U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

36–729 PDF 2008

RUNAWAY, HOMELESS, AND MISSING

CHILDREN: PERSPECTIVES ON HELPING

THE NATION’S VULNERABLE YOUTH

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTHY 

FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES 

COMMITTEE ON 

EDUCATION AND LABOR

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JULY 24, 2007

Serial No. 110–57

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor

(

Available on the Internet: 

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/education/index.html 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR 

GEORGE MILLER, California, Chairman

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan, Vice Chairman 

Donald M. Payne, New Jersey 

Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Lynn C. Woolsey, California 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Carolyn McCarthy, New York 

John F. Tierney, Massachusetts 

Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio 

David Wu, Oregon 

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Danny K. Davis, Illinois 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Timothy H. Bishop, New York 

Linda T. Sa ́nchez, California 

John P. Sarbanes, Maryland 

Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania 

David Loebsack, Iowa 

Mazie Hirono, Hawaii 

Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania 

John A. Yarmuth, Kentucky 

Phil Hare, Illinois 

Yvette D. Clarke, New York 

Joe Courtney, Connecticut 

Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire 

Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon, California, 

Ranking Minority Member 

Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin 

Peter Hoekstra, Michigan 

Michael N. Castle, Delaware 

Mark E. Souder, Indiana 

Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan 

Judy Biggert, Illinois 

Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania 

Ric Keller, Florida 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

John Kline, Minnesota 

Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington 

Kenny Marchant, Texas 

Tom Price, Georgia 

Luis G. Fortun ̃ o, Puerto Rico 

Charles W. Boustany, Jr., Louisiana 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

John R. ‘‘Randy’’ Kuhl, Jr., New York 

Rob Bishop, Utah 

David Davis, Tennessee 

Timothy Walberg, Michigan 

Dean Heller, Nevada

Mark Zuckerman, Staff Director 

Vic Klatt, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTHY FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES 

CAROLYN McCARTHY, New York, Chairwoman

Yvette D. Clarke, New York 

Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire 

Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

John P. Sarbanes, Maryland 

Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania 

John A. Yarmuth, Kentucky 

Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania, 

Ranking Minority Member 

Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon, California 

Kenny Marchant, Texas 

Luis G. Fortun ̃ o, Puerto Rico 

David Davis, Tennessee 

Dean Heller, Nevada 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

Hearing held on July 24, 2007 ............................................................................... 1

Statement of Members: 

Altmire, Hon. Jason, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Pennsylvania, prepared statement of .......................................................... 71

McCarthy, Hon. Carolyn, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities, Committee on Education and Labor ..................... 1

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3

Platts, Hon. Todd Russell, Senior Republican Member, Subcommittee 

on Healthy Families and Communities, Committee on Education and 

Labor .............................................................................................................. 3

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 4

Statement of Witnesses: 

Alberts, Beth, CEO, Texas Center for the Missing ........................................ 41

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 42

Additional materials submitted ............................................................... 47

Allen, Ernie, president and CEO, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children ............................................................................................ 35

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 36

Berg, Steven R., vice president for programs and policy, National Alliance 

to End Homelessness .................................................................................... 27

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 29

Booker, Rusty, formerly homeless youth ........................................................ 23

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 25

Additional material submitted ................................................................. 26

Krahe-Eggleston, Sue, executive director, Our Family ................................. 11

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 13

Rolle, Chris ‘‘Kazi,’’ creator, Art Start’s Hip-Hop Project ............................. 7

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 9

Additional material submitted ................................................................. 11

(1)

RUNAWAY, HOMELESS, AND MISSING

CHILDREN: PERSPECTIVES ON HELPING 

THE NATION’S VULNERABLE YOUTH 

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

U.S. House of Representatives 

Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities 

Committee on Education and Labor 

Washington, DC

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 3:05 p.m., in Room 

2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carolyn McCarthy 

[chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives McCarthy, Grijalva, Sarbanes, 

Yarmuth, Lampson, Platts, and Biggert. 

Staff present: Aaron Albright, Press Secretary; Tylease Alli, 

Hearing Clerk; Jody Calemine, Labor Policy Deputy Director; Carlos Fenwick, Policy Advisor, Subcommittee on Health, Employment, 

Labor and Pensions; Michael Gaffin, Staff Assistant, Labor; Lamont Ivey, Staff Assistant, Education; Brian Kennedy, General 

Counsel; Deborah Koolbeck, Policy Advisor, Subcommittee on 

Healthy Families and Communities; Lisette Partelow, Staff Assistant, Education; James Bergeron, Minority Deputy Director of Education and Human Services Policy; Robert Borden, Minority General Counsel; Kathryn Bruns, Minority Legislative Assistant; Cameron Coursen, Minority Assistant Communications Director; 

Kirsten Duncan, Minority Professional Staff Member; Taylor Hansen, Minority Legislative Assistant; Susan Ross, Minority Director 

of Education and Human Resources Policy; and Linda Stevens, Minority Chief Clerk/Assistant to the General Counsel. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY [presiding]. A quorum is present. The 

hearing of the subcommittee will come to order. 

Pursuant to committee rule 12-A, any member may submit an 

opening statement in writing, which will be made part of the permanent record. 

Before we begin, I would like everyone to take a moment to ensure that your cell phones and BlackBerrys are on ‘‘silent.’’

I would now like unanimous consent to allow the distinguished 

gentleman from Texas, Mr. Lampson, to be allowed to join us on 

the dais today and participate in the hearing. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

I now recognize myself, followed by the Ranking Member, Mr. 

Platts, from Pennsylvania, for an opening statement. 

2

I am pleased to welcome you all to the Subcommittee on Healthy 

Families and Communities hearing on runaway, homeless and 

missing children. 

I would like to thank the ranking member, Mr. Platts, for his interest in this important subject. 

I would also like to thank my two colleagues on the Healthy 

Families Subcommittee, Mr. Grijalva and Mr. Yarmuth, for their 

dedication to the issues of runaway and homeless children. 

Mr. Grijalva has taken the lead and urged the appropriation to 

increase funds for runaway and homeless youth programs, with 

success, this year. Mr. Yarmuth recently held a town-hall to illuminate the issues of runaway and homeless youth in his district in 

Kentucky. 

We are lucky to have such passionate members on this subcommittee, and I look forward to hearing from the witnesses from 

your districts today. 

Later, we would also like to welcome a visitor to hearing today, 

Mr. Lampson from Texas. We are glad that he will be able to join 

us later. Mr. Lampson has been personally dedicated to this issue 

for the last 10 years. He founded the Congressional Missing and 

Exploited Children’s Caucus, which now has over 130 members. 

Mr. Lampson remains the champion of missing and exploited children in Congress. 

We are here today to learn about runaway, homeless and missing 

children and gain perspectives on how we can help these young 

people as we begin the reauthorization process. 

Although there are no exact figures for the number of runaway 

and homeless youth in our nation, in 2002 1.6 million young people 

between the ages of 12 to 17 ran away from home and slept in exposed or poorly sheltered locations. 

Runaways may find shelter with a friend or member of the community, but for the children who find themselves on the street, 

food, shelter, health care, and personal safety needs are not met. 

Studies of runaway and homeless youth show high rates of emotional and mental health problems. According to the Basic Center 

Program and Transitional Living Program in 2006, 29 percent were 

identified as having mental health issues upon exiting care. 

In addition, many of the young people who enter shelters have 

a history with the juvenile justice system, on which we had a hearing just a few weeks ago. These issues are all related, as we have 

a juvenile correction system that fails to protect youth from shelters and streets. 

Runaway children may fall into the missing children category. A 

study funded by the Department of Justice found that nearly all of 

the 1.3 million children who went missing in 1999 were reunited 

with their caretakers. 

We will learn of the grassroots activities on these issues, which 

includes collaboration between those who assist runaway and 

homeless youth and those who locate missing children. 

However, not every child was reunited with caretakers, and that 

is why we have AMBER alerts, the National Center for Missing 

and Exploited Children, a Task Force on Internet Crimes Against 

Children and Law Enforcement Training Center. 

3

Today’s topics are difficult. I am looking forward to learning 

what we do for our runaway, homeless and missing children and 

recommendations on what we can do through reauthorization to 

better serve these young people. 

I want to thank all of you for taking the time to be here this 

afternoon. 

And now I yield to Ranking Member Platts for his opening statement. 

[The statement of Mrs. McCarthy follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Carolyn McCarthy, Chairwoman, 

Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities 

I am pleased to welcome you to the Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities hearing on runaway, homeless, and missing children. 

I would like to thank the Ranking Member, Mr. Platts for his interest in this important hearing. 

I would also like to thank my two colleagues on the Healthy Families Subcommittee, Mr. Grijalva and Mr. Yarmuth for the dedication to issues of runaway 

and homeless children. 

Mr. Grijalva has taken the lead and urged the appropriations to increase funds 

for runaway and homeless youth programs, with success this year. 

Mr. Yarmuth recently held a town hall to illuminate the issues of runaway and 

homeless youth in his district in Kentucky. 

We are lucky to have such passionate members on this subcommittee, and I look 

forward to hearing from the witnesses from your districts today. 

I would like to welcome a visitor to our hearing today, Mr. Lampson from Texas. 

We are glad that you could join us today. Mr. Lampson has been personally dedicated to this issue to for the last ten years. He founded the Congressional Missing 

and Exploited Children Caucus, which now has over 130 members. Mr. Lampson 

remains the champion of missing and exploited children in Congress. 

We are here today to learn about runaway, homeless, and missing children, and 

gain perspectives on how we can help these young people as we begin the reauthorization process. 

Although there no exact figures for the number of runaway and homeless youth 

in our nation, in 2002, 1.6 million young people between the ages of 12 to 17 ran 

away from home and slept in exposed or poorly sheltered locations. 

Runaways may find shelter with a friend or member of the community, but for 

the children who find themselves on the street, food, shelter, healthcare, and personal safety needs are not met. Studies of runaway and homeless youth show high 

rates of emotional and mental health problems. According to the Basic Center Program and Transitional Living Program in 2006, 29 per cent were identified as having mental health issues upon exiting care. 

In addition, many of the young people who enter shelters have a history with the 

Juvenile Justice system, on which we had a hearing a week and a half ago. These 

issues are all related, as we have a juvenile correction system that fails to protect 

youth from shelters and streets. 

Runaway children may fall into the missing children category. 

A study funded by the Department of Justice found that nearly all of the 1.3 million children who went missing in 1999 were reunited with their caretakers. 

We will learn of the grassroots activity on these issues, which includes collaboration between those who assist runaway and homeless youth and those who locate 

missing children. However, not every child was reunited with caretakers, and that 

is why we have AMBER alerts, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, a task force on internet crimes against children, and law enforcement training 

center. 

Today’s topics are difficult. I am looking forward to learning what we do for our 

runaway, homeless, and missing children, and recommendations on what we can do 

through reauthorization, to better serve these young people. 

Mr. PLATTS. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I will submit a formal statement for the record, and first just 

want to commend you for your continuing leadership on issues of 

importance to our youth, throughout our nation and here, espeVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:41 Feb 12, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\HFC\110-57\36729.TXT HOME PsN: DIC
4

cially dealing with runaway, homeless and missing children. Your 

hosting this hearing is going to allow us as a committee to be that 

much better informed and better prepared as we go into the reauthorization process. So thank you for your leadership. 

I also want to reference Mrs. Biggert from Illinois, who is also 

co-chair of the Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus and has 

been a great leader on these issues for us on the Republican side. 

And, Judy, we are glad to have you here with us, as well. 

To our witnesses, each of you bring what will be invaluable 

knowledge to be shared with us. Through your written testimony 

that you provided and your oral testimony here today, your life experiences, your expertise in this area is so critical for us being better informed. 

I look at our job as Congress men and women as being kind of 

general practitioner. We need to know a little bit about everything 

and, as an issue is moving forward, become experts on a few 

things. And, on this committee, dealing with the needs of our nation’s children is one of those areas where we are charged with 

being more experts. The way we become more expert on these 

issues is through information shared with us, such as you are going 

to do today. 

So I sincerely thank each of you for being here and for making 

time in your schedules to participate to help us have the knowledge 

we need to do right by our nation’s children and look forward to 

your testimony. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

[The statement of Mr. Platts follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Todd Russell Platts, Senior Republican 

Member, Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities 

Good afternoon. I’d like to welcome each one of you to this hearing entitled ‘‘Runaway, Homeless, and Missing Children: Perspectives on Helping the Nation’s Vulnerable Youth.’’ This is the third hearing in a series which we have held that examine the programs authorized by the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

Act (JJDPA). The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act and the Missing Children’s Assistance Act are Titles III and IV respectively of JJDPA. 

The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act authorizes three grant programs to meet 

the needs of homeless youth. The first, the Basic Center Program, provides emergency short-term shelter for youth, as well as food, clothing, counseling, and referrals for health care. The second program, the Transitional Living Program, assists 

older homeless youth in developing skills to promote their independence and prevent 

future dependency on social services. The final program authorizes funding for Maternal Group Homes, which provide a range of services for young mothers such as 

childcare, education, job training, and advice on parenting to promote their wellbeing and success as a parent. 

The Missing Children’s Assistance Act coordinates the various federal missing 

children’s programs though the Department of Justice’s Office of Juvenile Justice 

and Delinquency Prevention. In addition, it authorizes the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which provides assistance to families and law enforcement officials to help reunite families. 

Today, I look forward to hearing from our panel of expert witnesses and learning 

what their assessments are of the current programs. In Pennsylvania, 40 percent 

of individuals who become homeless during any given year are youths. It is vital 

that we provide support early to homeless youth to get them on a path of responsible independence and decrease their risk of entering the juvenile justice system. 

Finally, I would like to thank all of the panelists were joining us today. With that, 

I yield back to Chairwoman McCarthy. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you, Mr. Platts. 

5

And, again, welcome Ms. Biggert. We appreciate you being here. 

And, also, Mr. Lampson is here. 

Without objection, all members will have 14 days to submit additional materials or questions for the hearing record. 

Today we will hear from a panel of witnesses. 

Your testimonies will proceed in the order of your introduction. 

Our first witness, Mr. Chris—I am going to pronounce this 

wrong—‘‘Kazi’’ Rolle, comes to us as one of two voices of experience 

on our panel about homelessness. However, he will also have a 

message of hope and growth to share through his work on Art 

Start’s Hip-Hop Project, an after-school program for teens which 

teaches them to turn their life experiences into art through hiphop. He also has worked on the Hip-Hop Project, which can be seen 

in the documentary by the same name, with all profits going to 

support organizations working with young people. 

Now I wish to recognize the distinguished gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Grijalva, to introduce the next witness, Ms. Sue KraheEggleston from Arizona. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you very much, Madam Chair and Ranking 

Member Platts, for holding this very important hearing. 

Today, it is my distinct honor and pleasure to introduce a fellow 

Tucsonan, Sue Krahe-Eggleston, who is director of Our Family 

Services back home in Tucson. This service, Our Family, provides 

a comprehensive range, Madam Chair, of services addressing the 

needs of at-risk youth, children, families, seniors and works with 

neighborhoods. 

For the past 16 years, Sue, in her capacity as executive director, 

has helped define back home for the community the needs and the 

attention and the resources that youth in our community need. For 

that, we are very grateful for her leadership and for her very 

strong advocacy. 

She is nationally renowned and recognized as an advocate for 

children and family social services and currently serves as a board 

member of the National Network for Youth. It is my honor to introduce her. 

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and look forward to the 

testimony of all our witnesses and welcome them, as well. 

I yield back. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. And I thank you. 

Now I wish to recognize the distinguished gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Yarmuth, to introduce the next witness, Mr. Rusty 

Booker. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

It is my distinct privilege today to introduce a young man of incredible strength and courage, Rusty Booker. 

I met Rusty about 3 weeks ago at a forum I hosted on disconnected youth in our mutual hometown of Louisville, Kentucky. 

Rusty spoke of his experience with abuse, how he ran away at age 

12 and about his placement in five different foster homes. 

The power of his story comes not simply from the hand that he 

was dealt but the way that he played it. So often, when we think 

of disconnected youth, we think, often correctly, of helplessness and 

victimization. 

6

But this exceptional young man has long since left behind helplessness and the role of a victim. After a childhood of neglect, he 

took control of his life, set himself on a path toward adult success. 

He is determined to get a high school degree and join the police 

force. Also, at the age of 17, he has dedicated himself to helping 

others who suffered like he did, reaching out to kids on the street. 

Rusty is the success story. I thank him for being here to share 

his story. He has demonstrated an awful lot of courage in his life 

and today is one more chapter in displaying courage. 

I also want to thank Safe Place for ensuring he could be here 

today. 

I yield back. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you. 

Our next witness, Mr. Steve Berg, is the vice president for programs and policy of the National Alliance to End Homelessness. 

Prior to coming to Washington, Mr. Berg spent 14 years as a legal 

service attorney. Mr. Berg will speak to us today about what the 

research on runaway and homeless youth tells us. 

Mr. Yarmuth from Kentucky will also introduce our next witness, 

Mr. Ernie Allen. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Thank you again, Madam Chair. It is my big day 

here today. Big day for Louisville, too. 

You would be hard pressed to find someone who so consistently 

has shown more devotion to the nation’s missing and exploited children than the next witness to be introduced. 

My friendship with Ernie Allen goes back many years, to his 

time in Louisville. He has always shown a selfless dedication to 

serving our community as our city’s director of health and public 

safety, director of our county crime commission and now, as founder, president and CEO of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. 

He serves all our communities today, having helped recover well 

over 100,000 missing children, increasing the recovery rate from 62 

percent in 1990 to 96 percent today. Not despite, but because of, 

his success, Ernie knows as well as anyone the vast challenges still 

ahead of us. 

And so, Madam Chair, it is my honor to introduce a true humanitarian and an example for all of us, my friend, Ernie Allen. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you very much. 

Now I wish to recognize the distinguished gentleman from Texas 

and our guest today, Mr. Lampson, to introduce the next witness, 

Ms. Beth Alberts. 

Mr. LAMPSON. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I certainly thank 

you for allowing me to participate in the hearing today. 

As founder and co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Missing 

and Exploited Children, thanks to the suggestion from Ernie Allen 

a number of years back, I really am pleased to be able to welcome 

Beth Alberts here. 

Beth is the CEO of Texas Center for the Missing. It is a not-forprofit organization, established in 2000 by Houston executive Doreen Wise in memory of her son, Gabriel, after his 4-month disappearance and tragic loss. The center has one goal: to keep vulnerable children and adults safe. 

7

And since July 2001, Ms. Alberts has served as the director of 

the Houston Regional AMBER Plan, the largest regional AMBER 

Alert system in the country. 

Ms. Alberts also serves as the coordinator for both the Southeast 

Texas Child Abduction Response team, which is a multi-jurisdictional, multi-discipline team of 70 different agencies prepared to respond to endangered/missing child cases, and the Southeast Texas 

Search and Rescue Alliance, a consortium of volunteer search and 

rescue teams and missing children’s organizations, providing support to law enforcement agencies and families of the missing. 

Ms. Alberts serves as the secretary of the board of AMECO, 

Inc.—it is an international consortium of missing children’s organizations—and is a board member of the Harris County Department 

of Education’s Safe and Secure Schools and sits on the Children’s 

Assessment Center Partnership Council. 

A busy, busy lady, one that we have tremendous appreciation for 

her for caring, for her willingness to help and give back so much 

of herself and for being here today. 

Welcome. 

And, thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. And I thank you. 

For those of you that have not testified before, you will see in 

front of you a lighting system. Each witness will be able to speak 

for 5 minutes. The warning lights are green. Then, when you have 

yellow, you have a minute left. When it turns red, I will let you 

go a little bit, but if you go too long, you will hear a light tapping, 

which will get louder. 

That goes the same for the members sitting at the dais. Especially for us, right? 

The first witness we want to hear from is Mr. Rolle, if you 

would? 

STATEMENTS OF CHRIS ‘‘KAZI ROLLE’’, CREATOR, ART 

START’S HIP–HOP PROJECT 

Mr. ROLLE. Mike check, one, two, one, two. Peace and love. 

My name is Kazi, also known as Chris Rolle. I was born on a little island called Nassau, in the Bahamas. My mother was a Jamaican immigrant who was trying to get to America, because it was 

easier for a Bahamian to get to America than coming straight from 

Jamaica. 

At 6 months of age, she left on that journey and left me with her 

friend. Her friend and her husband were very abusive. And I lived 

there for 4 years. And at 4 years old, I was found wandering the 

streets, and, subsequently, the Department of Social Services in the 

Bahamas took me out of that home and placed me in the Children’s 

Emergency Hostel for orphans. 

Catherine Brown, who was a social worker there, she and I developed a relationship, and in 1982 I was fostered by her and her 

family. And the adjustment was very difficult. I had numerous behavioral problems. I always like to say she tried to give me heaven 

and I gave her hell. 

But she trucked on with me, and I was officially adopted in 1988, 

on November 4th, still posing a lot of behavioral challenges. And 

8

the family didn’t have the know-how or the resources to provide me 

with the emotional healing and help that I needed. 

And, in 1990, I was forced to have to go back to the orphanage. 

And in the orphanage, all the boys in my room, we got in trouble 

and we were asked to leave the orphanage. Some kids were adopted, and I went on to a psychiatric ward for unruly children. 

While I was there, the psychiatrist, his analysis came to the conclusion that a lot of the stuff I was dealing with was based on the 

fact that I missed my mother. I couldn’t understand why these 

strangers were doing so much for me and my own mother could 

give me away. 

So we contacted the American embassy, sent a letter to her and 

found that she wanted me. We sent a one-way ticket, and I came 

here on December 22nd, to America, in 1990. 

We had a tumultuous reunion, and I found myself 2 years later 

on the streets of Brooklyn. Wherever I laid my head was my home, 

and got in a lot of trouble. 

I was involved in street pharmaceutical corporations and family 

organizations that were one color, if you understand what I am 

saying. And they were my family. 

After being incarcerated a few times, I decided that I needed to 

get my life together, and I leaned on the people and the resources 

that I knew. I was a part of a theater company called Tomorrow’s 

Future Theater Company, Elaine Robinson, and she helped me to 

get into a school called Public School Repertory Company, which 

was a last-chance high school for kids who were interested in the 

arts. 

There I found a guy by the name of Scott Rosenberg, who founded an organization called Art Start, which was an arts education 

organization. And he just gave me the opportunity to just use my 

voice and use music and art. And I found that it was really a healing tool, to be able to put my life and all the things I was going 

through in music and art. 

I created a play called ‘‘Brooklyn Story,’’ and I shared it with 

people across the tri-state, and it moved a lot of young people. And 

just to put it out there, I think that was the beginning of my healing and a change for my life. 

Scott also supported me in creating my own program, because I 

made a commitment that I have got to give back. I understand 

what these kids are going through and I understand the journey, 

now. And I need to give back the same way that there were people 

along the way that took the time out to give to me. 

In 1995, I appeared on numerous shows for just gaining all these 

awards and recognition for doing all of this work. In 2000, I made 

it all the way to the Oprah Winfrey Show, to basically just say that 

this young brother has overcome some obstacles and was once 

homeless and now speaks at Harvard and across the world about 

how hip-hop can really heal and change lives. 

In 2007, this year, May 11th, a movie was released, executive 

produced by Bruce Willis and Queen Latifah, that chronicled my 

journey and the creation of this program, and a lot of lives were 

moved based on that. 

I am here today to just basically say that the step-parents, the 

organizations like Art Start, like the Hip-Hop Project, Network for 

9

Youth, all of the programs across the country that are trying to 

really reach our missing children, kids like myself, who were homeless and living in orphanages, they need the resources. 

They need the resources to do this work, because I could have 

been that kid crawling through somebody’s window or robbing 

somebody, because when you don’t have, you have to try to get it 

by any means necessary. And the only reason there was a change 

in my life, because there were programs and there were people and 

institutions that had some type of resources and a heart to try to 

help me. 

And those people need the resources and help to continue to do 

that work, because all young people need a place to call home. 

[The statement of Mr. Rolle follows:]

Prepared Statement of Chris ‘‘Kazi’’ Rolle, Creator,

Art Start’s Hip-Hop Project 

I was born in a little Island called Nassau in the Bahamas. My mother was a Jamaican immigrant who was trying to get to Amercia via the Bahamas , due the fact 

there were less obstacles for Bahamians seeking to come to United States than 

there were for people coming from here country. 

At 6months old, my mother left me in the care of friends to venture to the United 

States in hopes of opportunity. She had left three kids before with my grandmother 

in Jamaica. She never returned for me. In 1980, the Bahamian Department of Social Services substantiated reports that I was living in an abusive situation. At four 

years old, I was found wandering in the streets of and was subsequently institutionalized at the Children’s Emergency Hostel for orphans. 

Catherine Brown, a social worker at the hostel, developed a relationship with me 

and in 1982, I was fostered by here and her family. The adjustment was very difficult—they said that I presented numerous behavioral problems at home and in 

school, as I could not understand how strangers could love me when my own mother 

abandoned him. Thank fully Mrs. Brown trucked on. I was officially adopted on November 4th 1988. 

I still got into a lot of trouble and posed ongoing challenges. Due to lack of the 

proper resource to help me with my emotional issues, the family came their wits 

end in dealing with me. In 1990, I was placed in the Ranfurly Home for Children. 

While in the Ranfurly Home, I was placed in a psychiatric ward for unruly children. 

