Child Welfare Information Gateway

Children’s Bureau/ACYF/ACF/HHS

1250 Maryland Avenue, SW

Eighth Floor

Washington, DC 20024

800.394.3366

Email: info@childwelfare.gov

https://www.childwelfare.gov

BULLETIN FOR 

PROFESSIONALS

May 2013

Enhancing 

Permanency for Youth 

in Out-of-Home Care 

Use your smartphone to 

access this bulletin online.

What’s Inside:

• The importance of focusing on 

youth and family connections

• Federal legislation supporting youth 

permanency

• Strategies for permanency planning 

with youth

• Barriers to permanency for youth

• Conclusion

• References

Permanency for youth in foster care should 

include a permanent legal connection to a family, 

such as reuniting with birth parents, adoption, 

kinship care, or legal guardianship. However, 

when these options are less likely, workers 

can help youth pursue physical or relational 

permanency. Physical permanency is having a 

home or a place to be; relational permanency is 

having a relationship or connection with a caring 

adult (e.g., maternal and paternal kin, teachers, 

neighbors, former foster parents) (Mallon, 2011). 

Such adults may provide lifelong support that can 

help youth transition to adulthood, and they may 

even become a legal permanent option. In such 

instances, formalizing the permanent connection 
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

2 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

can help clarify what the youth can expect 

from the caring adult. In a study of California 

youth in care, the youth made distinctions 

among the different types of permanency, with 

most choosing relational permanence above 

physical and legal permanence (Sanchez, 

2004).

Over the past two decades, the Federal 

Government and child welfare field have given 

increased attention to youth in foster care who 

transition to adulthood without a permanent 

connection to a family or caring adult (“aging 

out”) (Courtney, 2009). Recent evidence of this 

focus includes the enactment of the Fostering 

Connections to Success and Increasing 

Adoptions Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-351) and 

the implementation of the National Youth in 

Transition Database. 

Despite this activity, the percentage of youth 

who leave foster care without a permanent 

family remains high. According to data from 

the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and 

Reporting System (AFCARS), the percentage 

of youth who age out increased from 7 

percent in fiscal year (FY) 2002 to 11 percent 

in FY 2011 (U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services [DHHS], Children’s Bureau, 

2006; DHHS, Children’s Bureau, 2012). 

Although the percentage of youth aging out 

of foster care has remained at 11 percent since 

FY 2009, the actual number has dropped from 

29,471 in FY 2009 to 26,286 in FY 2011, an 

11-percent decrease that has accompanied 

the general decrease in the number of 

children in foster care over the last 6 years 

(DHHS, Children’s Bureau, 2010a; DHHS, 

Children’s Bureau, 2012). 

National statistics show that youth stay in 

foster care longer than younger children 

and are more likely to have case goals of 

emancipation and long-term foster care 

(McCoy-Roth, DeVooght, & Fletcher, 2011). 

Additionally, youth who age out of the foster 

care system often leave with few skills, minimal 

education, and inadequate preparation for 

living as productive, independent adults. 

Responding to these issues, the Federal 

Government and many States and local 

jurisdictions are focusing on this population 

and implementing laws, policies, and 

programs specifically designed to help youth 

establish permanent connections. Many of 

these help youth build on relationships they 

have established throughout their lives with 

kin, foster parents, teachers, social workers, 

and others; other policies and programs help 

youth establish new relationships that can lead 

to permanent family connections. 

This bulletin addresses the specific challenges 

of permanency planning with youth and 

highlights successful models and strategies. 

The Importance of 

Focusing on Youth and 

Family Connections

More than two-fifths (42 percent) of the 

children in foster care are aged 11 years 

or older (DHHS, Children’s Bureau, 2012), 

and these older children have a much 

higher average length of stay than younger 

children in care (McCoy-Roth, DeVooght, & 

Fletcher, 2011). Youth who exit care without a 

permanent family are at risk for a number of 

negative outcomes. The Midwest Evaluation 

on Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth 

compared individuals who had aged out 

of foster care with individuals of the same 

age in the general population. At age 26, 

individuals who transitioned out of foster 
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

3 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

care experienced more unemployment, lower 

incomes, more economic hardships (e.g., not 

being able to pay rent or utilities), poorer 

health, and higher arrest rates than youth 

of the same age in the general population 

(Courtney, Dworsky, Brown, Cary, Love, & 

Vorhies, 2011). Additionally, individuals 

formerly in foster care were more likely to not 

have a high school diploma or GED, not have 

health insurance, and receive government 

benefits (Courtney et al., 2011).

Youth who have been in foster care or 

residential care may have little opportunity to 

experience quality parenting. One extensive 

study of more than 4,500 pregnant and 

parenting teens in foster care showed that the 

children of this population spent time in foster 

care at a much higher rate than the children 

of non-foster-care teen parents (10 percent vs. 

2 percent) (Dworsky & DeCoursey, 2009). This 

multigenerational cycle of children and youth 

entering foster care makes an even stronger 

argument for the importance of achieving 

permanent connections for youth, so that they 

can experience a positive relationship with an 

adult and go on to become successful adults 

themselves.

Worker Voice

“What I have found throughout my 

experience, is trying to break the cycle 

of older youth coming into care. . . Most 

of us experience love and parenting and 

then are able to parent when we are 

called to. With many of the teens who 

are in out-of-home care . . . parental love 

is lacking. Teens in independent living 

situations should also be taught parenting. 

They have children and then their kids end 

up in foster care as well. The chain keeps 

adding links rather than being stopped.”

