Support Programs for Youth Transitioning Out of Foster Care - Research Paper Example

? Policy Brief: Support Programs for Youth Transitioning Out of Foster Care PADM 596 Graduate Seminar 4 May Policy Brief: Support Programs for Youth Transitioning Out of Foster Care TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 2 Overview of the brief 2 Introduction 4 Purpose of the brief 4 Breakdown of the brief 5 Issue/Problem 8 Statistics 8 Table…… 9 Background 10 Statement of Interest 11 Pre-Existing Policies 12 Policy Choices/Alternatives 14 Mentoring Programs 14 Policy Recommendations 14 AB 12 15 Homeless Youth Provisions 16 Summary 18 References 20 Abstract The foster care system is designed to provide temporary homes and family support for children in crisis or children who do not have parents of their own. A number of options exist for children in foster care: some are adopted by their foster families, some find permanent homes with extended family, and others are adopted by individuals or families outside the system. According to McCoy-Roth, Freundlich and Ross (2010), federal statistics reveal that as of 2007 roughly 85 percent of all children discharged from foster care did so as a result of one of these three occurrences (p. 1). However, the 15 percent not reflected by this data spend their entire childhood and youth in the foster care system, until they officially grow out of the system when they reach the age of 18. Commonly, this phenomenon is referred to as “aging out of the system”. Youth that age out of the foster system often struggle with the transition from foster care to independent living; many feel isolated, overwhelmed, and ill-equipped for life on their own. Others lack significant and supportive relationships with adults or mentors. According to Courtney, Dworsky, Lee and Raap (2010), the authors of the longitudinal study Midwest Evaluation of the Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth: Outcomes at Ages 23 and 24, the propensity for drug and alcohol abuse, criminal activity, unemployment, homelessness and economic marginalization remains high among these youth (p. 5). This policy brief focuses on the experience of youth aging out of the foster care system in California. The brief is intended for state level legislators in the departments of child welfare and social services (Bardach, 2009; Moore, 1995). This brief provides some recommendations as to how to accelerate the implementation phase of the California Fostering Connections to Success Act, commonly known as Assembly Bill 12 or AB 12, which increases the age at which youth officially leave the system from 18 to 21 (California Fostering Connections to Success, 2012; California Implementation News, 2012; Lemley, Raucher, & Fried, 2012). I. Introduction The purpose of this policy brief is to discuss the difficulties faced by youth aging out of the foster care system in California at the age of 18, and to provide support and recommendations for the California Fostering Connections to Success Act, as well as extending foster care beyond the age of 18 in the state of California (California Fostering Connections to Success, 2012; California Implementation News, 2012; Lemley, Raucher, & Fried, 2012). Extending foster care from the age of 18 to 21 represents a viable alternative to the current practice of releasing youth from the system at age 18 (California Fostering Connections to Success, 2012; California Implementation News, 2012; Lemley, Raucher, & Fried, 2012). This policy brief argues that the decision to age youth out at 18 is premature from a developmental standpoint and essentially flushes these youth into a situation that they are not developmentally equipped to navigate. The policy brief is broken down into several subsections which illustrate the need for foster care to be extended beyond the age of 18 to 21. These include the Transitional Housing Placement Plus Program (THP-Plus), the THP-Plus Statewide Implementation Project, the Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008, and the California Fostering Connections to Success Act or Assembly Bill 12. The brief outlines some clear and actionable recommendations for state legislators as to how these programs might be enhanced to offer the best possible outcome for youth aging out of the foster care system in California. The brief also offers some recommendations as to how to accelerate the implementation of Assembly Bill 12, which was passed into law in January of 2012 (California Fostering Connections to Success, 2012; California Implementation News, 2012; Lemley, Raucher, & Fried, 2012). The transition from youth to adulthood is challenging for all people. It is a time when we leave the nest and begin living independently, developing the infrastructure of our adult lives, including our own place to live, our own job, and our own relationships that extend beyond the family and the immediate environment we had growing up. It is also the time of life when we enter into higher education in preparation for our careers. For many it means transitioning from a solid family support structure to exhibiting a greater degree of independence (Furstenberg, Rumbaut & Settersten, 2005). For youth who have grown up in the foster care system, no similar support structure exists. By the time