comment. Thank you for your
consideration.
Sincerely,
Kathi L. Grasso, Esq.
Statement of National Independent Living Association, Jacksonville,
Florida
The National Independent Living Association(NILA) submits
this document as testimony to the distinguished members of the
House Ways and Means' Subcommittee on Human Resources. The
National Independent Living Association is an association
connected to hundreds of public and private agencies, state
agencies, foster care parents, individuals and foster care
youth who represent 50 states across the nation. These member
agencies and individuals represent foster care youth and
services, youth at risk and young people in out of home
placements in need of extending, quality care in order to make
the transition from care to independence successful. Many of
our members are state coordinators, provide specialized
services and focus their programs specifically on independent
living services and transitional living skills. On behalf of
our members and on behalf of over 500,000 young people in care,
we thank you for the opportunity to submit our recommendations
and comments for your review.
In 1989, the founders of NILA were instrumental in shaping
the legislation for foster care youth. They made positive
change in policy and began a movement across the nation that
connected foster care services, providers, and youth together.
Over the years, the networking and advocacy that has taken
place for young people in out of home care has sparked concerns
for the constant changes and problems young people face, in
society and programming. These issues have become NILA's focus
as many of the young people leaving care become homeless,
incarcerated, pregnant and in greater need of mental health and
medical services. As Bill Pinto, Program Director for
Connecticut's Department of Human Services, stated in his March
9th testimony to the Subcommittee on Health and Human
Resources, ``To me, the story of Independent Living in the
United States is one of 'tragedy and triumph'. The tragedy is
that, far too often, graduates of the American child welfare
system become America's homeless, prisoners, public assistant
recipients and psychiatric patients.''
NILA feels very strongly about it's commitment and
responsibility to the older youth in America who are in
alternative care. Entering into adulthood can take many forms,
and particular experiences or events may be viewed as turning
points for individuals during which new directions are taken.
Research has shown that positive youth development is fostered
when adolescents have a sense of industry and competency, a
feeling of being connected to others and to society, a belief
that they have control over their lives and a stable identity.
Many of the children placed in out of home placements are
victims of abuse, abandonment, parents with addictions and many
other hardships. These youth require security and support that
will aide them in their growth as young adults to feel
connected, in control and with a sense of identity. We have a
responsibility to do more for the young people aging out of the
system than we have been. The challenges young people face at
age 18 are tremendous and it may be that the absence of support
from families, societal institutions, communities and friends,
rather than any given problem behavior, explains the failure or
inabilities of some adolescents to achieve successful
adulthood. We must support their desire to complete their
education, find gainful employment, and their will to become
independent, healthy members of society. It is critical that we
begin recognizing the transition from childhood to adolescence
to self-sufficiency or adulthood, is a process, not an event.
The bipartisan bill being introduced will play an important
role in promoting the successes of young people in out of home
placements transitioning to independent living. Unfortunately
there is no single ``cure all'' solution, but NILA supports all
efforts made for better policy and programming for these youth.
In 1997, Congress passed the bipartisan Adoption and Safe
Families Act which ensures that more young people in foster
care will have safe and permanent living arrangements. While
this was monumental for many children and youth, adoption is
not possible for every child in alternative placements. The
``Transition to Adulthood Program Act of 1999,'' being
introduced by U.S Representative Ben Cardin (D-MD) and U.S.
Representative Nancy Johnson (R-CT) addresses many of the
issues for Independent Living Services programs and the young
people they serve. NILA is pleased that Congress and the
Clinton Administration are addressing the needs of our young
people. In fact, a study contracted by the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services concluded that emancipated youth are
a troubled population.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Alliance For Children & Families, Into the Newsroom, public
relations staff, February 28-March 2, 1999. Study contracted by the U.S
Department of Health and Human Services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two thirds of the 18 year olds in the study did
not complete high school or a GED
Sixty-one percent had no job experience.
Thirty-eight percent had been diagnosed as
emotionally disturbed
Seventeen percent had a drug abuse problem
Nine percent had a health problem.
Seventeen percent of the females were pregnant
Of the total 34, 600 youths emancipated from
foster care during the study period, 40 percent received no
independent living services to help them prepare for
responsible adult life.
For those who had received services, the study
found that many of the skills encouraged by the Independent
Living Programs were positively related to good outcomes once
the adolescents left foster care.
A good example of this is the story about a young man in
foster care who just reached his 18th birthday. He is forced to
leave his current placement and is exited out on his own. For
much of his life he has become significantly familiar with the
word ``survival.'' He has survived a childhood of abuse,
neglect and domestic violence, multiple placements in foster
homes, group homes and alternative care. He knows how to
survive street life, sleepless nights under bridges, in cars
and at various friends homes and lonely holidays without
family. But he doesn't know how to fill out a job application
or how to interview for a job, let alone maintain one. He
doesn't know how important completing his education will be to
his future or how to find permanent, safe housing. He is
arrested for stealing food, and while jail isn't ideal, it is
three square meals, a bed to sleep on and a roof over his head.