— A permanency worker

Federal Legislation 

Supporting Youth 

Permanency

The growing focus on achieving permanent 

connections for youth led to the enactment 

of Federal legislation in 2008 that provides 

both incentives and requirements for States 

to focus on helping youth make permanent 

connections. The Fostering Connections to 

Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 

(Fostering Connections Act) amends titles 

IV-E and IV-B of the Social Security Act to 

promote permanency and positive outcomes 

for children and youth in foster care, including 

connecting and supporting relative caregivers 

and providing for and improving incentives 

for adoption. The Fostering Connections Act 

contains several provisions that help establish 

and strengthen youth permanency, including 

the following:

• Authorizing grants to State, local, or Tribal 

child welfare agencies and private nonprofit 

organizations to help children who are in or 

at-risk of foster care reconnect with family 

members through:

○ Kinship navigator programs

○ Efforts to find biological family and 

reestablish relationships

○ Family group decision-making meetings

○ Residential family treatment programs

• Requiring title IV-E agencies to identify and 

notify all adult relatives of their option to 

become a placement resource for the child, 

within 30 days of the child’s removal 
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

4 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

• Creating a new plan option for States and 

Tribes to provide kinship guardianship 

assistance payments under title IV-E on 

behalf of children who have been in foster 

care and have a relative who is taking legal 

guardianship

• Amending the Chafee Foster Care 

Independence Program to allow services 

to youth who leave foster care for kinship 

guardianship or adoption after age 16

• Permitting States to extend title IV-E 

assistance to otherwise eligible youth 

remaining in foster care after reaching 

age 18 and to youth who at age 16 or 

older exited foster care to either a kinship 

guardianship or adoption, provided that 

they have not yet reached age 19, 20, 

or 21, as the State may elect, and are in 

school, employed, engaged in another 

activity designed to remove barriers to 

employment, or incapable of doing so due 

to a documented medical condition (Child 

Welfare Information Gateway, n.d.)

For additional information about the 

Fostering Connections Act, visit Child 

Welfare Information Gateway at https://www.

childwelfare.gov/fosteringconnections/ or the 

National Resource Center for Permanency and 

Family Connections at 

http://www.fosteringconnections.org/.

Youth Voice

“If I hadn’t been given the opportunity to 

obtain permanency while in foster care, 

I am 100 percent positive that I would 

not be in the position I am in today. My 

foster mom ensured that I was treated 

like a traditionally raised youth and was 

identified as her son. I participated in 

extracurricular activities, school trips, and 

family vacations, which allowed me to feel 

a sense of belonging and create those 

lasting support networks that are of high 

importance when everything you had ever 

known changes overnight. Foster care was 

my saving grace; it gave me the chance 

to grow as a young man and transition 

into adulthood successfully. Permanency, 

whether legally defined or personally 

defined, should always be the number 

one goal when working with youth caught 

up in a system at no fault of their own.”

— Jeremy, youth formerly in foster care

The Children’s Bureau has funded several 

grant clusters that focus, in whole or in 

part, on improving youth permanency 

outcomes:

• Diligent Recruitment of Families for Children 

in Foster Care: http://www.adoptuskids.org/

about-us/diligent-recruitment-grantees

• Permanency Innovations Initiative: 

https://cbexpress.acf.hhs.gov/index.

cfm?event=website.viewArticles&issueid=12

3§ionid=19&articleid=3087

• Family Connection Grants: 

http://www.nrcpfc.org/grantees.html

• Youth Permanency Cluster: http://www.

nrcadoption.org/resources/ypc/home/

FEDERAL GRANTS ADDRESSING 

YOUTH PERMANENCY
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

5 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

Strategies for 

Permanency Planning 

with Youth

Supported by Federal legislation, States 

and localities have developed programs and 

practices that offer permanent connections for 

youth in foster care and services for successful 

transition to adulthood. The following 

strategies for establishing youth permanency 

are drawn from child welfare research and 

practice.

Involving Youth in 

Permanency Planning

Involving youth in planning for their own 

permanency outcomes can greatly facilitate 

the process (Walker & Child, 2008). Youth can 

express their own ideas about how they want 

to achieve permanency and can help identify 

possible resources for legal, physical, and 

relational permanency. They also can supply 

information about family members, distant and 

near, as well as other people with whom they 

feel a connection. In addition, talking to youth 

and actively involving them in the permanency 

planning process can be therapeutic for them 

and help prepare them for the transition 

to a new family or situation. Youth who are 

involved in the planning process may take 

more responsibility for the success of the 

arrangement (Casey Family Services, 2007). 

For more information about working with 

youth, see the Youth Voice Toolbox at http://

www.freechild.org/YouthVoice/. For ideas 

about empowering youth, visit the FosterClub 

website at http://www.fosterclub.com and the 

Foster Care Alumni website at 

http://www.fostercarealumni.org. 

Example: The Homecoming 

Project (Minnesota)

Funded by a Children’s Bureau Adoption 

Opportunities grant, the Minnesota 

Department of Human Services developed a 

program in 2003 focused on finding adoptive 

families for teens aged 13-17 years whose 

birth parents’ rights had been terminated. The 

Homecoming Project engaged youth through 

an intensive one-on-one relationship between 

each youth and a recruitment specialist 

who met frequently with the youth, spent 

significant time with the youth, and treated 

the youth as a true partner in the adoption 

process. Recruitment decisions were made 

with the input of the youth. Youth also were 

encouraged to become involved in Our Voices 

Matter, a youth advocacy group that provided 

opportunities for public speaking, support 

groups, and leadership experiences.

The 5-year Homecoming Project showed 

significantly better permanency outcomes for 

youth involved in the project compared to a 

control group of youth. Evaluators attributed 

this to the extraordinary youth engagement 

component of the project. Not only were 

more of the Homecoming youth actually 

adopted, but these youth were also less likely 

to have signed an affidavit stating that they 

did not want to be adopted.