It was determined by the Department of Social Services that my challenges were 

directly related to my early childhood experiences—as a result, the American Embassy was contacted to locate my biological mother and on December 21, 1990, reunited with her in New York City, USA. 

From 1990-1992, I’s relationship with my biological mother was highly tumultuous. By 1992, at age 16, I found himself homeless once again, on the streets of 

New York City. From 1992-1994, Wherever I laid my head was my home. Gangs 

were my family. Warm train station was my apartment. Street Pharmaceutical Corporations became was my employers. Five discount was how I shopped for clothing. 

It was all bout survival. I found my self incarserated numerous time. I was on a 

road to nowhere. All the people who said that I wouldn’t amount to nothing were 

being proved right. 

In 1994, at age 18, I finally decided to get my life together. I enrolled in Public 

School Repertory Company, a ‘‘last chance’’ performing arts high school and I discovered that I had a passion for music and theatre, and realized the power of the arts 

as an outlet for healing. I wrote a play based on my life story called a Brooklyn 

Story. 

At Public School Repertory, I connected with Art Start—an arts-based youth organization he also began writing, directing and acting for the award winning urban 

theater company, Tomorrow’s Future. My play, A Brooklyn Story, earned me a New 

York Governor’s Citation and a Martin Luther King, Jr. Award. In 1995, I received 

the CBS Fulfilling the Dream Award for my play and my work in schools and homeless shelters advocating education and drug abuse prevention. 

In 1999, having personally experienced the healing power of the arts, I chose to 

dedicate my life to providing a similar outlet for under-served youth. I created The 

Hip Hop Project, an award-winning program that connects New York City teens to 

music industry professionals to write, produce and market their own compilation 

album on youth issues. The program attracted Russell Simmons and Bruce Willis, 

10

whose support contributed largely the success of the program. In 2000 I was featured on the Oprah Winfrey Show in a segment called People Who Are Using Their 

Lives. In 2005 he passed the torch of leadership of the Hip Hop Project one of my 

students, and joined the organization’s Board of Trustees. 

I say all of this to say that I was that kid. Homeless. No where to go. Pocket had 

rabbit ears. I had nothing. I was at the bottom. Rock bottom. Being homeless. Not 

have a family. Not having resources, influenced my choices. If no one was there to 

give it to me, I am going to have to take it. Steal it. Whatever. By any means necessary. You feel me? 

We need more support for the programs like Art Start, Tomorrow’s Future theater 

group, The Hip Hop Project and all of the wonderful people who take their time to 

help people like myself. 

We also need to get the word out in a big way to caring community members, 

parents, and young people themselves that millions of youth experience homelessness in the United States each year. All of the step and extend family members who 

step up to the plate, they need all the support, resources and services available to 

assist them. These programs, families and those working to bring about awareness 

desperately need federal funding, cause these are expensive undertakings. Every 

youth in the nation deserves a place to call home. 

[Additional material submitted by Mr. Rolle follows:]

11

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. I thank you for that testimony. 

Mrs. Eggleston? 

STATEMENT OF SUE KRAHE–EGGLESTON, EXECUTIVE 

DIRECTOR, OUR FAMILY SERVICES 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. Good afternoon. 

In addition to serving as the Our Family executive director, I am 

also a member of the board of directors of the National Network 

for Youth, the nation’s leading organization on youth homelessness. 

I am testifying on behalf of both organizations today. 


nyy.eps
12

Our Family delivers the full continuum of runaway and homeless 

youth programs, including a street outreach program, a drop-in 

center, a shelter and family reunification program for minor-age 

youth, a transitional living program for older youth and supervised 

apartments for homeless young families. 

My agency could not offer this programming without the federal 

RHY funds. Arizona only appropriates a small amount of targeted 

money for homeless youth, but many states do nothing. The national system of support for this population is wholly reliant on federal funds. Accordingly, RHY must be reauthorized. 

In addition, Congress should raise authorization and appropriation levels, both to start new programs in underserved communities, as well as provide a cost of living increase to current grantees, which have operated at the same funding levels year after year 

after year, despite inflation. 

The causal factors for homelessness among young people in Tucson match those across the country. Our agency has supported 

youth in all manners of dire circumstances, and I want to give you 

some examples. 

There is a 14-year-old boy named John, who felt safer living in 

a tunnel than with his abusive parents. Then, there is a 16-yearold gay young person by the name of Paul dropped off at our shelter by his mom, with his belongings in a plastic bag, saying to us, 

‘‘Take him.’’

Then think about Angie, a young mom standing outside the hospital in Tucson with her four-pound little infant, not knowing 

where she was going to go. Then, lastly, there is Precious, a 21-

year-old mom of two, living in her car because the children’s father 

had been incarcerated. 

These are all stories of Tucson, but they could be stories of any 

community across our country. 

Yet we also see incredible resilience in our youth, young people 

whose running away is an expression of their most basic right to 

survive, young people seeking better options, young people craving 

for caring adults and supportive peers for the first time, or longing 

to mend those old family ties. 

Our Family helps youth tap their inherent strength and mobilize 

those assets for the youth’s recovery and ultimate well-being. 

Now, turning to policy considerations, my written statement includes 18 of the RHY reauthorization recommendations that the 

National Network of Youth has put together. They are the outcome 

of a consultation process we took with the grantee community. 

I will mention just two. First, we recommend the act require a 

process for developing performance standards for RHY programs so 

that all grantees would work towards common performance expectations. Secondly, RHY grantees seek a process to request reconsideration of unsuccessful applications when there is a good cause. 

We look forward to working with Representative Yarmuth and 

the subcommittee leadership in developing the RHY reauthorization bill. To complement RHY, we call on Congress to pass measures that respond to the needs of homeless youth, which surpass 

the scope of the RHY. 

13

Among them, Congress should pass Representative Biggert’s 

forthcoming Homeless Education Bill. Also, Congress should pass 

H.R. 601, the Homeless Student Aid Bill. 

RHY programs have never intended to be the tools to end youth 

homelessness. The act forms the safety net for unaccompanied 

youth and must be continued, with increased funding. But if we are 

to prevent and end youth homelessness, we must go way beyond 

RHY. 

We need more publicly funded resources for family substance 

abuse, mental health and strengthening of family services. We 

need a child welfare systems that permits youth to remain in care 

until they research the developmental age of adulthood, rather 

than the artificial legal age of majority. 

We need to support reentry of youthful offenders, such as the one 

that Representative Grijalva will be proposing. Permanent housing 

targeted to youth is also required. 

We are pleased to support Representative Hinojosa’s forthcoming 

Place to Call Home Act. It contains the solutions I just identified 

and much, much more. It is a policy blueprint for preventing and 

ending youth homelessness. We call on Congress to follow its design. 

Youth-serving organizations, young people and concerned community members will continue to fight for the day when there will 

be indeed a place to call home for all youth. Until then, the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act must remain available for the millions of young people in America each year without a safe place to 

live. 

And I thank you. 

[The statement of Ms. Krahe-Eggleston follows:]

Prepared Statement of Sue Krahe-Eggleston, Executive Director,

Our Family 

Part I—About Our Family 

Sue Krahe-Eggleston is the Executive Director of Our Family, a community-based 

organization in Tucson, Pima County Arizona which offers services in four main 

areas, including youth services. Youth programs include street outreach, youth center, shelter, and transitional living for runaway and homeless youth. 

Part II—Unaccompanied Youth Primer 

Runaway and homeless youth are the most vulnerable of our nation’s disconnected youth. Between one million and three million U.S. youth experience an unaccompanied situation annually. Unaccompanied youth become detached from parents, 

guardians and other caring adults due to a combination of family and community 

stressors. Data specific to Pima County also point to large numbers of homeless, atrisk youth in the region, with the same causal factors and risk factors as their peers 

nationally. 

Part III—Runaway and Homeless Youth Act Reauthorization 

The federal Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (RHYA) has established funding 

streams to support outreach, family reunification, shelter, and transitional living 

programs targeted to unaccompanied youth, all in an effort to provide a basic level 

of support for these vulnerable young people regardless of the state in which they 

are living. 

Federal RHYA programs are a substantial and reliable funding stream to Our 

Family and other RHYA grantees. For organizations in many states, RHYA funds 

are the only resources available explicitly to serve unaccompanied youth. RHYA is 

the sole federal law targeted solely to unaccompanied youth. Without RHYA, many 

unaccompanied youth in communities across the nation would go completely without 

support. 

14

Our Family urges Congress to reauthorize and strengthen the programs and authorities of the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act. We offer 18 recommendations 

for RHYA reauthorization. These recommendations were identified after an intensive consultation process with the RHYA grantee community convened by the National Network for Youth, the membership association of RHYA agencies. 

Part IV—Beyond RHYA 

The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act, while a critical federal law that must be 

continued and fully funded, is no substitute for the aggressive interventions necessary to eliminate the very factors causing unaccompanied situations among millions of the nation’s youth, or to respond to the resources and services needs of currently unaccompanied youth that surpass the scope and purpose of the Act. We call 

for action in juvenile justice, elementary and secondary education, postsecondary 

education, workforce investment, and other areas. We support the Place to Call 

Home Act. 

Part I—About Our Family 

Our Family makes Southern Arizona a better place to live, to grow up, and to 

grow older with a continuum of services to people in every stage of life. Last year, 

more than 29,000 at-risk children, youth, families, seniors and disabled adults used 

our services, which include counseling, education and mediation, housing, mediation 

and help for people in crisis. 

Our Family provides services in four main areas—counseling, education and prevention, youth services, and services to older and disabled adults. 

Our youth services include: 

• Teens in Transition helps homeless and near-homeless youth 13-21 stay in 

school and gain the skills to succeed, through case management, counseling, education and career planning, housing, and help with basic needs. 

• Reunion House offers brief-stay shelter, respite and family reunification services 

to youth ages 12-17, including systems youth who are awaiting placement and 

homeless youth who want to come off the street. 

• CommonUnity is a complex of safe, supervised apartments and a community of 

support for homeless young mothers ages 18-21 with up to two children. Life-skills 

classes and case management help residents break cycles of poverty and crisis and 

create a support network among themselves. 

• Skrappy’s is a drug- and alcohol-free youth center. Young people from all backgrounds participate in youth-led media arts and theater projects, dance classes, 

health fairs, volunteer projects and community activism, as well as concerts. 

• Street Outreach goes where homeless, runaway and street youth gather and 

helps them come off the streets. 

Of the more than 29,000 individuals who used Our Family’s services last year, 

six percent were age 12 or under, 54 percent were 13-17, 16 percent were 18-21, 

18 percent were 22-59, and 6 percent were 60 or older. 

Our Family is a $4.2 million organization with 100 employees, as well as an active 

corps of volunteers. It is accredited by the Council on Accreditation of Services for 

Families and Children Inc. and licensed as a behavioral healthcare institution by 

the Arizona Department of Health Services. Services are available in English and 

Spanish. 

Our Family, created in October 2005 by the merger of Family Counseling Agency 

and OUR TOWN, has a combined history of more than 75 years of service to the 

greater Tucson community. 

Our Family invites Members of Congress and Congressional staff in Arizona or 

visiting the Tucson area to visit our agency. For more information, please visit 

www.ourfamilyservices.org or call (520) 323-1708. 

Part II—Unaccompanied Youth Primer 

Unaccompanied Youth Basics 

Runaway and homeless youth are the most vulnerable of our nation’s ‘‘disconnected’’ youth. We refer to these two populations collectively as ‘‘unaccompanied 

youth.’’ Like other disconnected youth, unaccompanied youth experience separation 

from one or more of the key societal institutions of family, school, community, and 

the workplace. Their disconnection is accentuated by their lack of a permanent place 

to live, which is not only disruptive in and of itself, but also indicative of the larger 

socioeconomic instability they are experiencing. 

Between one million and three million of our nation’s youth experience an unaccompanied situation annually, according to various estimates derived from government studies and data sets. Some of these estimates do not include young adults 

ages 18 and older within their scope. 

15

Unaccompanied youth become detached from parents, guardians and other caring 

adults—legally, economically, and emotionally—due to a combination of family and 

community stressors. 

Family Stressors—Many of our nation’s unaccompanied youth are compelled to 

leave their home environments prematurely due to severe family conflict, physical, 

sexual, or emotional abuse by an adult in the home, parental neglect, parental substance abuse, or parental mental illness. For other youth, the values and traditions 

with which their families operate prescribe that the young person separate economically from the family unit upon reaching the legal age of majority or after graduation, in some cases regardless of whether the youth is actually prepared for independent adulthood. Others are expelled from the home due to parental inability to 

accept the sexual orientation, parenting status, mental or addictive disability, or 

normal adolescent behavior of their child. For still other young people, their families 

are simply too poor to continue to bear the financial burden of providing for the 

youth’s basic needs. Others are abandoned as their parents are incarcerated. Youth 

in families that are experiencing homelessness may be separated from the family 

unit—and become homeless on their own—so that emergency shelter or domestic violence services can be secured for the remaining family members, or to squeeze most 

of the family into means of habitation that are too small for all of its members. 

Community Stressors—State custodial systems—including child welfare, juvenile 

justice, mental health, addiction treatment, and developmental disabilities—which 

have responsibility for ensuring the safety and protection of children and youth who 

are not properly cared for by parents and guardians—are failing in general to accept 

older youth into their custody due to financial limitations and policy disincentives. 

Many of the young people who do come in contact with public custodial systems are 

not adequately prepared for independence and residential stability during their period of custody nor provided an aftercare arrangement to support them after the 

custodial relationship has ended. Many of these young people have no home environment to which to return. Youth with mental illness, addiction, and other disabilities 

face discrimination when searching for an independent living arrangement. 

Many unaccompanied youth who are psychosocially prepared for independent 

adulthood are not economically ready for self-sufficiency. Inadequate educational 

preparation, lack of employment skills, short or non-existent work histories, language barriers, and undocumented immigration status all contribute to the relegation of many youth to unemployment or to low-wage jobs—neither of which generate 

income sufficient for acquiring affordable housing. 

Policy barriers also stand in the way of permanency for unaccompanied youth. In 

some jurisdictions, youth below the age of majority are prohibited from entering into 

leases or other contracts on their own behalf. ‘‘One strike’’ laws prohibit individuals 

with criminal histories from residency in public and assisted housing and prohibit 

juvenile ex-offenders from returning to their families. And, federal, state, and local 

public and assisted housing programs rank young people low, if at all, among their 

priority populations for assistance. 

Regardless of the causal factor, unaccompanied youth, when left to fend for themselves without support, experience poor health, educational, and workforce outcomes 

which imperil their prospects for positive adulthood. This results in their long-term 

dependency on or involvement in public health, social service, emergency assistance, 

and corrections systems. 

Youth Homelessness in Arizona and in Pima County 

Youth Homelessness in Arizona 

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National 

Extranet Optimized Runaway and Homeless Youth Management Information System (NEO-RHYMIS), 943 youth were involved with Runaway and Homeless Youth 

Act emergency (BCP) and transitional (TLP) programs in Arizona in the 2004-2005 

federal fiscal year. Of this population, 67 percent were white, 6 percent were American Indian, 0.42 percent were Asian, 10 percent were African American, 0.32 percent were Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and 16 percent did not report 

racial information. Within the population of those reporting ethnicity (804), 14 percent were Hispanic. 42 percent were male and 58 percent were female. Girls are 

more prevalent in every age group of youth except for youth under the age of 12, 

where there are more boys than girls. The vast majority (81 percent) of Arizona 

youth who receive services through a BCP or TLP in that same time period entered 

the program from a private residence; more than half of these youth came from the 

home of a parent or legal guardian. Two percent of youth came from correctional 

institutions, two percent came from residential programs, four percent came from 

other shelters, two percent came from other living situations, less than one percent 

came from the military, and 10 percent came from the streets. 53 percent were atVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:41 Feb 12, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\HFC\110-57\36729.TXT HOME PsN: DIC
16

tending school regularly, and 3 percent had already graduated or obtained a GED. 

The rest were not regularly attending school. 24 youth seeking BCP or TLP services 

in Arizona were turned away during this time period. 

Youth Homelessness in Pima County 

Data specific to Pima County also point to the large numbers of homeless, at-risk 

youth in our region. Pima County demonstrates a number of factors that indicate 

significant need for the proposed services. First, there is a high number of runaways 

in our county. In 2003, 3,036 runaways were reported in Pima County, accounting 

for 20 percent of all juvenile crime reported. This number amounts to two percent 

of Pima County’s total juvenile population. Second, runaways face a pervasive drug 

economy in our region. The county lies 70 miles from the Mexican border in a high 

impact drug corridor. Drugs flow across the border and are distributed nationwide. 

Runaway and homeless youth, always at risk for involvement in drug use and drug 

sales, are at an especially high risk in Pima County. 

Tucson’s need for Runaway and Homeless Youth services is further demonstrated 

by a Homeless Youth Survey administered in the spring of 2005 by the Tucson Planning Council for the Homeless Youth Committee and Arizona State University’s 

School of Social Work. Information was gathered through 30 minute in-person and 

telephone interviews using an 18 page questionnaire that covered the following domains: demographics; housing and living situations; education; employment and income sources; sexual orientation, practices and risk behaviors and abuse; physical 

health, mental health, and substance abuse; use of, access to, and knowledge about 

community services, modes of transportation, social networks and personal issues; 

and personal/familial legal concerns. In total 458 surveys were completed. The information obtained indicates, from the youth themselves, what are the most pressing 

issues for Tucson’s runaway and homeless youth. (Homeless in Tucson by LeCroy 

and Milligan, 2005.) 

Homeless youth interviewed ranged from 13-18 years old and were predominantly 

Hispanic/Latino/a or white, heterosexual, non-married and female. The majority of 

youth (76 percent) lived in Tucson before becoming homeless. Over 60 percent of the 

youth had been homeless at least twice during their young lives, with an average 

3.5 times in 2005, up from 1.92 times in 2002. Over half of the youth had spent 

at least one year of their life homeless and, at the time of the survey, half had been 

homeless for more than 180 days. The average age at which youth first became 

homeless was 14. Nine percent self-reported homosexuality and 7 percent reported 

bisexuality. The main reasons cited for leaving home the first time included running 

away because of problems (24 percent), being removed by Child Protective Services 

(21 percent), and being kicked out or told to leave the home (20 percent). Over 75 

percent of the youth said they would not continue to be homeless if they had a 

choice. 

Forty percent of the youth spent the night prior to the interview at a friend’s 

house, 14 percent spent the night in an unstable environment (e.g., park, wash, car, 

street, backyard), and 13 percent spent the night at a family member’s house. Notably, 10 percent of the youth did not know where they would be sleeping the night 

of the interview. Half of the youth (50 percent) were currently enrolled in school or 

some other type of educational/training program, down slightly from 2002 when 56 

percent of youth surveyed were enrolled in school and/or an educational program. 

Of those not currently attending school, the main reasons reported were lack of a 

permanent address and/or difficulties with transportation. 

Many of the youth had experienced significant trauma before age 18, and were 

still suffering its effects. 63 percent reported experiencing verbal/emotional abuse, 

52 percent said they had witnessed domestic violence occur in their household, 50 

percent reported witnessing drug/alcohol abuse, 44 percent reported experiencing 

physical abuse, 42 percent experienced neglect, and 25 percent reported being sexually abused (19 percent of females, 6 percent of males) before the age of 18. When 

asked whether abuse/neglect was ever a factor in their leaving home, 60 percent of 

the youth said yes. Alarmingly, 28 percent said that they had attempted suicide in 

the past, up from 19.5 percent in 2002. These statistics substantiate the tenuous, 

high-risk situation that faces RHY in Tucson, the risk factors they face for having 

unsuccessful adulthoods, and the critical nature of getting services to them. 

Our Family’s Homeless Youth Profile 

Data collected on homeless clients who received case management services at Our 

Family between 7/1/05 and 6/30/06 (n=82) reflect similar patterns to the County and 

the State. The average number of runaway episodes was four. The current status 

of youth entering the program included: 35 percent at home; 35 percent runaway; 

17 percent homeless; 9 percent throwaway, 8 percent other/street. Substance use 

17

was a prevalent problem indicated at intake: 35 percent smoke cigarettes; 55 percent use beer, wine or wine coolers; 45 percent use hard liquor; 35 percent had 5 

or more servings of alcohol on the same occasion; 40 percent use marijuana; 10 percent use cocaine; 10 percent use methamphetamines, 5 percent use over the counter 

drugs above recommended dosage; 2 percent use inhalants; 40 percent use alcohol 

and marijuana on the same occasion; 5 percent used two or more drugs (excluding 

alcohol and tobacco) on the same occasion; 30 percent have been asked to sell drugs 

and 12 percent have sold drugs. Approximately 30 percent of the youth said they 

had been physically abused by a parent or guardian. 5 percent reported being sexually abused by parents and another 12 percent reported being sexually abused by 

a parent’s partner. Almost all of them listed emotional abuse, and 30 percent said 

that a household member abused alcohol or drugs. In addition 30 percent had poor 

grades in school, 60 percent had been charged with a misdemeanor, 5 percent with 

a felony, and 26 percent were depressed. 

Trends in Homeless Youth Population Observed by Our Family 

Our Family’s Reunion House Basic Center Program (RH) has seen double the 

number of youth 12-17 who are school dropouts at intake. These young people have 

been absent from educational services often for a semester or more and as such are 

a grade or two behind their peers. A number of these youth profess to have no desire to continue their education, seeing school as a useless and stressful environment. 

Our Family’s Teens In Transition TLP (TNT) has noted a continuing high demand 

from couples coming in for services where the female is significantly younger than 

the male. Because of the male partner’s age these couples are unable to access housing options and homeless couples services targeted to underage youth. There appears to be no defined reason for this shift but it is noteworthy and provides a considerable challenge when attempting to provide housing for these individuals and 

their children. 

Our Family’s CommonUnity TLP (CUP) has continued to see increasing numbers 

of 22-24 year old mothers and their infant children on street who are coming in to 

seek services. CUP must turn these mothers away, as they are too old for the program. They are referred out to other providers who often have considerable waiting 

lists or are limited in their effectiveness with younger adults. Domestic and Relationship Violence issues remain prevalent, with approximately 92 percent of the 

young parents coming into CUP dealing with the effects of relationship and domestic violence in their lives. 

The Street Outreach Program (SO) continued to see an increase in the number 

of youth dealing with death or loss of a parent or guardian in their lives due to substance abuse. In many cases these issues directly relate to the initial destabilization 

of the youth with their families. 

The Homeless Youth Services at Our Family continued to see a steady increase 

in the numbers of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) youth requesting services. This is due in part to increased awareness through outreach to LGBT 

organizations as well as establishing a positive rapport and reputation among LGBT 

youth. This also highlights the number of LGBT youth who run away, are kicked 

out, or who otherwise become homeless and need the services we offer. 

CommonUnity and Teens in Transition Programs have seen increases in the number of parenting youth that have inquired about transitional/independent living 

services. 

Tucson youth service providers also report an explosion of methamphetamine 

use—a trend mirrored nationally. 

Barriers Facing Pima County Homeless Youth 

The Homeless Youth Committee of the Pima County, Arizona Plan to End Homelessness has identified the following major barriers that impede homeless youth in 

their transition back to permanent housing and to successful adulthoods. (Plan to 

End Homelessness, Pima County, Arizona, Spring 2006.) 

• While Tucson’s youth services are extensive, they are not enough to meet these 

needs. Homeless youth ages 18 through 24 have few, if any, emergency and transitional housing options. Whether they are ‘‘legally’’ adults (i.e. over 18) or not, Pima 

County homeless youth are at best uncomfortable, and at worst subject to victimization, in adult shelters or service environments. 

• Youth of all ages have almost no affordable addiction treatment options: in part 

because there is little funding to serve them, in part because agencies which do offer 

youth treatment are oversubscribed, and in part because youth simply do not feel 

comfortable engaging in therapeutic environments with older adults. 

18

• LGBT youth, many of whom have already been victimized, have no dedicated, 

safe emergency or transitional housing alternatives. 

• And all youth making a transition to independence need serious—and now seriously underfunded—life and job skills training, adequate housing, and often counseling. 

Our Family has identified the following additional barriers, based on our observation of the daily struggles of our residents and program participants: 

• Some homeless youth and young adults are unable to access HUD-funded homeless assistance services because their homeless living arrangement, usually ‘‘couch 

surfing,’’ does not qualify as ‘‘homeless’’ under the HUD definition. 

• Many of our participants are unable to pursue the postsecondary education and 

training they desire—and that is imperative to move them to high-wage employment in high-growth sectors—because they must forego education in order to maintain employment, which is their sole source of income. 

• Homeless young families expend considerable resources on childcare; subsidized 

child care slots are precious in our community. 

• Permanent housing to which our youth may transition is in short supply. Youth 

and young adults are low on priority lists, or even the community’s radar screen 

as a subpopulation in need of housing assistance. 

• Youth access to mental health services is a major challenge; there is simply insufficient publicly funded mental health treatment and support options for adolescents and for adults. 

• Reentry of youth offenders into the community is uneven, and certainly far behind in program development compared to the system of support for transitioning 

foster youth. 

Runaway and Homeless Youth Act Program Basics 

The federal government, through the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (RHYA) 

has established funding streams to support outreach, family reunification, shelter, 

and transitional living programs targeted to unaccompanied youth, all in an effort 

to provide a basic level of support for these vulnerable young people regardless of 

the state in which they are living. RHYA programs have the purposes of preventing 

victimization and ensuring basic safety of unaccompanied youth and ensuring their 

access to family reunification, housing, education, employment training, health care, 

and other social services. 

