Ensuring Educational Stability for 

Children in Foster Care: Best Interest 

Determinations and Immediate Enrollment

August 24, 2016
TODAY’S PRESENTERS

 Stevi Steines

Chief Deputy, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

 Mary Myslewicz

Casey Fellow, Office of Innovation & Improvement, U.S. 

Department of Education

 Lessons from the Field

– Joan Rock, Resource Coordinator for Family Services, 

Vermont Agency of Human Services

– Andrea Burton, Social Worker, Vermont Agency of 

Human Services

– Amy Woolard, Attorney & Policy Coordinator, Legal Aid 

Justice Center

– Patricia Popp, State Coordinator, Project HOPE - Virginia

2
TODAY’S AGENDA

 Provide an overview of the federal framework for 

ensuring educational stability for children in foster care

 Unpack the Every Student Succeeds Act provisions 

related to best interest determinations and immediate 

enrollment

 Learn lessons from early implementation in Vermont and 

Virginia

 Q&A

3
EDUCATIONAL STABILITY: A TIMELINE

4

October 

2008: 

The Fostering 

Connections 

to Success & 

Increasing 

Adoptions Act

December 

2015: 

The Every 

Student 

Succeeds Act 

(ESSA)

June 

2016: 

ED/HHS 

Foster 

Care 

Guidance 

Released

Aug./Sept. 

2016: 

ED/HHS 

Foster 

Care TA 

Webinar 

Series

December 

2016:

ESSA 

Foster 

Care 

Provisions 

Take Effect
KEY ESSA PROVISIONS

 Children in foster care remain in the school of origin, unless 

it is determined that it is not in his or her best interest

 If it is not in the child’s best interest to remain in the school 

of origin, the child must be immediately enrolled in the new 

school even if they don’t have the required documentation. 

 LEAs must collaborate with child welfare agencies (CWAs) 

to develop and implement clear written procedures for how 

transportation will be provided, arranged, and funded for 

the duration of a child’s time in foster care.

 Each SEA must designate a point of contact (POC) for 

CWAs. LEAs must also designate a POC for CWAs if the 

corresponding CWA notifies the LEA, in writing, that it has 

designate a POC.

5
MCKINNEY-VENTO PROVISIONS

 The phrase “awaiting foster care placement” will be 

removed from the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance 

Act’s definition of homeless children and youth.

– For non-covered states, this change is effective 

12/10/16 

– For covered states--that is, States that define “awaiting 

foster care placement” in statute or regulations--this 

change is effective 12/10/17

 After the effective date, youth “awaiting foster care 

placement” must be served under ESSA

 Some children in foster care may still be eligible for 

McKinney-Vento services (e.g., youth who are living in 

transitional shelters or motels)

6
JOINT GUIDANCE

Table of Contents

Educational Stability Questions 1 – 9 

School of Origin Questions 10 – 11 

Best Interest Determination Questions 12 – 17 

Dispute Resolution Questions 18 – 20 

Transportation Questions 21 – 32 

Immediate Enrollment/Records Transfer Question 33

Points of Contact (POCs) Questions 34 – 37 

Student Data and Privacy Question 38

Collaboration Questions 39 – 40 

7

Access the joint guidance here:

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/edhhsfostercarenonregulatorguide.pdf
Best Interest Determinations 

& Immediate Enrollment

8
BEST INTEREST DETERMINATIONS

SEAs must provide assurances that:

 Children in foster care enroll or remain in the school of 

origin unless there is a determination that it is not in his or 

her best interest to attend the school of origin

 The best interest determination must be based on all 

relevant factors, including:

– Appropriateness of the current educational setting

– Proximity to the school in which the child is enrolled 

at the time of placement

ESSA REQUIREMENTS

9
BEST INTEREST DETERMINATIONS

 School of origin is the school that the child was enrolled 

at the time of initial placement 

– If the child’s foster care placement changes, the 

school of origin would then be the school in which the 

child is enrolled at the time of the placement change.