For more information, read Finding Permanent 

Families for Teens Under State Guardianship 

at http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/main/groups/

children/documents/pub/dhs16_147732.

pdf and Finding Adoptive Families for Teens 

at http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/main/groups/

children/documents/pub/dhs16_143827.pdf.
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

6 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

Strengthening Family Preservation 

and Reunification Services 

Maintaining children safely with their birth 

families remains the first priority for most 

children and youth. The most common case 

plan goal for youth is family reunification 

(Fajardo & Swope, 2012), and support services 

to promote this goal should be part of the 

case plan. The array of services needed 

depends on each family’s circumstances but 

may include:

• Family support services that build on family 

strengths

• Coordination with other community services 

• Services or training specifically tailored for 

the parent and youth

• Mental health services for the parent and/

or youth

Example: Solution-Based 

Casework (Kentucky)

There is growing evidence for the efficacy 

of Solution-Based Casework (SBC) in child 

welfare practice, especially in the areas of 

family preservation and reunification. SBC 

is based on three elements: full partnership 

with the family, a focus on the patterns of 

everyday family life, and solutions that target 

the prevention skills needed to reduce risks 

in everyday life. The State of Kentucky has 

incorporated many components of SBC 

into its statewide practice model, and a 

research study looked at Kentucky’s child 

maltreatment recidivism rates after 6 months 

among families that had open child welfare 

cases (Antle, Barbee, Christensen, & Sullivan, 

2009). Approximately half of the 760 families 

had caseworkers who were implementing 

the SBC model, while the other half had 

caseworkers who were not implementing 

the SBC model. Families receiving support 

from SBC caseworkers had significantly lower 

maltreatment recidivism rates than families 

with non-SBC caseworkers. Results suggest 

that workers implementing SBC may be better 

able to help families keep youth safe in their 

homes. 

For more information, visit the SBC website: 

http://www.solutionbasedcasework.

com/~solution/evidence-base

Offering Guardianship and 

Subsidized Guardianship as Options

For youth who are reluctant to have legal 

ties permanently severed with their birth 

parents, as would occur through adoption, the 

option of guardianship may provide a legal 

and permanent family. Guardians, who may 

be relatives or nonrelatives (depending on 

State law), are given parental responsibility 

and authority for the youth by a court. The 

Fostering Connections Act offers States 
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

7 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

and Tribes a new option to provide kinship 

guardianship assistance payments (GAP) 

under title IV-E on behalf of children who have 

been in foster care and for whom a relative is 

taking legal guardianship. To date, 18 States 

and the District of Columbia have extended 

guardianship assistance for youth up to age 

21 who are in school, employed, engaged in 

another activity designed to remove barriers 

to employment, and/or incapable of doing 

so due to a documented medical condition 

(Children’s Defense Fund et al., 2012). Prior 

to the Fostering Connections Act, a limited 

number of States applied for and received 

time-limited Federal waivers that provided 

them with more flexibility in using Federal 

funding for subsidized guardianship programs. 

Other States funded guardianship programs 

through State money or Temporary Assistance 

for Needy Families (TANF) funds. These types 

of programs may enable caregivers who 

have been receiving a foster care subsidy 

to become legal guardians without losing 

necessary financial support. 

For more information about how jurisdictions 

are implementing GAP, read the Children’s 

Defense Fund et al’s (2012) Making It 

Work: Using the Guardianship Assistance 

Program (GAP) to Close the Permanency 

Gap for Children in Foster Care (http://www.

childrensdefense.org/child-research-datapublications/data/making-it-work-usingthe.pdf), which details the progress of 30 

jurisdictions, including 1 American Indian 

Tribe. For information about State statutes 

regarding the placement of children with 

relatives, visit Child Welfare Information 

Gateway at https://www.childwelfare.gov/

systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/placement.

cfm. 

Example: Permanency 

Guardianship (Maine)

Even before the passage of the Fostering 

Connections Act in 2008, Maine had 

established a State-funded guardianship 

program that provided a subsidy to families in 

which relatives or other adults became legal 

guardians of children or youth who might 

otherwise remain in foster care. In developing 

the program, which became law in 2005, 

Maine leaders also hoped that it would make 

it possible to keep sibling groups together 

more often in a permanency setting, increase 

the number of children remaining in their 

communities, and promote placement stability 

for children and youth.

After the passage of the Fostering 

Connections Act, Maine applied for and 

received approval to use title IV-E GAP 

funding for eligible families. The State 

continues to use State funds for Tribal children 

and others not eligible for IV-E funding. 

Since adding the Federal funding, the 

number of children and youth in permanency 

guardianships in Maine has grown from 

approximately 100 to about 300 (Children’s 

Defense Fund et al., 2012). Benefits have 

included more timely permanency and a slight 

bump in adoption numbers, with about 10 

percent of permanency guardianships having 

moved to adoption (Children’s Defense Fund 

et al., 2012).

For more information, see the 

Permanency Guardianship Handbook 

at http://www.fosteringconnections.

org/tools/assets/files/ME-PERMANCYGUARDIANSHIPHANDBOOK-3-1-08-2.doc
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

8 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

Maintaining Relationships With Kin

Maintaining relationships with kin can provide 

important connections and supports for youth. 

It may take some effort to locate relatives of 

youth and other adults important to them, but 

these individuals may be very happy to be 

found, which can lead to positive outcomes 

for the youth. There are many anecdotes of 

relatives and others who had lost contact 

with youth but, when they were contacted 

later, were delighted to establish permanent 

connections or be involved in the youth’s 

transition (ChildFocus, 2007; Louisell, 2008; 

Iowa Foster and Adoptive Parents Association, 

2008). In some cases, paternal relatives may 

not have received adequate attention initially 

from the child welfare system but are able to 

provide the needed family connection later in 

the case.

Some youth may resist adoption because 

they believe it requires severing relationships 

with their birth families, but exploring the 

possibility of open adoption may alleviate 

these concerns. Open adoptions allow for 

both a permanent legal family for the youth 

and continued connections with birth parents, 

siblings, or other relatives. Guardianship with a 

relative acting as the legal guardian is another 

option for many youth, and provisions in the 

Fostering Connections Act have made it more 

viable because guardians may now be eligible 

for financial support. 