they reach age 18, many of these youth have lived in multiple homes and with multiple families, and their experience of childhood is transitory. People who grow up in a solid structure often have access not only to more financial support during this period than do foster youth transitioning out of the system, they also have access to adult mentors and guides who can support them as they make decisions about their futures. For youth who have grown up in the foster care system, often these crucial life decisions must be made alone and with no real recourse to funding or emotional and psychological support. Essentially, they are on their own (Courtney et al, 2010; THP-Plus Statewide Implementation Project, 2012). From the perspective of human development, late adolescence, the developmental stage between the ages of 16 and 19 years of age, marks a period of transition in itself (Erikson, 1980; Gemelli, 1996). At this time in an individual’s life, he or she is in the process of minimizing reliance on the family and parental structures. At this stage of development, the youth builds a sense of self that is separate from his parents and an understanding that his parents’ views are not his own (Erikson, 1980; Gemelli, 1996). Youth between 16 and 19 years old develop opinions and perspectives at this stage of life that remain with them throughout adulthood (Erikson, 1980; Gemelli, 1996). However, this stage of development presupposes a stable family and social environment where experiments and mistakes in the developing adult self can be made with relatively minor consequences. The developing sense of self is in its nascent stage; often, the newness of the self leads the youth to feeling more socially isolated than ever (Erikson, 1980; Gemelli, 1996). The young person has not yet attained the stage of autonomous adult identity. Stable and lasting relationships with adults, parents, siblings and teachers are critical during this stage of development to ensure the autonomous self develops fully (Erikson, 1980; Gemelli, 1996). For youth transitioning out of foster care into independent living, this complex and often disorienting developmental stage is made all the more complicated by the fact that none of these relationships exist. The only real social and familial network that they have ever known is about to disappear forever. As a result, many youth transitioning out of the foster care system are gripped by an intense apprehension about the future, which makes it difficult for them to make rational decisions that support their best interests. II. Issue/Problem The issue or problem at the heart of this policy brief is the continued economic marginalization of youth that age out of foster care in the state of California at the age of 18. This policy brief seeks to answer the following question: what more can be done to improve economic outcomes for youth that age out of the foster system? How can we implement programs that will minimize homelessness, criminal involvement and recidivism, low level of education attained, economic marginalization, and unemployment among this vulnerable group? II. i. Statistics According to McCoy-Roth, Freundlich and Ross (2010), 29,000 youth left the foster care system in the United States at the age of 18 in 2008 as a result of aging out (p. 1). This number represented 10 percent of the young people in foster care. What this means is that 29,000 18 year olds were released from essentially the only real form of family structure they have known and are expected to live independently with no further support from the foster care system. More worrisome than this statistic is the fact that since the Adoption and Safe Families Act and the Chafee Foster Care Independence Act were passed in 1999, the number of youth emancipated from the foster care system has continued to rise (McCoy-Roth, Freundlich, & Ross, 2010). Since these acts went into effect, roughly 228,000 young people have aged out of the system, an increase of 64 percent (McCoy-Roth, Freundlich, & Ross, 2010, p. 1). The state of California sees the highest number of youth aging out of its foster care system, according to 2007 data (McCoy-Roth, Freundlich, & Ross, 2010, p. 2). Table 1 reflects the percentages of youth aging out of foster care by state. II. ii. Table Table 1: State by state breakdown of foster care emancipation due to aging out STATE NUMBER OF YOUNG PEOPLE AGING OUT PERCENTAGE OF YOUNG PEOPLE THAT AGED OUT Virginia 1,103 30 Maine 202 22 Illinois 1,245 21 D.C. 157 21 Massachusetts 1,150 19 Maryland 461 17 Connecticut 499 16 California 5,188 12 New Jersey 830 12 New York 1,506 12 II. iii. Background What happens to these young people once they leave the system? Many fall through the cracks into unemployment, homelessness, criminal activity, incarceration and drug and alcohol abuse. Criminal activity and substance abuse is a major concern for youth in foster care, and these problems become more intense in youth that have been emancipated from the foster system, as suddenly there is no modicum of support whatsoever; therefore, many youth turn to drugs and alcohol for solace or escape or, conversely, to crime as a means of acquiring money when they lack the skills necessary for traditional employment. Youth who are able to stay in foster care