The RHYA Basic Center Program (BCP) provides grants to community-based, 

faith-based, and public organizations to support family strengthening efforts, including counseling, home-based services for families with children at risk of separation 

from the family, and emergency and respite shelter (no greater than 15 days) for 

youth under the age of 18. 

The RHYA Transitional Living Program (TLP) provides competitive grants to 

community-based, faith-based, and public organizations to support longer-term residential services (up to 18 months) and life skill supports to youth ages 16 through 

21 who are unable to return home safely. TLPs assist youth in successfully 

transitioning into responsible adulthood and self-sufficiency and connecting them to 

education, workforce, and other supports. This program includes maternity group 

homes, which are residential arrangements for pregnant and parenting youth who 

are fleeing from abusive homes. Maternity group homes assist these youth in accessing housing, prenatal care, parenting classes, child care, and educational services. 

The RHYA Street Outreach Program (SOP) provides competitive grants to community-based and faith-based organizations to support street-based outreach and 

education to homeless children and youth who have been sexually abused or who 

are at risk of commercial sexual exploitation. 

RHYA basic centers and transitional living projects serve nearly 50,000 youth in 

all 50 states. RHYA street outreach projects make over 2.3 million contacts with 

youth annually. 

The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act also authorizes funds for the National 

Runaway Switchboard, a national communications system for runaway youth and 

their families; regional training and technical assistance for grantees; an information clearinghouse; a management information system; research and evaluation; and 

peer monitoring of grantees. 

Congress first enacted the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act in 1974 as Title III 

of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. It was most recently reauthorized in 2003. RHYA programs are administered by the Family and Youth Services Bureau within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). 

19

Part III—Runaway and Homeless Youth Act Reauthorization 

Need for the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act 

Federal RHYA programs are a substantial and reliable funding stream to Our 

Family and other RHYA grantees. For organizations in many states, RHYA funds 

are the only resources available to serve unaccompanied youth explicitly. More important, they are the sole federal programs targeted to unaccompanied youth. Without RHYA, many unaccompanied youth in communities across the nation would go 

completely without support. 

More RHYA Capacity is Needed across the Nation. The basic living needs of too 

many of our nation’s unaccompanied youth are not being met through state and 

local child welfare systems or permanent housing and homeless assistance programs. Furthermore, few states have established funding streams targeted to unaccompanied youth. RHYA basic center and transitional living projects served approximately 55,000 youth in FY 2005, yet estimates of the U.S. unaccompanied youth 

population are one million at minimum, suggesting that at least approximately 

950,000 of the nation’s unaccompanied youth are not able to access RHYA services. 

Effectiveness of the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act 

RHYA Projects are Cost Effective Alternatives to Custodial Care and Arrest. The 

average cost of serving a youth in a transitional living project of $11,877 is less than 

half the minimum cost of serving youth through the child welfare or juvenile justice 

systems, with annual costs ranging from $25,000—$55,000 per youth depending on 

the state. Law enforcement officials are the referral source for 20 percent of youth 

entering basic centers. 

RHYA Projects Use Federal Funds to Leverage Community Resources. RHYA 

projects succeed due to partnerships created among families, schools, communitybased organizations, faith communities, law enforcement agencies, businesses and 

volunteers. 

RHYA Projects Raise the Achievement Level of Unaccompanied Youth. The last 

federally-funded evaluations of the Basic Center Program and the Transitional Living Program found that they produced positive outcomes for participating youth in 

the following areas: 

Family Strengthening 

• Basic center youth reported lessened rates of family conflict and parental physical abuse. 

• Transitional living youth reported that the program helped them better manage 

communication and maintain positive relationships with their families. 

Education 

• School participation among basic center youth doubled after basic center services commenced, compared to the participation rate 30 days prior to accessing a 

basic center. 

• The proportion of youth in transitional living projects attending college was 

three times that of homeless youth who were not in a TLP. 

Employment 

• Employment rates of youth in basic centers increased by 24 percent. 

• 60 percent of transitional living youth were employed part-time or full-time, 

compared to 41 percent of homeless youth not participating in a TLP. 

Runaway and Homeless Youth Act Reauthorization Recommendations 

The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act is scheduled to sunset in 2008 and merits 

extension. In addition, new issues affecting unaccompanied youth and unaccompanied youth service providers have emerged that require a Congressional response. 

Our Family urges Congress to reauthorize and strengthen the programs and authorities of the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act in a timely manner. We offer the 

following recommendations for RHYA reauthorization. These recommendations were 

identified after an intensive consultation process with the RHYA grantee community. 

Funding 

1. Reauthorize and increase authorization levels for Runaway and Homeless 

Youth Act programs. The runaway and homeless youth consolidated account should 

be authorized at the $200 million level in FY 2009 and ‘‘such sums as may be necessary’’ in each of FY 2010 through FY 2013. The runaway prevention account 

should be authorized at the $30 million level in FY 2009 and ‘‘such sums as may 

be necessary’’ in each of FY 2010 through FY 2013. 

20

Funding levels for RHYA programs are inadequate for meeting the need for such 

services. With estimates of unaccompanied youth at the low-end of one million, and 

the RHYA basic center and transitional living programs reaching only 55,000 youth 

annual, at least 900,000 of the nation’s unaccompanied youth do not have access to 

the supports and services that RHYA programs offer. For these unserved youth, 

their unaccompanied episodes are prolonged; they are at heightened risk of victimization, poor health, school failure, and unemployment; and they are thwarted from 

attaining safe, productive, and healthy adulthoods. 

2. Increase the RHYA Basic Center Program allotments for small states and for 

territories. The minimum BCP allotment for states with small youth populations 

should be increased to $200,000. The maximum BCP allotment for U.S. territories 

should be increased to at least $100,000. 

BCP formula allotments to states with small youth populations are limited to 

$100,000. This amount makes it difficult for HHS to fund more than one basic center in each such state, even though the geographic swath of many such states tends 

to be wide. BCP allotments to territories are limited to $40,000. This amount is 

hardly enough to act even as seed money for basic centers in territories to leverage 

non-RHYA funds. 

3. Permit HHS to redistribute unexpended BCP funds to other BCP applicants for 

a one-year grant period, after which time the amount should be returned to the BCP 

general pool for re-allocation. RHYA grantees and applicants would benefit from 

greater transparency and standardization in the manner in which HHS reallocates 

‘‘unrequested’’ BCP allotments from states lacking applicants to ‘‘excess’’ BCP applicants from states with qualified applicants requesting a total of funds that exceed 

the state’s allotment. 

RHYA Project Admission and Length of Stay Criteria 

4. Limit basic centers to providing shelter services to individuals who are less 

than 18 years of age, with an exception that basic centers located in states with 

child-caring facility licensure laws that permit a higher age may serve up to the age 

permitted by the state law. RHYA grantees and applicants would benefit from clarification on the maximum age of youth permitted to receive emergency shelter 

through a basic center. The current RHYA permits basic centers to provide emergency shelter to youth ‘‘not more than 18 years of age,’’ which some interpret to 

mean ages 17 and under and others interpret to mean through age 18. To resolve 

confusion in the field, we recommend that the maximum age for emergency shelter 

services through a BCP be extended to youth ‘‘who are less than 18 years of age,’’ 

which is in alignment with the maximum age used in the formula for allocating 

BCP funds. However, grantees should be given the discretion to serve youth over 

age 17 if the child-caring facility licensure law in which the basic center is located 

permits a higher age. 

5. Allow extensions in length of stay in basic centers from 14 days to up to 30 

days and in transitional living projects from 18 months through 24 months, on a 

case-by-case basis, provided that the state child-caring facility licensure law applicable to the basic center permits a longer length of stay. RHYA grantees report difficulty in ensuring safe exists for some of their program participants within the 

timeframes required by current law. The grantees then find themselves in the situation of either keeping the participant at the basic center or transitional living 

project with other than federal funds, or triggering an unsafe exit by the youth. Providing grantees limited flexibility to keep some of their participants in service beyond the target exit period would allow a greater level of individualized support for 

those unaccompanied youth at greatest risk of unsafe program exits. 

RHYA Applicant Eligibility, Use of Funds, and Funding Conditions 

6. Add public entities as eligible applicants for Street Outreach Program funds. 

Eligibility for the Street Outreach Program (SOP) is limited to private nonprofit organizations, whereas public organizations as well as private nonprofit organizations 

may apply for BCP and TLP funds. Extending SOP eligibility to public organizations 

would provide public entities receiving either BCP and/or TLP funds the opportunity 

to build a longer continuum of RHYA services by also competing for SOP funds. 

7. Clarify that RHYA funds are to be distributed to organizations and not directly 

to program participants. The President’s FY 2007 budget request included a proposal to reserve a portion of Transitional Living Program (TLP) funds for vouchers 

directly to participants to purchase maternity group home services on their own. Appropriations Committees in both chambers the 109th Congress, in consultation with 

their authorization committee counterparts, concluded that a voucher arrangement 

was neither contemplated by the statute nor in the best interest of either the pregnant and parenting youth or unaccompanied youth service providers. Accordingly, 

21

the committees rejected the proposal in report language to accompany the FY 2007 

Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bills. Current law should be amended to clarify that RHYA funds are to be made available for distribution to organizations and 

not directly to program participants. 

8. Allow transitional living projects to use RHYA funds for facility renovation. 

Renovation costs should not exceed 15 percent of the total first-year award. The current RHYA permits use of BCP funds for facility renovation, but does not permit 

TLP funds to be used for facility renovation. A parallel use of funds for renovation 

should be extended to TLP grantees. 

9. Require basic centers and transitional living projects to have in place written 

emergency management and crisis response plans as a condition for receiving federal RHYA awards. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita focused national attention on the 

need to ensure more effective responses to emergencies and crises, including by congregate care providers. The 109th Congress recently amended the Older Americans 

Act and the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Act to ensure that federally-funded 

congregate care providers funded through these programs have emergency management and crisis plans in place. A parallel requirement should be established for 

RHYA basic centers and transitional living projects. 

Federal Program Management 

10. Require HHS to develop performance standards for RHYA direct service 

grantees. The HHS Secretary shall provide an opportunity for public comment on 

the performance standards. At one time, HHS had developed program performance 

standards for basic centers, and was in process of developing program performance 

standards for TLP and SOP grantees. These standards provided guidance to grantees on the minimum expectations of program performance. HHS has suspended 

standards development or activation lacking clear instruction in the RHYA statute 

to support them. 

11. Require HHS to develop a process for accepting and considering appeals for 

reconsideration from unsuccessful RHYA applicants. The HHS Secretary shall provide an opportunity for public comment on the appeals process. The RHYA statute 

does not prescribe, and HHS has not established, an orderly process for accepting 

or considering appeals for reconsideration from unsuccessful RHYA applicants. Lack 

of a formal process has led to lack of transparency whether or how reconsiderations 

are made. 

12. Add a finding on the applicability of positive youth development to the organization and delivery of services to unaccompanied youth. Inclusion of a finding on 

positive youth development in the RHYA statute is important for encouraging grantees to apply youth development principles to the development and implementation 

of their projects. 

13. Add a statutory definition of ‘‘runaway youth’’ identical to the definition of 

such term in the Code of Federal Regulations. The RHYA statute does not include 

a definition of ‘‘runaway youth.’’ However that term is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (45 CFR 1351.1) as ‘‘a person under 18 years of age who absents 

himself or herself from home or place of legal residence without the permission of 

his or her family.’’ For the convenience of policymakers, RHYA grantees, and the 

general public, the current regulatory definition of ‘‘runaway youth’’ should be inserted into statute. 

National Activities 

14. Require HHS to develop each fifth year, directly or via contract, a national 

estimate of the prevalence of unaccompanied situations among youth and young 

adults. The nation lacks a single, reliable source of data on the prevalence of unaccompanied situations among youth. The dearth of data impairs federal, state, and 

local public policy decision-making, community needs assessment, service organization and delivery, and performance measurement. 

15. Require HHS to establish research, evaluation, and demonstration priorities 

each two years and to provide an opportunity for public comment on such priorities. 

The RHYA grants HHS authority to make grants for research, evaluation, demonstration and service projects. RHYA grantees, youth, advocates, and other stakeholders have limited to no input into the identification or prioritization of issues to 

be studied or evaluated. 

16. Require HHS to conduct, directly or via contract, a study demonstrating the 

economic and social benefit of providing emergency housing, transitional housing, 

permanent housing and supportive services to unaccompanied youth, and the extent 

to which that housing and services offsets the costs of allowing such conditions to 

persist for young people. While it is intuitive that interventions which resolve unaccompanied situations among youth are more cost-effective to the public in the longVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:41 Feb 12, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\HFC\110-57\36729.TXT HOME PsN: DIC
22

term than ignoring the problem, there is yet to be conducted an authoritative costbenefit analysis to ‘‘prove’’ this assertion. A cost-benefit study would be instructive 

to policymakers about the type and level of investments in health and human needs 

programs for children, youth, and families. 

17. Authorize HHS to conduct, directly or via contract, a public information campaign to raise awareness of the unaccompanied youth population and their service 

and support needs. Unaccompanied youth are a largely invisible or misunderstood 

population. Lack of public awareness of this group of young people, their life circumstances, and the interventions available to support them and end their homeless 

situations, allows homelessness to persist among the nation’s youth. 

18. Amend the Higher Education Act to authorize forgiveness of educational loans 

for workers in RHYA grantees with at least five consecutive years of service. Nonprofit and public organizations supporting unaccompanied youth face a number of 

workforce challenges, including difficulty recruiting and retaining employees for 

long terms of service, compensating employees at competitive wages, and attracting 

employees with postsecondary education. Student loan forgiveness is a strategy that 

has been deployed with success in other sectors to recruit and retain workers in 

shortage occupations and should be extended to the unaccompanied youth service 

sector. 

PART IV—Beyond RHYA 

The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act, while a critical federal law that must be 

continued and fully funded, is no substitute for the aggressive health and human 

needs interventions necessary to eliminate the very factors causing unaccompanied 

situations among millions of the nation’s youth, or to respond to the resources and 

services needs of currently unaccompanied youth that surpass the scope and purpose of the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act. A comprehensive response to the 

causal factors of and ultimate solutions to unaccompanied situations among youth 

is required. We call the Education and Labor Committee’s attention to a number 

of opportunities beyond RHYA reauthorization within its jurisdiction where decisive 

impact could be made for unaccompanied youth. 

Juvenile Justice 

There is a clear intersection between the juvenile justice system and youth homelessness, in terms of both youth entry into the system due to their homeless and 

youth exit from the system into homelessness. We urge the Committee to use the 

reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act to break the 

connection between juvenile justice and youth homelessness. We call for repeal of 

the valid court order exception to the JJDPA deinstitutionalization of status offenders requirement. We also call for the establishment of a youth offender reentry 

grants program. 

Elementary and Secondary Education 

Youth experiencing homelessness encounter difficulties enrolling in and attending 

School. These barriers include legal guardianship requirements, residency requirements, lack of necessary immunization, academic, or other records, and inadequate 

transportation to their schools of origin from their temporary living arrangements. 

As a result, many homeless young people struggle in obtaining education, or fall out 

of the educational system altogether. Congress has responded to the educational 

needs of homeless children and youth by establishing laws and a grant program (the 

EHCY program) which ensure that children and youth experiencing homelessness 

shall have a right to enroll, attend, and succeed in school. We urge Congress to reauthorize and strengthen the Education for Homeless Children and Youth program 

during No Child Left Behind reauthorization. 

Postsecondary Education 

Postsecondary education offers students experiencing homelessness and others 

hope for escaping poverty as adults. The Higher Education Act has the potential to 

assist disconnected youth to graduate from high school, apply for and access postsecondary education, and complete their degrees—if they can access the network of 

HEA programs and services. The most basic access barrier facing homeless students 

is the very ability to apply for student financial assistance. We 

Urge Congress to approve the FAFSA Fix for Homeless Kids Act (H.R. 601, 

Biggert), legislation that would allow youth to be considered independent students 

for purposes of applying for financial aid (the Federal Application for Federal Student Aid) if they have been verified as an unaccompanied homeless youth by a 

school district homeless liaison, shelter director, or financial aid administrator. 

We also encourage the establishment of a supportive services program for disconnected postsecondary students and the establishment of a grant program to colleges 

23

and universities so that they may assist homeless students in retaining campus or 

off-site housing during periods when the institutions are closed. 

Workforce Investment 

Income is a necessary tool which unaccompanied youth must possess in order for 

them to pay for housing and thus exit homelessness. Workforce services for youth 

entail far more than job readiness training and job placement. Because of their developmental stage, youth require comprehensive, intensive employment and training 

programs that involve the following: job skill training, including classroom training, 

on-the-job training, and apprenticeships; training in life skills and work-related values; exploration of life options, including career paths that are non-traditional for 

a youth’s gender, race, culture and/or social class; meaningful connections between 

youth and their peers, adults, and communities; opportunities for youth to assume 

leadership roles and develop responsibility, self-reliance, initiative and the desire 

and ability to participate in decisions affecting their lives; opportunities that take 

into account the life circumstances of youth, such as housing, health, and transportation; and connections to postsecondary education and training opportunities. Like 

other systems, unaccompanied youth are experiencing difficulty accessing workforce 

services in their communities. We urge the Committee to use the reauthorization 

of the Workforce Investment Act to help connect unaccompanied youth to the workforce. We ask that runaway and homeless youth organizations be added as members 

of local Youth Councils. We also call for an assurance that Youth Councils permit 

unaccompanied youth to participate in workforce services without parental consent. 

Place to Call Home Act 

In February 2007, the National Network for Youth announced a long-term campaign to end youth homelessness. A Place to Call Home: The National Network for 

Youth’s Permanency Plan for Unaccompanied Youth. Our Family supports the Place 

to Call Home Campaign. 

The signature public policy component of the campaign is the Place to Call Home 

Act, comprehensive legislation to prevent, respond to, and end runaway and homeless situations among youth. The bill includes provisions in the homeless assistance, 

housing, child welfare, juvenile justice, public health, education, workforce investment, teen parenting, and immigration areas. Representative Rube ́n Hinojosa (DTX) will introduce the bill imminently. We encourage Members of Congress to join 

as original co-sponsors to the Place to Call Home Act. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Booker? 

STATEMENT OF RUSTY BOOKER, FORMERLY HOMELESS 

YOUTH 

Mr. BOOKER. Hi. My name is Rusty Booker. I am 17. I was born 

and raised in Louisville, Kentucky. I just want to thank all of you 

for giving me an opportunity to share my story with you. 

I was born to a mom, 17. Living with my mom and stepfather 

was difficult. My stepfather came home every night drunk and 

would beat my mom. My brother and I didn’t sleep well, not knowing if we would be next. 

At age 8, my parents finally divorced, and my mom started 

drinking. She never laid a hand on my brother and I. Drinking was 

her way of forgetting the past. 

I was sent with my stepfather and his wife at age 9. The abuse 

soon started afterwards. My brother soon came afterwards. I was 

placed in foster care and then, very quickly and unbelievably, back 

with my stepfather. 

Months after I was placed back with my stepfather, I started 

sending letters to my previous foster family from an abandoned 

house’s mailbox, so my stepparents wouldn’t know. A month or so 

after the letters, I built the courage to run. 

24

I contacted my previous foster family, and they told me to look 

for a Safe Place instead of going back home. I went to a library 

that had a Safe Place sign on the front. I was 12 at the time, and 

until that day didn’t know what Safe Place was but glad that there 

was a public place, like the library, where I could get help. 

They took me to the YMCA Safe Place Services shelter in Louisville. When I got to the shelter, the staff welcomed me. I felt safe 

for the first time in many years. 

They did an intake, provided me clothes, hygiene products and 

clean linens. The next morning, I had a warm breakfast and I met 

with a caseworker who would change my life forever, Mr. Bill. 

When we talked, at first I had a hard time connecting with him 

and getting solutions, but it wasn’t long before I was sharing my 

life story with him. The shelter determined that going home was 

not going to be possible, and I understood. 

Within 2 weeks, they arranged for me to be placed in a foster 

home with a loving family. But I still had problems, and over the 

next several years I was placed in psychiatric hospitals and along 

with that came therapy and meds. 

Then came another foster home, group homes, even jail. I started 

using drugs. And, after witnessing my friend get shot in a deal 

gone bad, I thought to myself, ‘‘Nobody asked me what I wanted.’’ 

I felt like I was to blame, and powerless to change my life. I had 

no family, no home and, at this rate, no future. 

After another failed foster home, I went to Safe Place again and 

asked for help. I knew the shelter was there for me. Again I felt 

safe and understood. I met with Ms. Missy and told her everything 

that I had been through. She didn’t judge me or laugh at me. She 

understood me and made me feel wanted. 

The next day I met Mr. Quan, a man with a story for every lesson he learned that I needed to learn or had already but in a 

rougher way. He, too, understood me. He has taught me very many 

ways of how to not let little things get blown way out of proportion. 

And then there is Mr. Bill. When I met with him again after several years, I gave him a hug. I felt so relieved to see someone I 

knew that really cared about me and loved me more than anyone 

I knew at the time. 

I am not really going to put his business out on Front Street, but 

I will say that he has been through a huge amount of things that 

other kids and myself can relate to. 

Mr. Bill, Ms. Missy and Mr. Quan and the other wonderful and 

amazing staff at Safe Place Services are keeping me drug-and alcohol-free. I don’t know the last time I have felt this good about myself. 

To some, these people I mentioned may just be ordinary people, 

but to me and 600 other kids a year in Louisville, these people are 

heroes. Mr. Bill even gave up his vacation to bring me to D.C. so 

I could testify. 

There are 14 kids at the Safe Place Services right now who have 

experienced many of the same things that I have. I would like to 

be able to convince kids that Safe Place is a first step to getting 

help and the shelter is a place where they can feel safe and begin 

to solve their problems. 

25

Many times, when I was younger, I wanted to run for help, but 

when I was in a rural area there weren’t many places to go. Louisville is a smaller city, compared to here in D.C. or L.A. or even Atlanta. 

Kids all around the country, thousands of kids, feel like I did. No 

one understands them, and they need a place to turn. I hope that 

they, too, will be able to get to find a Safe Place site, get to a shelter, feel safe and have a bed, a warm meal and someone to talk 

to instead of roaming the streets or bumming money. 

I am asking for your help to make a difference for kids just like 

me, because every kid deserves a second chance. I plan to finish 

my GED and plan to go to college and get a degree in law enforcement. 

Thank you for letting me share the experiences I have had. I 

know I am headed in the right direction. I used to always ask myself, ‘‘Why me?’’ Maybe this is why. Maybe what I have been 

through can make a difference for someone else. I hope you will 

make it possible for kids like me to have these programs in their 

city. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. Booker follows:]

Prepared Statement of Rusty Booker, Formerly Homeless Youth 

My name is Rusty Booker. I’m 17 years old. I was born and raised in Louisville, 

KY. I just want to thank all of you for giving me an opportunity to share the story 

of my life with you. 

My life was never easy. I was born to a mom of 17. Living with my mother and 

stepfather was so difficult. My stepfather came home every night, got drunk and 

beat my mom. My brother and I didn’t sleep well not knowing if we would be next. 

At age eight my parents divorced and my mom started drinking. She never laid a 

hand on my brother and me. Drinking was her way of forgetting the past. I was 

sent to live with my stepfather and his wife at age nine. The abuse started then. 

Belts, ping pong paddles, even his hand all against flesh. I wouldn’t be able to sit 

while my bottom and legs were marked with bruises. My brother soon came afterwards. I was placed in foster care and then back with my stepfather. Months after 

I was placed back with my stepfather. I started sending letters to my previous foster 

family from an abandoned house’s mailbox so my stepparents wouldn’t know. A 

month or so after the letters, I had built the courage to run. 

I contacted my previous foster family and they told me to look for a Safe Place 

instead of going back home. I went to a library that had a Safe Place sign on the 

front. I was 12 at the time and until that day didn’t know what Safe Place was but 

was glad that there was a place like the library where I could get help. They took 

me to the YMCA Safe Place Services shelter in Louisville. When I got to the shelter 

the staff welcomed me. I felt safe for the first time in many years. They did an intake and got me clothes, hygiene products and clean linens. The next morning I had 

a warm breakfast and it was good. I met with a caseworker who would change my 

life forever—Mr. Bill. When we talked, at first I had a hard time connecting with 

him and getting solutions, but it wasn’t long before I was sharing my life’s story 

with him. 

The shelter determined that going home was not going to be possible and I understood. Within two weeks, they arranged for me to be placed in a foster home with 

a loving family. But I still had problems and over the next several years, I was 

placed in a psychiatric hospital and along with that came therapy and meds. Then 

came another foster home, group homes, even jail. I started using drugs and after 

witnessing my friend getting shot because of drugs, I thought to myself, nobody 

asked me what I wanted. I felt like I was to blame and was powerless to change 

my life. I had no family, no home and at this rate, no future. After another failed 

foster home, I went to Safe Place again and asked for help. 

I knew the shelter was there for me. Again I felt safe and understood. I met with 

Ms. Missy and told her everything that I had been through. She didn’t judge me 

or laugh at me. She understood me and made me feel wanted. The next day I met 

Mr. Quan, a man with a story for every lesson he learned that I needed to learn 

26

or had already but in a rougher way. He too, understood me. He has taught me very 

many ways of how to not let little things get blown way out of proportion. And then 

there is Mr. Bill. When I saw him again after several years, I gave him a hug. I 

felt so relieved to see someone I knew that really cared about me and loved me more 

than anyone I know. I’m not really going to put his business out to the public, but 

I will say that he has been through a huge amount of things that other kids and 

me can relate to. Bill, Ms. Missy and Mr. Quan and the other wonderful and amazing staff at Safe Place Services are keeping me drug and alcohol free. I don’t know 

the last time I have felt this good about myself. 