Meanwhile, the young lady he got pregnant is having the baby.
She is familiar with the welfare system and knows how to
survive on it and manipulate it. But she doesn't know how
important pre-natal care is nor does she have strong parenting
skills because she has never known a positive parent role
model. As dramatic as this sounds, these two young people
represent a large number of youth being emancipated from care
every year. NILA believes the issues that youth in out-of-home
placements are faced with are among the most integral,
important issues facing Congress. If the well being of our
children is a priority, then we must act with vigor.
NILA's Board of Directors, members and its legislative
committee have reviewed the highlights of the bipartisan bill
being introduced and have outlined additional recommendations
and other improvements that we believe will better address the
needs of young people making the transition to adulthood.
An increase in the Independent Living budget from
$70 million to $140 million.
Current allocations to states remains based on the 1984
census and overall dollars have not been increased since 1992.
A substantial increase is pertinent to the delivery of services
to youth who are suppose to receive them.
National policy for states flexible funding that
provides measurable outcomes for design and implementation of
programming specific to older youth in out-of-home care.
While there are many responsible programs that are
providing quality, extended care to youth aging out of the
system, there are many, unfortunately, that continuously fail
our older adolescents. Policy that promotes accountability and
outcome measures will also promote proper and safer exits from
care for youth.
Reallocation of funds based on the average of the
last two years' foster care census (both IV-E and non IV-E
eligible).
This number should be re-calculated regularly to allow for
the shifts in the population. The distribution formula for the
Independent Living IV-E initiative funds has not been updated
since 1984. For many states the current formula does not meet
their needs for the increased number of youth they are serving.
Employment tax credit for hiring current or former
foster care youth.
Less than half of the youth emancipated from care without
support or aftercare, are unemployed. Only 38% maintain a job
for over a year. Incentive to employers to work with and train
these youth could prove to be very affordable. When adolescents
perceive their futures in terms of work that will allow them to
have positive work experiences and become economically self-
sufficient, they are more likely to feel a sense of
responsibility and capability to manage their future.
An increase in allowable savings for youth up to
$5,000.
NILA strongly recommends that young people graduating from
foster care not be penalized by becoming ineligible for Title
XX or other social services for maintaining a personal savings
plan.
Lowering the age for IV-E eligibility to 14 years.
The younger an adolescent begins to get involved in skills
training, self-preparation and specialized programming, the
more likely the results will be positive. Studies have shown
that if in early adolescents (ages 11-14) and through mid-
adolescence (ages 15-17) characteristics of competency,
connectedness, self control and identity are nurtured, it is
more likely that these youth will engage in pro-social
behaviors, exhibit positive school performances and be members
of nondeviant peer groups.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration
for Children and Families, Understanding Youth Development: Promoting
Positive Pathways of Growth; January 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
No more than 40% of allocations to be spent on
room and board and at least 60% of the funds to be spent on
training and services to prepare youth for self-sufficiency.
Allocations for room and board are very important to
assisting programs in transitioning youth to self-sufficiency
and long term independent living. It is apparently evident that
skills training and support services and after care are the
back bone to the success of ``long-term.'' Therefore a greater
percentage of the funding needs to go to training and
programming that promotes preparedness.
NILA supports the Data Reporting Requirements
proposed in the bipartisan bill being introduced.
NILA recommends additions to the data requirements be; the
number of youth who are in college, post secondary education
and other trade/training educational institutes.
A stronger emphasis on educational assistance and
preparation for employment.
The Westat study, conducted in 1989-1990, showed that youth
who received continued services and support to attend
continuing educational programs, were more likely to obtain
employment that provided a comfortable wage for living. They
were also more likely to abstain from re-entering the system as
criminals, welfare recipients or homeless members of society.
Requirements that states will provide some
assistance to youth, who are not otherwise covered by medical
insurance, to obtain and pay for their medical services until
age 21.
There are 20,000 youth who age out of foster care every
year. Not one of them should be without health coverage of some
type. The security of these youths medical and mental health is
critical to the success of their futures.
Allow youth in out of home placement to remain in
care until age 21 if they are completing their education and
preparing for their transition to adulthood.
Many youth are forced to leave care upon reaching the age
of 18. Many have not completed their education by this time and
are forced to drop-out for various reasons. Continued emotional
and tangible support for these young people, coupled with
programs designed to promote education and life skills
training, will most likely encourage youth to reach for higher
education accomplishments.
Continuation of services to youth who have left
care, such as housing and financial assistance, up until age
21.
Between the ages of 18-21 the process of transitioning from
adolescence to adulthood needs continued services. Transitional
housing is essential to those youth who require some structure
and supervision. Supervised group homes and apartments,
subsidized housing and community based training should all be
part of the process for continuum of care to youth.