 If it is determined to be in their best interest, children 

have the right to remain in their school of origin for the 

duration of their time in foster care 

 Encourages states to continue to prioritize educational 

stability once child exits foster care

GUIDANCE PROVISIONS

10
BEST INTEREST DETERMINATIONS

 SEAs and State CWAs should establish uniform guidelines 

for local agencies

 LEAs and local CWAs should collaborate to develop a 

joint process for making best interest determinations

 Should consider multiple student-centered factors

– Transportation costs should not be a factor

 Should consult child, if appropriate, and adults who have 

meaningful relationships with child

GUIDANCE PROVISIONS

11
BEST INTEREST DETERMINATIONS

 Develop mechanism for where and when best interest 

determination will occur

 If parties cannot come to agreement, ultimate decision 

should reside with the CWA

 SEAs and LEAs should coordinate with CWAs to develop 

a dispute resolution process to address disagreements

 To the extent feasible and appropriate, a child must 

remain in his or her school of origin while awaiting a 

decision to reduce the number of school moves

GUIDANCE PROVISIONS

12
IMMEDIATE ENROLLMENT

SEAs must provide assurances that:

 If it’s not in the child’s best interest to stay in his or her 

school of origin, the student must be immediately 

enrolled in the new school, even if the child is unable to 

produce records normally required for enrollment

 The enrolling school shall immediately contact the school 

last attended to obtain relevant academic and other 

records

ESSA REQUIREMENTS

13
IMMEDIATE ENROLLMENT

 A child can’t be denied enrollment because they don’t 

have proper documentation

 A child should also be attending classes and receiving 

appropriate academic services

 SEAs and LEAs should review policies to remove barriers 

to immediate enrollment

GUIDANCE PROVISIONS

14
15

Lessons from the Field
LESSONS FROM THE FIELD: VIRGINIA

GUEST PRESENTERS

16

Amy Woolard

Attorney & Policy Coordinator

JustChildren Program, Legal Aid Justice Center

amy@justice4all.org 

Patricia A. Popp, Ph.D.

State Coordinator

Project HOPE – Virginia, The College of William and Mary

pxpopp@wm.edu
A BRIEF HISTORY OF FOSTERING 

CONNECTIONS EDUCATION LAW IN VA

Va. Code 22.1-3.4

 Previously addressed immediate school enrollment of 

students in foster care & transfer of records (2005):

– Provisions were similar to the Fostering Connections Act’s 

intent but were vague and permissive, not mandated

– Some school divisions were explicitly or implicitly putting up 

barriers to enrollment, especially for youth in group homes

 Amended effective July 1, 2011 to mirror the Fostering 

Connections Act in terms of educational stability:

– Integrated interagency workgroup recommendations into 

both child welfare and school practice and code (explicitly 

made education part of foster care plan)

– Created mandate for the process and called for 

collaborative process

17
DEVELOPMENT OF JOINT GUIDANCE

A workgroup was convened in 2010 between advocates, 

representatives from state and local education and child 

welfare agencies, and the courts. The initial work took 

nearly two years:

Full Resource Page: 

http://www.doe.virginia.gov/support/student_family/foster_ca

re_students/index.shtml

 VDOE/VDSS Joint Guidance on School Placement for 

Children in Foster Care (Revisions & Superintendent’s 

Memos)

 Best Interest Determination for Foster Care School 

Placement Form

 Immediate Enrollment of Child in Foster Care Form

18
19
JOINT DETERMINATION OF A CHILD’S BEST 

INTEREST

 As quickly as possible (e.g., within 3 business days), LDSS 

and school division representative or IEP shall jointly 

determine child’s best interest for school placement

 Presumption: Child will remain in same school, unless 

contrary to child’s best interest. LDSS should already 

have taken educational needs into account for home 

placement

 Meeting is intended to be a collaborative process that 

integrates the child’s needs and preferences

 Specific language included around child’s participation 

in this process

20
21
ROLE OF THE COURT

The judge, guardian ad litem (GAL), and any advocates 

should act as ongoing safeguards to the process:

 At every hearing, should ask about educational 

placement, stability, and attendance

– If there are changes, should ask for an explanation

 Consult GAL if the student’s educational needs are unmet

 Ensure the education decision-maker is clearly identified 

for the court

22
RECENT ISSUES IN IMPLEMENTATION

Subsequent guidance documents and memos have 

addressed common practical issues post Fostering 

Connections:

 Transportation: Who will fund it? How will it be 

provided?