To some, these people I mentioned may just be ordinary people, but to me and 

six hundred other kids a year in Louisville, these people are heroes. Mr. Bill even 

gave up his vacation to bring me to DC so I could testify today. 

There are 14 kids at the Safe Place Services right now who have experienced 

many of the same things that I have. I would like to be able to convince kids that 

Safe Place is a first step to get help and the shelter is a place where they can feel 

safe and begin to solve their problems. Many times when I was younger, I wanted 

to run for help, but when I was in a rural area there weren’t many places to go. 

Louisville is a smaller city compared to here in DC or LA or even Atlanta. Kids all 

around the country, thousands of kids, feel like I did. No one understands them and 

they need a place to turn. I hope that they, too, will be able to get to find Safe Place 

sites to get to a shelter, feel safe, and have a bed, food, someone to talk to instead 

of roaming the streets, bumming money or doing anything just to survive. 

I’m asking for your help to make a difference for kids just like me, because every 

kid deserves a second chance. I plan to finish my GED and plan to go to college 

and get a degree in law enforcement. Thank you for letting me share the experiences I have had. I know I’m headed in the right direction. I used to always ask 

myself ‘‘Why me?’’ Maybe this is why. Maybe what I have been through can make 

a difference for someone else. I hope you will make it possible for kids like me to 

have these programs in their city. 

[Additional material submitted by Mr. Booker follows:]

National Safe Place 

Safe Place offers the first step to help for any young person at risk of abuse, neglect or serious problems. The testimony presented by Rusty Booker to the US 

House of Representatives, Healthy Families and Communities subcommittee of the 

Labor and Education Committee addressing Runaway and Homeless Youth issues 

represents just one young man who was the victim of serious circumstances and 

made the decision to ask for help. His courage and determination to alter the path 

on which he was headed represents that of many other young people. More than 

205,000 youth have also made the decision to seek help at a Safe Place location or 

contacted a youth shelter agency after learning about Safe Place at their school. 

Businesses and community buildings such as fire stations and libraries are designated as ‘‘Safe Place’’ sites. Any youth in crisis can walk into one of the nearly 

16,000 Safe Places across the country and ask an employee for help. These locations 

display the yellow, diamond-shaped Safe Place sign on their location. Inside, employees are trained and prepared to assist any young person asking for help. Youth 

who go to a Safe Place location are quickly connected to the nearby youth shelter. 

The shelter then provides the counseling and support necessary to reunify family 

members and develop a plan to address the issues presented by the youth and family. 

In addition to providing youth in crisis immediate access to help and safety at 

community locations, the visibility of Safe Place signs makes the community more 

aware of some of the issues that young people experience. As consumers enter their 

neighborhood market or convenience store, the Safe Place sign is a constant reminder that keeping young people safe is everyone’s responsibility. Safe Place provides an opportunity for the entire community to get involved in helping to solve 

some of the serious issues that face young people and getting their life back on 

track. According to Suzanne Quinlan, Human Resources Director for Louisville area 

Dairy Queen corporate stores, ‘‘You could not pay us enough to take down the Safe 

Place sign. Even if we only get one child, it is important that both kids and parents 

can easily find Safe Places.’’

The success of Safe Place is based on public/private collaborations between businesses, school systems, fire departments, law enforcement, and a network of volunteers. An estimated 250,000 employees at Safe Place locations nationally are trained 

and ready to help a child or teen. Transit systems in 45 cities designate their buses 

27

as mobile Safe Place sites. When a youth boards a bus asking for help, the driver 

contacts the dispatch office and a trained supervisor is immediately sent to transport the youth to the shelter. 

National Safe Place, headquartered in Louisville, KY provides youth shelters 

across the nation with the infrastructure, materials and training to establish and 

maintain a Safe Place program. Agencies operating Safe Place receive all of the tools 

for successful implementation. National corporations such as Sprint, Southwest Airlines, and CSX partner with National Safe Place to offer support benefiting youth 

in Safe Place communities through cause marketing campaigns, awareness and education initiatives and in-kind contributions. 

National Safe Place currently partners with 140 shelters in 40 states. An equal 

number of runaway youth shelters could establish the program, but have not because of limited resources. Safe Place expands the reach of youth shelters, offering 

additional front doors in the community where a youth can get help in his or her 

own neighborhood. Often young people must quickly run from a dangerous or 

threatening situation. Having a Safe Place nearby makes it possible for them to do 

so. 

Safe Place is a proven, nationally recognized program. Its success is contingent 

upon each generation of young people understanding that the Safe Place sign is a 

symbol of immediate help and safety and that seeking help is a better resolution 

to their crisis than running. Efforts must be made to bring Safe Place to the 10 

states where it is not available and to incorporate this outreach program within 

more shelters. Safe Place is a cost-effective initiative. Businesses and public organizations are willing to support the program to foster the safety of young people and 

the community. Safe Place also empowers young people to seek help earlier in their 

crisis before it escalates; thus it is easier for shelter staffs to affect a positive resolution in a shorter period of time. In many instances, it eliminates inappropriate 

placements in the juvenile justice or other such systems, saving tax payer dollars. 

Rusty Booker testified on behalf of other runaway and homeless youth in similar 

situations. We must make an effort to raise the awareness of the services provided 

by runaway and homeless youth shelters. Safe Place does that. An investment of 

resources for Safe Place will benefit many other young people like Rusty. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you, Rusty. 

Mr. Berg? 

STATEMENT OF STEVEN R. BERG, VICE PRESIDENT FOR PROGRAMS AND POLICY, NATIONAL ALLIANCE TO END HOMELESSNESS 

Mr. BERG. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. 

I would like just start by saying thank you for holding this hearing. I know every person who is on this panel who has done specific 

things to move this issue forward, move the issue of homelessness 

forward. And we are grateful for that and for what so many other 

members of Congress have done. 

I am here to talk a little bit about some of the research numbers 

about this problem. We have submitted our written testimony, 

which I would refer people to. Part of that is a bibliography which 

makes a pretty good reading list for people who want to dip into 

the issue even further. 

Let me just make a few quick points here, by way of summary. 

The first point, it is a couple of bad news and a couple pieces of 

good news. 

The first piece of bad news is this is a sizable problem. I mean, 

the number you recited, 1.6 million people, young people, every 

year, this does not include people who are staying with relatives 

or staying with friends. It is young people who are in shelters, who 

are on the streets or who are staying temporarily with strangers 

in often dire circumstances. 

28

A striking finding of the research is that for more than half of 

these young people, no one was looking for them while they were 

going through this experience. There were not people making police 

reports or posting things. They were on their own, in many cases, 

abandoned by families or what supports they had. 

And the other thing is substantially fewer than half were in shelters during these experiences. The rest, a small number of the 1.6 

million, was living with strangers. For the most part, young people 

were surviving on the streets. They were surviving in abandoned 

buildings. They were surviving outside. 

The second piece of bad, but mixed, news is that many of the 

young people how have these experiences, there are mixed and 

complex and difficult histories. Severe conflict within the family is 

a near-universal experience. Also prevalent are issues of abuse and 

neglect, issues of abandonment, issues of substance abuse, more 

often with the parents than with young people. Issues of mental 

health and poverty is a common occurrence. 

The involvement with the juvenile justice system is very common. The involvement with the child welfare system is very common. These add up to the fact that prevention of homelessness for 

young people, while extremely important and, the research shows, 

doable, is difficult. 

The good news, and I hope you take this from the hearing and 

the witnesses that have preceded me, is that young people are resilient. They go through these experiences, but the research shows 

what many people who work in the field know from experience, 

which is that despite incredible hardship and incredible experiences, people, when they are given the chance, do recover from the 

trauma and do go on to lead very useful and, indeed, in many 

cases, exemplary lives. 

The other piece of good news is we have a pretty clear idea of 

what the interventions are that bring about those good results. We 

could always have more on this, and one of the probably areas 

where there is more research needed is sort of individual rigorous 

evaluations of individual program models. 

But, from the research that exists, we see that a stable residence, 

a connection and attachment to a caring adult and the supportive 

services that build on the strength of these young people and that 

address the problems that they have get good results. So sort of 

programmatically, we are aware of the answers and we can put 

them into place. 

The final point I would like to make, and the research bears this 

out, is the urgency of this question. I think sometimes in this day 

and age we are all a little too used to the idea of homelessness and 

have lost, to some extent, the idea that homelessness for anyone is 

an immediate and crucial problem that needs to be dealt with as 

a crisis, an individual emergency in each case. 

I think certainly for young people this is the case. I think the stories you hear will back this up. What I can say about the research 

is, the longer young people stay homeless, the worse their troubles 

get. 

Every night is an additional risk of drug abuse and addiction, of 

being the victims of crime or of turning to crime, of sexual abuse, 

of physical abuse. Every night that young people stay homeless inVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:41 Feb 12, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\HFC\110-57\36729.TXT HOME PsN: DIC
29

creases the risk of deteriorating mental health conditions, higher 

risks of suicide, the longer people stay homeless. 

These are young people who are in grave danger. But, on the 

other hand, every night, young people are moved from the streets 

into programs that prevent those dire consequences from happening. We know what the programs are. We have good federal 

policies in place. 

We will be working with the committee staff to make them even 

better through reauthorization, but the main point is we need to 

get behind these programs and make sure they are funded and 

available to everyone. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. Berg follows:]

Prepared Statement of Steven R. Berg, Vice President for Programs and 

Policy, National Alliance to End Homelessness 

Thank you, Chairwoman McCarthy, Ranking Member Platts, and the honorable 

members of this subcommittee on behalf of our Board of Directors and partner members for providing this opportunity to address the subcommittee on research findings 

concerning youth homelessness in the United States. I would like to start by congratulating this subcommittee on its important work in addressing the need of 

homeless and other vulnerable youth in our nation. The National Alliance to End 

Homelessness believes that ending youth homelessness is well within our reach. The 

population is small enough for our collective effort to eradicate this social crisis 

among our states. 

The National Alliance to End Homelessness is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that was founded in 1983 by a group of leaders deeply disturbed by the appearance of thousands of Americans living on the streets of our nation. We have committed ourselves to finding permanent solutions to homelessness. Our bipartisan 

Board of Directors and our 5,000 nonprofit, faith-based, private and public sector 

partners across the country devote ourselves to the affordable housing, access to 

services, and livable incomes that will end homelessness. The Alliance is recognized 

for its organization and dissemination of evidence-based research to encourage best 

practices and high standards in the field of homelessness prevention and intervention and we wish to share our insights with you today. 

As our name implies, our primary focus is ending homelessness, not simply making it easier to live with. We take this idea very seriously. There is nothing inevitable about youth homelessness in the United States. We know more about youth 

homelessness and how to address it than we ever have before, thanks in part to extensive research. We know a great deal about the pathways into homelessness for 

youth, the characteristics of youth who experience homelessness, and interventions 

and program models which are effective in offering youth reconnection to family, 

community, and stable housing. 

We have been asked today to summarize the research available on the characteristics and experiences of homeless youth, the causes of youth homelessness, and the 

solutions to youth homelessness. We will also point out the limitations of the research, and identify some research questions that we believe need to be addressed. 

Overview of research 

Demographics and Experiences of Youth Homelessness 

Homeless youth are typically defined as unaccompanied youth aged 12 to 24 years 

who do not have familial support and are unaccompanied, and who are living in 

shelters, on the streets, in a range of places not meant for human habitation (e.g. 

cars, abandoned buildings) or in others’ homes for short periods under circumstances that make the situation highly unstable (so-called ‘‘couch surfing’’). 

Youth homelessness is essentially caused by a breakdown in families, where environments of abuse, neglect, or youth abandonment are exacerbated by larger systemic issues such as poverty, unemployment, poor housing, and lack of community 

and economic support in rural and urban neighborhoods. Youth turn to shelters and 

the streets as an often rational choice to avoid violence, abuse, neglect, and abandonment but the alternative can be hard lives riddled with poor health and exploitation by unscrupulous adults. 

Two major incident studies by the U.S. Department of Justice and Professor 

Ringwalt and colleagues estimate that the number of youth below the age of 18 who 

30

flee from their home, are barred from home by their guardian, or experience homelessness ranges from 1.6 to 1.7 million in the course of a year. Additionally, an unknown number of young adults aged 18 to 24 experience homelessness each year. 

Some youth will remain away from their home for only short periods of time (a few 

nights) while others will experience long periods of homelessness and become streetdependent. Street-dependent youth often sleep exclusively outdoors, in public places, 

or in abandoned buildings, form their own unique culture and family structure with 

other street-dependent youth, and often rely on street economies such as prostitution, drug sales, theft, or begging to meet their basic needs. However, street-dependent youth represent a small minority of the total homeless youth population. Local 

programs funded by the federal Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (Department of 

Health and Human Services) served over 500,000 homeless and runaway youth in 

2005. Homeless youth can be found in urban, suburban, and rural areas through 

the United States and few differences have been found when urban, suburban, and 

rural youth are compared. 

A 1999 study by the U.S. Department of Justice, the Second National Incidence 

Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway Children, estimated 

1,682,900 youth had a runaway/throwaway episode that year. Of these youth, 37 

percent were actively sought by their caretakers and 21 percent were reported to 

authorities for purposes of locating them. This study underscores that a majority of 

runaway and homeless youth (63 percent) are never reported or sought after by 

their parents or primary caretakers. 

There is little gender disparity among various homeless youth groups, except that 

youth living on the streets are more likely to be male. While youth from all races 

and cultures run away, become homeless or are thrown away by parents, shelter 

and housing programs report a significant disproportionate representation of American Indian and African-American youth. 

Also, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender youth have been found to be overrepresented in homeless and street populations with estimates ranging from 11 to 

35 percent. Compared to heterosexual homeless youth, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and 

transgender homeless youth also are exposed to greater victimization while on the 

streets. 

Background information on homeless youth show that they tend to come from lowincome communities and their families are disproportionately poor or working class. 

Many grew up in single-parent households or blended families. 

Contrary to stereotypes about homeless youth, studies have not consistently 

shown that substance abuse is characteristic of a majority of runaway youth. While 

many studies show use and abuse of drugs or alcohol, research is inconclusive that 

homeless youth are more prone to dependency. However, studies of homeless youth 

have shown high rates of parental alcohol or drug abuse (24 to 44 percent) which 

likely contributes to youth homelessness. Additionally, most homeless youth are still 

in school but may have experienced difficulties, discipline actions, and delays. One 

2005 study showed that 79 percent of youth were attending school on a regular 

basis before entering shelter. 

Additionally, homeless youth are at elevated risk for mood disorders, suicide attempts, and post-traumatic stress disorder. High rates of behavioral disorders are 

also noted. Regardless of the assessment method used or the sample, homeless 

youth are more likely to experience mental health and behavioral disorders than 

adolescents in the general population. 

Numerous studies have indicated that once homeless, youth often engage in sexual behaviors that put them at high risk for both sexually transmitted diseases and 

pregnancy. Most studies indicate that a portion of the homeless youth population 

engages in survival sex which is the trading of sexual acts for basic needs like a 

place to stay. A significant number of homeless girls are also pregnant or parenting. 

One national, representative sample study published in the American Journal of Adolescent Health found that 48 percent of street youth and 33 percent of shelter 

youth had histories of pregnancy or impregnating someone, as compared to 10 percent of a nationally representative sample of housed youth. 

Homeless youth may be characterized by the length of time spent homeless—recent runaways, transitionally or episodically homeless, homeless and shelter using 

youth, and street-dependent youth who may travel. Evidence suggests that differences may exist between subtypes of homeless youth, and therefore, unique, targeted interventions may be merited. 

In summary, research has given us insight into some fairly constant variables 

that cut across most homeless youth groups. The common characteristics of their experience prior to becoming homeless include: 

• Abuse and neglect histories 

• Parental alcohol and substance abuse 

31

• Poverty (except runaways) 

• Broken family relationships (single parent, blended, or no parental contact) 

• Severe family conflict 

• Difficulty with educational success and advancement despite enrollment in 

school. 

Research has also given us a warning that the longer youth remain homeless, the 

greater their likelihood of experience a host of troubles, including: 

• High rates of sexual activity 

• Acute medical problems 

• Alcoholism and alcohol/chemical addiction 

• HIV 

• Mental health diagnosis & institutionalization 

• Suicide 

• Physical violence 

• Sexual assault. 

Pathways to Homelessness for Youth 

Research offers information about the pathways into homelessness for youth. 

Studies show that there are often multiple factors which cause a youth to leave 

home: severe family conflict, physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, substance abuse, 

mental health disabilities, and abandonment. Youth consistently report severe family conflict as the primary reason for their homelessness but also report multiple 

barriers to reunification. Behavioral issues on the part of the youth may be a source 

of the conflict, but this is certainly not always the case. 

Beyond the individual and family problems, youth homelessness is also fed by 

lack of affordable housing, poverty, and child welfare and juvenile correction systems that fail to protect youth from shelters and the streets. 

A sizable minority of homeless youth have had histories of foster care or juvenile 

justice placements and still end up homeless before their 18th birthday. According 

to the 2007 National Symposium on Homelessness Research, the percentage of 

homeless youth who report previous placement in foster care or an institutional setting ranged between 21 and 53 percent across studies. A longitudinal study by the 

University of Chicago found that 14 percent of former foster youth became homeless 

after being discharged from care. Another large representative sample study of foster youth aging out of care by Professors Fowler and Ahmed noted that 17 percent 

of homeless youth had experienced literal homelessness during the 3.6 years after 

exiting care. One predictor of future homelessness for foster youth is whether the 

youth had repeatedly run away from placement. By contrast, feeling very close to 

at least one family member reduced the odds of becoming homeless by nearly 80 

percent. 

Homelessness may not be a surprising result given the multiple placements and 

school transfers experienced by foster youth. One study by Casey Family Programs 

found that more than 30 percent of foster youth experienced eight or more placements with foster families and group homes and a majority experienced seven or 

more school changes between elementary and high school age. In addition to residential instability, many foster youth face mental health problems and developmental or behavioral challenges. The Northwest Foster Care Alumni Study by 

Casey Family Programs found that foster youth experience anxiety disorders, depression, panic disorders, and social phobias at two to four times the rate of the general population. 

Solutions to Youth Homelessness 

There is a growing body of evidence about what works. We know interventions 

that work to restore youth and offer them a pathway out of homelessness. The past 

ten years of research and study have provided some indication of methodologies 

which result in positive outcomes for youth to prevent or end homelessness. 

Most homeless youth do not experience long-term homelessness. Homeless youth 

often go home, find relatives, or make it on their own as young adults. In a 2004 

study by Professor Paul Toro of 249 homeless youth as compared to a matched sample of 149 housed youth, ages 13 and 17 years, conducted longitudinally over seven 

years, most of the adolescents returned fairly quickly to their family of origin. Nearly 93 percent were no longer homeless after seven years of study. However, not all 

were successfully reunified with parents. One third lived with their families, about 

20 percent lived with relatives or friends, and over a third (34 percent) lived on 

their own. Therefore, the pathway out of homelessness sometimes focuses on parents, sometimes focuses on kin and extended family, and sometimes focuses on independent living. 

32

Studies of what works focus on three areas. The first is early intervention/prevention that seeks to avert a homelessness episode or to ensure that a family separation does not result in an out-of-home placement that so often leads to long term 

homelessness. The second is interventions with youth who are already homeless, to 

rapidly reunite them with their families while strengthening the families to achieve 

more stability. The third is independent housing options other than reunification for 

youth who will not be able to return to their families. The implication of these three 

strategies is that the first and best option is to try to reconnect youth with their 

families, and only after this fails should independent living options be considered. 

Initial early intervention and prevention services which focus on mental health 

and family systems can often meet the crisis needs of a family and prevent homelessness and/or foster care placement. 

Two forms of mental health services have been identified that show positive results in decreasing youth anti-social behavior and aggression: multisystemic therapy 

(MST) and functional family therapy (FFT). Both have indicated that youth recipients have significantly fewer out-of-home placements and decreased recidivism to 

the juvenile justice system. 

Multisystemic Therapy is an intensive family- and community-based treatment 

that addresses multiple aspects of serious antisocial behavior in adolescents. MST 

uses family members to design the treatment plan and attempts to encourage behavior changes by using strengths in various areas of the youth’s life (family, peers, 

school, and neighborhood). Evaluations of MST have demonstrated the following 

benefits: • decreased recidivism and re-arrests; • reduced adolescent alcohol and drug use; • reduced long-term rates of crime for serious juvenile offenders; • improvements in family functioning; • decreased behavior and mental health problems for youth; and • favorable outcomes at cost savings in comparison with usual mental health and 

juvenile justice services. 

Functional Family Therapy is so named to identify the family as the primary 

focus of intervention. Therapists employing FFT believe they must do more than 

simply stop antisocial or unhealthy behavior, they must motivate families to change 

by identifying their strengths, helping build on those strengths in ways that enhance self respect, and offering recommendations on particular pathways for improvement. Data show that when compared with other forms of community intervention like probation support, residential treatment, and alternative therapeutic 

approaches, FFT is highly successful. In randomized trials FFT was shown to have 

reduced recidivism for a wide range of anti-social or criminal behavior. In addition, 

studies have shown it to reduce the cost of treatment. 

Youth who are experiencing abuse or neglect at home could also be diverted away 

from costly out-of-home placements and homelessness through Family Group Conferencing or Family Group Decision Making programs. In these early intervention 

and prevention programs extended family, kin, and important people in the life of 

the youth come together to implement a plan for the continued safety, nurturance, 

and permanency of the youth. These programs show remarkable success in stabilizing youth. Research on Family Group Decision Making found reductions in reabuse, increased family involvement, decreased residential instability, and more extended families accepting care of the youth. 

Program models have proven effective at reuniting homeless youth, even those 

with troubled histories, with their families. 

Originally designed to assist young people who have been diagnosed with mental 

health disabilities and their families, Intensive Case Management (ICM) works with 

a family (in conjunction with teachers and other helping professionals) to develop 

an individualized comprehensive service plan. Case Managers who are professional 

and specially trained conduct an assessment and assist in coordinating supports and 

services necessary to help children and adolescents live successfully at home and in 

the community. The case loads are small (1 to 10 or 1 to 12) and offer round-theclock access. Intensive Case Management services have been used successfully with 

homeless youth. One study published in the Journal of Emotional and Behavioral 

Disorders noted that homeless youth receiving Intensive Case Management services 

showed improved psychological well-being, less aggression, and satisfaction with 

their quality of life. 

Both shelter and outreach services can be used as a gateway to exit homelessness. 

A 2002 study by Professor Thompson and colleagues compared 261 runaway and 

homeless youth who received services through emergency shelter and crisis services 

with 47 at-risk youth receiving services from a long-term day treatment program. 

The study found that both groups experienced positive changes in their family relaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:41 Feb 12, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\HFC\110-57\36729.TXT HOME PsN: DIC
33

tionships, runaway behavior, school behavior, employment, sexual behavior and self 

esteem. The study noted that there were no significant group differences in the 

amount of change they experienced, leading one to observe that the less-costly shelter system had as positive return in positive outcomes for youth as the more expensive day treatment programs. 

Some youth will never be able to return to their families, and there are successful 

housing programs that not only meet the housing needs of such youth, but also have 

programming that addresses their development needs and helps them to build relationships with adults and with the community. 

Multiple housing models exist for youth but they have limited capacity in most 

jurisdictions. Examples of youth housing models include: host homes, shared housing, community-based group homes, dormitories, scattered site transitional housing, 

single-site transitional housing, permanent scattered site housing with supportive 

services, and foyer (employment-focused) housing. These models incorporate life 

skills training, connection to caring adults, and opportunities for growth, mistakes, 

and positive youth development. Many homeless youth rely on such housing options 

when family members are unwilling or unable to care for their nurturance and welfare. Most homeless youth never receive housing benefits because of lack of supply 

and long waiting lists. 

Limitations of the research and unanswered questions 

There is an extensive body of study and research on the characteristics and demographics of homeless youth, as well as the pathways or antecedent factors leading 

up to a youth turning to life on the streets. Unfortunately, there are limitations to 

existing research and we are left with remaining questions. 

One problem is that studies that have examined homelessness among adolescents 

have often cast the problem as individual vulnerability instead of examining the 

broader environmental factors involved. This has created the tendency by research 

to focus on the youth behavior in risky situations while homeless, rather than on 

the adult behaviors that often propel youth from their homes or on interventions 

and supports that could end youth homelessness. Additional research that focuses 

on child welfare, juvenile justice, and economic or social network failures that have 

a role in youth homelessness may allow us to address these causal factors. 

Further, little research has been conducted on the inherent characteristics possessed by youth which make them resilient to negative outcomes despite their homelessness. Homeless youth are resilient and creative and often exit homelessness 

after short periods of time. While it is important to understand the deficits of homeless youth, a greater understanding of their strengths and assets could lead us to 

new interventions that build upon these strengths to help young people gain residential stability and escape life on the streets. 

There is little research that helps clarify the distinction between youth who remain on the streets or hop between shelters and those that remain housed with 

friends and relatives, either stably or unstably. Further research is needed to understand which program models, resources, or intervention methods best equip ‘‘couch 

surfing’’ youth with the opportunity to find stable homes and brighter futures. 