longer and take advantage of foster care treatment services demonstrate a greater propensity to overcome their addiction issues, according to recent studies. For example, Robst, Armstrong and Dollard (2011) conducted a study of emancipated foster youth in the state of Florida to determine if indeed foster youth treatment services helped to improve the outcomes for these at-risk youth. The study authors partnered with the Florida state department of juvenile justice and the Florida state department of law enforcement to study two groups of foster care youth: those who were placed in treatment group care, and those who were placed in treatment foster care. The study subjects represented a range of issues common to foster care youth or older foster youths – those recently emancipated from the foster care system – including felony charges, misdemeanors, prior involuntary examinations, and inpatient psychiatric stays (Robst, Armstrong & Dollard, 2011). The study results revealed that male foster care youth and older youth in foster care were more likely to be treated in the group setting, whereas youth with previous foster care problems were more likely to be placed in treatment foster care. The study authors deducted from the study data that the older youth given treatment foster care – similar to the programs offered as part of the California Fostering Connections to Success Act – demonstrated larger reductions in the number of felony charges (Robst, Armstrong & Dollard, 2011). These youth were also less prone to be sent back to out-of-home programs in the 6 months that followed their time in the treatment foster care programs. Robst, Armstrong and Dollard (2011) concluded therefore that group care treatment locations may not serve the needs of older foster youth with previous criminal activities in their backgrounds. According to the study data, this was particularly true in the case of older foster youth with felony charges, who appear to respond better and receive more long-term lasting support for behavioral change in treatment foster care programs (p. 696). II. iv. Statement of Interest California state legislators have an appropriate interest therefore in the outcomes of programs aimed at easing the transition from foster care into independent living, since their state records the highest number of young people aging out of the foster care system. Young adults who are able to pursue their education and find work place less strain on the social service system. In addition, former foster youth who receive support during the transition from foster care into independent living are less likely to fall through the cracks into homelessness and criminal activity (Lorentzen, Lemley, Kimberlin, & Byrnes, 2008). II. v. Pre-Existing Policies Lorentzen et al. (2008) conducted a survey of 458 young people enrolled in the Transitional Housing Placement Program (THP-Plus), a program designed to support foster youth coming out of care that was put into practice in 2001 (p. 1). The THP-Plus was created by the state legislature and is funded by the California department of social services (Lorentzen et al., 2008). THP-Plus operates 24 month programs that provide housing for recently emancipated foster youth (Lorentzen et al., 2008). In addition to housing support, THP-Plus offers support services such as education and career counseling (Lorentzen et al., 2008). The study respondents reported a number of significantly favorable outcomes associated with the programs, including higher education levels, higher rates of employment, and higher earnings (Lorentzen et al., 2008). Similarly, the Midwest Study data collected by Courtney, Dworsky, and Pollack (2007) compared the outcomes of foster youth that aged out of the system between states where one group aged out in the traditional format – at the age of 18 – in the states of Iowa and Wisconsin, and the other group left the foster care system at age 21 in the state of Illinois. Courtney, Dworsky, and Pollack (2007) conducted an analysis of the reported data with an eye to education, specifically asking whether or not the respondents from each group had completed high school or attended college (p. 44). According to Courtney, Dworsky, and Pollack (2007), the group of respondents that remained in the foster care system until their 21st birthday in Illinois were almost twice as likely to have gone to college, and over twice as likely to have finished their first year of college compared to their counterparts in the Iowa and Wisconsin groups (p. 44). The study authors factored in any of the other variables that might explain this difference and learned that the rise in education could only be attributed to the Illinois policy that allows foster care youth to remain in the system until they turn 21 (Courtney, Dworsky, & Pollack, 2007; Dworsky & Courtney, 2010). Policies such as those demonstrated by THP-Plus and by the Illinois Foster Care System prove that these few short years are crucial for the development of youth and that a small investment in these years pays dividends for these young people for the rest of their lives in terms of higher education, better jobs and higher earning potential (Courtney, Dworsky, & Pollack, 2007; Dworsky & Courtney, 2010). IV. Policy Choice and Alternatives Mentoring support