Example: Kinship Navigator 

Program (Ohio)

In 2009, using funding authorized by the 

Fostering Connections Act, the Children’s 

Bureau awarded 24 discretionary grants for 

a variety of family connections projects. The 

Public Services Association of Ohio received 

a grant to develop an enhanced kinship 

navigator (KN) project in seven counties 

to support relatives caring for children 

and youth either informally or through the 

foster care system. Participating counties 

hired and trained KNs, who worked directly 

with approximately 1,000 kinship families 

to provide information and referrals (using 

community mapping), case management, 

and support group facilitation. Other services 

included child care, respite care, legal and 

court assistance, and financial assistance. 

A comparison of outcomes between counties 

with and without the KN programs highlighted 

the benefits of the KN programs: Counties with 

KN programs placed children with kin more 

often than did other counties, and children 

and youth served by KN programs were more 

likely to exit agency custody to legal custody 

or guardianship to a kin caregiver, experienced 

fewer days in custody, experienced lower 

recurrence of maltreatment, and had 

significantly reduced foster care reentry rates 

compared to children and youth in counties 

without KN programs. In addition, satisfaction 

with the KN programs by kinship caregivers 

was high, with families acknowledging 

that basic needs were met, although legal 

assistance was a challenge. 

KNs also performed a significant amount 

of outreach to faith- and community-based 

organizations. Once these organizations 

learned about kinship families, they were 

willing partners and generous donors, offering 

financial support and other resources, such as 

respite care. 

For more information, see the Kinship Ohio 

website: http://www.kinshipohio.org, including 

the reports on the Kinship Navigator grant at 

http://www.kinshipohio.org/resources.htm.
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

9 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

Example: Extreme 

Recruitment (Missouri)

A coalition of Missouri partners (including 

the Missouri Children’s Division, Missouri’s 

Coalition of Children’s Agencies, and others) 

applied for and received a Children’s Bureau 

Diligent Recruitment grant, which the coalition 

used to develop Extreme Recruitment—a 

12–20 week individualized recruitment effort 

for St. Louis youth who had been in the child 

welfare system at least 15 months (many for 

much longer). As part of Extreme Recruitment, 

the project hired two full-time private 

investigators to seek out and contact relatives 

and other potential family connections. The 

investigators had experience in finding people 

and knew how to use public records and other 

leads (attending a family funeral, for example) 

to track down potential family connections for 

youth. Within 2 weeks of hiring an investigator 

to track down relatives, the project went from 

a 23-percent contact rate to an 80-percent 

contact rate (talking to a live person) 

(Serdjenian, 2011). 

For more information about Missouri’s 

Extreme Recruitment, visit http://www.

foster-adopt.org/ForProfessionals/

ExtremeRecruitment.aspx.

Recruiting Foster and Adoptive 

Families for Youth

Not all youth have kin available for 

permanency. For some youth, permanency 

efforts must shift to foster parents and other 

nonrelatives. Recruiting foster parents for 

youth carries great potential for finding them 

permanent adoptive or guardianship families. 

For example, in FY 2011, foster parents 

became adoptive parents for 54 percent of 

the children who were adopted with public 

agency involvement (U.S. DHHS, Children’s 

Bureau, 2012). Efforts to recruit foster and 

adoptive families for youth can include (1) 

getting the message to the public about older 

children available for fostering or adoption, (2) 

highlighting the benefits of adopting youth, 

and (3) finding permanent connections for 

specific children. 

Media and Social Media. The use of the 

media and social media to present children 

waiting for adoption and other permanency 

outcomes has grown tremendously. 

Photolisting on the Internet has become a 

prevalent practice, and youth can contribute 

by helping to craft their own stories. 

Prospective families reading the listings can 

find enough information on a particular youth 

to pique their interest so that they follow 

up with the youth’s agency. The Federal 

Government sponsors a national photolisting 

service, AdoptUSKids 

(http://www.adoptuskids.org), in English 

and Spanish, through funding provided by 

DHHS. In addition, agencies have found some 

success with print campaigns, videos and 

videoconferencing, and television and radio 

campaigns, such as Wednesday’s Child. (For 

additional information about social media and 

recruitment, visit Child Welfare Information 

Gateway at https://www.childwelfare.gov/

adoption/nam/professionals/sm-recruit.cfm.) 

Market Segmentation. Market segmentation, 

which allows agencies to focus recruitment 

efforts on families most likely to adopt children 

from foster care, also has become popular. 

Agencies can analyze data about current, 

successful foster and adoptive families, as 

well as data about youth in care and other 

factors, to help develop targeted recruitment 

plans for potential foster and adoptive families 

(AdoptUSKids, 2011). Those families can 

then be targeted through direct or other 

advertising methods.
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

10 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

Connecting Youth and Prospective Families.

Creating opportunities for families and adults 

to come into contact with youth who need 

homes is the key to broadening the pool of 

potential adopters. Activities sponsored by 

the John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence 

Program, such as job fairs, teen conferences, 

employment mentoring, and life skill groups, 

provide excellent opportunities for youth 

to meet caring adults who might become 

permanent connections. Adults who may 

never have considered adopting may 

become more open to the idea once they 

meet a particular child in need. Supportive 

relationships, such as mentoring, may also 

evolve into permanency options when adults 

find they have grown more connected to the 

youth. Adoption parties, in which waiting 

youth and families meet during scheduled 

fun activities, are another way of creating 

opportunities to bring youth and prospective 

families together. 

For more information and ideas, read 

AdoptUSKids’ Increasing Your Agency’s 

Capacity to Respond to Prospective Parents 

and Prepare Older Youth for Adoption: 

Going Beyond Recruitment for 14 to 16 

Year Olds at http://adoptuskids.org/_assets/

files/NRCRRFAP/resources/going-beyondrecruitment-for-14-to-16-year-olds.pdf. 