 Students eligible under the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA)

 Foster Care Education Liaisons in local child welfare 

agencies

 Maintaining school of origin until BID is completed

23
NEXT STEPS FOR VIRGINIA

Subsequent guidance documents and memos have 

addressed common practical issues post Fostering 

Connections:

 Transition to Title I from VA’s Student Services 

Department

 Gathering/analyzing achievement data for youth in 

foster care

 Interagency/inter-department collaboration at state, 

regional, and local levels

24
LESSONS FROM THE FIELD: VERMONT

GUEST PRESENTERS

25

Joan Rock

Resource Coordinator for Family Services

Vermont Agency of Human Services

joan.rock@vermont.gov

Andrea Burton

Social Worker

Vermont Agency of Human Services

andrea.burton@vermont.gov
VERMONT’S EDUCATIONAL BEST INTEREST 

DETERMINATION PRACTICE

Today’s Highlights

 Benefits to the children

– A case study of two siblings in elementary school

 Benefits of using the Best Interest Determination Tool

 Benefits of Collaboration

 Benefits of regular meetings and conversations

 Normalizing the process

26
THE BEST INTEREST DETERMINATION TOOL

There are 8 areas of inquiry on the Tool:

1. What does the child think?

2. What does the child’s primary family 

think?

3. What is the distance to the school of 

origin?

4. How long has the child been 

connected to this school?

5. What are the safety considerations?

6. What is the impact on the child’s 

social, emotional and/or behavioral 

well-being? 

7. What is the potential impact on 

academics?

8. What is the child’s permanency plan?

27

Access the full BID Tool:

http://vtfutres.org/grades-toolkit/screen-for-success/
CASE STUDY: CHILDREN’S TIMELINE

 Custody: November 2014 

– Placement in new town 

– BID completed 

– Results: Remain in school of origin through the school year

 New School Year 2015-2016

– BID completed over the summer

– Results: Children remain in school of origin

 Permanency Plan Changed: December 2015

– Placement changed to permanent home in new town

– BID completed

– Results: Maintain in school of origin through current school year

 May 2016

– BID completed

– Results: Transition to new school in town of residence

28
CASE STUDY: NORMALIZING TRANSITION 

TIME

 Pre-adoptive Mom arranged for the siblings to 

participate in the Step-Up Day offered by the new 

school.

 Pre-adoptive Mom initiated the planning for a good-bye 

party at the end of this school year. 

 Pre-adoptive Mom identified therapists in the new 

school.

 Pre-adoptive Mom enrolled them in softball this spring in 

their new town.

 Pre-adoptive Mom did as much work with the school 

enrollment paperwork as she could.

29
PROCESS

 Team Members: Caregivers, primary family, children, 

teachers, Special Education Coordinator, LEA, Service 

providers, GAL, Education Surrogate, Social Worker

 Social worker convenes a meeting

– Individual phone calls

– Conference calls

– Face to face meetings

 Follow-Up Meetings:

– Revisit BID

– Review children’s needs and services

– Address disagreements

30
BENEFITS OF USING THE TOOL, MEETINGS, & 

CONVERSATIONS

 To establish the appropriateness of educational stability 

for each child

 Sharing of relevant information about the children and 

their plans

 Collaborative Planning

 Discussion regarding transportation

 Logistical problem solving

 Facilitates difficult conversations when there is 

disagreement

 Emphasizes the children’s needs are the priority

31
32

Questions for Panelists?
33

Technical Assistance
JOINT ED-HHS WEBINAR SERIES

Webinar Topic Date Location

An Overview of the 

ED/HHS Joint Guidance 7/27/16 http://www.fostercareandeducation.org/AreasofFocus/EducationStability.aspx

Points of Contact 8/17/16 https://1sourceevents.adobeconnect.com/p9u6

46javei/

Best Interest Determination & 

Immediate Enrollment 8/24/16 Coming soon!

Transportation 8/31/16

2-3pm ET Coming soon!

Dispute Resolution and 

Collaboration

9/7/16

2-3pm ET Coming soon!

34

Access the joint guidance here:

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/edhhsfostercarenonregulatorguide.pdf
QUESTIONS ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION?

SEAs & LEAs

 Send questions to ED’s ESSA mailbox: 

essa.questions@ed.gov

CWAs

 The Children’s Bureau (CB) provides technical assistance 

through the Capacity Building Center for States

– For additional information, reach out to your Center for 

States Liaison - https://capacity.childwelfare.gov/map

CONTACT US!

35

For additional information, please visit our websites:

• ED’s Every Student Succeeds Act page - http://www.ed.gov/essa?src=rn

• HHS’ Educational Stability for Children and Youth in Foster Care page -

https://www.childwelfare.gov/topics/systemwide/servicearray/education-services/meeting-needs/educational-stability/
36

Thank you!