programs represent an alternative to extending foster care (Cavell, DuBois, Karcher, Keller, & Rhodes, 2009). Over two million young people coming out of foster care in recent years have benefitted from these programs, according to Cavell et al., (2009). Mentoring policy alternatives pair foster youth aging out of the system with a caring adult figure who is not usually a relative, yet someone who the young person can look to for support as he or she transitions into independent living (Cavell et al., 2009). Mentoring programs do have their difficulties, one of the main one’s being recruiting and retaining qualified mentors. Policy makers need to be aware that mentors are not only hard to find, but they are hard to screen, and there are far more youth in need than there are qualified mentors available to work with them (Cavell et al., 2009). In addition, some mentors prove ultimately damaging to the youth emerging from foster care because they end the relationship abruptly, facilitate destructive behaviors such as drug and alcohol abuse or only give sporadic mentoring time to their mentee (Cavell et al., 2009). V. Policy Recommendations Slow implementation of the California Fostering Connections to Success Act, commonly known as Assembly Bill 12 or AB 12 has been attributed to a number of issues, including the number of foster youth aging out of the system, lack of awareness about the law, lack of training, eligibility issues and legal problems (California Fostering Connections to Success, 2012; California Implementation News, 2012; Lemley, Raucher, & Fried, 2012). V. i. AB 12 AB 12 was designed to work with the existing Federal Fostering Connections to Success Act (California Fostering Connections to Success, 2012; California Implementation News, 2012; Lemley, Raucher, & Fried, 2012). The program extends foster care funding for young people until age 20 or 21 (California Fostering Connections to Success, 2012; California Implementation News, 2012; Lemley, Raucher, & Fried, 2012). Recommendations to accelerate the implementation of AB 12 include the following: Invest in training programs for social workers and support workers currently involved with youth in foster care between the ages of 16 and 18 in order to inform these youth that they can stay in the foster care system longer if they so choose Invest in education preparation courses for foster youth between the ages of 16 and 18 who are considering their options for college Partner with private sector companies to support foster youth work placements Partner with private sector companies to develop innovative funding and educational programs Conduct workshops in lower grades for foster care students between the ages of 14 and 16 as a means of educating all stakeholders interested in pursuing a college degree so that they can begin to prepare themselves academically. Conduct extended foster case workshops in support programs for high school dropouts and custodial mothers who are still in foster care, letting them know about the program and giving them the options they need to decide if they want to return to pursue their education. Simplify and streamline the eligibility process. As of January, 2012, youth under the age of 19 are eligible for the program. Determine if there are extenuating circumstances that might allow otherwise ineligible youth access to the program, such as in the case of custodial mothers who left high school to have a baby. Simplify court issues, particularly non-related legal guardianship that was fashioned by a juvenile court. Conduct workshops for legal guardians and adoptive parents. Conduct awareness raising campaigns in homeless shelters. V.ii. Homeless Youth Provisions The latter recommendation is of particular relevance to this discussion. Since AB 12 offers a chance to return to high school, complete a GED and possibly continue on to college through state sponsored funding, it is imperative that the AB 12 implementation make a special effort to reach homeless youth who may have fallen through the cracks in earlier years and to make allowances for this population. A retroactive clause that allows youth who have recently aged out of the system and become homeless is one policy change that AB 12 needs to address. The state needs to find a way to reach out to those who are at the bottom – those who have reached the furthest edge of marginalization, and offer them a way back. Emancipated foster youth who have become homeless are key stakeholders who typically miss out on programs of this sort. In short, those who need it most remain ineligible and unable to take advantage of the very programs designed to help them. Recommendations for reaching homeless youth recently aged out of foster care include the following: Invest in training for front line shelter staff so that they can serve as purveyors of information about the program. Conduct street outreach to speak to homeless youth where they are. Partner with street outreach organizations to reach homeless youth where they are. Organize homeless shelter visits from staff working to implement AB 12. It is important to remember that a lot of the infrastructure that we take for granted such as cell phones and Internet access do not exist for homeless youth, thus developing awareness of the AB 12 program