Example: You Gotta 

Believe! (New York)

You Gotta Believe (YGB) is a New York Citybased program that uses a Finding Families 

model to place teens and preteens from 

foster care into permanent homes. After YGB 

receives a referral from a city, county, or other 

municipal foster care agencies, it assigns a 

mentor to each referred teen. The mentor 

gets to know the teen and attempts to learn 

about adults who have been important in the 

teen’s life and then contacts those adults to 

invite them to consider a parenting course. 

YGB also recruits families by sending staff 

members, current and former foster youth, 

and experienced adoptive families to talk 

to groups at places such as churches and 

street fairs. Families can join the 10-week 

training sessions at any point. These 

sessions are taught by YGB staff, adoptive 

parents, and youth and provide another 

opportunity for teens seeking permanent 

homes to meet prospective families. Once 

a teenager is placed with a family, YGB 

provides postadoption services in the form of 

telephone coaching and in-person support, 

support groups throughout the city, and 

support networks and adoption blogs that 

connect new and experienced adoptive 

parents.

The Children’s Bureau has awarded multiple 

discretionary grants to YGB, and the Bureau 

awarded an Adoption Excellence award to 

the program in 2007. In one 4-year federally 

funded study, 98 of the 199 youth referred 

to YGB achieved permanency. An interesting 

finding from the study showed that prospective 

parents who signed up for parent training 

because they had a specific teen in mind for 

adoption were far more likely to meet all the 

requirements and to have a teen placed with 

them than were prospective parents who took 

the training but had no particular teen in mind 

for adoption (Avery, 2010).

For more information, visit the You Gotta 

Believe website at 

http://www.yougottabelieve.org.
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

11 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

Focusing on Pre- and 

Postplacement Services

The provision of appropriate and timely 

services may make the difference in whether 

permanency outcomes are successful for 

youth. Preplacement services should focus on:

• Helping youth understand the long-term 

benefits of having a permanent family

• Helping both the youth and the family 

decide whether the placement is desirable

• Providing the family with full background 

information about the youth

• Determining how and if connections to 

birth family members will be maintained 

• Planning for the youth’s educational, health, 

and other needs

• Preparing both the family and the youth for 

typical transition issues

The availability of postplacement services 

may make adoption, kin care, or guardianship 

possible for many families and youth that 

require additional assistance after placement. 

The NRC for Permanency and Family 

Connections offers extensive resources on 

working with youth and families to prepare 

them for youth permanency: http://www.

hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/info_

services/youth-permanency.html. Families may 

need postplacement services in several areas, 

including:

• Financial assistance or subsidies (most 

children adopted from foster care are 

eligible for subsidies)

• Community services (including medical 

or mental health services, educational 

services, and respite care)

• Support groups (for parents and for youth) 

Example: It’s Up to Me to 

ReConnect (Michigan)

The Children’s Bureau funded the It’s Up to 

Me to ReConnect project, which focused on 

helping youth achieve permanency while 

strengthening connections with extended 

families and involved the development of 

instruments to measure youth’s readiness for 

permanency (the Openness to Permanency 

Scale) and the quality of a relationship 

between a youth and adult (the Quality 

Relationship Scale). The Openness to 

Permanency Scale addresses such topics as 

conflicted loyalty, self-esteem, and worthiness 

and can be used for discussions among 

youth, caseworkers, and families. The Quality 

Relationship Scale includes self-reports for 

both youth and adults as a way to assess 

communication, commitment, security, 

honesty, and respect in the relationship and 

also as a way for youth and adults to discuss 

these areas. For more information on this 

project, see the NRC for Adoption website at 

http://www.nrcadoption.org/resources/ypc/

grantee-projects/bethany-christian-services/. 

Exploring Relational Permanency

Although child welfare policies often focus 

on legal permanency, some youth may 

feel that the establishment of relational or 

emotional permanency is more important to 

them (Casey Family Services, 2005; Sanchez, 

2004). Relationships between youth in foster 

care and nonparental adults, including other 

family members, professionals involved in 

the youth’s life (e.g., caseworker), and adults 

informally involved in the youth’s life (e.g., a 

friend’s parent) can help improve a variety of 

outcomes for youth, including educational 

attainment, living situations, emotional wellbeing, interpersonal relationships, and coping 

(Ahrens, Lane DuBois, Garrison, Spencer, 

Richardson, & Lozano, 2011). The Permanency 
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

12 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

Pact (http://www.fosterclub.com/files/

PermPact.pdf), developed by FosterClub,1

provides a formalized, facilitated process 

for adults to pledge and specify the support 

they can provide to youth in foster care. 

Mentor programs also can provide youth in 

foster care with additional relational supports, 

although these relationships may vary in terms 

of permanence and the types of support 

provided (Avery, 2011).

Youth Voice

“The search for permanence is long 

and complicated for most foster youth. 

Learning how to cultivate a healthy 

relationship as an adult is difficult if it 

wasn’t modeled for you. However, the 

growth opportunity provided by adult 

supporters, who can later become 

permanent connections, can make the 

difference. Some days it may mean that 

an older youth may have someone to call 

and check in with or to help with taxes. 

Or it may mean having someone who 

can attend your graduation or a major 

surgery. Creating permanent connections 

means maintaining those meaningful and 

supportive relationships into adulthood, 

despite being in foster care and lacking a 

permanent legal guardian.”

— Crys, youth formerly in foster care

Strengthening the Workforce to 

Support Enhanced Permanency

Staff who are overburdened with caseloads 

are not able to provide optimum services 

to youth and families. A summary of Child 

and Family Services Review (CFSR) findings 

1 Foster Club is a national organization for youth in, or formerly 

in, foster care, providing them with a way to make their voice 

heard and to exchange ideas and receive and provide support.

identified frequency and quality of caseworker 

visits to both children and birth families as 

being significantly associated with better 

permanency outcomes (U.S. DHHS, Children’s 

Bureau, 2011). In addition, the stability of 

caseworker assignments can impact casework. 