Allow youth to re-enter foster care after age 18.
Often times youth who have been part of multiple
placements, traumatic, abusive histories and no family network
or support, have a great desire to venture out of care and try
``freedom'' on their own. Statistics show that many of these
young people often flounder and falter at their first attempt
to independence. However, trial and error can be a clever
teacher. Many youth realize ``freedom'' is more than just
'being on your own' without adult supervision. It is knowlege
and a good sense of direction. Many wnt and need to return to a
sense of connectedness and security while they maneuver
themselves comfortably into self-sufficiency. States should be
given incentives to allow youth who leave voluntarily at age
18, to re-enter voluntarily at any time prior to age 21.
Provide one year of after care services up to age
21.
After care has proven itself to be a significant factor in
a young person's ability to adjust to the transition into
independent living. Many programs across the nation already
have built-in after care programs. These programs should be the
models that other after care programs are designed after. They
are strong examples of how essential it is to the success of
these youth exhibiting responsible actions
and lifestyles.
4Research and evaluation to determine best practices in
preparing youth for adult life.
In order for the transition from childhood to adolescence
to adulthood to progress efficiently, it is crtical that we
evaluate effective programming, successful training approaches,
and the emotional and physical well-being of these youth. It is
just as important the we continue to research the trends and
effects of societal change and assess the challenges in their
home environments to begin implementing preventative
programming as well.
NILA strongly implores the honorable members of the
Subcommittee for Health and Human Services to act right now on
behalf of all the young people in alternative care by passing a
bill that will enhance the quality of care, build a strong
sense of community and continue the development of good
programming. The challenges our young people face are getting
bigger and tougher everyday. The opportunity to create policy
that is in their best interests and will contribute to their
transition into adulthood, is now. In closing, John F. Kennedy
said it best;
``All this will not be finished in the first one hundred
days. Nor will it be finished in the first one thousand days,
nor in the life of this Administration, nor even perhaps in our
lifetime on this planet... But let us begin.''
NILA Designated Representatives Sheet
NILA Management Staff
James D. Clark, Executive Director
NILA Headquarters
4203 Southpoint Blvd,
Jacksonville, FL 32216
904-296-1055 ext 1025
Robert E. Arnold, Assistant Executive Director
NILA Headquarters
4203 Southpoint Blvd,
Jacksonville, FL 32216
904-296-1055 ext 1018
Shelly R. Davalos, NILA Coordinator
NILA Headquarters
4203 Southpoint Blvd,
Jacksonville, FL 32216
904-296-1038, fax 904-296-1953
NILA Board of Directors Executive Committee:
Cathy Welsh, Chair
South Bronx Human Development org
One Fordham Plaza, Suite 900
Bronx, NY 10458
Kathi Crowe (Vice Chair)
Rhode Island Department of Children & Families
610 Mt. Pleasant Ave, Bldg 2
Providence, RI 02908
Lee White, Treasurer
Northwest Media
326 West 12th Ave.,
Eugene, OR 97401
541-343-6636 fax 541-343-0177
Diann Stevens, Secretary
Ohio Department of Social Services
1951 Gantz Rd.
Grove City, OH 43123
614-278-5974 fax 614-278-5988
Youth Board Members:
Geisha Grice--California Youth Connections
San Francisco, CA 94104
Srv510-351-4401
Shanequa AndersonLeakke & Watts
Bronx, NY 10451
714-293-1194
Amanda Knight--Missourti Division of Family Srv
573-751-4319
Board of Directors By Region
Region I: Kathi Crowe (Vice Chair)
Region II: Karen Lendon
Leake & Watts
Yonkers, NY 10704
718-617-5100 fax 718-893-1268
Region III: Patrick Patrong
Maryland Ind. Living Program DHR
Baltimore, MD 21201-3521
410-767-7634 fax 410-333-0127
Region IV: Don Adams
South Carolina Dept. of Social Services
Columbia, SC 29202-1520
803-898-7715 fax 803-898-7652
Region IV: Lori Day
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33325
954-916-9403 fax 954-524-4451
Region V: Diann Stevens (Secretary)
Regiion VI: Rhonda Dyer
Pathways Youth Home
San Antonio, TX 78250-63009
210-521-8288 fax 210-543-9553
Region VII: Dotti Banks
Missouri Division of Family Services
Jefferson City, MO 65103
573-751-4319 fax 573-526-3971
Region VIII: Sharon Collins
Catholic Charities Arch of New Orleans
Marrero, LA 70072
504-340-5100 fax 504-347-0095
Regiion IX: Beverlee Kroll
Arizona Dept Economic Security--ACYF
Phoenix, AZ 85007
602-542-3981 fax 602-542-3330
Region X: Lee White (Treasurer)
State Seat: Janet Luft
Texas Dept. Protection & Regulatory
Austin, TX 78714-9030
512-438-5442 fax 512-438-3782
Private Seat: Cathy Welsh (Chair)