There are several programmatic models and methodologies which may hold promise in working with youth. However, there is little rigorous research that verifies 

results. School-based programs that offer youth a safe way to access services or receive one-to-one counseling and support may help prevent and end homelessness, 

but we have found little evaluation of such programs. We also know that a minority 

of homeless youth experience chemical or alcohol addiction, yet we do not know 

whether out-patient support groups or residentially-based treatment geared toward 

adolescents is more effective. Most of the research on chemical and alcohol addiction 

is focused on adults. Further, given the high rates of adult sexual exploitation, molestation, and assault of homeless youth, it would be helpful to have a better understanding of the level of support, outreach, case management, and housing stability 

that are needed to effectively escape prostitution and the commercial sex industry. 

Another area of youth homelessness that has been under-examined is the experience 

of undocumented youth who may flee to America to escape abusive, violent, or neglectful families in their home countries. We do not know the dimensions of this 

problem, or what solutions are workable. 

Finally, Congress has funded an array of services, housing and shelter for vulnerable and homeless youth, although not enough to meet all of the need. While we 

are able to point to some interventions that offer solutions, the vast array of service 

systems have yet to be rigorously evaluated. It would appear that critical research 

and study in this area is in its own adolescent phase—able to produce some solutions but not fully matured. When evaluations have been done on local service sysVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:41 Feb 12, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\HFC\110-57\36729.TXT HOME PsN: DIC
34

tems or specific programs, rigorous experimental designs have generally not been 

used and often lack comparative data to allow cross-system comparison. 

Implications 

After a reviewing the current body of research and studies on youth homelessness, 

the Alliance wishes to offer the following implications, as a framework for this subcommittee in crafting public policy to end youth homelessness: 

1. Youth by definition are still developing and require attachment to and the support of caring adults. Homeless youth are unique in that they represent a population of homelessness that is impacted by physical, emotional, and cognitive development. Any consideration, intervention, or program model must consider how positive youth development is both retarded and enhanced through our programmatic 

responses. 

2. Youth homelessness is as much about societal and system failures as individual 

and family breakdown. The pathways to homelessness for youth are about breakdown of families, abuse and neglect, but also community systems (including economic conditions, social networks, housing stock, and child welfare systems) contributing to youth living on the streets of America. 

3. Our targeted response should be tailored toward the length of time spent homeless. Recent runaways and couch surfing youth should be quickly served to find alternative family placements, while shelter and street-dependent youth require intensive case work and access to housing models grounded in life skills training and 

opportunity for growth, with rapid stabilization in housing as the highest possible 

priority. 

4. We know some of what works and Congress should invest in those interventions that have shown positive outcomes. Those typically tend to be mental health 

services, intensive case management services, respite care tied to family reunification counseling, and housing coupled with life skills training and positive youth development services. 

5. We can end homelessness for youth, and prevent untold suffering, hardship and 

expense in so doing. With coordination of services between child welfare systems 

and community-based organizations centering on family, health, and housing this is 

a social condition that is not inevitable. 

Thank you again and we look forward to working with you to confront and end 

youth homelessness. 

SOURCES

Cauce, A. M., Morgan, C. J., Wagner, V., Moore, E., Sy, J., Wurzbacher, K., Weeden, 

K., Tomlin, S., and Blanchard, T. (1994) Effectiveness of intensive case management for homeless adolescents: Results of a 3-month follow-up. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 2, 219-227. 

Courtney, M., Dworsky, A., Ruth, G., Keller, T., Havlicek, J., and Bost, N. (2005). 

Midwest Evaluation of the Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth: Outcomes at age 19. Unpublished report. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children. 

Fowler, P. J., Ahmed, S. A., Tompsett, C. J., Jozefowicz-Simbeni, D. M., and Toro, 

P. A. (2006) Community violence, race, religiosity, and substance abuse from 

adolescence to emerging adulthood. Unpublished manuscript, Department of 

Psychology, Wayne State University. 

Green, J. M., and Ringwalt, C. L. (1998). Pregnancy among three national samples 

of runaway and homeless youth. Journal of Adolescent Health 23, 370-377. 

Promising Strategies to End Youth Homelessness: Report to Congress, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, 

Administration on Children, Youth, and Families, Family and Youth Services 

Bureau. 

Ringwalt, C. L., Greene, J. M., Robertson, M., and McPheeters, M. (1998). The Prevalence of homelessness among adolescents in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 88(9), 1325-1329. 

Robertson, M. J., and Toro, P. A., Homeless Youth: Research, Intervention, and Policy, 1998 National Symposium on Homelessness Research. 

Second National Incidence Study of Missing, Abducted, Runaway and Thrownaway 

Children (NISMART II), U.S. Department of Justice, 2002, Washington, D.C. 

Thompson, S. J., Pollio, D. E., Constantine, J., Reid, D., and Nebbitt, V. (2002). 

Short-term outcomes for youth receiving runaway and homeless shelter services. 

Research on Social Work Practice, 12(5), 589-603. 

Toro, P. A., Dworsky, A., and Fowler, P. J., Homeless Youth in the United States: 

Recent Research Findings and Intervention Approaches, 2007 National Symposium on Homeless Research, Draft from February, 2007. 

35

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you, Mr. Berg. 

Mr. Allen? 

STATEMENT OF ERNIE ALLEN, PRESIDENT AND CEO, 

NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN 

Mr. ALLEN. Madam Chair, members of the committee, I particularly want to express my gratitude to my friend, Congressman 

Yarmuth, and to the great leadership of the Congressional Caucus 

on Missing and Exploited Children, Chairman Lampson and cochair Congresswoman Biggert. 

I want to report to the committee that the progress in the search 

for America’s missing children is extraordinary. More missing children come home safely today in this country than at any time in 

the nation’s history, and that is because the leadership of Congress 

and the leadership of law enforcement, we have been able to build 

a national network. 

Today, images and information are transmitted instantly across 

the nation. There are 50 state missing children clearinghouses. Because of the AMBER Alert and the leadership of great nonprofit organizations like the Texas Center for the Missing, we are mobilizing the eyes and ears of the public. 

Law enforcement is better prepared. There is more technology, 

more resources. The good news is, it is working. The bad news, as 

you all know, is that 2,000 children will be reported by their parents to the police as missing today somewhere in the United 

States. 

And, the bad news is, despite all our progress and despite a recovery rate in the upper 90s, thousands of children each year still 

don’t make it home. Our national center, which is now 23 years 

old, at your mandate operates a National Missing Children’s Hotline. 

We are currently handing about 300 calls a day. We have handled 2.2 million over our history. And let me say the long partnership with the runaway and homeless youth community is extraordinarily important, because, for example, we link with the National 

Runaway Switchboard. 

When the kid calls our hotline, we pass them immediately to the 

National Runaway Switchboard. And when the parent or a member 

of the public calls the National Runaway Switchboard, they send 

it to us. It is that kind of cooperation that I think is essential in 

this issue. 

We are focusing aggressively on issues like the long-term missing. There are still thousands of children who have not been identified, many of whom are deceased and whose remains have not been 

identified, bringing closure for these families. 

We are working with the FBI and others to provide direct, onscene response, technical experts to help law enforcement, who 

may waste valuable time because they don’t know what to do. So 

there is enormous progress. 

An area of perhaps greater challenge is the area of child sexual 

exploitation. And let me just say a few words about that. This is 

an issue that has exploded with the advent of the Internet. In 

1998, the Congress asked our center to establish what it called the 

911 for the Internet, a cyber tip line. Last week, we handled our 

36

500,000th report, and these reports are of online enticement of children, child pornography, child sex tourism, a range of child sexual 

exploitation offenses. 

The good news is that these reports have led to thousands of arrests and successful prosecutions. The bad news is that this problem has proliferated. For example, child pornography has become 

a multi-billion dollar commercial industry and the victims are getting younger and younger. Our staff has reviewed 8 million images 

and videos in an attempt to identify the children. 

And what we have learned is that of the offenders how have been 

identified, 39 percent have had images of children younger than 6 

years old. Nineteen percent have had images of children younger 

than 3 years old. 

This is an enormous challenge. Law enforcement is doing more 

today than ever before. The FBI, ICE and other agencies are gearing up the Internet crimes against children task forces around the 

country are doing extraordinary work, but law enforcement is 

under-resourced, under-manned and is tackling a problem that is 

far greater than any of us ever thought. 

The last thing I would want to point out is that a couple of years 

ago, in the PROTECT Act, the Congress asked for us to take on 

a pilot project to do background screening for youth-serving organizations. 

We have done that, and we have found that even though these 

applicants are being fingerprinted and know they are being subject 

to national criminal history background checks, fully 3 percent of 

the applicants have had criminal histories, many of them serious 

criminal histories involving crimes against children. 

Background screening needs to be continued. This needs to be a 

national effort for youth-serving organizations that is fast, accurate 

fingerprint based and either free or as close to free as we can get 

it. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

[The statement of Mr. Allen follows:]

Prepared Statement of Ernie Allen, President and CEO, National Center for 

Missing and Exploited Children 

Madame Chairwoman and members of the Subcommittee, as President of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC), I welcome the opportunity to appear before you to discuss issues affecting our nation’s children. NCMEC 

joins you in your concern for the safety of the most vulnerable members of our society and thanks you for bringing attention to the problems facing America’s families 

and communities. 

Let me first provide you with some background information. NCMEC is a not-forprofit corporation, mandated by Congress and working in partnership with the U.S. 

Department of Justice as the national resource center and clearinghouse on missing 

and exploited children. NCMEC is a true public-private partnership, funded in part 

by Congress and in part by the private sector. Our federal funding supports specific 

operational functions mandated by Congress, including a national 24-hour toll-free 

hotline; a distribution system for missing-child photos; a system of case management and technical assistance to law enforcement and families; training programs 

for federal, state and local law enforcement; and programs designed to help stop the 

sexual exploitation of children. 

In recent years, our nation has become outraged by the abductions of children like 

Jessica Lunsford, Jetseta Gage, Erica Pratt, Shasta Groene, Samantha Runnion, 

Elizabeth Smart, and many others. Their stories have unleashed fear among parents everywhere who are asking, ‘‘How safe is my child?’’

The response is, ‘‘Safer than ever before.’’

37

More missing children are coming home safely today than at any time in our history. Law enforcement is responding more swiftly and effectively. There is a national network in place. Parents are more alert, more aware, and talking to their 

children about their safety. 

Yet that is not enough, and there are some inescapable facts. Hundreds of children still do not make it home each year, and many more continue to be victimized 

by acts of violence. In fact children are the most victimized segment of our society.1

Further, research has consistently shown that crimes committed against children of 

all ages are the most underreported of any victim category.2

How has NCMEC responded to this? 

We have worked with law enforcement on more than 133,000 missing-child cases, 

and played a role in reuniting more than 115,000 children with their families. We 

have a 96.2 % recovery rate, up from 62% in 1990. We have analyzed more than 

500,000 reports of crimes against children on the Internet, and referred them to law 

enforcement, resulting in hundreds of arrests and successful prosecutions. 

Here are some of the services we provide: 

• Hotline: Since 1984 our 24-hour, national and international toll-free hotline has 

received more than 2 million calls, or, on average, nearly 300 calls per day, intaking 

new cases and receiving leads on current cases, which are triaged according to urgency of the information and the case, and referred to the investigating law enforcement agency. Information from callers about runaway children is immediately 

transmitted to the National Runaway Switchboard. • Case Management: NCMEC Case Managers serve as the single point of contact 

for the searching family and provide technical assistance to locate abductors and recover missing children. • Case Analysis and Support: Using NCMEC databases, external sources, and geographic databases, our analysts track leads, identify patterns among cases, and 

help coordinate investigations by linking cases together. In 2006 NCMEC created 

the Attempted Abduction Program to analyze attempted abduction trends and patterns and collect information to assist law enforcement during investigations. Currently, no other national organization aggressively tracks attempted abductions 

across the United States. • Forensic Imaging: NCMEC provides age-progressed photographs of missing children and reconstructed facial images of unidentified, deceased children. Since 1990 

NCMEC has age-progressed the photographs of almost 3,300 children; these new 

photos played a role in helping to identify and recover 768 children. Of the 117 facial reconstructions performed by NCMEC forensic artists for law enforcement, 29 

children have been identified. • Cold Case Team: NCMEC works with families, law enforcement, and medical 

examiners to resolve long-term missing children cases, cases of unidentified human 

remains of victims believed to be children and young adults, and ‘‘cold’’ child homicide cases. Former homicide detectives review each case, develop a set of recommendations regarding the investigation, and, if requested, provide forensic resources. NCMEC is currently handling 468 cases of long-term missing children, 201 

cases of unidentified human remains, and 7 ‘‘cold’’ child homicide cases. 

• Photo Distribution: NCMEC is actively distributing photos of missing children 

via a wide array of resources, including franked envelopes of members of Congress. 

Three hundred and fifty public and private sector companies and organizations partner with us to distribute photos, at no cost to NCMEC or taxpayers. 

• Team Adam: Created in 2003, Team Adam is a rapid, on-site response and support system that provides no-cost investigative and technical assistance to local law 

enforcement. It consists of 62 retired federal, state and local investigators experienced in crimes-against-children investigations. NCMEC has deployed Team Adam 

296 times in 43 states, which has helped to resolve 321 cases of missing children. 

• AMBER Alerts: NCMEC offers technical assistance and training, in concert 

with the U.S. Department of Justice, to all state AMBER Alert programs. We also 

disseminate AMBER Alert messages to secondary communications distributors, such 

as cell phone service providers. 

• Website: In 1997 we launched our website, www.missingkids.com. The use of 

the web has enabled us to transmit images and information regarding missing children instantly across America and around the world. The response has been overwhelming. On the first day of operation, our website received 3,000 ‘‘hits.’’ Today, 

we receive more than 1 million ‘‘hits’’ every day, and are linked with hundreds of 

other sites to provide real-time images of breaking cases of missing children. To 

demonstrate the value of this in a real-world sense, a police officer in Puerto Rico 

searched our website, identified a possible match, and then worked with one of our 

case managers to identify and recover a child who had been abducted as an infant 

from her home seven years earlier. 

38

• Publications: NCMEC has designed, written, edited and published many 

collaterals and publications for law enforcement, other child-serving professionals, 

and the general public. Since 1984, NCMEC has published more than 42 million 

copies of its publications. • Training: Each month, in our Jimmy Ryce Law Enforcement Training Center, 

NCMEC brings in police chiefs and sheriffs for training in the policy and practical 

aspects of missing and exploited child investigations. In addition, we are also training state and federal prosecutors, police unit commanders, and many others. We 

also conduct on-site training sessions for hospital staff in preventing infant abductions. • International Cases: NCMEC plays a key role in international child abduction 

cases, handling all cases of children abducted out of the United States, as well as 

acting as the State Department’s representative on incoming cases under the Hague 

Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Since September 

1995, we have handled 8,264 international child abduction cases, resulting in the 

resolution of 4,714 cases. We are using the Internet to build a network to distribute 

images worldwide in partnership with Interpol. We also provide attorney referrals 

and other assistance to American parents whose children were abducted to another 

country. 

While NCMEC’s initial mandate was missing children’s issues, NCMEC has also 

been a leader in the fight against child sexual exploitation. As technology has 

evolved and provided those who sexually exploit children with more sophisticated 

and insidious tools to prey on their vulnerability, the challenges of protecting our 

children have increased in complexity and number. The mission and resources of 

NCMEC have responded to this challenge in the following ways: • Exploited Child Division: In 1997, in response to the increasing prevalence of 

child sexual victimization, NCMEC officially opened our Exploited Child Division 

(ECD). ECD is responsible for the receipt, processing, initial analysis and referral 

to law enforcement of information about these crimes. As technology continued to 

advance and the use of computers became more widespread, Congress recognized 

the need to provide the public with a central reporting mechanism for crimes 

against children on the Internet—and came to us. • CyberTipline: In response to Congress’ request, NCMEC launched the 

CyberTipline, www.cybertipline.com, in 1998. The CyberTipline serves as the national online clearinghouse for investigative leads and tips and is operated in partnership with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (‘‘FBI’’), the Department of Homeland Security’s Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (‘‘ICE’’), the U.S. 

Postal Inspection Service, the U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Department of Justice’s 

Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section and the Internet Crimes Against Children 

Task Forces, as well as state and local law enforcement. Leads are received in seven 

categories of crimes: 

• possession, manufacture and distribution of child pornography; 

• online enticement of children for sexual acts; 

• child prostitution; 

• child-sex tourism; 

• child sexual molestation (not in the family); 

• unsolicited obscene material sent to a child; and 

• misleading domain names. 

These leads are reviewed by NCMEC analysts, who visit the reported sites, examine and evaluate the content, use search tools to try to identify perpetrators, and 

provide all lead information to the appropriate law enforcement agency. The FBI, 

ICE and Postal Inspection Service have ‘‘real time’’ access to the leads, and all three 

agencies assign agents and analysts to work directly out of NCMEC and review the 

reports. The results: in the 9 years since the CyberTipline began operation, NCMEC 

has received and processed more than 500,000 leads, resulting in hundreds of arrests and successful prosecutions. 

• CyberTipline for Internet Service Providers: In 1998, Congress passed the Protection of Children from Sexual Predators Act,3 which requires that providers of 

electronic communication services report apparent child pornography on their systems to NCMEC. To facilitate this new role, NCMEC created a separate reporting 

mechanism through which these providers can swiftly and efficiently transmit the 

images and related information to NCMEC for analysis and referral to law enforcement. In response to this congressional mandate, NCMEC handles approximately 

500 reports per week. 

• Child Victim Identification Program (CVIP): CVIP was formally created in 2002 

in response to the Supreme Court’s decision that federal laws prohibiting child pornography only apply to images of real children and not to images that simply appear 

to be children.4 CVIP analysts assist law enforcement and prosecutors by maintainVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:41 Feb 12, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\HFC\110-57\36729.TXT HOME PsN: DIC
39

ing a catalog of information about identified child victims, which can be used to provide the evidence required to get a conviction in court. The program also serves to 

assist law enforcement in rescuing children who are currently being abused but 

whose identity and location are unknown. To date, CVIP has processed more than 

eight million images and movies, and has cataloged information about more than 

one thousand child victims who have been identified by law enforcement agencies 

around the world. 

Here is but one example of CVIP’s success: our analysts received images of several 

young girls whom they did not recognize from previous images. The photos were 

taken in various rooms in a home. By scrutinizing the background in each image, 

our analysts detected clues to the location of the girls: an ad for a local convenience 

store, an envelope with the name of a storage facility, and a Girl Scout uniform. 

A team of federal, state and local law enforcement used this information to find the 

girls and arrest their abuser. He was the grandfather of two of the girls as well as 

their legal guardian. He was convicted and given a sentence of 750 years in prison. 

None of the girls had told anyone about what he had done to them. Their abuse 

would be continuing today if no one had tried to find them. • Partnerships with Internet Industry: Last year, six Internet industry leaders, 

AOL, Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, Earthlink and United Online, created a Technology 

Coalition to work with NCMEC to develop and deploy technology solutions that disrupt the ability of predators to use the Internet to exploit children or traffic in child 

pornography. The Technology Coalition brings together the collective experience, 

knowledge and expertise of its members and represents a significant step towards 

making the world safer for our children. • NetSmartz411: This is a first-of-its-kind, online service operated by NCMEC to 

answer questions about Internet safety, computers and the web. It is provided at 

no cost to the public, in partnership with the Qwest Foundation. Concerned parents, 

children, or anyone, can directly access the NetSmartz411 library to search for information as well as contact NCMEC experts to ask questions related to online safety 

and the Internet. • Safety Education Campaigns: NCMEC has partnered with federal agencies, industry leaders and public service organizations to create campaigns to educate parents and children about Internet safety. These safety messages include ‘‘Help Delete 

Online Predators,’’ ‘‘Don’t Believe the Type,’’ ‘‘Type Smart. Post Wisely’’ and ‘‘Think 

Before You Post.’’

In recent years, Congress has asked NCMEC to undertake a number of new challenges and responsibilities beyond its core functions. We have welcomed them and 

believe that NCMEC is well suited to take on these tasks. Further, we consider 

these initiatives to be an integral part of our mandate as the national resource center and clearinghouse on missing and exploited children. These new challenges include the following: 

• LOCATER: Congress asked NCMEC to develop and implement a program to enhance basic law enforcement technology in responding to missing child cases. 

NCMEC created LOCATER, a web-based program which enables police to create 

high-quality color posters for local distribution when a child disappears as well as 

disseminate that information online to other law enforcement agencies, the media 

and other outlets. NCMEC has approximately 4,000 active LOCATER users. 

• NetSmartz Internet Safety Resource: When Boys & Girls Clubs of America 

launched its effort to create technology centers in all of its clubs, Congress asked 

that NCMEC develop a state-of-the-art Internet safety resource to ensure that these 

centers could be used safely by children. Thus, NetSmartz was born—an interactive, 

educational safety resource for children, parents, educators and law enforcement 

that uses age-appropriate, 3-dimensional activities to teach children how to stay 

safer on the Internet. NetSmartz is now available at no cost to other youth organizations, schools, and the general public at www.netsmartz.org. Since its inception, 

16 state Attorneys General have recommended the use of NetSmartz in their public 

schools; currently, all 50 states have schools that use NetSmartz. 

• Background Checks for Non-Profit Child-Serving Organizations: In response to 

Congress’ request in 2003,5 NCMEC launched a pilot program to conduct national 

criminal history background checks on applicants for volunteer positions with nonprofit organizations that provide services to children. Because it is a fact that child 

molesters will seek legitimate access to children, these organizations are particularly attractive to predators. To date, our Background Check Unit (BCU) has conducted over 33,000 fitness determinations based on criminal histories. A startling 

number of applicants were found to have lied about not having criminal histories, 

which included violent crimes and crimes against children. This project has demonstrated not only the need for fingerprint-based checks of the national criminal history database, as opposed to name-based checks of state databases, but also the 

40

need to make these comprehensive checks available at the lowest possible cost to 

ensure that these organizations are able to provide the best protection to the children they serve. 

• Hurricanes Katrina and Rita/National Emergency Child Locator Center: The 

Department of Justice asked NCMEC to lead federal and local efforts to recover the 

more than 5,000 children displaced during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005. 

Team Adam consultants were deployed to the affected areas to serve as an on-site 

rapid response and support system, providing investigative and technical assistance 

to local law enforcement. Team Adam consultants also set up safe areas for missing 

children in the evacuee shelters and, working directly from these shelters, electronically transmitted information and photos of the children directly to NCMEC headquarters. To manage the volume of Katrina/Rita-related calls, NCMEC created a 

dedicated Katrina/Rita Missing Person Hotline which we operated in addition to our 

existing Call Center Hotline. In the aftermath of the hurricanes, NCMEC handled 

more than 34,000 Katrina/Rita-related calls. NCMEC’s relationship with the media 

proved vital to our efforts—because of the ongoing television coverage of NCMEC’s 

Katrina/Rita Operation, millions of people saw the photos of displaced children and 

got information that led to their reunification. As a result of NCMEC’s expertise and 

ability to rapidly mobilize critical resources, all (100%) of the more than 5,000 missing/displaced children cases reported to NCMEC in the aftermath of the storms 

were resolved within 6 months. 

In 2006, Congress passed legislation to create the National Emergency Child Locator Center at NCMEC 6 to similarly handle all future such disasters. We have developed a Disaster Response Plan and are actively working with the Department of 

Homeland Security, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the American 

Red Cross to establish policies and procedures necessary for the Center’s operation. 

• The Financial Coalition Against Child Pornography: At the request of Senator 

Richard Shelby, NCMEC brought together leading banks, credit card companies, 

third party payment companies and Internet service companies, in a joint effort to 

eradicate the multi-billion-dollar commercial child pornography industry from the 

Internet. 

• Sex Offender Tracking Team: At the request of the U.S. Marshals Service, 

under its mandate per the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act,7 NCMEC 

created the Sex Offender Tracking Team (SOTT) to serve as the central information 

and analysis hub to help locate non-compliant registered sex offenders. Analysts 

provide information upon request to federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. In addition, SOTT analysts compare NCMEC’s attempted abduction data, online predator data, and child abduction data to identify potential linkages with noncompliant sex offenders being sought by law enforcement. This information will be 

used to create more effective prevention and response strategies regarding these offenders. 

The legacy of missing and exploited children in the United States can be seen in 

new laws, heightened public awareness, improved response from law enforcement, 

and unprecedented national attention to prevention and education. The recent resurgence of awareness of this ongoing problem is a call to action to all law- and policymakers across the country. Enormous progress has been made to better protect 

our nation’s children in the past 20 years, but our children deserve even more. 

Since 1984, per your mandate and with your support, NCMEC has been proud 

to serve as America’s national resource center and clearinghouse for missing and exploited children. 

Madame Chairwoman, we are deeply grateful for the Subcommittee’s leadership 

and support, and, as always, stand ready to work with you and your committee to 

bring more missing children home and keep every child safe. 

ENDNOTES

1 Children as Victims: 1999 National Report Series. Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, May 

2000, page 6. 2David Finkelhor and Richard Ormrod. Reporting Crimes Against Juveniles. Washington, 

D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. 

Department of Justice, November 1999, page 3. 3P.L. 105-314. 

4 Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002). 

5The Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to end the Exploitation of Children Today 

(PROTECT) Act, P.L. 108-21. 6Defense Appropriations Bill, P.L. 109-295. 

7P.L. 109-248. 

41

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you, Mr. Allen. 

Ms. Alberts? 