Frequent changes in the worker assigned to a 

case may result in disruptions in permanency 

planning for youth (Landsman, Tyler, Black, 

Malone, & Groza, 1999). 

Agencies should ensure that staff receive 

training and supervision support for working 

with youth and recruiting and working with 

families for youth. Training should include 

preparing both youth and families for 

permanency and providing postplacement 

support. Workers should know what services 

are available for families and should monitor 

families after placement. In addition, crosstraining among caseworkers and recruiters 

may help them understand the value of 

each others’ jobs. For information about a 

Children’s Bureau grant cluster focused on 

the training of agency supervisors to promote 

effective practice with youth in preparation 

for independent living, including establishing 

permanent connections, visit https://www.

childwelfare.gov/management/funding/

funding_sources/independent.cfm. 
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

13 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

Example: Permanency 

Roundtables (Georgia)

One way to support the workforce is to 

bring in permanency experts and create 

new “specialist” staff positions to help 

caseworkers consider new ways to approach 

permanency. In 2008, Casey Family Programs, 

working with Georgia’s Division of Family 

and Children Services (DFCS), developed a 

Permanency Roundtable process designed to 

help youth who had been in foster care the 

longest achieve permanency and to help staff 

learn new ways of addressing permanency 

barriers. Each roundtable consisted of a 

2-hour meeting that included a Casey Family 

Programs permanency expert, a DCFS 

master practitioner (a new role created to 

provide leadership to workers in the field), 

the youth’s case manager and supervisor, 

and a DFCS administrator or practice expert. 

Over 6 weeks, roundtable teams met to 

discuss the cases of 496 children and youth, 

including 269 teens. At each meeting, the 

caseworker presented the case, and the entire 

team brainstormed to identify permanency 

strategies and develop a permanency action 

plan (with an average of seven steps) for the 

worker to implement. There was structured 

follow-up to help the worker and supervisor, 

and the program included extensive data 

collection. At the 24-month follow-up, 34 

percent of the teens had achieved legal 

permanency (i.e., reunification, adoption, 

guardianship), 36 percent had turned 18 and 

left care, and 27 percent remained in foster 

care.

For more information on the Georgia 

Permanency Roundtable project and similar 

projects in other States, visit the Casey Family 

Programs website: http://www.casey.org/

Resources/Initiatives/PermanencyRoundtables.

Strengthening Court Supports 

The court process can be a catalyst to 

achieving timely permanency outcomes for 

children and youth. Casey Family Programs 

(2009) conducted an assessment of 11 court 

systems that have promising practices for 

achieving youth permanency and reported the 

following themes:

• Using interdisciplinary teams to work 

toward system reform efforts

• Ensuring that youth attend and participate 

in dependency court hearings

• Holding review hearings more frequently

• Providing data reports regularly to judges

• Holding Permanency Roundtables and case 

readings to focus on permanency

• Developing bench cards, checklists, and 

professional guides for judges, attorneys, 

and other court staff

• Providing cross and joint training

• Revising policies and guidance in order to 

implement new strategies

To assist judges and other court staff better 

manage court practice for child maltreatment 

cases, the National Council of Juvenile and 

Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) developed 

Resource Guidelines: Improving Practice in 

Child Abuse and Neglect Cases 

(http://www.ncjfcj.org/sites/default/files/

resguide_0.pdf). The NCJFCJ Model Courts 

program, which seeks to institute systemic, 

procedural reforms to improve outcomes 

for children in foster care, is based on these 

guidelines (Ensign, Davis, & Lee, 2009). 

An examination of youth-focused reforms 

implemented by the Model Courts noted 

several of the items highlighted by Casey 

Family Programs as well as benchmark 

permanency hearings, service provision and 

mentor programs for youth, and alternative 

dispute resolution programs, such as 

mediation and family counseling (Dobbin, 

2009).
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

14 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

Example: Model Court Benchmark 

Meetings (Louisiana)

In 2007, the Orleans Parish Juvenile Court 

judge in Louisiana instituted the use of 

Benchmark Conferences for youth (14–18 

years old) in foster care to ensure that 

youth felt supported and were receiving all 

necessary services. The conferences, which 

continue today, include the youth, the judge, 

the caseworker, and an adult of the youth’s 

choosing and with whom the youth hopes to 

have a permanent connection. This adult, who 

is referred to as the Child-Identified Advocate, 

signs a formal pact filed with the teen’s 

record that shows a commitment to having a 

supportive and ongoing relationship with the 

youth.

The youth is asked to prepare for the 

conference by talking with his or her lawyer, 

CASA, and caseworker and by completing a 

Youth’s Report to the Court (which asks about 

the youth’s interests and needs) and a Dream 

Sheet (which asks about the youth’s goals for 

the next few years and how the youth plans 

to achieve them). There is an emphasis on 

education needs and goals and on engaging 

the youth in planning for the future. The 

Benchmark Conference also gives the judge 

an opportunity, through informal discussion 

with the youth, to find out about the youth’s 

placement, school and classes, sibling access, 

and other important relationships in the youth’s 

life. 

This innovation is part of the NCJFCJ Model 

Courts program. For more information, 

access:

• The Benchmark Program Conferences 

packet (which includes the forms and pact, 

as well as other information): 

http://www.clarola.org/index.

php?option=com_mtree&task=att_

download&link_id=37&cf_id=24

• The NCJFCJ website: http://www.ncjfcj.org/

our-work/dependency-model-courts

Barriers to Permanency 

for Youth

Youth in foster care face a number of barriers 

to achieving permanency specific to their 

situations. Recognizing these challenges may 

help child welfare workers seek solutions 

that can facilitate permanent families and 

connections for these youth.