demands a much proactive approach from legislators and AB 12 implementation stakeholders. VI. Summary In conclusion, this policy brief details the benefits to the state of California in accelerating the implementation phase of the California Fostering Connections to Success Act, commonly known as Assembly Bill 12 or AB 12. Accelerated implementation of AB 12 will allow state legislators to provide support services for foster youth aging out of the California state foster care system between the ages of 18 and 20 (California Fostering Connections to Success, 2012; California Implementation News, 2012; Child Welfare Realignment: Just the Facts, 2012; Lemley, Raucher, & Fried, 2012; THP-Plus Foster Care ACL 11-53: County Plans and Letters of Intent, 2011; THP-Plus Statewide Implementation Project, 2012). Studies in other states have demonstrated that youth that receive support during this critical period of development are consistently and statistically less likely to engage in criminal activity, to fall through the cracks into homelessness, and to suffer from chronic unemployment and or underemployment. In addition, young people who have aged out of the foster care system in states where they remain in the foster care system until they are 20 or 21 years of age consistently and statistically attain higher levels of education, including post-secondary training and college. With higher levels of education, these young people find better jobs, earn more income, and eventually contribute more to the state and federal tax base. Therefore, for California state legislators seeking a business case for accelerating the implementation of AB 12, foster care youth that age out later are more equipped to look after themselves and find work. What this means is that they are ultimately less likely to require state support. In addition, young people that age out of the foster care system in their early twenties are less likely to become involved in criminal activity, which means an overall reduction in the number of incarcerations, less funding required for maintaining the state’s correctional facilities, and an overall improvement in the state’s safety level and social well being. Therefore, should the state of California legislators accelerate the implementation of AB 12 and invest in these two short years of a young person’s life, the state can potentially save tens of thousands of dollars in social service funding over the long term. VII. References Bardach, E. (2009). A practical guide for policy analysis: The eightfold path to more effective problem solving. (3rd ed.). Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. California Fostering Connections to Success (2012). Retrieved from http://www.cafosteringconnections.org/index.html California Implementation News (2012). Retrieved from http://www.fosteringconnections.org/california Cavell, T., DuBois, D., Karcher, M., Keller, T., & Rhodes, J. (2009). Strengthening mentoring opportunities for at-risk youth. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago. Child Welfare Realignment: Just the Facts (2012). Retrieved from http://www.cafosteringconnections.org/pdfs/1-25-12%20Realignment%20Presentation.pdf Courtney, M. E., Dworsky, A., Lee, J. S., & Raap, M. (2010). Midwest Evaluation of the Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth: Outcomes at Ages 23 and 24. Chicago: Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago. Dworsky, A., & Courtney, M. (2010). Does extending foster care beyond age 18 promote postsecondary educational attainment? Chicago, IL: Chaplin Hall at the University of Chicago. Erikson, E. H. (1980). Identity and the life cycle. London: Norton. Furstenberg, F. F., Rumbaut, R. G., & Settersten, R. A. (2005). On the frontier of adulthood: Emerging themes and new directions. In R. A. Settersten, F. F. Furstenberg & R. G. Rumbaut (Eds.), On The Frontier of Adulthood: Theory, Research, and Public Policy (pp. 3-25). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Gemelli, R.J. (1996). Normal Child and Adolescent Development. Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Press. Lemley, A., Raucher, D. & Fried, T. (2012). Top ten things you need to know about extended foster care. San Francisco, CA: California Fostering Connections to Success. Lorentzen, B., Lemley, A., Kimberlin, S., & Byrnes, M. (2008). Outcomes for former foster youth in California’s THP-Plus program: Are youth in THP-Plus faring better? San Francisco, CA: John Burton Foundation. McCoy-Roth, M., Freundlich, M., & Ross, T. (2010). Number of youth aging out of foster care continues to rise; increasing 64 percent since 1999. Washington, D.C.: Fostering Connections Resource Center. Moore, M. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management. Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard Press. Robst, J., Armstrong, M., & Dollard, N. (2011). Comparing outcomes for youth served in treatment foster care and treatment group care. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 20(5), 696-705. THP-Plus Foster Care ACL 11-53: County Plans and Letters of Intent (2011). Retrieved form http://www.cafosteringconnections.org/pdfs/8-31-11Web%20Seminar%20final%20%282%29.pdf THP-Plus Statewide Implementation Project (2012). Retrieved form http://www.thpplus.org/ Read More