STATEMENT OF BETH ALBERTS, CEO, TEXAS CENTER FOR 

THE MISSING 

Ms. ALBERTS. Thank you so much for letting me come from the 

small state of Texas today to talk to you. 

During 2006, there were more than 650,000 children reported 

missing in the United States and more than 60,000 of those are in 

my home state of Texas. Of these Texas cases, at the end of 2006, 

5,182 of those children remained missing. Those are the kinds of 

things that make me lie awake at night and wonder if we are ever 

going to get all of those kids back. 

I beg you, when you are looking at the issue of missing and 

homeless children, not to differentiate between them, even if a 

child left home voluntarily. Any child who is away from home, from 

a stable, loving environment, is a child at risk. 

No child chooses to be marginalized. Children never knowingly 

choose to expose themselves exploitation and victimization. A child 

who chooses to run away is always running to a better place, they 

hope, than the place they have been. They do not consciously 

choose to become vulnerable to predators and exploiters. 

Children who live on the street have three ways to support themselves: They steal from us, our communities; they sell drugs; and 

they sell themselves. Many resort to all three, creating yet more 

victims. 

It has also been said that children are our most valuable resource, but this is seldom reflected in our practices as a society. 

With our national focus on terrorism, we worry more about an 

enemy we cannot see, cannot know and whose motives we cannot 

understand than those who threaten our children daily. 

Make no mistake, the animals who prey on our children are terrorists of the worst order, and they target our most vulnerable citizens, those who represent our future, our children. 

Predators systematically and methodically threaten and terrorize 

our children on all fronts, whether they are runaway or homeless 

children, those threatened by their own family members or by pornographers who line their pockets with the profits from the sale of 

innocents. 

Our defense must be no less systematic and methodical. The primary motive for stranger abduction is sexual assault of the child, 

and child molesters have on average 117 victims prior to their first 

arrest. 

Children are no longer safe from these terrorists online, on the 

streets, in their homes or even in their beds. And what is our response? Very little response, until that particular chicken comes 

home to roost in our backyard. And then we are outraged and we 

pick up the mantle and carry on. 

But we must act now, before another young life is lost, before another child loses the very innocence that defines childhood. 

There is good news. There is hope. There are concerned citizens 

working together, such as the member organizations of the Association of Missing and Exploited Children’s Organizations and the National Center who work tirelessly to ensure that no stone is left 

42

unturned in the battle to protect our children and to punish the 

guilty. 

The AMBER Alert program has been so successful and has accomplished so much. The multi-jurisdictional, multi-discipline child 

abduction response teams now are poised to take this critical notification system one step further by providing for an immediate, fullscale response to a critical missing child incident. 

The attorney general’s Project Safe Childhood has begun successful efforts to pull together teams to wage war on Internet predators. And as a response to continued threats to our kids, small, 

independent efforts are popping up across communities daily. 

I am very proud of the staff and volunteers of the Texas Center 

for the Missing for being on the front lines, providing both leadership and training to others in the field for all of these critical programs. 

Unhappily, I must report to you that not one of these programs 

is adequately funded and few, if any, receive a penny of government funding at the local, state or national level. Local grassroots 

efforts are the most effective method for delivering prevention efforts and saving children’s lives. 

If only a fraction of our war on terror dollars was devoted to the 

protection of our children, we could dramatically reduce the number of children traumatized. 

Margaret Mead said, ‘‘Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only 

thing that ever has.’’

I believe that we at the Texas Center for the Missing, through 

our extensive collaborative partnerships, and through our champions like Congressman Lampson, that we have begun to have a 

tremendous impact on this problem. But true social change does 

not happen in isolation. It happens through the concerted efforts of 

a diverse group of caring, committing citizens focusing on a complex issues and seeing, really seeing, not just the forest, but the 

trees. 

We must ensure the replication of these collaborative networks 

10,000-fold are our country and the world to save both our children 

and ourselves from a future more bleak than we can imagine. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Ms. Alberts follows:]

Prepared Statement of Beth Alberts, CEO, Texas Center for the Missing 

The problem 

During 2006 there were 662,228 children reported missing in the United States 

and 60,729 in my home State of Texas (The National Crime Information Center, 

2007). In Texas, 5,182 of those cases remained active at the end of 2006, and I lie 

awake at night wondering if we will be able to recover all of those missing children. 

Any child who is away from a stable and loving home is a child at risk. No child 

chooses to be marginalized. Children never knowingly make a choice to expose 

themselves to exploitation and victimization. A child who chooses to run away is always running from a bad place to what they hope is a better place. They do not 

consciously choose to become vulnerable to predators and exploiters. It has often 

been said that children are our most valuable resource, but this is not reflected in 

our practices as a society. 

The National Runaway Switchboard reports between 1.6 and 2.8 million youth 

run away in a year and that youth aged 12 to 17 are at higher risk for homelessness 

43

1 Hammer, H; Finkehor, D. & Sedlak, A. (2002). Runaway/Thrownaway Children: National Estimates and Characteristics. National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway and 

Thrownaway Children. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 

than adults.1 Despite these startling statistics, law enforcement training academies 

are not required to provide any Amber Alert or missing persons investigative tools, 

training, or resources. Local nonprofit agencies must fill the void. 

The solution: Local nonprofit leadership and collaboration 

Harris County, Texas, represents Texas Center for the Missing’s largest client 

base. Harris is the largest of the 13 counties in Texas Center for the Missing’s primary service area and has a larger population than 24 states in U. S. From 2005 

to 2006, the number of children reported missing rose from 11,648 to 14,809 and 

in Harris County alone, from 8,905 to 11,134—both of these represent more than 

a 25% increase! Might I repeat, this is a 25% increase in just one year. Despite 

these alarming numbers, there is no dedicated funding for local prevention efforts 

or law enforcement investigation and response. 

Yes, there is some good news. Strategic partnerships are being formed across the 

United States and North America. Collaborative efforts like Project Safe Childhood 

and regional Child Abduction Response Teams are set to have a significant impact 

through both prevention and recovery of missing children. However, neither of these 

vital projects is funded. Local organizations are required to tap into their already 

stretched budgets to provide the people, the time, the resources, and the coordination to make these efforts successful. 

Roles of Texas Center for the Missing: A model for local efforts 

Texas Center for the Missing offers, or coordinates the delivery of, services to 

meet the needs of the entire spectrum of missing persons issues. I would encourage 

other communities to implement a similar comprehensive community child safety 

plan that should include: 

• Programs to educate parents and caregivers in the ways to safeguard children 

on the streets and on the Internet, and exactly what to do, step-by-step, if a child 

does go missing; 

• Encouraging families to discuss safety issues and to create their own emergency 

response plan; 

• Programs to educate our children in ways to stay safe in our community and 

on the Internet, and alternatives to running away; 

• Fast public notification of a missing child via the Amber Alert for abducted children, or other systems for those missing children who were not abducted; 

• Timely, coordinated responses to endangered missing child incidents; and 

• Follow-up and aftercare for victims and families. 

Texas Center for the Missing’s advocacy and support services for victims and their 

families include guidance in reporting and finding a missing or abducted child, guidance in finding a runaway child, a resource database for abduction survivors and 

their families, and liaison support between families and law enforcement including 

case management, reunification, and information and referral services. 

Amber Alert 

The National Center on Missing and Exploited Children reports that there are 

121 Amber Alert programs across the United States credited with recovering 236 

children. In the 13-county Houston Region, covering more than 12,000 square miles 

and a population of more than 5.5 million people, we have issued 65 Amber Alerts 

representing 70 children. Of these, children in 58 cases were recovered safely, 3 

were found deceased, and 4 remain missing. This is an 89% success rate and exemplifies what a powerful tool the Amber Alert can be. 

The Amber Alert has made a huge difference in missing child cases; however, it 

is imperative to understand what the Amber Alert is and what it is not. The Amber 

Alert is a very effective tool for law enforcement to enlist help in tracking down an 

abductor, the abductor’s vehicle or the missing child. It is a way for the media and 

the general public to assist in the recovery of an innocent child and a malicious 

predator. 

The Amber Alert is not a panacea. It will never replace a thorough, efficient, and 

effective law enforcement investigation. It will not replace vigilant supervision of 

children by trusted adults nor will it replace missing child prevention and education 

programs. It will not replace adequate prison sentences and good criminal justice 

supervision of probationers or parolees and, in particular, child sex offenders. Rapists and child molesters are serial offenders. It is well documented within the mental health community that most sex offenders are beyond rehabilitation (‘‘compared 

44

2 Report on the Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released from Prison in 1994. U.S. Department 

of Justice-Office of Justice Programs: Bureau of Justice Statistics. 

to non-sex offenders released from State prisons, released sex offenders were 4 times 

more likely to be rearrested for a sex crime.’’ 2 ). 

Law enforcement officers are the only ones who can issue an Amber Alert for an 

abducted child. It is a critical element in the resolution of a child abduction, but 

it is only a part of what we must do to keep children safe. We must each do our 

part by protecting children and responding when they are in danger. It is my fervent hope that someday soon we will not need the Amber Alert, the Child Abduction 

Response Team or a National Missing Children’s Day because all of our community’s children will be safe. 

Southeast Texas Child Abduction Response Team (SETCART) 

The Southeast Texas Child Abduction Response Team (SETCART) is an effort to 

bring seasoned investigators, tenured prosecutors, search-and-rescue volunteers and 

victims’ advocates together to work the most urgent child abduction cases. The 

Southeast Texas Child Abduction Response Team will enable the immediate deployment of all necessary resources for qualifying cases and therefore positively impact 

these serious, life-threatening scenarios. 

Texas Center for the Missing and the Houston Regional Amber Alert are providing leadership for the development and implementation of the Southeast Texas 

Child Abduction Response Team. Our effort was the first in Texas and serves the 

region that historically has the most missing child cases in the state. With over 150 

law enforcement agencies in the Southeast Texas region, this is a Herculean effort 

that requires unbiased leadership and strong relationships within the community. 

Currently, more than 70 law enforcement agencies in our region have signed on to 

SETCART. 

SETCART is a multi-disciplinary, cross-jurisdictional, pre-planned and coordinated response to cases of endangered missing children and child abductions based 

upon a highly successful model system operating in Florida. While Florida has a 

state mandate and state funding with which to implement their CART process, 

Texas is not so fortunate. SETCART is a grassroots-driven effort in which participation is purely voluntary for all of our member agencies. 

Missing Persons Response Kit 

Texas Center for the Missing has also developed a Missing Persons Response Kit 

for law enforcement agencies so that they have at their fingertips the tools and contacts to provide the fastest, most effective response in the critical period after a 

child is missing. Amber Alert and Missing Persons Investigation training is provided upon delivery of each resource kit. Contents of the Resource Kits can be found 

in Appendix A. 

Southeast Texas Search and Rescue Alliance (SETSARA) 

One of the greatest achievements of Texas Center for the Missing has been the 

coordination of the Southeast Texas Search and Rescue Alliance (SETSARA): a coalition of volunteer search-and-rescue groups and law enforcement partners. Prior to 

the creation of SETSARA, law enforcement had little confidence in the professionalism of search-and-rescue experts and, therefore, did not access this important 

resource. To compound the issue, there was a mutual feeling of distrust among the 

individual search-and-rescue groups so that communication was limited and duplication of efforts was common. Now local groups work together to offer effective and 

efficient search resources to law enforcement and the community. 

Formed in 2001, SETSARA provides its membership with search training and 

public safety agencies (e.g., law enforcement, fire department, and wildlife agencies) 

with awareness, education, and search services. By providing necessary resources to 

law enforcement (and only the resources they need and request), we enable law enforcement agencies to focus on what they do best—the investigation. 

Association of Missing and Exploited Children’s Organizations (AMECO) 

AMECO is an organization of member agencies in the United States and Canada 

who provide services to families with missing and exploited children. Our mission 

is to build and nurture an association of credible, ethical and effective non-profit organizations that serve this vulnerable population. 

In partnership with the National Center on Missing and Exploited Children and 

the International Center on Missing and Exploited Children, the member organizations of the Association of Missing and Exploited Children’s Organizations, of which 

Texas Center for the Missing is one, serve hundreds of thousands of children and 

families each year. 

45

*Jenny’s name has been changed to protect her identity. 

These passionate, professional, caring staff and volunteers work diligently to protect children. Most of us feel it is a mission, a calling, and not just a job. However, 

we are truly fighting an uphill battle. Two things threaten the work we do: a lack 

of awareness on the part of the community and legislators about the severity of the 

problem, and the lack of funding to support these critical life-saving efforts. 

Our greatest challenge has been that funding dollars are scarce while demand for 

our services continues to increase! 

Crime-Stoppers 

Another collaborative partnership that Texas Center for the Missing has found to 

be successful is working with the local Crime Stoppers organization. Crime Stoppers 

of Houston works closely with Texas Center for the Missing and the Houston Amber 

Alert to maximize the publicity of open Amber Alert cases on the anniversary of the 

child’s abduction. The press conferences convened by Crime Stoppers of Houston 

provide another tool for law enforcement agencies to secure leads in a cold case. 

The Internet Threat 

I believe the battle to protect our children has moved, largely, from the street to 

the Internet. This is not good news. Unfortunately, the Internet has re-defined who 

is accessible and expanded the victim pool exponentially. A single predator can communicate with hundreds of children and set them up for victimization. Predators 

share their victims with other predators and manipulate children to self-exploit by 

sending explicit photos across the internet which are then shared among these heinous criminals. 

Locally, Texas Center for the Missing participates in the US Attorney’s Southern 

District Office efforts to implement this vital program. Prevention is key to educate 

children on the dangers they face online, as well as how to avoid self-exploitation. 

The very simple concept that, ‘‘Digital is forever.’’ is often lost on the most impressionable in our society—young teenagers who are looking for ‘‘safe’’ ways to rebel 

against their parents and expand their boundaries as young adults. To address this 

issue, Texas Center for the Missing has developed a cadre of internet safety education programs which are modeled closely upon the National Center for Missing 

and Exploited Children’s NetSmartz program. Preventing a child from being abused 

or exploited is the ultimate goal in all of our educational programs. A complete list 

of our educational programs can be found in Appendix B. 

Project Safe Childhood 

Guided by the leadership of the Attorney General, Project Safe Childhood (PSC) 

aims to combat the proliferation of technology-facilitated sexual exploitation crimes 

against children. The threat of sexual predators soliciting children for physical sexual contact is well-known and serious; the danger of the production, distribution, 

and possession of child pornography is equally dramatic and disturbing. The response to these growing problems must be coordinated, comprehensive, and robust. 

It must aim to investigate and prosecute vigorously as well as protect and assist 

victimized children. At the same time, it must recognize the need for a broad, community-based effort to protect our children and to guarantee to future generations 

the opportunity to grow safely into adulthood. 

Project Safe Childhood is a definite step in the right direction, pulling together 

diverse teams working together to keep children safer online, to snare Internet 

Predators and prosecute them to the fullest. Unfortunately, the predators are cunning, incredibly technologically savvy and highly adaptable to all of the obstacles 

we place in front of them. We must arm ourselves better against this crime on all 

levels or we will remain seriously outgunned. As Attorney General Gonzales says, 

‘‘We can not prosecute our way out of this problem.’’ Sadly, this program, too, is unfunded. 

JENNY’S STORY*

In January, 2006, a petite, 15-year-old girl from League City, TX, was 

lured away over the Internet by a 26-year-old man who lived in her area. 

He picked her up, took her to his house, drugged and raped her and shared 

her with two of his friends, one of whom carved Xs with a razor blade from 

one of her pelvic bones across to the other. 18 months later she and her family are still struggling with their recovery while having to deal with the 

court, the DA’s office and the fact that one of the perpetrators of this heinous 

46

crime is on the run and may never face justice. This traumatized victim and 

family strive everyday to get their lives back to normal. 

Many civilians as well as law enforcement officers do not feel that internet 

lures are a danger or on some level believe that a child who leaves of their 

own volition is not endangered or does not deserve emergency response. Jenny’s story exemplifies how a child’s single poor choice can lead to a nightmarish experience that becomes a life sentence for and her entire family. 

Next steps 

The U. S. Attorney General’s Project Safe Childhood, Jessica’s Law, which has 

been passed in various states across the country, and the recently passed Adam 

Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act provide even greater support of programs to 

arm children and families as well as punish those who would rob our children of 

their innocence. 

We are fortunate to have all of the partnerships and programs discussed in this 

document, but it will take all of us, working together, to truly protect our children. 

In the past, we could let our children play in the front yard without standing guard 

over them. In the past, we could put our children to bed at night and comfortably 

expect to find them safely there the next morning. Unfortunately, these two simple 

acts, and many more, can no longer be taken for granted. We have seen children 

snatched out of their yards and their school and play areas, off the streets in our 

communities, and from their very homes, that place we all think of as a haven. 

RACHEL

Robert Cooke, whose daughter Rachel has been missing since January 

2002 says ‘‘When I first met the director of Texas EquuSearch, he told me 

my wife Janet and I are now in a special club. It’s a club no one wants to 

join. It’s a club of sorrow and grief. It’s the club of parents and families of 

missing children. 

The club is full of emotions. There is anger at the person who took your 

loved one. The worst feeling of all is helplessness. What can I do? What 

haven’t I done? We’ve posted flyers and passed out bumper stickers and buttons, but nothing has brought our Rachel home. 

Many sleepless nights occur in the club. When you are able to sleep and 

you awake, you wake up to a reality far worse than any nightmare. The guilt 

is overwhelming. Why was I not there to protect her? Why didn’t I teach her 

how to protect herself? I am her father; it was my job to protect her. Well, 

I say it’s time to reduce the membership drive for this club’’. 

Funding 

Nothing to which I have ever been exposed has affected me as deeply as this 

issue. I have never been more convinced that working together, caring people can 

make a difference. I have never been more convinced that we can, we must, do more 

to protect our children and keep their families from joining ‘‘the club.’’

Unfortunately, most people believe that the missing children problem is solely the 

province of law enforcement and is already well-funded by our tax dollars. As a result, concerned citizens are unaware of the need to support this effort. The truth 

is a very different story. 

Did you know that there are no designated funds for our Amber Alert system? 

There are no monies at the local, state or federal level to help offset the costs associated with administering this important effort. Each year in the thirteen-county 

Houston-Galveston region, populated by more than 5 million people, 12,000—15,000 

children are reported missing, and Texas Center for the Missing is responsible for 

all costs associated with administering the Amber Alert in our high-need region. 

Legislation and other public policy issues to pursue 

• Comprehensive Funding Tied to Collaborative Efforts 

• Establish Statewide Minimum Standards for Certification for Search and Rescue Volunteers 

• Give parole officers the right to enter sex offenders residences so law enforcement officers do not have to wait hours for warrants when looking for an abducted 

child 

Conclusion 

Regardless of the circumstances under which a child is missing or homeless—abduction, runaway or thrownaway—each of those children, dulled by that trauma, 

represents a bright future—our future. However, we must devote resources to helping them regain the innocence and sense of hope that will inspire them to become 

47

an active, caring part of the communities in which we live. Otherwise, we have condemned them and ourselves to less—less quality of life, less security, less of a safety-net for those closest to us. 

When I was a child, I dreamed of having a child, loving and nurturing a young 

life. When I realize that dream and had my two daughters, I poured my heart and 

soul and most of my energy into protecting them and raising them. They were my 

number one priority, as they should be. 

Too often children are not the number one priority of their parents, or of the communities and society in which they are reared. Lip-service is paid to them in grand 

speeches and editorials, and through poorly funded programs that address piecemeal programs instead of servicing the spectrum of comprehensive needs. 

Ultimately, we are judged not on what we say but what we do, and children learn 

from us too—not from listening to what we say but by watching and emulating what 

we do, and recognizing where they fall in our priorities. I believed while raising my 

young children that the world was, at least generally, a safe place. I wonder what 

young mothers think now. 

Unfortunately, adults no longer represent figures of authority to our children, 

those to whom respect is due. Adults are seen as threats to, or targets of, children. 

However, we must not blame the child. The child learns by example, by our actions 

not our proselytizing. 

We can blame the media, the celebrities, and law enforcement, but we are the 

ones who must bear the brunt of the blame—parents, grandparents, citizens of the 

communities in which our children grow up, decision-makers and policy-makers. We 

must ask ourselves each day ‘‘Am I putting the welfare of our children first?’’

We are fortunate in the Houston area to have a comprehensive network of organizations that mobilize and deploy resources to help save children. Most areas don’t. 

However, would it not be better to eliminate the problem of missing children by putting child predators on notice that we won’t tolerate them targeting our children, 

and if they do, we will hunt them down like the animals they are? 

Predators like Joseph Smith, who murdered Carlie Brucia in Florida in 2004 and 

will never be released from prison, will never victimize another child, but those like 

him are legion. Our best defense against his type are more, and better-funded, programs like the ones AMECO Organizations offer to parents and children in how to 

reduce the ways for them to become victims. 

Each time a child has been abducted—my heart is crushed, and I want to rewind 

the clock to see what could have been done differently to prevent the tragedy. But 

all I can do is help when I can and stay steadfast in my convictions that we can 

reduce these incidences. Working in the missing child field has changed my life forever. I am convinced there is no more challenging or rewarding work, nor has my 

contribution to any field been more important. Together we can save lives and childhood’s innocence. 

For the victim and family involved in an abduction or Internet luring case—the 

victimization is a ‘‘life sentence’’. Their lives are normal the day before the incident, 

but during and after it there lives will never be the same again. 

[Additional materials submitted by Ms. Alberts follow:]

Appendix A.—Law Enforcement Missing Person Resource Kit Inventory 

List 

Pre-Planning 

• When It’s Not an Amber Alert: Developing a Missing Child Response Plan 

• Law Enforcement Policy and Procedures for Reports of Missing and Abducted 

Children 

Amber Alert 

• Houston Regional Amber Plan Brochure 

• Missing Children, the (Houston) Amber Alert and You 

• Website Overview (www.amber-plan.net) 

• User Name and Password 

• Navigating the Online Web Activation System 

• Contact Information 

• Houston Regional Amber Plan (includes After Action Report Form) 

• Texas Amber Alert Network 

• Amber Alert (National) Brochure 

• Amber Alert Fact Sheet 

• Amber Alert Best Practices Guide for Public Information Officers 

48

• Amber Alert Best Practices Guide for Broadcasters and Other Media Outlets 

Local Resources and Investigative Checklists, Alert Systems, and Guides 

• Resources for Law Enforcement—Texas Center for the Missing 

• Investigative Checklist for First Responders 

• Alzheimer’s and Related Disorders Missing Person Checklist 

• Lost Person Questionnaire 

• A Child is Missing Flyer 

• Critical Reach Alert System Packet 

• FBI’s Child Abduction Response Plan: An Investigative Guide 

• Missing and Abducted Children: A Law Enforcement Guide to Case Investigation and Program Management 

• Recovery and Reunification of Missing Children: A Team Approach 

Texas Checklists, NCIC, DNA Tools, and Clearinghouse Services 

• Basic Checklist for Working Unidentified Person Cases (Texas) 

• NCIC $M Messages 

• Information on the Texas Missing Persons DNA Database 

• Texas Missing Persons CODIS DNA Database Sample Collection Kit 

• Sexual Assault Medical Examinations Reimbursement Form for Law Enforcement Agencies 

• Laboratory of Forensic Anthropology and Human Identification: Case Submission Information 

• Texas DPS Missing Persons Clearinghouse Brochure 

• Texas DPS Special Crimes Service Overview 

• Texas DPS Missing Persons Clearinghouse State and Federal Missing Persons 

Statutes 

National Resources 

• National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) Resources for 

Law Enforcement Professionals 

• NCMEC Nationwide Support Services 

• Association of Missing and Exploited Children’s Organizations (AMECO) Membership List 

• National Association of Search and Rescue (www.nasar.org) 

• Safe Return: Alzheimer’s Disease Guide for Law Enforcement 

• Resources/Websites of U.S. Departments 

• NCMEC General Information and Publications 

• National Training Available 

Family Resource Packet 

• When Your Child is Missing: A Family Survival Guide 

• Texas Crime Victims’ Compensation Application Form (English) 

• Texas Crime Victims’ Compensation Application Form (Spanish) 

• Victim Support Resource Database (Greater Houston Area) 

• A Family Resource Guide on International Parental Kidnapping 

• Alzheimer’s Association Brochure 

• SafeReturn—Wandering: Who’s at Risk? 

• Covenant House-Texas Flyer 

Discs and Software 

• Simple Leads Management System 

• Federal Resources on Missing and Exploited Children: A Directory for Law Enforcement and Other Public and Private Agencies 

49

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you very much. 

There are many of us that sit on the Education Committee that 

feel very strongly—before I came here, I was a nurse, so I kind of 

look at things holistically. And many of us are looking at those 

young families from when the child is born to be able to reach out 

and give help to them at that particular time, hopefully so that we 

won’t be running into problems later on, working with the parents 

and certainly working with the newborn child. 

But, with that, Rusty and Mr. Rolle, I guess I would want to 

hear from you. You have been through the justice system, you have 

been through foster homes, you have been through homeless shelters. 

Where do you feel could be an improvement as far as where did 

the system drop both of you? Where did we lose you, as a society? 

What could have been done, or what do you think could have been 

done? Because I am sure you probably thought about that, if someVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:41 Feb 12, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\HFC\110-57\36729.TXT HOME PsN: DIC

appb.eps
50

body had gotten to you at an earlier age to work with you, or did 

you have to go through it, just grow out of it, or with the help that 

you got? 