Policies and attitudes may not reflect an 

emphasis on permanency for youth. Some 

child welfare professionals may believe the 

myth that youth are unadoptable (North 

American Council on Adoptable Children, 

2009). Although the provisions of the 

Fostering Connections Act seek to change the 

approach toward permanency for youth, there 

is still work to be done to address this barrier 

to permanency. A cluster of Children’s Bureaufunded grantees addressed this issue as part 

of their projects (DHHS, Children’s Bureau, 

2010b).

Sequential case planning and a focus 

on independent living services may be 

inadequate for permanency. The continued 

use of sequential case planning can slow the 

permanency process. When an agency waits 

until parental rights have been terminated 

before considering alternative permanency 

plans, the permanent family connection for a 

child or youth is delayed. In addition, agencies 

may focus primarily on providing Independent 

Living services to youth, believing that these 

services meet expectations for working 

towards permanency. While Independent 

Living services are important in preparing 

youth for adulthood, they are not sufficient 

to connect youth with permanent families or 

other permanent connections. 
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

15 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

There are not enough families recruited to 

foster and adopt youth. Many agencies need 

to place a greater emphasis on identifying 

families who are willing to provide homes for 

youth, including strengthening efforts to find, 

engage, and support kin, including paternal 

kin, as permanent connections for youth. 

There is often a lack of focused recruitment 

for this group; in addition, youth who need 

families are often invisible to the community 

(Mallon, 2005). 

Youth initially may be resistant to 

permanency planning. Many youth show 

initial or even long-term resistance to 

permanency planning that involves the 

termination of their birth parents’ rights 

because they still feel emotional ties to 

their families. They may fear embarking on 

a relationship with a new family because of 

repeated past disappointments, or they may 

not understand the long-term consequences 

of being without a family as a young adult. 

The court process may slow or hinder 

efforts toward permanency. Even when 

agencies and workers are focused on 

permanency for youth, their efforts can be 

hindered by court processes that are slow 

or by judges who are reluctant to terminate 

parental rights. Judges also may not be aware 

of the viability of finding adoptive families 

for youth. Another barrier in some cases may 

be the lack of a good working relationship 

between child welfare workers and courts and 

the lack of youth voice in court. 

Conclusion

Youth face numerous challenges achieving 

permanency when exiting foster care. With 

an increasing percentage of youth aging 

out of foster care, it is especially important 

for child welfare agencies and other related 

professionals to be well-equipped to support 

youth on their path to permanency, be it 

legal, relational, or physical. The surging 

focus on youth permanency by Federal, State, 

and local governments, including an influx 

of grant awards targeting this area, should 

yield additional research, policy, and other 

resources in the years ahead about how to 

best serve, support, and collaborate with 

young people in care. 

Youth Voice

Throughout this bulletin, a number of 

quotations from youth provide a sampling 

of the power of the youth voice in the 

permanency process. The NRC for 

Permanency and Family Connections has 

developed digital stories that highlight 

youth and reflect various perspectives of 

the child welfare system, including those 

of youth. These videos are especially 

useful for worker training and for family 

recruitment. To view these stories, visit 

http://www.nrcpfc.org/digital_stories/

index.htm.
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

16 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

References

AdoptUSKids. (2011). Overview of market 

segmentation. A tool for targeting 

recruitment. Retrieved from https://

www.adoptuskids.org/_assets/files/

NRCRRFAP/resources/overview-of-marketsegmentation.pdf

Ahrens, K. R., Lane DuBois, D., Garrison, 

M., Spencer, R., Richardson, L. P., & 

Lozano, P. (2011). Qualitative exploration 

of relationships with important nonparental adults in the lives of youth in 

foster care. Children and Youth Services 

Review, 33, 1012–1023. doi:10.1016/j.

childyouth.2011.01.006

Antle, B. F., Barbee, A. P., Christensen, D. N., 

& Sullivan, D. J. (2009). The prevention 

of child maltreatment recidivism through 

the Solution-Based Casework model 

of child welfare practice. Children and 

Youth Services Review, 31, 1346–1351. 

doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.06.008 

Avery, R. J. (2010). An examination of theory 

and promising practice for achieving 

permanency for teens before they age out 

of foster care. Children and Youth Services 

Review, 32, 399–408. doi:10.1016/j.

childyouth.2009.10.011 

Avery, R. J. (2011). The potential contribution 

of mentor programs to relational 

permanency for youth aging out of 

foster care. Child Welfare, 90(3), 9–26. 

doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.12.003

Casey Family Programs. (2009). Promising 

court practices: Strategies to achieve timely 

permanency. Retrieved from http://www.

county.allegheny.pa.us/WorkArea/linkit.aspx

?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=27108

Casey Family Services. (2005). Strengthening 

families and communities: A call to 

action: An integrated approach to youth 

permanency and preparation for adulthood. 

Retrieved from http://www.aecf.org/upload/

publicationfiles/casey_permanency_0505.

pdf

Casey Family Services. (2007). Getting with the 

plan: Strategies to involve youth in planning 

their futures. Retrieved from http://www.

caseyfamilyservices.org/connectionscount/

article1/206/

ChildFocus. (2007). Making “relative 

search” happen: A guide to finding 

and involving relatives at every stage 

of the child welfare process. Retrieved 

from http://centerforchildwelfare2.

fmhi.usf.edu/kb/Implementation/

MakingRelativeSearchHappen.pdf

Children’s Defense Fund, Child Trends, 

American Bar Association Center on 

Children and the Law, Casey Family 

Programs, Child Focus, & Generations 

United. (2012). Making it work: Using the 

guardianship assistance program (GAP) 

to close the permanency gap for children 

in foster care. Retrieved from http://www.

childrensdefense.org/child-research-datapublications/data/making-it-work-using-the.

pdf
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

17 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare 

Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/focus/enhancing/index.cfm

Child Welfare Information Gateway. (n.d.). 