Could you put your mike on? 

Mr. ROLLE. Today, I had a conversation with Vicki. She runs the 

Network for Youth. And I didn’t know of half of the services that 

were in New York City. And I didn’t know how to get to the place 

that would have told me where the services was. 

I kind of just stumbled on people in the community just trying—

when I got kicked out of my mother’s house, I was walking down 

the street and a friend of mine who was in the theater group said, 

you can stay at my house. I had this big bag of stuff in my hand, 

and he said, what happened? I told him what happened. But that 

was only because I was a part of that group. 

And this was out of our own pocket. We met at the local school, 

so it was just her ingenuity, trying to figure out how to do something, because she just had a heart. Even myself, with the work 

that I do. So a lot of it is, I guess, public awareness, or in entertainment we say marketing, to be known. 

I don’t know, sitting on the subway, I can see a place, see signs 

or see something that is attractive to a young person that he can 

say, all right, if need something, I could call this number. And I 

never knew of any places like that. So I think that was missing. 

And then for me, personally, I think where I got lost a little bit 

was the arts in the school for me, being in school—not so much the 

arts, but a place to kind of just talk, if that makes sense. When 

I heard him speak, it touched me, because I feel like that is why 

I couldn’t pay attention in school, or I acted out, was because I 

didn’t have a place that I could talk about those things. 

Who wants to hear about some kid, what he is dealing with? So 

that is where I kind of got lost. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you. 

Rusty? 

Mr. BOOKER. I guess I could say, going through everything I 

went through, I guess I can say I always felt like I could go to Safe 

Place to get what I needed done. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. How did you find out about the Safe 

Place, just to go to them? 

Mr. BOOKER. When I was 12, my previous foster mother told me 

about it and she told me to go to the library and ask for it. And 

it took me a couple of hours. I sat there thinking, because I was 

kind of scared about what was going to happen afterwards, after 

I got there. 

But I finally got the courage to walk up there and ask for it. And, 

like I said, when I got there, I talked to somebody and within 2 

weeks I was with that previous foster mother that had told me 

about it. 

And I don’t feel like the state really did anything after I left 

there to find me somewhere to go. They just stuck me back in an 

abusive home. And there, I just went downhill. I once again was 

in that home and it wasn’t doing anything for me. 

I had nobody to talk to, was roaming the streets, selling drugs, 

doing drugs, just doing whatever I pleased. And nobody was ever 

there for me. 

51

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. And I guess just a follow-up question, 

for the rest of the panel, especially with what kind of background 

checks are we doing for the foster homes that these kids are going 

into? 

And what are we doing as far as when you talked about the first 

thing I was talking about—obviously, we should be fingerprinting 

those that are working with children. We should be doing the same 

thing with the elderly, in nursing homes. 

I happen to think we should be going both ways, because there 

is a lot of abuse in nursing homes, also. But I will go back with 

what is the answer? When these kids go into foster homes and they 

turn out to be bad homes and these kids have no place to go? 

Mr. ALLEN. Madam Chair, clearly, there are an extraordinary 

number of committed, dedicated people doing great work. I mean, 

what we hear around the country is there just aren’t enough. And 

there are inadequate resources to support these alternative programs and been the basic social services programs. 

And state and local governments are just overwhelmed with the 

sheer magnitude of the problem. And I think this is a very complex 

answer, and it is one that involves more resources and also involves—you talk about background screening. 

We have dealt with these cases all the time that make it to us 

and we just have to build systems where the protection of the child 

is paramount in all of this. And I think there are ways to do that, 

but it is complicated. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. I will finish up with this. I know back 

in New York many years ago, actually, my neighbor took in foster 

children for a long time. One of the problems that she came across 

was back then every 2 years, even though the children were with 

her, happy, they had to be moved out so there would be no attachment. Thank goodness we have outgrown that, hopefully to a large 

extent. 

With that, Mr. Platts? 

Mr. PLATTS. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

My thanks again to all of our witnesses and, Rusty and Mr. 

Rolle, or Kazi, if you prefer, especially the two of you, being willing 

to come and share your personal experiences and stories. It certainly helps us better understand the real-life aspect of these 

issues. 

And I commend your courage in doing so and through your efforts of ensuring that your challenges result in positive outcomes 

for others. And that through your efforts here today and not just 

today in testifying, but in your work, in your community, in your 

efforts, that you are going to make a difference for others. And so 

I especially thank you. 

And I would like to recognize, and I don’t know if he is comfortable, and I don’t know who he is, so if he is not, but if Mr. Bill, 

as referenced here, if you would like to stand and be recognized on 

behalf of all of those who work with children. [Applause.] 

We appreciate your helping Rusty to be here and, as I say, in 

kind of being recognized on behalf of all of our men and women 

throughout the country who are working on behalf of youth to improve and ensure the safety of their lives, so thank you. 

52

Mr. Allen, I want to follow up, and you talked about it in your 

written testimony and in your oral testimony, about the background checks, this effort to try to ensure that predators don’t get 

access through a legitimate program. Did you say 3 percent on average? 

Mr. ALLEN. We have done in the pilot that was set up under the 

PROTECT Act, the FBI runs the records, and then we do fitness 

determinations so that we communicate to the youth organization 

on a red-light, yellow-light, green-light basis. 

We have reviewed 25,000 applicants, and of that number, roughly 7 percent had criminal records and slightly less than 3 percent 

had what we considered disqualifying criminal records. This is in 

every case knowing that they are being fingerprinted and knowing 

that they are going to be subjected to a national FBI-based criminal history background check. 

Mr. PLATTS. Given that that is 3 percent of that 25,000, so we 

are talking a significant number, that are seeking access to children that shouldn’t be, what happens once you make the identification? 

I guess, does law enforcing in any way follow up on that information? Are those who obviously present information either falsely, 

that they have no reason—I imagine some of those 3 percent in 

their adjudication probably are prohibited from having contact with 

children. 

Is there any specific follow-up mechanism to ensure that not just 

they are prevented from being in that program, because the worry 

is they will go to another program and not get caught? 

Mr. ALLEN. Yes. Now, I think the key point in all of this is in 

many of these instances, these offenders have not done something 

wrong by applying to be a volunteer, absent some kind of violation 

of their parole condition or probation condition, but where possible, 

where actionable, we are making sure that the appropriate law enforcement agency gets that information. 

Mr. PLATTS. Because by them having it, there may be something 

in their parole that says no contact and the fact that they actively 

sought would then be evidence that they are violating that parole. 

Mr. ALLEN. Yes. 

Mr. PLATTS. Okay, related to that, and, Ms. Alberts, I think it 

was in your testimony you talked about access to parolees and parole officers being given more access on a timely manner where 

there is belief that perhaps a child has been abducted or sexually 

abused by someone on parole. 

Ms. ALBERTS. Absolutely. There are several cases. If you will recall, the Jessica Lunsford case, that was a case right there where 

she was in that parolee’s residence, that had they not had to wait 

for a warrant, something could have been hopefully avoided at that 

time. 

We just felt that, in working with our law enforcement agencies, 

that the probation and parole officers have rights of access to the 

domicile for welfare checks or those kinds of things. And why not 

in a case, during those critical first hours that a child is missing, 

if we can close in and close that gap, I think that would be phenomenal. 

53

Mr. PLATTS. I assume that most of that is probably going to be 

driven by state law in most prosecutions. 

Ms. ALBERTS. Right, right. 

Mr. PLATTS. Although there are federal prosecutions as well. And 

I guess I was under the belief that someone on parole basically 

gave up their right to privacy while they are on parole. But your 

understanding is that if they go in for other reasons, but they still 

have to——

Ms. ALBERTS. My understanding is that in order to come in in 

a circumstance like this, it still has to meet the probable cause in 

order to justify a warrant. That is my understanding. I am not an 

attorney, but that is what my law enforcement folks are telling me. 

Mr. PLATTS. I see my time has expired. I am not sure if we will 

have a chance to come back with a second round. If not, again, I 

want to thank each of you. 

Is it okay if Ms. Eggleston had a follow-up I think? 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Oh, sure. 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. Many of the RHY providers are licensed 

by the state. So in Arizona, and I speak about my own state, every 

staff member that works, or volunteer that works in our programs 

have to be fingerprinted and have to go through a background 

check. 

Yes, we do get those few that knowingly apply for positions. The 

challenge we have is the time line to get that information back. It 

is a drudgerous process. So even a good person coming to volunteer 

that has no background until they are cleared, we can’t let them 

work with our young people. 

So the challenge we have is the time line. It can take 3 to 6 

months and it costs, $60, $80 a pop to have it done. So, for us, most 

of us are licensed. Most of us that provide the services within the 

RHY umbrella meet those criteria, but it is a time line issue more 

than anything else. 

Mr. PLATTS. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. You are welcome. 

Mr. Grijalva? 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And, as my colleague Mr. Platts mentioned, let me thank Mr. 

Booker and Mr. Rolle. Your persistence and your strength is something that I respect and admire very much. Thank you for your testimony. 

Ms. Krahe-Eggleston, a couple of questions. Do you have any 

data, or even an idea, of the percentage of homeless young people 

in the centers that you have that have aged out of foster care? 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. Congressman, I could tell you an approximate, but I could gather that information for you specifically and 

get that to you in writing. We see a lot of street kids that have 

aged out of the system, by choice sometimes. They don’t want to 

be involved with the system. They have been involved with the system that has been very difficult for them for a long time. 

The foster care system isn’t always a friendly system, to say the 

least. So most of them would rather not be involved with the system, and as soon as they turn 18, they disappear. 

54

But the Chafee funds that came in a few years ago picked up a 

lot of those kids. But I can get you that information. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you. 

Your agency operates a residential program for homeless young 

families. Tell the committee a little bit about that and about what 

I perceive to be an increasing need for that kind of residential service. 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. The young families that we see, whether 

they are single-parent families or intact young families, just trying 

to get by in today’s time, it is very, very difficult. The housing 

costs, just the day-to-day living costs, become insurmountable. In 

the service delivery system we have, we have young couples. 

We have couples that are under the age of 21 or 24 sometimes, 

but mostly under the age of 21, that choose to have children and 

they are a couple. And some are married, some are not. But they 

are a couple. 

Being able to serve them is a huge gift to our community, and 

it is one that the need for that kind of service has become more 

and more apparent as time has gone by. I think we see that across 

the country with that. 

Of course, single moms, single dads, raising kids at age 19 years 

old is a huge challenge today. We see it. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you. 

And one other question, if I may. Some examples of how your 

agency provides positive youth development principles to the young 

people that you work with. I think this legislation, this authorization, is also about youth development. It is not just a safe harbor. 

There are things that need to occur as part of that safe harbor. 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. For me, the biggest issue around positive youth development is having the kids involved with every step 

of their process within the system. People can’t decide what is 

going to happen to a 16-year-old by themselves. That 16-year-old 

or 15-year-old or 18-year-old needs to have a voice in what happens 

to them, for them, with them. 

Also, getting the kids involved at all levels of our organization is 

really important, and most of us within the RHY community, kids 

are on our boards. Young people serve on our advisory committees. 

They have a say in how the program operates and what services 

they need. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you very much. 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. You are welcome. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. A final question. Mr. Berg, you mentioned in your 

oral testimony, I don’t know how to describe it, but you become desensitized, tolerate, benign acceptance of the idea or the concept of 

homelessness, and, in this specific instance, homeless youth. 

We talked about outreach. We talked about getting information 

to those persons that need it. But how do we combat that attitude? 

I sense it as well. There is a margin of tolerance—‘‘Oh, they are 

homeless’’—and you kind of walk away from it. 

Mr. BERG. Yes, thank you, Mr. Grijalva. I agree. I think hearings 

like this are helpful. The more community-based kind of hearings, 

I think the more people can hear from, particularly in the issue of 

youth homelessness, from young people themselves who have gone 

through these things. 

55

I think that is very effective. I know I constantly talk to members of Congress and their staff who us sort of wonky, D.C. types 

can talk until we are blue in the face, but what they remember is 

talking to a person who had been homeless and suddenly realizing 

that this just wasn’t some number on a page. 

We struggle with that all the time. The other part is we need 

policies that are directed at immediate solutions, short-term solutions, getting people off the streets and into some sort of stable 

housing, fast. And we need to have performance measures for providers that include those. 

I know the National Network for Youth has been in favor of that. 

Those are some of the things that will be helpful. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. You are welcome. 

Mrs. Biggert? 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

One of the first situations I think that caused me to get so interested in these types of programs was having a neighbor who had 

a daughter that was troubled and was a runaway. And they never 

found her, never heard from her. My neighbor died not too long 

ago, and I think that was the thing that was so troubling to her, 

was never to know what had happened to her child. 

And for all of the good work that all of you do on this, I noticed 

that, Mr. Allen, you have a cold case where you are still working 

on finding those missing children that have been gone for a long 

time. 

Mr. ALLEN. Congresswoman, the media spotlight dims and the 

world forgets, but these families don’t forget. And so we have a 

team that is actively looking at these long-term cases, trying to 

look for new leads. We have resolved, having worked more than 

5,000 of these cases, resolved about, as I recall, 368. 

All but 12 of them were resolved through identifying a deceased 

child. And while that doesn’t bring a live child home, at least it 

brings closure. But I think it is important. 

These are long, long-term cases. And in 12 of the cases, where 

law enforcement had run out of leads, the child was found alive 

and was brought home. So it is really important that we not forget 

about these kids that are out there. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, and thanks for all you do on that. 

And then, Mr. Berg, how do you reach runaways? Or any of you 

that are in these services, and I know so many times that they are 

ready to come home if they can find a way home or a pathway to 

connect with their families again. How do you encourage that? How 

do they get to know about the services? 

Mr. BERG. Yes, I think one of the things is the runaway and 

homeless youth programs of course include a very active street outreach program that I think is very effective and reaches lots and 

lots of people and are very effective where there is a family ready 

to take a child back. 

I would note parenthetically that there are many situations 

where that is not the case, where the outreach is a good first step, 

but there is nothing behind it. And that is why more of the kinds 

of programs, transitional programs and permanent housing options, 

are very necessary. 

56

But I think people in the field have really developed this sort of 

art and science of outreach to a very great extent. There are a lot 

of very skilled practitioners who carry this out. 

Partly, it is knowing that there are options available and just 

making sure that people know what those are. I mean, the story 

about sort of not having a place to find about what sort of services 

are available I think is sort of a common one. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Well, one of the bill that I am working on is to 

provide for homeless children who are emancipated and are not 

working with their parents, or there is no connection. And right 

now, they cannot get scholarships to college because the parents 

can’t or won’t sign the form and they won’t disclose their finances, 

which of course they wouldn’t be using for their child’s education, 

anyway. 

Do you have any idea how many youth could take advantage of 

something like this? 

Mr. ROLLE. I had a couple of things, but just on that particular 

point, the state of California, they did something very similar 

where they wanted to talk about foster care, because it is very, 

very high there. And one of the things that I found when I emancipated is I didn’t know where to go to go to the next level. 

And I think that I am creating a network for the people in positions like yourself to look down at all of these people doing this 

work and connect them, because sometimes we don’t know about 

each other. 

And if there is a network of I don’t have them, you have them, 

and we both kind of converse about what are the things that we 

can help each other on, I think that is very important. And a lot 

of times everybody is fighting for the money. There is not enough 

money. So if there is enough money, then we are, like, we can work 

more together. 

So I think that is very important, especially for emancipated 

youth, because they are the ones who feel the jails, fill the cemetery, the strip clubs, because those girls, a lot of them go to college. 

They are the ones that are in the clubs, trying to go to college, really, trying to find a way. And the innovation is not there, and I 

think that was wonderful, what Ms. Eggleston said about having 

the young people involved. 

Because young people, that is who evolved us as human beings. 

They are the ones that think innovatively and come with new 

ideas. And one of the feelings for most young people is that we 

don’t matter. 

I think she said an excellent point about terrorism. We know 

that that matters in America, but we don’t feel as young people 

that we matter, by the way the funding goes, that there is not a 

feeling or a marketing from the government to say that young people matter and we don’t want them homeless, we don’t want them 

running away from home. 

That feeling is not there, so I think innovation and having more 

strong voices of young people to say something about it. 

Mr. BERG. If I could just add on that particular piece of legislation. I hope everyone, other members of the committee, are aware 

of this particular piece of legislation. 

57

I can’t tell you the numbers, but it is maybe not like the worstoff kids, but the idea that young people who have been abandoned 

by their parents can’t go to college because there is nobody to sign 

the financial aid forms, I find that personally offensive. And I am 

glad it has been dealt with. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. I hope all the members know, because if they sign 

up as co-sponsors, we can get it through much faster. So, thank 

you. 

I yield back. Thank you. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you. 

Mr. Yarmuth? 

Mr. YARMUTH. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And to all the professionals on the panel, thank you very much 

for being here. Thanks for all you do to help with this serious national problem. 

Kazi, thank you for your story and for all you do. 

Rusty, you did a great job and your community is very proud of 

you, and I am very proud to be your Congressman, so thank you 

for everything you have done today. 

And Mr. Platts beat me to introducing Bill, but I will say that 

this morning, I was talking to Bill, and he mentioned the fact that 

when he was younger and people were deciding what to do, that 

all of his friends were becoming lawyers and politicians. I don’t 

know who all those people were. But the implication may be that 

he hadn’t chosen the right path, but I know he knows he did. And 

I know today Rusty is grateful that he did, and so are we. 

Kazi mentioned something that leads me to a topic that came up 

in our forum that we held a few weeks ago. And that was the fact 

that even in a community like Louisville, which has national Safe 

Place headquarters and a wide array of services that are available 

to homeless and runaway youth, that there is no continuum of contact with the young people who are disconnected. 

And they go from one service, where they do get some help or 

attention, and then they are back into the community and disconnected once again and they go through a series of these encounters 

with services. But nobody is there to kind of help them through the 

entire process. 

Any of the professionals who would like to comment on that, and 

with specific reference to whether they know of any models for providing some kind of continuum. 

Ms. ALBERTS. I like to think we are, and I think that what you 

have heard today in talking about the partnerships and collaborations, I think that is the key. You will notice in my written testimony, one of the things I said was to tie funding to collaborative 

efforts so that people don’t feel like it is okay to operate in isolation 

when they hit a particular point on a spectrum of services. 

There needs to be a requirement that you know what came before for the child and what needs to come after, because children 

fall through the cracks. They get a little bit of this and they get 

a little bit of that. And they try to make a patchwork quilt out of 

it, and there are huge, gaping gaps in those services. 

This is a pet peeve of mine. I have been in nonprofit management for 27 years, and the reason we have the program that we 

have at the Texas Center for the Missing is that I recognize the 

58

need to make sure that if we are not doing it, somebody is doing 

it, all along, from the beginning to the end of those programs, because it is the only true way to make a difference. It is the only 

way to save those kids who need help. 

And communication, collaboration, partnerships, whatever it 

takes. And no territoriality. There is no my piece of the pie needs 

to be bigger than your piece of the pie. 

I don’t know who the author of the quote is. It is unknown, but 

it says it is amazing what you can get accomplished when nobody 

cares who gets the credit. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Did you want to respond, Ms. Krahe-Eggleston? 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. I would really like to. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Sure. 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. I have the honor of working in a community that works very hard at collaboration for the young people 

that we serve. We have a small group of providers of the types of 

services that I referred to today. There is four or five of us in town, 

and we meet every week or every other week, at least, and talk 

about the cases that we have. 

The money only goes so far, so we try not to duplicate services. 

We really have those conversations across the board that our case 

managers have. 

Good case management, to me, is the key, building that relationship with the young person and being able to maintain that. Funding that we get our service that we get that are narrow based, 

where there is a finite beginning and end, it doesn’t do our young 

people any good. 

What does the best for your young people is a continued involvement over the long haul. It is the relationship Rusty talked about 

with his workers. It is the relationship that the young people we 

are involved with—in our young moms program, we have been involved with moms for the last 6 years and we know, and they stay 

with us a couple years, we know where 97 percent of those young 

women are today and keep in touch with them regularly. 

That is the key to success. 

Mr. YARMUTH. I would like to also maybe add another element 

to this discussion, and that is the connection between the juvenile 

justice system and the social services that are available for the 

homeless, because obviously many of the kids who are homeless 

and runaways end up in an encounter with the juvenile justice system. 

Is this something that your experiences has shown that works or 

is there sometimes too great a disconnect between the judicial system and the social service aspect? 

Mr. ALLEN. Just a brief comment, and I think these folks know 

better than I, but when I got into this, when we got into it, in the 

1970s, the whole premise was you would have the law enforcement 

system over here that is viewing these kids in one way. You have 

the social services system over here that is viewing these kids in 

another way. And the kids get caught in the cracks. 

And so our whole beginning in this effort in Louisville 30 years 

ago was to create a police-social work team, to kind of blur the traditional lines and the traditional turf battles between jurisdictions, 

59

between units of government and, frankly, I think there are models 

all over the country where that is working and working very well. 

And when you put people together, they can share information, 

even though their mindset and their approaches are different. 

Mr. ROLLE. I had just something real brief on that. I think that 

one of the key things is the innovation. And the reason why I say 

innovation, there is a song by a guy named Justin Timberlake. He 

had a song called I am bringing sexy back. But if you translate 

that into the work that we are doing, it is old ideas in a new time. 

Even the funding that is for stuff like this is, to my understanding, the same amount that it has been many, many years ago, 

and the economy is just different. So even finding the people working in social services, and I know a lot of them, they are burnt out. 

Their bosses don’t even care, because their salaries don’t really—

so that feeling that you get burnt out doing this work. People need 

things. They need you to be excited about coming to work and that 

is why they fall through the cracks in the juvenile justice system. 

For people doing this youth work, there needs to be innovation 

in how we deal with them. We need to make the job, for lack of 

better words, in the way that I know how to translate it, is sexy. 

People need to feel like I want to be involved with the youth and 

giving back. So that is one thing. 

And another thing, something that you asked earlier, I think, 

when we fall through the cracks is in the foster home, when you 

go back there, there is not—I think that instead of just placing 

them in a home, the whole house should now go under some type 

of training. 

In New York City, there is a place called Harlem Children’s 

Zone, and that is a great model for a lot of things that he is talking 

about. But, the Harlem Children’s Zone, they provide training from 

birth, when the baby is still in the womb, for certain families, so 

that those families can have that training. 

And it is sexy to go there and the whole environment. The funding is there, the whole environment says that, all right, our youth 

matter. So I would just say innovation is the key word. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. You are quite welcome. When you were 

talking about burnt out, I am thinking of my nurses, all over the 

country. We are trying to work on that, too. 

Mr. Sarbanes? 

Mr. SARBANES. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding the hearing. 

I wanted first to salute Representative Biggert for her work on 

these issues. In particular, we have been working recently on the 

McKinney-Vento funning, which is critical in a whole host of areas 

in terms of keeping families together and combating homelessness 

among young people. And Representative Lampson, who has obviously been right on the forefront of dealing with issues of missing 

children. 

Can you quantify the extent to which the issue is about communication and coordination and collaboration for purposes of finding 

kids who have fallen through the cracks, versus real services that 

have to be provided through affirmative outreach? 

60

Because what I gather from the discussion is there is a certain 

amount of this which is just making sure that we are in touch with 

each other better, so that when kids disappear or run away, or are 

lost or missing, there is a communication infrastructure in place 

that allows you to find them and get them back home. 

But there is another dimension, which is reaching out to kids on 

a continuous basis and having resources behind that so that you 

can not just get them reconnected, but support that so that they 

don’t fall into the cracks again. And I don’t know if you can quantify how that splits out. 

You will probably say that they are too interrelated to separate, 

but I don’t know if anybody wants to comment on that. 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. I think for education purposes, the thing 

that helps the most is people just knowing what is going on. The 

schools are a great place to connect with young people. If they 

know there is a safe place out there within their school structure 

and the school is aware of what is going on in the communities, 

they are a huge help. 

We have found that over and over and over again. Youngsters as 

young as 8, 9, 10 years old, know that there is a principal or a 

teacher or somebody that has the information about a service, 

whether it be in regards to homelessness or a multitude of services. 

But the school system, I have found, is probably one of the best 

ways to get the information out so that teachers know that there 

are services out there, so that those other significant people in the 

little ones’ lives start young enough that notice things going on 

with a child and his family. And teachers are great at that. 

Sometimes, they don’t know the resources that are out there. So, 

in my book, it is really important that the education process is a 

community-wide process about the services that are out there and 

what needs to happen, but, as well, it is our responsibility to get 

that information out. 

We spend a lot of time in the schools, mostly middle schools and 

high schools, but we get information out to all the counselors on 

a regular basis, and I think that is part of that prevention and 

early intervention piece that may avoid those children hitting the 

streets at age 16 or 14. 

Mr. SARBANES. The other question I had is that in the larger 

committee, Education and Labor Committee, we have had numbers 

of hearings over the last few months on the issue of economic insecurity in the country. And I would imagine that you all can sense 

the interplay between this predatory culture on the one side and 

the economic insecurity of any families on the other. 

And as economic insecurity is heightened in the society, it leads 

to increased pressures on families. It helps break down families in 

ways that then makes them much more vulnerable to the predatory side of our society. And if you could comment on that, if you 

are seeing the trends of that sort of interplay between this culture 

and economic insecurity. 

Mr. ROLLE. I experienced that. It wasn’t in this country, but coming from a poor country, the reason why I was in that abusive situation was really based on that. The lady that my mother left me 

with, my mother got stuck in America and she couldn’t leave. 

61

So the lady that I lived with, I was there too long and I became 

another expense. And the stress of that, and then her husband 

leaving, was the reason why I became the stress release. When the 

resources are there for people—she was a stepparent—so when the 

resources are there for people like her. And it goes even deeper, because the reason there are not resources for people like her is because the agencies that do the work feel as if they don’t have 

enough resources and then it trickles down. 

Even the brother here, he said when his father left and his mother was dealing with it, she had to go through her healing, she 

needed to know that there were resources and a place for her, because of what she was dealing with trickled down to him, and it 

goes on. 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. Many, many of our young people are 

homeless due to economic issues, whether it means a parent became incarcerated and all of a sudden there is no more money at 

home, or that mom had another baby and you are 16, you are 17, 

just go fend for yourself. 

The economic issues are huge, and we have many, many young 

people that live 10 to an apartment, just to try and get by. And 

they are okay, they are doing their best to get by. 

A lot of our young moms come to us with a garbage bag of clothes 

and that is it, and a baby on their hip, and have no place to go. 

Think about affording just diapers today. Just think, if you have 

been to the grocery store lately and bought a box of diapers, think 

about living on minimum wage, having to pay a portion of childcare 

if you don’t qualify and having to pay for food, housing. Just the 

day-to-day living is almost impossible. And it is very hopeless for 

many of them. 

Mr. SARBANES. Thanks for your testimony. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Mr. Lampson? 

Mr. LAMPSON. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Wow, what magnificent stories. It is hard to know where to start 

and I wish I were a member of your committee. It would be fun 

to work with on one hand. On the other hand, you would probably 

reach a little bit of a level of frustration because there probably are 

more questions than there are answers to give. 

But as I was listening to everybody’s stories, the things that I 

thought of were some luck involved on the part of finding the right 

people, just happening across the right thing that Mr. Booker came 

across the Safe Place. And I want to ask you a question about Safe 

Place in just a minute. 

I keep writing down, time and time again, commitment. I write 

down the word ‘‘money.’’ Our children are an investment. We are 

choosing, it seems like, to postpone that investment, and instead of 

trying to make the resources available now, as difficult as it is, we 

are choosing to not do it and then we are choosing to pay for people 

to stay in prison or hospitals or to support the criminal activity 

that they are getting away with. 

For me, right now, it is hard to find the answers to the questions 

in listening to what you all are doing. I found, when I visited a 

Boys and Girls Club—I happened to have been in Galveston, Texas, 

about 2 years or so ago, when a truant officer brought a 12-yearVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:41 Feb 12, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\HFC\110-57\36729.TXT HOME PsN: DIC
62

old little girl in, and I got to sit in on the interview there with her 

and found out what difficulties that she was facing. 

She didn’t have anyone to listen to her about her problems with 

education. She thought all the teachers hated her, didn’t like her, 

weren’t willing to help her. She thought she was dumb, stupid, 

couldn’t pass classes. She was making F’s in every subject. 

And through the course of the conversation with her, we found 

out that she did have some interests. She was interested in astronomy and, interestingly enough, she actually picked up a book on 

calculus to, she said, try to help herself understand some of that. 

And here is a 12-year-old reading a calculus book, and I don’t even 

know what calculus is. Knowing then that students, kids, have 

great opportunities if we would but see it in them. 

And I want you to talk some more, Ms. Eggleston, if you don’t 

mind. You talked abut this catch-22 of getting kids caught in a situation where they have to maintain employment in order to stay 

afloat financially. Employment prevents them from being able to go 

into school and taking opportunities, whether it is secondary or 

post-secondary, any of them. 

What can policymakers do to help right this lack of—what are 

the specific things that you would tell us to try to put into words, 

policy? 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. One of the first things I would do is talk 

about true age, of being able to be independent. I don’t know how 

many of you are parents, but I know my children, when they were 

18, weren’t able to support themselves. 

We forget that these children are our children as well, and that 

magic age of 18 across our country is a falsehood, as far as I am 

concerned. So, for me, taking a policy look at what is the age of 

majority, because that dictates a lot of things in our world. 

Again, I think about my own family, and these are no different. 

To me, that is really important. The other issue is being able to afford to do all those things that the affordability is impossible. Finding jobs that pay well isn’t easy. A living wage is not $8 an hour. 

I don’t know any community where you can live on $8 an hour, to 

be honest, if you are a single mom trying to raise a child. 

A lot of our issues around unaccompanied and disconnected 

young people, these are people that don’t have support systems. 

These are people that don’t have you or me or an aunt or uncle. 

We find that we play that role for so, so many. 

We supplement rents all the time for young people. We help pay 

utilities. We try and take care of the young people that are lucky 

enough to touch the service delivery system. There are a lot that 

don’t. There are a lot that don’t. 

So how do we expand that safety network? I mean, that is a resource issue. A lot of us raise a lot of money in our own communities to supplement what we get from what comes from our federal friends. 

Mr. LAMPSON. Well, the specifics are the things that are going 

to be hard. Changing the age of majority, maybe. Minimum wage, 

we already——

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. You are working on that. 

Mr. LAMPSON [continuing]. Have done. 

63

I want to talk at some point in time, and my time is up, but, Mr. 

Booker, I do want to find about Safe Place, because we have Project 

Safe Place in my congressional district. 

And I want to find out the comparisons. I know that it started 

in Louisville, Kentucky, at the YMCA, a great project. And then, 

obviously, some work that Ms. Alberts is doing on pornography 

that we would also like to question about. 

But I just want to thank the chairwoman for allowing me to participate in this committee hearing today. 

Thank you so much. It is a great set of presenters. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Thank you, Mr. Lampson. 

Just to let you know, we are going to go through, if it is all right 

with the witnesses, another set of questions. Not everybody wants 

to ask questions, but some of us do. 

As I told the witnesses earlier, I have a markup, so if I get up 

and leave, it is not anything that you said, and one of my colleagues will take over the chair. 

One of the things, listening to all of this, how much federal 

money do you actually get for the shelters themselves, or how do 

you operate the shelters? Where do the bricks and mortar come 

from? 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. Well, I can speak for myself. I think I 

will speak for many of the shelters across the country. Our communities are wonderful supporters of the service that we do. 

The federal money that we receive does not cover the cost of the 

services. It is the seed money that opens the door for other things. 

The shelter-specific money, in my case, covers about half of the ongoing expenses within our agency. 

I find money through private sources, through grants, through 

fees, through any other way I can to supplement those dollars. But 

the federal money is a base that we work from. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. The other reason that I am asking is 

because I sit on Financial Services, and with that we are starting 

a new program this year that will follow through, and I have to 

look into it and I have to bring it up to my chairman on that particular committee. 

But being when we are talking about, especially those that are 

transiting from ‘‘a young teenager’’ to that 18 to 21, when that 

seems to be the most vulnerable time for a lot of these young people, that there should be some sort of housing that could come out 

of HUD. 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. Well, every community deals with that 

difference. CDBG has been, for years, a good friend for many of us 

in helping to fund bricks and mortar, at least in our community, 

using our community section eight has been a place that we also 

used. 

Those kind of resources are out there if you can get to them. In 

our community, the one I come from, it is very friendly for those 

things, but every community isn’t that way. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. But from that transition age, from 18 

to 21, is it better for them to have their own apartment, because 

you had mentioned at 18 it is kind of hard to be on your own, or 

would it be better that there would be almost like a group home 

64

type thing, with three or four young people together and maybe one 

house mother, house dad? 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. There are many, many wonderful program models, including all that you said. There are apartment 

complexes across the country that have developed it. Kids have 

their own little piece of that apartment complex. There are housing 

units that are, again, the example you gave, many kids live there 

and there are staff members that come and go. 

I think the key to all this is that caring adult more than anything else. All these programs are just different environments. Is 

there one that works for every child, absolutely not. 

Chairwoman MCCARTHY. Does anyone else have any? 

The other thing, just going through, thinking about what each 

and every one of you has said, from a young child, teenage years, 

foster homes, shelters. We also deal with juvenile justice on this 

committee. 

Last week, we passed mental parity. Hopefully, we will have resources out there to help, again, more students. 

But when a young person is in the juvenile justice system, or a 

young person might even be in prison, they come out and they are 

homeless. And they would have a record, which there is a big debate going on in Congress, because a lot of times then they can’t 

get a job. 

Prison, if you really look at the term, means rehabilitation, depending on what the crime was, obviously. But a lot of our young 

people that do go to prison, and I talk to my correction guys all the 

time, one of the things that they are lacking is they need mental 

health, most of them, and they need to get a high school education 

because most of them have learning problems. 

So, again, when I say I look at things holistically, my mind is 

going from one pot to the other pot and how do we bring it all together? I think we have our work cut out for us on this committee 

on how we are going to be able to pull these things out. 

And one of the things that Mr. Platts and I have tried to do on 

this committee is to have more joint hearings. When we did juvenile justice, we brought in the Juvenile Justice Committee also, so 

we had a joint hearing so we can try and figure out, how can we 

work together? And I hope that we will be able to continue doing 

that in the future for other hearings. 

Mr. Platts? 

Mr. PLATTS. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

As a parent, one of the things that has just been, I guess, startling in both the testimony, again, written and oral, is just the 

numbers. The national numbers of 600,000-plus missing in a year, 

the 1.6 million-plus runaways. 

In the survey, Ms. Krahe-Eggleston, that you referenced in your 

testimony, that 6 percent are 12 or under in a typical year, seeking 

your services, and especially startling that 28 percent had attempted suicide. 

As a nation, the alarm bell should be going off, when you look 

at number after number, and certainly each of you understand 

that. And we need to do a better job at it. 

I don’t know if you can give me an answer on how we can do a 

better job, and it is the funding side. For the various programs, I 

65

don’t know if you have available to you today or a ballpark of what 

you spend per child that you serve in a year on average and what 

percentage, in a percent standpoint, or a dollar standpoint, is from 

either the federal government specifically from these programs that 

we are talking about reauthorizing and funding or from taxpayers, 

federal state and local. 

And that may not be something that you readily have available. 

Ms. ALBERTS. I can tell you right off the bat, it costs us about 

$10 per client per year, and we get zero of any kind of government 

funding. It is all private. 

So the passion I hope that you hear in my testimony and what 

I am talking about, it is there always and this is to me why I lie 

awake at night. It is not only these missing kids and the roughly 

4 to 8 percent that will never be located in our country, but the 

fact that I, unfortunately at times throughout the year wonder 

where my next paycheck is going to come from. 

Because, again, I am going to use that patchwork quilt corollary 

for our budget is like that. We are literally scrambling constantly, 

looking for funds and trying not to do what unfortunately I have 

seen programs do in the past, which is mission drift and have their 

mission follow funding as opposed to seeking funds that actually do 

fit the mission. 

But none of these things are easy answers. Like I said, 27 years 

of nonprofit management, and these social issues are dramatic. I 

really applaud your efforts to bite off a big piece of this, but, again, 

I am going to tell you, It is communication and collaboration, as 

well as funding and caring, committed folks that will stay in the 

field. 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. In my written testimony, there are some 

examples of cost-benefit on a national, especially with the Transitional Living Services. So you could pull some of that information, 

or we could get you some more on that line. 

But, most of us, it is a combination of resources that make this 

work. Because the RHY funds have been flat for so very long, in 

order to continue to do the work we do, we have to figure out ways 

to supplement other ways. 

And if I just want to add a little bit to something that was just 

mentioned, I know I am taking up your time. But the issue of work 

force is a huge issue for us. And I know that there are some issues 

on the table around college and waiving——

Mr. PLATTS. Forgiveness and things? 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. That would be a huge gift in our field. 

You would have more people coming to our field. And that work 

force issue is one that as an executive director I am challenged 

with daily, daily. 

Mr. PLATTS. Thank you. 

Mr. ROLLE. Can I just say to that? 

Mr. PLATTS. Yes, sure. 

Mr. ROLLE. I just want to second the last thing she said. Go back 

to that innovation, it means innovator. That is the same work that 

I do with the Hip-Hop Project. The Hip-Hop culture has transcended from this subculture within the United States to a global 

culture, and all of the young people respond to that. 

66

One of the things—Madam Chairperson just left—that she said 

was that she tried do this kind of joint work, meaning bringing the 

stuff that is going on in the jails with the social services. 

So it is the same thing we are finding in education, that a lot 

of people don’t want to get in education, or kids don’t think that 

that is cool, to be in education and understand their work. So a lot 

of the work that I am doing within hip-hop is to try to explain to 

these artists, and work with young people before they become these 

successful artists that their work is joint. 

Jay-Z, do you know who Jay-Z is? Somebody like Jay-Z, who is 

like God out there in the realm of hip-hop and the idol of those 

guys who are going to jail, half of the reason they are going to jail 

is they want to be the next Jay-Z. But they don’t know that JayZ may not realize the power that he has. 

If he said, ‘‘We are going to go to school.’’ Or the fact, if he was 

here today, the power and influence that he can have with what 

he has within the culture of hip-hop that is global to really say 

something and do something. 

So I just say that I second what she says in that the field of education, the field of social work, is not cool to get into mainly because people don’t feel that they can take care of their families. It 

is something that they are doing unless there is just a passion 

there. 

Mr. PLATTS. And I see my time is up. 

And maybe just a final comment, Mr. Chairman, and it kind of 

follows on Kazi’s kind of broad picture here, is that while today’s 

hearing is specifically the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act, Missing Children’s Assistance Act, that issues, mental health parity 

that the chair had referenced. 

There is legislation that Danny Davis and I are sponsoring, education begins at home. It is about teaching parenting skills to lowincome new parents, to how to establish a good home setting for 

their newborns, their children, counseling services in our schools. 

All those in the end relate to kind of the underlying problems 

that drive to this issue. And that while we are focused on these 

acts, that we also need to be advocates and pursuing those issues, 

as well. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. GRIJALVA [presiding]. Thank you, sir. 

And let me turn to Mr. Yarmuth for any additional questions you 

might have. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have one thing 

I would like to pursue. 

We talk a lot about numbers in this topic, and I think the value 

of this hearing is to hear from Kazi and Rusty, people who put a 

human face on these stories, but numbers are important when we 

are talking about legislation and planning and budgeting and so 

forth. 

But I would like to ask Mr. Berg, is the methodology we use to 

kind of make estimates about homeless, runaway kids in this country adequate, or are there some things that we ought to be doing 

to give us a better, more accurate picture of what we are dealing 

with? 

67

Mr. BERG. You can draw some conclusions from the evidence that 

exists, but I think there is definitely a need for a better job of 

knowing how big the problem is and some of the other dimensions 

of it. I think the adult homeless system has been working a lot on 

that over the last few years. 

The system that is in place in the runaway, homeless youth programs is good and provides a lot of good data, but not everyone is 

in that system. I think there is a lot to be said to getting a better 

handle and investing a little bit on getting a better handle on the 

size of the problem. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Allen, you have dealt with this, too. What are 

your thoughts? 

Mr. ALLEN. Yes, I think there is a significant need for better data 

across the board. In the area of missing children, what is called 

runaway, thrown away children, the Justice Department research, 

it is done once a decade. So we are still citing data from 1999 research, which was released in 2000. 

One of the things that we are working on now with various parts 

of the Justice Department is I think it is very important that there 

be an annualized data set, drawn from existing data sources. 

One of the problems right now is that the NCIC reports, the National Crime Information Center, reorts at the FBI really don’t 

break out reported missing children by usable categories. So it is 

a huge challenge, but frankly I think there ought to be numbers 

in this field, just like there are numbers in the Uniform Crime Reports that tell us how many burglaries and how many auto thefts 

there are a year. Because we need to be able to track this year to 

year to have a better sense of whether we are making progress or 

not. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Okay, thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Oh, I am sorry. 

Ms. ALBERTS. I just want to second that emotion. This is the only 

field that had the dearth of information and data. When I ran the 

substance abuse program, I could wake up on any day and tell you 

roughly how many kids were using what drug in the high schools. 

The data, particularly funding sources, they want that data. They 

don’t want it to just be anecdotal, I know we are doing great stuff 

and here is why. We need that data. 

Thank you, that is huge. 

Mr. BERG. And I think this relates to what Mr. Grijalva said before, which is the feeling of sort of like we have had this problem 

forever and we just learned to tolerate it. 

On homelessness, people support doing something about homeless. They support it a lot, but they believe there is nothing that 

can be done, which is not the case. But we need to be able to have 

data to show people, show the public, that we are succeeding at 

this. We have programs that work. We can have whole communities that are reducing the number of homeless people. 

Without a functioning data system, or without a very good data 

system, you won’t be able to make that case. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, sir. 

68

And let me turn to Mrs. Biggert for any questions she might 

have. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I just wanted to ask Rusty, after you have listened to all of the 

talk here, if you have any ideas on how best to spread the word 

about the Safe Place for other children who have found themselves 

in the same situation. From all this talk, I think you were very fortunate to have found that place. 

Mr. BOOKER. I think so far they are doing good, but they could 

make a lot of improvements. The public signs that they have in 

Louisville, they have them on TARC buses, the libraries. Safe 

Place, White Castle donated $30,000 to Safe Place, and that White 

Castle was made a place where a child or a teenager can go and 

ask for a Safe Place to get help. 

But I feel that there are more places and more things that can 

be done, and we all need to work together to see what can be done. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Well, I really was taken by your story, and I have 

to ask you, did your brother had the opportunities that you had? 

Did he do all right? 

Mr. BOOKER. My brother is currently locked up until he is 18. 

And, yes, he did have some of the opportunities I had, but he really 

had nobody to help him after he got through those opportunities. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. A while back, after Columbine, we had a task 

force here of members of Congress. We heard from a lot of experts 

and did field hearings. But the one thing that was so true is that 

violence begets violence and it usually starts with the back of a 

hand, and that is usually a parent. 

We see all the things that happen and they are so terrible, so I 

really applaud you for finding your way and hope that there will 

be a lot of other children that will be able to do that. 

Thank you for being here. 

I yield back. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you. 

Mr. Lampson, questions? 

Mr. LAMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I wanted you to talk about Safe Place, and you did, so thank you, 

you got that in. 

Ms. Alberts, we spend, $7,000, $8,000 a year on a child in school. 

What does the state of Texas appropriate each year for programs 

for children who are not in school? 

Ms. ALBERTS. Not enough. 

Mr. LAMPSON. Do you have any idea? 

Ms. ALBERTS. We usually fall pretty low on the totem pole. There 

are no specific funds in the state of Texas for the type of work that 

we do. 

Mr. LAMPSON. No specific funds available for what you are doing. 

Ms. ALBERTS. No. We have worked a lot in the runaway community with Covenant House and some of the law enforcement agencies, and there are some small bits of money that they piece together, but there is nothing comprehensive. 

Mr. LAMPSON. How do they get it? Do they get it through grants? 

Ms. ALBERTS. Yes, yes. 

69

Mr. LAMPSON. As far as an appropriation that would go to every 

county or to every child, there is not. Do you know of any programs 

at the federal level? 

Ms. ALBERTS. No, I am not familiar with any program that looks 

at that at all, that deals with that, that services that. 

Mr. LAMPSON. And what about at the federal level? Is there anything that anyone knows about? Obviously, there is some appropriation at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, 

but is there anything that filters down to Child Protective Services 

or other programs that will be able to grab hold of a child and help 

point them into a program? 

When I mentioned the little girl a while ago, we got her into 

three different places to live. And the little-bitty bit of funds that 

they had ran out and all three programs closed while she was participating. We had to get one and move her to another and so on. 

People try, they are, but if they don’t have the resources to be 

able to do it, it is not going to succeed. 

What were you going to say, Ms. Eggleston? 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. Many states do nothing, many states 

and local communities. 

There are a few states, and I am not sure of the specifics. I can 

tell you which states do and don’t. I can get that information to 

you. 

In Arizona, we have about less than $0.5 million a year that is 

spread out amongst our communities. 

Mr. LAMPSON. What is the best state that you know of? And is 

there one that could be piloted, or could be copied, where we find 

some way that we might do something that would be beneficial? 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. I don’t know that I can tell you that 

right now, but I can give that to you. 

Mr. LAMPSON. I would appreciate it if you would. Would you all 

rather see grant programs and let the people somehow or other 

apply for money? Or would you like to see some kind of mechanism 

to get money into specific agencies that might be able to help locally? Would you comment on that? Anybody, all of you. 

Ms. KRAHE-EGGLESTON. What would I like? Any of those would 

be nice. 

I think recognizing those groups in the communities that have 

experience. I think the challenges that we have with grants, state 

grants, have to do with procurement issues and laws around how 

money can be sorted out through the states. At least in our state, 

there are laws around how money can be allocated. 

It just can’t go to any program. You have to go through a process 

to get it. Private money, we are always applying. Most of us apply 

a lot to a lot of private—you heard White Castle. White Castle does 

stuff in Kentucky. Our local electric company in Tucson does a lot 

for a lot of us. We need all of them. 

Mr. LAMPSON. Ms. Alberts, were you going to say something? 

Ms. ALBERTS. I was going to say, one of the things that we talked 

about, I thought about something after we finished. The Harris 

County Sheriff’s Office is the only agency in our area that has a 

specific runaway division. They actually have a squad of officers to 

deal with that problem, and it is very successful in how it can be, 

given its scope. 

70

And they are tied in well with the social service agencies in the 

area. But I think runaway and homeless youth, I think looking at 

what happens to a child, the bulk of the resources for a law enforcement agency are spent picking up those runaways and taking 

them home. 

That is another of those areas where it is not against the law to 

run away. There is nothing that can be done. Occasionally a judge 

will say somebody has to do community service or something. I 

think that is another one of those places that we might look at trying to figure out how to intervene there. 

Mr. ALLEN. A quick comment, and I think this is more historic, 

and these folks may be able to correct me. But what we hear from 

the runaway community is that the Runaway and Homeless Youth 

Act is helpful in terms of a certain level of support, but particularly 

in the areas of the more difficult problems, the chronic runners, 

there becomes a place where there really aren’t resources to address the kids with the most serious needs. 

We hear from communities all the time, that they are funding for 

shelters for the first time a kid runs, or for the early part of the 

episode. But the really longer term, the chronic, the most serious 

challenge. Really, this is the problem that is answered simply 

through resources. 

Mr. LAMPSON. If there were going to be a comprehensive study, 

who would do it? Who should do it? About what you were speaking 

of a little while ago, Mr. Allen? 

Mr. ALLEN. Are you talking about data? Are you talking about 

a study of what the best models are and where the gaps are? 

Mr. LAMPSON. Both. 

Mr. ALLEN. Well, historically, as it relates to data, what the government has done has been to go to universities and God bless universities and the work they do, but that is expensive. I think we 

need to develop a systematized way to capture data, reported data, 

and interpret it. 

For example, that is what we are trying to do on the whole area 

of missing children. There are police reports all the time. Maybe we 

don’t have it for all 50 states, but maybe it can be extrapolated——

Mr. LAMPSON. Would the National Center be the appropriate 

place to go for that, or would one of the federal agencies? 

Mr. ALLEN. I think the National Center, with the National Institute of Justice, or the Bureau of Justice Statistics or somebody like 

that, the people who are already capturing data. 

As it relates to the runaway and homeless youth community, I 

am not sure, but I think that same model can be replicated. In 

terms of who should develop the models for identifying where the 

gaps are, I think you go to the leadership of the national runaway 

community and you gather the experts and you say this is where 

services are adequate, this is where services are not. Here is the 

void and here is what it would cost to fill that void, based upon the 

numbers of kids who are identified in these services. 

Mr. LAMPSON. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Let me on behalf of the chair, the ranking member and the members of this committee thank each and every one 

71

of you for your testimony. It is invaluable as we go through this 

reauthorization process. 

Much of what was said, I personally felt that the issues that we 

talked about and the chair mentioned it, not only this reauthorization, but how we are conscious with every piece of legislation that 

we are working with, that we are integrating this group of young 

people into that process, be it health care, be it education, be it the 

issue of economics, be it the issue of reentry for people coming out 

of the justice system. I think all those are valuable things that we 

need to be conscious of as we go along. 

But, with that said, let me thank you very much as we go forward. 

As we conclude this hearing, I would like to invite everyone to 

the reception that is being sponsored by the National Network for 

Youth, shining a light on youth homelessness. Mr. Platts and 

Chairwoman McCarthy are serving as honorary co-sponsors of this 

event. 

One of our witnesses, Kazi, will speak with homeless youth of 

D.C. and share clips from the documentary, the Hip-Hop Project. 

It is going to be in room B-369 of the Rayburn Building, of this 

building, at 6:30. 

As previously ordered, members will have 14 days to submit additional materials for the hearing. Any member who wishes to submit follow-up questions in writing to the witnesses should coordinate with majority staff within the requisite time. 

And, with that, without objection, this hearing is adjourned. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Altmire follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Jason Altmire, a Representative in Congress 

From the State of Pennsylvania 

Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this hearing on runaway, homeless and 

missing children. 

It is estimated that between 1 million and 1.7 million youth experience homelessness on a yearly basis. Some of these children are homeless for a few nights while 

others are homeless for long periods of time. Youth who become homeless run a high 

risk of being physically or sexually abused and are also more likely than their peers 

to engage in high risk behaviors. 

Title III of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act authorizes federal programs that help combat youth homelessness. As Congress reauthorizes the 

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act I hope that we study how to improve the programs authorized by title III. 

Thank you again, Madam Chair, for holding this hearing. I look forward to continuing to work with you on this important issue. I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

[Whereupon, at 5:05 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

Æ