Fostering Connections to Success and 

Innovations Act of 2008: P.L. 110-351. 

Retrieved from https://www.childwelfare.

gov/systemwide/laws_policies/federal/

index.cfm?event=federalLegislation.

viewLegis&id=121

Courtney, M. E. (2009). The difficult 

transition to adulthood for foster youth 

in the US: Implications for the state as 

corporate parent. Retrieved from http://

www.srcd.org/index.php?option=com_

docman&task=doc_download&gid=469

Courtney, M. E., Dworsky, A., Brown, A., Cary, 

C., Love, K., & Vorhies, V. (2011). Midwest 

Evaluation of the Adult Functioning of 

Former Foster Youth: Outcomes at age 26. 

Retrieved from http://www.chapinhall.org/

sites/default/files/Midwest%20Evaluation_

Report_12_21_11_2.pdf

Dobbin, S. A. (2009). Facilitation of systems 

reform: Learning from Model Court 

jurisdictions. In B. Kerman, M. Freundlich, 

& A. N. Maluccio (Eds.), Achieving 

permanence for older children and youth in 

foster care. New York: Columbia University 

Press.

Dworsky, A., & DeCoursey, J. (2009). Pregnant 

and parenting foster youth: Their needs, 

their experiences. Chicago: Chapin Hall at 

the University of Chicago. Retrieved from 

http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/

files/Pregnant_Foster_Youth_final_081109.

pdf

Ensign, K., Davis, S. A., & Lee, E. (2009). 

Dependency court reform addressing 

the permanency needs of youth in foster 

care: National Evaluation of the Court 

Improvement Program. In B. Kerman, 

M. Freundlich, & A. N. Maluccio (Eds.), 

Achieving permanence for older children 

and youth in foster care. New York: 

Columbia University Press.

Fajardo, V., & Swope, H. (2012, June). National 

foster care and adoption data: Why age 

matters. Presented at the 38th Annual 

Conference of the North American Council 

on Adoptable Children, Arlington, VA. 

Iowa Foster & Adoptive Parents Association. 

(2008). Completing the circle: Uncovering, 

discovering & creating connections for 

your foster & adoptive children. Retrieved 

from http://www.ifapa.org/pdf_docs/

CompletingtheCircle.pdf

Landsman, M. J., Tyler, M., Black, J., Malone, 

K., & Groza, V. (1999). The permanency for 

teens project. Iowa City: University of Iowa 

School of Social Work, National Resource 

Center for Family Centered Practice.

Louisell, M. J. (2008). Six steps to find a family: 

A practice guide to family search and 

engagement (FSE). Retrieved from 

http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/

nrcfcpp/downloads/SixSteps.pdf

Mallon, G. (2005). Toolbox no. 3: Facilitating 

permanency for youth. Washington, DC: 

CWLA Press.

Mallon, G. (2011). Permanency for LGBTQ 

youth. Protecting Children, 26(1), 

49–57. Retrieved from http://www.

americanhumane.org/assets/pdfs/children/

protecting-children-journal/pc-26-1.pdf
Enhancing Permanency for Youth in Out-of-Home Care https://www.childwelfare.gov

McCoy-Roth, M., DeVooght, K., & Fletcher, M. 

(2011). Number of youth aging out of foster 

care drops below 28,000 in 2010. Retrieved 

from http://www.fosteringconnections.org/

tools/assets/files/Older-Youth-brief-2011-

Final.pdf

North American Council on Adoptable 

Children. (2009). It’s time to make older 

child adoption a reality: Because every 

child and youth deserves a family. Retrieved 

from http://www.nacac.org/adoptalk/

MakeOlderChildAdoptionReality.pdf

Sanchez, R. M. (2004). Youth perspectives on 

permanency. Retrieved from 

http://www.senecacenter.org/files/cpyp/

Files/YouthPerspectives.pdf

Serdjenian, T. (2011, Winter). Extreme 

recruitment: An interview with Melanie 

Scheetz. Permanency Planning Today, 8. 

Retrieved from http://www.nrcpfc.org/

newsletter/ppt-winter-2011.pdf

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services. (2006). The AFCARS report: Final 

estimates for FY 1998 through FY 2002 

(12). Retrieved from http://archive.acf.hhs.

gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/tar/

report12.pdf

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, Children’s Bureau. (2010a). The 

AFCARS report: Preliminary FY 2009 

estimates as of July 2010 (17). Retrieved 

from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/

files/cb/afcarsreport17.pdf

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, Children’s Bureau. (2010b). 

Making the case for permanency with 

youth, workers, and families. Children’s 

Bureau Express, 11(4). Retrieved from 

https://cbexpress.acf.hhs.gov/index.

cfm?event=website.viewArticles&issueid=1

16§ionid=2&articleid=2872

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, Children’s Bureau. (2011). 

Federal Child and Family Services Reviews: 

Aggregate report: Round 2: Fiscal years 

2007–2010. Retrieved from http://www.acf.

hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/fcfsr_report.

pdf

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, Children’s Bureau. (2012). The 

AFCARS report: Preliminary FY 2011 

estimates as of July 2012 (19). Retrieved 

from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/

files/cb/afcarsreport19.pdf

Walker, J. S., & Child, B. (2008). Involving 

youth in planning for their education, 

treatment and services: Research tells us 

we should be doing better. Portland, OR: 

Research and Training Center on Family 

Support and Children’s Mental Health, 

Portland State University. Retrieved from 

http://www.rtc.pdx.edu/PDF/pbAMP-Youth

ParticipationResearchSummary.pdf

Suggested Citation: 

Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2013). 

Enhancing permanency for youth in outof-home care. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services, 

Children’s Bureau. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Administration for Children and Families

Administration on Children, Youth and Families

Children’s Bureau